(PS5-A16) State Law Addressing Controversies Related to Batterer Intervention Programs

This research assesses the extent to which three current treatment-related controversies are addressed in state policy related to Batterer Intervention Programs (BIP): treating female perpetrators, bidirectional violence, and considering perpetrators’ trauma history. Literature supports the need to address these topics to improve BIP efficacy. To address this question, relevant governing documents were obtained from U.S. states as available (n = 47, 94%) and with good interrater reliability (IRR= 82.4%). Although most states have gender-neutral or gender-non-specified BIP guidelines (n = 31, 66%), 16 states (24%) have documents that specify they can only be used for male batterers. While a substantial minority (n = 20, 40%) advise DVIPs to assess for perpetrator trauma, only a few states specifically endorse a trauma-informed approach (n = 6, 12%) or require BIP facilitators to include trauma information (n= 2, 4%). Finally, less than half of states (n = 22, 44%) specifically exclude messages about bidirectional violence in their programs, despite the prevalence of this among violent couples. Only one state currently advises its BIPs to assess for bidirectional violence at intake. Many states’ BIP guidelines have not been updated recently, with only 17 indicating that their guidelines have been updated within the last five years. State policies must address the needs, motivations, and experiences of all perpetrators needing to attend a BIP by addressing a wider array of relationship dynamics, considering incorporating a strength-based perspective and trauma-informed care, and providing gender-specific treatment recommendations for BIPs. Existing BIP policy also needs to be regularly reconsidered as we advance our understanding of perpetrators who identify with various gender identities and who are expressing violence in LGBTQ2+ relationships.