Domestic violence cannot be minimized by ideology, supposition, and “because I think it is and that’s that” way of thinking, which is nuts. Solutions have to be based on replicable scientific evidence.
NCFM NOTE: Mr. Davis is a leading domestic violence researcher, author, retired police officer, and college instructor. This article is well worth the read if you are interested in evidence-based practices for the Domestic Violence Industry.
If the introduction below interests you the complete paper is online at http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981868751
Evidence-Based Practices
By Richard Davis
Evidence-based practices are designed to introduce or maintain objectivity in our decision making processes (Macionis, 2011). Far too many domestic violence/aggression interventions, policies and programs that are presented to the criminal justice system are biased by ideological subjectivity rather than empirical objectivity (Dasgupta, 2003; Kruttschnitt, McLaughlin & Petrie, 2004; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000).
Too many 21st century public policy makers and domestic violence/aggression interveners remain focused on 20th century hypotheses and theories rather than 21st century evidence-based data (Black, et al., 2011; Fagan, 1996; Kruttschnitt, McLaughlin & Petrie, 2004; Maline, 2013; Walters, Chen & Breiding, 2013).
The phenomenon that is domestic violence/aggression has become an enigma because it continues to be primarily or solely presented as a women rights quandary rather than a human rights dilemma. Once understood without bias, it can be both. In this 21st century the majority of our public policy makers and domestic violence interveners seem to be pitting the rights of one group of victims against another (Wallace & Roberson, 2011).
What is equally troubling is that too many social scientists do not agree on a definition for domestic violence/aggression. Many research and present it as intimate partner violence while others research and present it as family violence. Once understood without bias, it can be both. Domestic violence/aggression does not mean the same thing to too many researchers, public policy makers, practitioners and interveners and hence to most people in general (Wallace & Roberson, 2011).
Domestic violence/aggression is also viewed, understood and defined differently by federal agencies and individual state statute law. Hence it is often perceived as two different phenomenon (www.womenslaw.org, 2013).
How does one accurately study or research a phenomenon if a definition cannot be agreed on because the definition of any act both sets limits and focuses research within certain boundaries? The lack of agreement in defining family [domestic] violence has led to confusion and disarray in attempts to determine factors that cause or contribute to family [domestic] violence. (Wallace & Roberson, 2011, p. 4)ha
Mr. Davis´article on Gather.com got marked as spam and is not viewable. I tried starting an account so I could contact him and let him know, but it says they are currently not accepting new accounts. If anyone reads this and has a Gather.com account, maybe you could let Mr. Davis know.
Shortly after the first domestic violence shelter was founded in the UK, the domestic violence industry became feminist agenda driven, rather than factually driven, according to the founder of that first shelter in the UK. The feminists’ “gender based violence” agenda that presumes male guilt before any evidence is even looked for has created a mountain of misandry in the domestic violence industry as shown in “Los Misandry” at Youtube.