Facilitators of probation-based domestic violence perpetrator programmes: ‘Who’s in the room?’

Abstract

The role that probation practitioners play in the desistance process has begun to receive much needed attention. Yet, the experiences of facilitators of probation-based, domestic violence perpetrator programmes have long been neglected. This article explores the experiences and wellbeing of eight facilitators from one cohort of the Building Better Relationships (BBR) programme in England. Drawing upon five-months’ observations and in-depth interviews, I demonstrate how working with domestically violent men with insufficient knowledge, experience, or support, exacerbated within the context of Transforming Rehabilitation reforms, impacted significantly on facilitator well-being, professional identities, and practice. Practice implications are discussed.

Responding to coercive control in criminal justice domestic violence perpetrator programmes in England and Wales: Conceptual, operational, and methodological complexities

“…Unfortunately, they were short-lived when intolerable feelings and fears that were not dealt with inevitably resurfaced. Dale's accounts also raise ethical questions about DVPPs that elicit painful stories for the sole purposes of translating them into cognitive distortions, whilst depriving facilitators of the time, therapeutic knowledge, and skills of working through these difficult but unaddressed feelings (Renehan, 2021b). Finally, they raise questions about the reliability of abusive men's narratives of change when these are extracted from the messy, contradictory, and complex (emotional and social) worlds in which they live and the fragility upon which these invested narratives are hinged.…”

“…I know with harassment, when we've had people who've been on the groups particularly, they're very slippery. (Tracy, facilitator) Given what is known about the gendered underpinnings of abusive men's coercive behaviours (Downes et al, 2019) and the increased risk to women when sexist beliefs are invested in to justify abuse post-separation (Monckton Smith, 2020), facilitators' concerns expressed here and elsewhere regarding the gendered nature of this work (Renehan, 2021b, see also Hughes, 2019) suggest that the content and/or approach of the programme may require further review. Nevertheless, it is also crucial not to overlook the relationship between 'masculinity, violence, and personal crisis' in the prevention of domestic abuse (Gadd, 2012: 496).…”

“…This was because the session 'learning points' and the 'rigid' and 'repetitive' (400-page) manual within which these were embedded, were prioritised over the relational aspects of desistance focussed practice (see similar concerns in Hughes, 2017). Facilitators were troubled that they were unable to be responsive to the emotional difficulties some men expressed, claiming (and sometimes were observed to be (Renehan, 2021b)), 'running' around like 'headless chickens' (Grace) and 'into sessions' ill-prepared (Tracy, facilitator). As such, delivering programmes was compared to working on a 'conveyor belt': This sat uncomfortably with facilitators after encouraging male participants to open up, or when trying to be 'responsive' to those who presented with histories of abuse, self-harm and sometimes even suicidal thoughts (Ellie).…”

The criminalisation and exploitation of irregular Chinese migrant workers in the United Kingdom

“…The study utilised the Free Association Narrative Interview Method (FANIM) pioneered by Hollway andJefferson (2000, 2012) and further elaborated by Gadd (2004Gadd ( , 2012. The method has been applied in numerous criminological studies (Broad and Gadd, 2022;Gadd and Dixon, 2011;Harris, 2022;Renehan, 2021;Yoshida, 2020). The FANIM encourages interviewees to tell their own stories through the use of openended, story-eliciting questions (e.g., can you tell me your experiences of working in the UK?)…”

(En)gendering change: Understanding the gendered dynamics of domestic abuse perpetrator programmes

“…Instead, group facilitators and participants tend to be viewed as fixed variables who passively role out and consume the programme; the effectiveness of which tends to be viewed as being determined by design and content. The interpersonal skills and knowledge required of facilitators, and the understandings of participants is often overlooked (Hughes, 2017;Renehan, 2021a).…”