This study examines a population of spouse abusers undertaking a treatment program. Its purpose was to identify the variables associated with dropout and completion of treatment and to build a predictive model. Data were collected on 286 men who began group treatment in one of eight community programs in the province of Quebec, Canada. Results show that men who complete treatment are older, better educated and have better economic conditions than men who drop out. They also have a more stable family life, have been in a relationship for a longer period of time and have more children with their actual spouse. Men who completed treatment showed more commitment, better working capacities and a higher level of agreement with their therapists, thus developing a stronger therapeutic alliance. Support provided by people in the environment was significantly related to treatment completion. Social and judicial pressures were not related to completion.

Attrition in intervention programs for domestically violent men is considered to be a serious and enduring problem. Researchers have found a number of sociodemographic variables that partially explain this phenomenon; however, models based on these variables have a limited predictive power. Scott (2004) argues that a firm theoretical base is needed in future investigations of the problem and suggests the use of the transtheoretical model of behavior change (TTM), which was found to predict dropout with accuracy in other areas of behavioral change. This study investigated the relationship between four TTM constructs (Stages of Change, Decisional Balance, Self-Efficacy, and Processes of Change) and premature termination with a sample of Canadian French-speaking men (N = 302) in five domestic violence treatment programs. Contrary to the initial hypotheses, the TTM constructs did not predict dropout. Discussion investigates how social desirability bias affects results being obtained by current TTM measures and whether more motivation to change at intake necessarily relates to involvement in treatment for longer periods of time.

La concomitance de violence conjugale et de troubles mentaux chez les conjoints violents est un sujet controversé, tant au plan conceptuel qu’au plan clinique. De nombreuses études ont objectivé la présence de troubles mentaux dans la population des conjoints violents, sans toutefois s’intéresser aux points de vue des professionnels qui accompagnent ces hommes dans un processus de changement. Cet article présente les résultats d’une recherche qualitative qui visait à explorer les points de vue de professionnels spécialisés dans l’intervention auprès de conjoints violents quant à la concomitance de violence conjugale et de troubles mentaux chez leur clientèle. Onze professionnels ont été rencontrés au cours d’une entrevue de recherche semi-dirigée. Les participants estiment que les conjoints violents souffrant de troubles mentaux (CVTM) se distinguent de l’ensemble des conjoints violents par un degré élevé de désorganisation, et conçoivent les troubles mentaux comme un facteur augmentant le risque d’exercer de la violence conjugale. Leurs points de vue sont observables à travers leurs énoncés verbaux et les conduites professionnelles qu’ils adoptent auprès des CVTM, soit l’évitement, la distanciation et l’intégration. Le discours des participants reflète les paradoxes associés à la catégorisation des CVTM et à l’intervention auprès de cette clientèle.

No abstract

There are ongoing debates in the scientific community and in practice settings about how intimate partner violence (IPV) should be defined and understood and about how various interventions must be carried out. If these debates are to bear fruit, however, we must first gain a comprehensive understanding of each stakeholder's viewpoints on IPV and its solutions. This article seeks to contribute to this goal by summarizing empirical studies investigating how practitioners who work with IPV perpetrators understand the problem and its solutions. Based on an integrative review of the literature, it focuses on how practitioners define IPV and its causes, how they perceive the perpetrators and victims, and on the solutions they put forward in order to work against this social problem. The limitations of our current knowledge are outlined as well as the implications of this review for IPV debates.