Much of the violence reported in the literature involves intimate partner
violence (IPV) committed by men toward women, a pervasive problem in a
significant proportion of U.S.
families. Roughly 1,800 instances of homicide and manslaughter between intimate
partners occurred in 1998, with more than 1,300 of these involving women as
victims (Rennison and Welchans,
2000). The findings from the National Crime Victimization Survey indicate that
nearly 1 million women are victims of IPV each year (Rennison
and Welchans, 2000). Surveys of representative
samples of couples that include less severe instances of aggression (e.g.,
single episodes of pushing or slapping one's partner) suggested that 8.7 million
couples experience an incident of physical violence from within the dyad each
year (Straus and Gelles, 1990). Additionally, a
survey of U.S.
couples indicated more than one in five experienced at least one episode of
violence during the previous year (Schafer et al., 1998).
IPV and Substance Abuse
Intimate partner violence is a major public health concern. Substance use
has been found to co-occur in 40% to 60% of IPV incidents across various
studies (Easton et al., 2000a, 2000b; Fals-Stewart et
al., in press; Moore and Stuart, 2004). Several lines of evidence suggest that
substance use plays a facilitative role in IPV by precipitating or exacerbating
violence (Fals-Stewart, 2003). Several studies
suggest the promise of interventions that target substance use in men who have
histories of IPV (Fals-Stewart, 2003; Fals-Stewart et al., in press; Moore and Stuart, 2004).
It is known that many IPV episodes involve alcohol or drug consumption.
Kaufman Kantor and Straus (1990) found over 20% of
males were drinking prior to the most recent and severe act of violence. Fals-Stewart (2003) found that on days of heavy drug use,
physical violence was 11 times more likely. Victims of IPV report that the
offender had been drinking or using illicit drugs (Miller, 1990; Roberts,
1998). Miller (1990) reported that offenders of IPV typically use alcohol and have a dual problem with drugs. In addition, the strong
relationship between substance use and perpetration of IPV has been found in
primary health care settings (McCauley et al., 1995), family practice clinics
(Oriel and Fleming, 1998), prenatal clinics (Muhajarine
and D'Arcy, 1999) and rural health clinics (Van Hightower and
Gorton, 1998). The relationship between substance abuse and IPV has also been
observed to be quite prevalent among individuals presenting at psychiatric
settings (Gondolf et al., 1991) and substance abuse
treatment facilities (Easton et al., 2000b).
A Proximal Effects Model
Three primary conceptual models have been posited to explain the observed relationship
between substance use and spousal violence: 1) spurious model; 2) indirect
effects model; and 3) proximal effects model (Fals-Stewart,
2003; Leonard and Quigley, 1999).
The spurious model suggests that the relationship between substance use and IPV
is the result of these variables being related to other factors that influence
both drinking and violence. For example, individuals who are young may tend to
be violent and to use drugs; thus, drug use and violence may appear directly
related when, in fact, they are not. Although not entirely consistent, the
results of several studies suggest that alcohol and other drug use are
associated with IPV after controlling for factors thought to be associated with
both behaviors such as age, education, socioeconomic or occupational status,
and ethnicity (e.g., Leonard and Jacob, 1988; Pan et al., 1994). However, the
relationship between substance use and violence remains strong even after
controlling for levels of general hostility (e.g., Leonard and Senchak, 1993) and normative views of aggression (Kaufman Kantor and Straus, 1990).
In the indirect effects model, substance use is viewed as being corrosive to
relationship quality. Thus, long-term substance use creates an environment that
sets the stage for partner conflict and, ultimately, partner violence. Again,
however, when marital satisfaction, relationship discord or other similar
variables are controlled for when examining the link between substance use and
violence, the relationship remains strong (e.g., McKenry
et al., 1995).
According to this model (Fals-Stewart, 2003),
individuals who consume psychoactive substances are more likely to engage in
partner violence because intoxication facilitates violence, which may be
mediated through the psychopharmacologic effects of drugs on cognitive
processing (Chermack and Taylor, 1995) or the
expectancies associated with intoxication (Critchlow,
1983). It follows from this theory that substance use should precede IPV and
the episode of violence should occur closely in time to the consumption of the
drug. Several longitudinal studies supported temporal ordering consistent with
this model. Fals-Stewart (2003) collected daily
diaries from partners with histories of IPV entering either an alcoholism or
domestic violence treatment program over a five-month period, which allowed for
a detailed examination of the daily temporal relationship between
male-to-female aggression and drinking. The data suggested that alcohol and
male-to-female aggression were linked only on days when the drinking occurred
before the IPV episode. The odds of severe male-to-female physical aggression
were more than 11 times higher on days of men's drinking than on days of no
drinking. Moreover, in both samples, over 60% of all IPV episodes occurred
within two hours of drinking by the male partner. These findings were recently
replicated with another sample of men entering treatment for drug abuse (Fals-Stewart et al., 2003).
Three conceptual models have been put forth to explain the relationship
between alcohol use and violence. Although each may have some merit and may, in
fact, explain part of the relationship between substance use and violence, the
greatest empirical support rests with the proximal effects model (Fals-Stewart, 2003). Hence, it is reasonable that
interventions targeting substance use among men with histories of IPV and
substance use may lead to reductions in partner violence.
Referral for Treatment
Currently, men convicted for IPV are referred to batterer/IPV programs
(e.g., the Duluth Model). The program uses a psychoeducation
structure; actual behaviors are identified and challenged by facilitators, who
model alternative behaviors and solutions to conflict. This approach often
treats men with IPV in a classroom setting with 10 to 20 men in a group format.
This method has the following limitations: 1) lack of structured/standardized
assessments to rule out co-occurring psychiatric or substance abuse disorders;
2) lack of objective indicators to rule out current substance use (e.g., breath
samples, urine toxicology screening); 3) lack of collateral data from the
victim regarding ongoing abuse; and 4) lack of other therapeutic options for
men who request additional or other treatments (e.g., individual therapy, psychiatric
consultation, parenting, couples therapy) (Babcock and LaTaillede,
In addition to these limitations, there is very little empirical support
regarding the effectiveness of the Duluth Model in reducing violence or
substance use (Babcock and LaTaillede, 2000). In
fact, meta-analytic reviews of outcomes for these approaches have consistently
found them to be of very limited effectiveness, with effect sizes near zero
(Babcock and LaTaillede, 2000). Many batterer
programs do not address substance use, are highly confrontational in nature and
reach far fewer individuals than substance abuse treatment programs. Hence, it
is likely that focusing on IPV with men who batter within the context of a
substance abuse treatment facility may reach a comparatively larger number of
individuals with IPV.
1. Babcock JC, LaTaillede JJ (2000), Evaluating interventions for men who batter. In: Domestic
Violence: Guidelines for Research-Informed Practice, Vincent JP, Jouriles EN, eds. Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley
2. Carroll KM (1998), A Cognitive-Behavioral Approach:
Treating Cocaine Addiction (NIH Publication 98-4308). Rockville,
Md.: U.S. Department of Health and Human
3. Carroll KM, Nich C, Ball SA et al. (1998),
Treatment of cocaine and alcohol dependence with psychotherapy and disulfiram. Addiction 93(5):713-727.
ST, Taylor SP
(1995), Alcohol and human physical aggression: pharmacological versus
expectancy effects. J Stud Alcohol 56(4):449-456.
5. Critchlow B (1983), Blaming the booze: the
attribution of responsibility for drunken behavior. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin 9:451-473
6. DeRubeis RJ, Crits-Christoph
P (1998), Empirically supported individual and group
psychological treatments for adult mental disorders. J Consult Clin Psychol 66(1):37-52.
7. Dobson KS
(1989), A meta-analysis of the efficacy of cognitive
therapy for depression. J Consult Clin Psychol 57(3):414-419.
8. Easton C, Swan S, Sinha R
(2000a), Motivation to change substance use among offenders of domestic
violence. J Subst Abuse Treat 19(1):1-5.
9. Easton CJ, Swan S, Sinha R
(2000b), Prevalence of family violence in clients entering substance abuse
treatment. J Subst Abuse Treat 18(1):23-28.
10. Fals-Stewart W (2003), The
occurrence of partner physical aggression on days of alcohol consumption: a
longitudinal diary study. J Consult Clin Psychol 71(1):41-52.
W, Golden J, Birchler GR (in press), Domestic
violence. In: Handbook of Behavioral Treatments for Psychological
Disorders, Herson M, ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif.:
12. Fals-Stewart W, Golden J, Schumacher JA (2003),
Intimate partner violence and substance use: a longitudinal day-to-day
examination. Addict Behav 28(9):1555-1574.
13. Fals-Stewart W, Kashdan
TB, O'Farrell TJ, Birchler GR (2002), Behavioral couples therapy for drug-abusing patients: effects on
partner violence. J Subst Abuse Treat 22(2):87-96.
14. Fals-Stewart W, O'Farrell TJ, Freitas
TT et al. (2000), The timeline followback
reports of psychoactive substance abuse by drug-abusing patients: psychometric
properties. J Consult Clin Psychol
EW, Mulvey EP, Lidz CW
(1991), Psychiatric admission of family violent versus nonfamily
violent patients. Int J Law Psychiatry
16. Irvin JE, Bowers CA, Dunn ME, Wang MC (1999), Efficacy of relapse
prevention: a meta-analytic review. J Consult Clin
17. Kaufman Kantor G, Straus M (1990), The "drunken bum" theory of wife beating. In: Physical
Violence in American Families: Risk Factors and Adaptations to Violence in
8,145 Families, Straus MA, Geles RJ, eds. New Brunswick,
N.J.: Transaction Publishers.
18. Leonard KE, Jacob T (1988), Alcohol, alcoholism, and
family violence. In: Handbook of Family Violence, Van Hasselt VB, Morrison RL, Bellack AS,
Hersen M, eds. New York: Plenum Press,
19. Leonard KE, Quigley BM (1999), Drinking and marital aggression in newlyweds:
an event-based analysis of drinking and the occurrence of husband marital aggression.
J Stud Alcohol 60(4):537-545.
20. Leonard KE, Senchak M (1993), Alcohol and
premarital aggression among newlywed couples. J Stud Alcohol Suppl 11:96-108.
21. Maude-Griffin PM, Hohenstein JM, Humfleet GL et al. (1998), Superior efficacy of
cognitive-behavioral therapy for urban crack cocaine abusers: main and matching
effects. J Consult Clin Psychol
22. McCauley J, Kern DE, Kolodner K et
al. (1995), The "battering syndrome": prevalence and
clinical characteristics of domestic violence in primary care internal medicine
practices. Ann Intern Med 123(10):737-746 [see comment].
23. McKay JR, Alterman AI, Cacciola
JS et al. (1997), Group counseling versus individualized relapse prevention
aftercare following intensive outpatient treatment for cocaine dependence:
initial results. J Consult Clin Psychol
24. McKenry P, Julian T, Gavazzi
S (1995), Toward a biopsychosocial
model of domestic violence. Journal of Marriage and the Family 57:307-320.
25. McLellan AT, Kushner H, Metzger D et al. (1992),
The Fifth Addition of the Addiction Severity Index. J Subst
Abuse Treat 9(3):199-213.
26. Miller B (1990), The interrelationships between
alcohol and drugs and family violence. In: Drugs and Violence: Causes,
Correlates, and Consequences, De La Rosa M, Lambert EY, Gropper
B, eds. Rockville, Md.: National Institute on Drug Abuse, pp177-207.
27. Monti PM, Rohsenow DJ, Michalec E et al. (1997), Brief coping skills treatment for
cocaine abuse: substance use outcomes at three months. Addiction
28. Moore TM, Stuart GL (2004), Illicit substance use
and intimate partner violence among men in batterers' intervention. Psychol Addict Behav
29. Morgenstern J, Longabaugh R (2000),
Cognitive-behavioral treatment for alcohol dependence: a review of evidence for
its hypothesized mechanisms of action. Addiction 95(10):1475-1490 [see
30. Morgenstern J, Morgan TJ, McCrady BS et al.
(2001), Manual-guided cognitive-behavioral therapy training: a promising method
for disseminating empirically supported substance abuse treatments to the
practice community. Psychol Addict Behav 15(2):83-88.
31. Muhajarine N, D'Arcy C (1999), Physical abuse
during pregnancy: prevalence and risk factors. CMAJ 160(7):1007-1011 [see
32. Nowinski J, Baker S, Carroll K (1992), Twelve-step
facilitation therapy manual: a clinical research guide for therapists treating
individuals with alcohol abuse and dependence. NIAAA/Project
MATCH Monograph 1. DHHS Pub. No. (ADM)92-1893. Rockville, Md.:
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.
33. O'Farrell TJ, Fals-Stewart W (2000), Behavioral couples therapy for alcoholism and drug abuse. J Subst Abuse Treat 18(1):51-54.
34. O'Farrell TJ, Fals-Stewart W, Murphy M, Murphy CM
(2003), Partner violence before and after individually based alcoholism treatment
for male alcoholic patients. J Consult Clin Psychol 71(1):92-102.
35. Oriel KA, Fleming MF (1998), Screening men for
partner violence in a primary care setting. A new strategy
for detecting domestic violence. J Fam
Pract 46(6):493-498 [see comment].
36. Pan HS, Neidig PH, O'Leary KD (1994), Predicting
mild and severe husband-to-wife physical aggression. J Consult Clin Psychol 62(5):975-981.
37. Project MATCH Research Group (1997), Matching
alcoholism treatments to client heterogeneity: Project MATCH posttreatment drinking outcomes. J Stud Alcohol 58(1):7-29
38. Rennison CM, Welchans S
(2000), Intimate partner violence. Bureau of Justice
Statistics Special Report. NCJ 178247.
Available at: www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs. Accessed March 16, 2005.
39. Roberts AR (1998), Substance abuse among men who batter their mates. The dangerous mix. J Subst Abuse
40. Schafer J, Caetano R, Clark C (1998), Rates of
intimate partner violence in the United States. Am J Public Health
41. Schumacher JA, Fals-Stewart W, Leonard KE (2003),
Domestic violence treatment referrals for men seeking alcohol treatment. J Subst Abuse Treat 24(3):279-283.
42. Sinha R, Easton C, Renee-Aubin
L, Carroll KM (2003), Engaging young probation-referred marijuana abusing
individuals in treatment: a pilot trial. Am J Addict
43. Spielberger CD (1991), State-Trait Anger
Expression Inventory: Revised Research Edition. Odessa, Fla.:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
44. Straus MA, Gelles RJ (1990), Physical Violence in
American Families: Risk Factors and Adaptations to Violence in 8,145 Families. New Brunswick, N.J.:
45. Straus MA, Hamby SL, Boney-McCoy S, Sugarman DB
(1996), The revised conflict tactics scales (CTS2): development and preliminary
psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues 17(3):283-316.
46. Van Hightower NR, Gorton J (1998), Domestic violence among patients at two
rural health care clinics: prevalence and social correlates. Public Health Nurs 15(5):355-362.