Abstract

BackgroundStudies have shown rates of IPV-perpetration among men in substance misuse treatment at rates far higher than the general population. There is poor evidence for the effectiveness of IPV perpetrator programmes. MethodsAn analysis of drugs and alcohol policy documents 1998–2015 was conducted using discourse analysis to examine how English drug and alcohol policy has addressed IPV among substance misusers. Transcripts of interviews with 20 stake holders were analysed thematically. ResultsHow policy ‘frames’ IPV-perpetration among drug and alcohol misusers has implications for service provision. IPV has increasingly been framed in terms of its implications for child safeguarding, and has been ‘folded in’ to policies targeting Troubled Families. With increasing ‘localism’ in English drug and alcohol policy there has been little specification of services for substance misusing IPV-perpetrators. Policy and literature produced by IPV perpetrator and victim organisations has framed IPV-perpetration as an individual choice with intoxication as a post hoc excuse for violence with limited implications for effective service development. Interviews with stake holders indicate a range of understandings/explanations for IPV among substance misusing men. Stake holders suggest that not all staff have the confidence or skills to ask men about their relationships and that there are few referral routes for substance misusing men who seek help for their IPV perpetration. ConclusionThere are gaps and contradictions in the extent to which English drug and alcohol policy has sought to address IPV-perpetration among substance misusers. Recent National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance provide an opportunity to include domestic abuse training for all front line social care staff including in the substance misuse sector. There is a need for further research into effective services for substance misusing perpetrators and the development of training for front-line staff.

Highlights

  • Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is a recent term in public health discourse and describes physical, sexual, or psychological harm by a current or former partner or spouse

  • Alongside the dimensions of aggression, control and severity of violence, theorists have examined how substance misuse may interact with the effects of broader culture, subculture, family and individual characteristics in IPV perpetration (Dahlberg, Krug, Mercy, Zwi, & Lozano, 2002)

  • The Call to End Violence against Women and Girls Action Plan (VAWAG) launched by the UK Coalition government in 2010 followed the development of a victimfocused, safeguarding and advocacy system by the previous Labour government 1997–2010 including the development of MultiAgency Risk Assessment Conferences (MARACs), Independent Domestic Violence Advocate (IDVA) services and Specialist Domestic Violence Courts

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is a recent term in public health discourse and describes physical, sexual, or psychological harm by a current or former partner or spouse. Studies suggest that reported rates of physical or sexual violence perpetration among men receiving treatment for substance misuse are four times higher (34–42%) Results: How policy ‘frames’ IPV-perpetration among drug and alcohol misusers has implications for service provision. With increasing ‘localism’ in English drug and alcohol policy there has been little specification of services for substance misusing IPV-perpetrators. Conclusion: There are gaps and contradictions in the extent to which English drug and alcohol policy has sought to address IPV-perpetration among substance misusers.

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call