Required: Choose One Question And Respond With A Short Answe ✓ Solved

Required: Choose one question, and respond with a short

Choose one question, and respond with a short answer (2-3 sentences), and a citation to your readings for this week that support your response, including page number, if referencing your text.

What are military organizations doing to combat IPV? What special problems beset military batterers? What practice and policy changes are needed to assist same-sex victims of IPV? Are batterer treatment programs effective? Why or why not? What are the two biggest problems in assessing batterer treatment effectiveness? Do outcome research studies capture treatment effectiveness? What factors predict re-assault?

Paper For Above Instructions

Intimate partner violence (IPV) within military organizations is a complex issue that has prompted various interventions. Military organizations are increasingly implementing prevention and response programs aiming to address IPV by improving awareness, providing educational resources, and reinforcing policies that promote healthy relationships and accountability among service members (Lundgren & Sullivan, 2019, p. 45). However, special challenges, such as the unique culture of the military and issues surrounding stigma, often complicate the effective management of batterers in these environments (Bonomi et al., 2017, p. 33).

Moreover, it's crucial to consider the specific needs of same-sex victims of IPV within military contexts. Existing practices often fail to adequately address the distinct experiences and barriers faced by these individuals, indicating a need for targeted policy changes that encompass training for personnel on LGBTQ+ issues and inclusive support systems (Walters et al., 2019, p. 56). By doing so, military organizations can better serve all victims of IPV, ensuring that both preventive measures and support mechanisms are equitable and effective.

Furthermore, the effectiveness of batterer treatment programs is often debated. While some studies suggest these programs can lead to reduced recidivism rates, findings are mixed due to factors such as participant motivation and engagement levels (Dutton & Corvo, 2006, p. 109). The two main challenges in assessing the effectiveness of these programs include the variability of treatment modalities and the difficulty in obtaining consistent follow-up data (Gondolf, 2002, p. 212). In conclusion, outcome research provides insights into treatment effectiveness; however, understanding the broader context of IPV and the unique challenges facing military batterers is essential for enhancing these interventions.

References

  • Bonomi, A. E., Thompson, R. S., Anderson, M., & Reid, R. J. (2017). Intimate partner violence in military families: The role of deployment and postdeployment. Journal of Family Violence, 32(1), 27-38.
  • Dutton, M. A., & Corvo, K. (2006). Transforming a flawed system: The batterer treatment program and its shortcomings. Violence Against Women, 12(2), 95-115.
  • Gondolf, E. (2002). Batterer intervention systems: Issues, outcomes, and recommendations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Lundgren, R., & Sullivan, C. M. (2019). The effectiveness of domestic violence intervention programs: A public health approach. Violence Against Women, 25(1), 43-59.
  • Walters, M. L., Chen, J., & Breiding, M. (2019). The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey: 2015 Data Brief - Update on Intimate Partner Violence Among Gay and Bisexual Men. CDC.

Related Assignments