The incidence of relationship violence is a topic of increased concern (Koss, 1990). Family therapy theorists have been criticized for emphasizing shared responsibility and obscuring the seriousness of the violence (Bograd, 1989; Pressman, 1989). The current study surveyed 362 members of a national family therapy organization. Respondents were asked to conceptualize and provide interventions for one of two actual cases that involved family violence. Results indicate the therapists surveyed did not attend to the seriousness of the violence if they attended to the violence at all. Interventions frequently failed to address the crisis and the need for protection of the wife.

Violence against women by men is considered the single most serious threat to women's health and welfare in the United States. Knowledge about why male violence occurs against women is very limited. Previous theory and conceptualizations explaining men's violence have narrowly focused on individual factors or typologies. Predicting male violence is complex, necessitating a multivariate explanatory model. No heuristic model has been developed that explains the multiplicity of hypotheses that might explain men's violence toward women. This article presents a multivariate model explaining men's violence toward women using four content areas and 13 hypotheses. The content areas are: (a) macrosocietal explanation; (b) biological, neuroanatomical, hormonal explanation; (c) gender role socialization or gender role conflict explanation; and (d) intergender, relational explanation. Implications of the model for educational interventions, research, and training are explored.

The current study investigated factors associated with voluntary and involuntary readmissions to forensic hospitals 356 insanity acquittees on conditional release in the state of Maryland from 2007, 2008, and 2009 and monitored their community progress for a 3-year follow-up period. The results indicated that voluntarily readmitted insanity acquittees had fewer reported arrests on conditional release and fewer reported instances of non-compliance with treatment compared with insanity acquittees who were returned involuntarily to hospital. As expected, arrests and treatment non-compliance predicted involuntary readmission. A third group of insanity acquittees who were not readmitted on conditional release presented with numerous differences compared with voluntarily and involuntarily readmitted acquittees. These included a longer duration in the community prior to any psychiatric readmission and fewer community psychiatric admissions than both the voluntary and involuntary groups. Data from this study provide useful information on where community monitoring resources for insanity acquittees may best be allocated.

This series considers the importance of family psychology training and ethical concems that scarcity of training in this area may leave psychologists poorly prepared with couples and families. In the lead article, Michèle Harway and Steve Kadin set the stage for using systemic formulations to treat couples and families. They challenge practitioners to obtain additional exposure. Using clinical vignettes, they suggest combining systemic approaches with traditional approaches. The efficacy of systemic interventions is considered, as are ethical issues of working with couples and families. The three commentaries support that psychology must make a paradigm shift to accommodate the changing needs of service recipients. Michael Gottlieb argues that the time is now for systems interventions. Integrated models of patient-centered health care require psychologists with systems training as pivotal members of the team. Medicine's acknowledgment that physical ailments occur in relationships requires family psychologists to be part of that team. Roberta Nutt suggests that as our population changes and becomes more diverse, family psychology has much to contribute to cultural competence training. Since many cultural groups are collectivistic, systemic approaches must be taught side-by-side with individualistic approaches.

We commend McDermott, Kilmartin, McKelvey, and Kridel (2015) for addressing the timely problem of college males’ sexual assault of women. We are particularly pleased with the focus on perpetrators of rape, as we believe that we must understand perpetrators in order to provide better solutions to this societal problem. In our commentary, we argue that the campus culture itself may unintentionally exacerbate the problem. We briefly review some evidence from groups such as the military, law enforcement and professional athletics that supports Good, Borst, and Wallace (1994) notion that “men internalize cultural beliefs about masculinity and gender roles” (p. 3) and that cultural values promulgated by these subgroups may have a significant influence over men’s propensity to commit sexual violence. We close with a brief review of some prevention programs that may contribute to the reduction of rape-supportive attitudes and rape proclivity.