Studies of batterer intervention and prevention programs (BIPPs) offer mixed results regarding their effect on recidivism. The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of BIPP for cases assigned to a misdemeanor family court. This study focused on determining whether BIPP cases, compared with alternative sanctions, had significantly lower recidivism rates 12 months after program involvement. Findings indicated that BIPP was more effective than jail or regular dismissal in reducing the likelihood of future arrests, but not plea deferred adjudication and conditional dismissal. Results argue toward the efficacy of some form of treatment versus simply receiving jail time.
ArcherC.DuPreeC.MillerN.SpenceD.UekertB. (2002). National evaluation of the grants to encourage arrest policies program. Institute for Law and Justice. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/199441.pdf
2.
Augusta-ScottT.DankwortJ. (2002). Partner abuse group intervention: Lessons from education and narrative therapy approaches. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 17, 783-805.
3.
BabcockJ. C.GreenC. E.RobieC. (2004). Does batterers’ treatment work? A meta-analytic review of domestic violence treatment. Clinical Psychology Review, 23, 1023-1053.
4.
BelknapJ.FleuryR. E.MeltonH. C.SullivanC. M.LeisenringA. (2001). To go or not to go? Preliminary findings on battered women’s decisions regarding court cases. In EigenbergH. M. (Ed.), Women battering in the United States: Till death do us part (pp. 319-326). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
5.
BlackM. C.BasileK. C.BreidingM. J.SmithS. G.WaltersM. L.MerrickM. T.. (2011). The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS): 2010 summary report. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
6.
Bush-ArmendarizN. B.Heffron CookL.BohmanT. (2011). Statewide prevalence of intimate partner violence in Texas. Austin, TX: Institute on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, Center for Social Work Research School of Social Work, University of Texas at Austin.
ChangH.SaundersD. G. (2002). Predictors of attrition in two types of group programs for men who matter. Journal of Family Violence, 17, 273-292.
11.
CokerA. L. (2005). Opportunities for prevention: Addressing IPV in the health care setting. Family Violence Prevention and Health Practice, 1, 1-9.
12.
DavisR. C.SmithB. E.NicklesL. B. (1998). The deterrent effect of prosecuting domestic violence misdemeanors. Crime & Delinquency, 44, 434-444.
13.
FederL.DuganL. (2002). A test of the efficacy of court-mandated counseling for domestic violence offenders: The Broward experiment. Justice Quarterly, 19, 343-375.
14.
FoxJ. (1991). Regression diagnostics. Quantitative applications in the social sciences series (07–079). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
15.
GondolfE. W.FosterR. (1991). Pre-program attrition in batterer program compliance. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15, 428-437.
16.
GoverA. R.BrankE. M.MacDonaldJ. M. (2007). A specialized domestic violence court in South Carolina: An example of procedural justice for victims and defendants. Violence Against Women, 13, 603-626.
HenningK.FederL. (2004). A comparison of men and women arrested for domestic violence: Who presents the greater threat?Journal of Family Violence, 19, 69-80.
19.
JacksonS.FederL.FordeD. R.DavisR. C.MaxwellC. D.TaylorB. G. (2003). Batterer intervention programs: Where do we go from here?Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
KingsnorthR. (2006). Intimate partner violence: Predictors of recidivism in a sample of arrestees. Violence Against Women, 12, 917-935.
22.
KleinA. R. (2004). The criminal justice response to domestic violence. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.
23.
MaxwellC. D.GarnerJ. H.FaganJ. A. (2002). The preventive effects of arrest on intimate partner violence: Research, policy, and theory. Criminology & Public Policy, 2, 51-80.
24.
MeltonH. C.BelknapJ. (2003). He hits, she hits: Assessing gender differences and similarities in officially reported intimate partner violence. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 30, 328-348.
25.
MenardK. S.AndersonA. L.GodboldtS. M. (2009). Gender differences in intimate partner recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 61-76.
MillerJ.JohnsonD. (2009). Problem solving courts: A measure of justice. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
28.
MillerS. L. (2005). Criminalized conduct: The paradox of women arrested for domestic violence. Rutgers, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
29.
PortwoodS. G.HeanyJ. F. (2007). Responding to violence against women: Social science contributions to legal sanctions. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 30, 237-247.
30.
RennisonC. M. (2003). Crime data brief: Intimate partner violence, 1993-2001. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ipv01.pdf
31.
ShermanL. W.SchmidtJ. D.RoganD. P.SmithD. A.GartinP. R.CohnE. G.. (1992). The variable effects of arrest on criminal careers: The Milwaukee domestic violence experiment. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 83, 137-169.
SwanS. C.GamboneL. J.CaldwellJ. E.SullivanT. P.SnowD. L. (2008). A review of research on women’s use of violence with male intimate partners. Violence and Victims, 23, 301-314.
34.
TarrN. (2003). Civil orders of protection: Freedom or entrapment?Washington University Journal of Law & Policy, 11, 157-194.
ThistlethwaiteJ. M.O’BrienJ. G.GibbsD. (1998). Severity of dispositions and domestic violence recidivism. Crime & Delinquency, 44, 388-399.
37.
TilleyD. S.BrackleyM. (2005). Men who batter intimate partners: A grounded theory study of the development of male violence in intimate partner relationships. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 26, 281-297. doi:10.1080/01612840590915676
38.
TjadenP.ThoennesN. (2000). Prevalence, incidence, and consequence of violence against women: Findings from the National Violence Against Women study. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
39.
TolmanR. M.WeiszA. (1995). Coordinated community intervention for domestic violence: The effect of arrest and prosecution on recidivism of women abuse perpetrators. Crime & Delinquency, 41, 481-488.
VenturaL. A.DavisG. (2005). Domestic violence: Court case conviction and recidivism. Violence Against Women, 11, 255-277.
42.
WienerR. L.WinickB. J.GeorgesL. S.CastroA. (2010). A testable theory of problem solving courts: Avoiding past empirical and legal failures. International Journal of Law & Psychiatry, 33, 417-427.
43.
WinickB. J. (2000). Applying the law therapeutically in domestic violence cases. University of Missouri-Kansas City Law Review, 69, 33-91.
44.
WooldredgeJ.ThistlethwaiteA. (2002). Reconsidering domestic violence recidivism: Conditioned effects of legal controls by individual and aggregate levels of stake in conformity. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 18, 45-70.
45.
WooldredgeJ.ThistlethwaiteA. (2004). Bilevel disparities in court dispositions for intimate assault. Criminology, 42, 417-456.
46.
WooldredgeJ.ThistlethwaiteA. (2005). Court dispositions and rearrest for intimate assault. Crime & Delinquency, 51, 75-102.
