As a registered charity with a 24 year track record we offer intensive, 36 hours of therapeutically informed group-work at weekends to help people to address and change their concerning behaviours.
Temper Domestic Violence is a DAPP “equivalent”. It is not accredited by “Respect”, nor will it ever be.
Although early intervention is required and seen as positive the main efforts of the “Accredited work” are to prolong the separation of children from their father for as long as possible. In a substantial proportion of cases Cafcass colludes with this process by, as a policy, insisting on the “accredited” work which virtually all the evidence insists is ineffective, for example the Ministry of Justice report of 2014. p. 24 , Cafcass also funds some of that work essentially with tax-payers’ money. A judge in an approved judgment 2019 recently wrote about the case in front of them:
“I reject the Cafcass risk assessment as being flawed for the following reasons. First, it assumed the mother’s allegations to be entirely true when there was no sufficient evidential basis for that. Secondly, the application of the ‘matrix’ in this case served to categorise both individual events and the general picture as more serious than they in fact were. Thirdly, there is no analysis as to whether the abuse was ‘situational’. I reject Cafcass’ general approach because the domestic abuse risk assessment has prevented an application of the welfare checklist.”
And his further criticisms were these:
“It is my fear that general principles, perhaps a philosophy, has been applied by Cafcass to the case.”
“..there is to my mind nothing unique or even unusual about Cafcass’ stance in this case. At one point and probably more than one it is clear that the decisions were taken at a level higher than that of the officer.”
“I have several times referred to the widespread concerns held by judges here at the Central Family Court, as expressed to me as Designated Family Judge, concerning Cafcass’ current approach to these cases. I have referred to the meetings which I and other judges have held with Cafcass managers on the issues which arise in this case.”
For men who have to fund themselves the costs of a typical “accredited” “power and control” programme are approximately £60-£80 per session, 2 – 2.5 hours per week, for between 26 and 32 sessions, plus an initial interview which may cost several hundred pounds. Only about 25% of those men will who start a course will complete that work. Those that complete may then also get a report which says that in the report writer’s “professional opinion” they still pose an unacceptable risk.
In the interests of children:
Work with female abusers, which we also offer, is no less important than work with male abusers. The volumes may be different but that is about all. The work required by people is skills in “Emotional Regulation” – which includes “anger management”. You can read a bit about emotional regulation here. The vast majority of the relationships involved in these cases are about “situational couple violence”. They are not about “Power and Control”. You can read the Guru’s recognition, the late Ellen Pence, about that right here.
Temper is a DVPP “equivalent” for those convicted of offences and a DAPP for those not convicted of an offence.
However you dress up the statistics Children, girls and boys, are the primary victims of domestic violence: they are the reason for child protection, for Cafcass and much of the work of the Family Courts.
Sandra Horley of REFUGE quoted the statistic: “2 women per week are killed, on average, by a partner or former partner.” She ignored and virtually nobody will quote you (or even know!) that at least 65 boys and girls are killed per year by a parent or parenting figure. This makes a child in a domestic setting approximately 2.5 – 3 times as likely as a woman to be killed! How is it that we do not know this? Could it be the vested interest of certain politics?
Children are no less damaged by witnessing and experiencing women’s violence than they are by men’s violence. It could be argued that because children are relatively very much more engaged with women than with men, for mainly biological reasons, that work with the violent, aggressive and abusive woman is even more urgently needed than work with the man, who in many cases has very much less contact, particularly with very young children. But of course the woman, as very often a main carer of the children, needs to be as safe as possible, too.
Utterly amazingly in very nearly 30 years virtually no progress has been made in addressing female violence. We believe we are the only organisation in the UK that has really made any progress in this direction. More than 100 of our 1100 completions have been by women.
The safety of children needs to be the primary focus in this type of work. That is why Temper Domestic Violence is gender inclusive in its work, enabling both men and women in heterosexual and gay and lesbian relationships the opportunity to take part and bring about changes in themselves which will improve the safety of their children, their partners, current and future and, of course, themselves.
The work undertaken needs to be driven by “psychological processes” and consequently open to all, rather than having a “patriarchal only focus” which obviously excludes women who exhibit violent and abusive behaviours and additionally those people in same-sex relationships.