RESPECT, a charity which runs the “men’s domestic abuse helpline”, names 54 people employed, 50 women and 4 men. They were the so-called “Accreditor of the DAPPs” (Domestic Abuser Perpetrator Programmes). Those “accredited DAPP programmes” were decommissioned in June 2022. RESPECT’s preferred version was based the Domestic Violence Intervention Project, based in London. Criticism of that project’s outcomes, can be found here. Joseph Rowntree funded research of the project in 1998. Ms Jo Todd and Ms Kate Iwi re-vamped the content but by 2007, the DVIP completion rates, presumably using Ms Todd’s “re-vamped programme”, had halved again to less than 25% of men completing the programme. Ms Todd was elected CEO of RESPECT. Wikipedia here outlines many of the original Duluth problems. RESPECT, SafeLives and a group of academics are still trying to advocate and gain credibility for their failed programme: The DRIVE programme. Outcomes for the “Drive” programme are outlined on page 71 of the 184 page research. They completely contradict the outcomes highlighted on page 1 of the 19 page executive summary. A detailed criticsm of that research can be found here, my criticsms can be found at this link and later I’ve posted some positive remarks of the research recognitions here. The recognitions of things which were positively needed in such programmes were available at least 25-30 years ago.

“What is your Daddy? And what is your Mummy?” “My Daddy is a “perpetrator”. “My Mummy is a victim.” Those are the very unhelpful labels for children which have been applied by an extremely devisive adversarial mindset, “upon allegation”, to the children’s parents. “Toxic masculinity” and “mean girls” arise from those labels. How helpful is that to our children and grandchildren?

Focussed on the business of the Family Court and the interests of children, Practice direction 12J quite corretly avoids the use of the word “perpetrator” (using it just twice) preferring the “alleged abuser” (used 82 times) and, of course, an “alleged victim”.

The Cafcass sponsored RESPECT ACCREDITED DAPP programmes are effectively “dead”. Their autopsy starts here. What was wrong with the “RESPECT accredited DAPP programmes”? They quite simply failed to engage with the men. This clip from 2020 tells you of the historic problems and you can read here What are the likely reasons they needed to be decommissioned and how Temper intervenes positively and effectively? Also Why work is also needed for female abusers! This document gives you a risk assessor’s positive views of a client in 2004, and another’s ( 2017) which indicates what was needed for his client and what was wrong with the Duluth offering. Below that, is the cautionary tale of a client’s experiences with the DVIP in London. DVIP, which has been first a division of the Richmond Fellowship, which was then linked to “Humankind” and is now, parhaps a division of “Waythrough”. DVIP formed the background to the “RESPECT Accreditation”, and was the first “accredited project.”