Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

Research review: Domestic violence risk assessment

Author: Thangam Debbonaire, director, Domestic Violence Responses Publication Date: 22 September 2011

Find this document useful?

Community Care Inform has a wealth of practice-related information available online. To see how you can get full access to more documents just like this one, and to request a free trial for your organisation, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk

Quick links: Introduction Purposes of risk assessment Limitations of risk assessments Types of risk factors Practice considerations Clinical/practitioner judgement Risks from different courses of action Summary of risks for victims of domestic violence Summary of risks for children living with or witnessing domestic violence Summary of risks for perpetrators of domestic violence Risk assessment tools Summary of risk factors and relevant tools for assessment for specific outcomes Legislation and guidance Extracts from Cafcass safeguarding procedure Additional extract from the safeguarding procedure, summarising the duties of the practice guidance Further information from the practice guidance: experts in family proceedings relating to children Role of the social worker Key tasks for the social worker Role of the Cafcass officer Resources Bibliography

Introduction Social workers, court welfare officers and other practitioners working with adults or children Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 1

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

are now often expected to carry out or obtain a specialist risk assessment where there is domestic violence. Risk assessment for domestic violence can inform many areas of practice and help to keep victims safer, protect children from harm and help to inform strategies with the abusive partner. For these assessments to be useful for informing responses and interventions, it is important to be clear about what is being assessed, how and with what evidence. Some practitioners may not be clear about which risks they are assessing for, the relative strengths of different indicators or the methods for conducting the assessments or analysing the results. Ideally, such tools should be introduced through specific training. This briefing paper aims to: provide information about the nature, purpose and value of domestic violence risk assessments; introduce some of the most commonly used domestic violence risk assessment tools; provide information about the various risk factors for outcomes where there is domestic violence, linking these to relevant risk assessment tools; and provide links to other resources which will help to inform the process of carrying out or commissioning risk assessments by social workers, Cafcass and others. Purposes of risk assessment Different risk assessments may be assessing for: Risk of any domestic abuse starting. Risk of domestic abuse continuing, once started. Risk of domestic abuse escalating in severity and/or frequency. Risk of further physical assault resulting in a police call out. Risk of homicide or serious injury. Risk of homicide/suicide. Risks of children witnessing domestic abuse. Risk to children of being directly affected by abuse. Risk of child abduction. Risk of child homicide.

Each of these types of risk has a different set of risk indicators. There is also sometimes controversy amongst researchers about the most valid way to interpret data about risk. Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 2

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

Limitations of risk assessments For tools to be most effective, risk assessments should be based on well carried out research which identifies clear risk factors for different outcomes. Even then, the assessments are of risk only: they do not and cannot predict outcomes, they only help to inform decision making. Decisions will also need to be made about how to weigh up the decision where, for example, a given outcome is assessed as highly likely to happen, though not at all certain, but with a relatively low level of impact if it does, or where it is assessed as not very likely though not out of the question, but with a very high level of impact if it does. Practitioners should ideally develop a thorough understanding of the evidence base for risk assessments, in order to make more informed decisions. In any case, they will need to be trained to administer and make effective use of any risk assessment instrument they are using. Failure to participate in training results in ineffective use of the assessment process and can often result in hugely varying use amongst professionals (Hoyle, 2007). Tools developed to assess the risk of one aspect of domestic violence risk may be well tested for that context but when applied to assess for another outcome be less well supported by research or even contra-indicated. A significant example is the use of tools developed using evidence about maletofemale intimate partner violence for risk in other contexts, such as female-to-male or same sex. None of the tools in common use has been validated for female-to-male or same sex contexts. Care should be exercised when coming to conclusions about risk assessments in these contexts. Tools vary, yet most claim to be supported by evidence. Some miss out factors which others identify as critical and which research strongly suggests are important, such as victim prediction. This suggests that risk is far from scientific but in fact a social construct (Hoyle, 2008).

Types of risk factors Risk factors include the dynamic (changing: such as age, relationship status, etc) and static (unchanging: such as gender). These should be reviewed regularly in the light of changes. Types of factors are presented lower down this paper, showing which outcomes they are linked to. Practice considerations Some tools do not weight the different elements or leave some critical ones out. They can Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 3

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

thus give false negatives if practitioners are not aware of the significance of a cluster of factors (Hoyle, 2008). For example, many practitioners interpret separation of the couple as a predictor of safety, when in fact, in male-to-female intimate partner violence it is an indicator of increased risk of assault, of new assault, of increased likelihood of homicide and of increased likelihood that children will witness the violence if contact is not carefully supervised. This tension is compounded by procedures which emphasise the desirability of the victim ending the relationship and do not require behaviour changes of the perpetrator. Victims are also making their own assessments of a range of different risks affecting them and their children. They may come to different conclusions. Given that the responsibilities and duties on statutory agencies to protect victims are not reliable and given that risk assessment is only ever an estimate of probable increases in risk of something happening, it seems unreasonable to expect that the victim, who is most under pressure and fear, to comply 100 per cent with safety plans which she does not agree with or feels do not address significant risks for her or her children.

Professionals carrying out specialist domestic violence risk assessments The person carrying out the risk assessment may be a generic social worker or Cafcass officer. It could also be a specialist domestic violence risk assessor. Specialist domestic violence intervention agencies working with perpetrators are often able to provide more specialist, in-depth domestic violence risk assessments. The Respect directory of expert risk assessors for domestic violence will be useful for practitioners needing expert assessments from specialists.

Clinical/practitioner judgement There is little evidence that clinical judgement out-performs use of reliable, validated and well administered risk assessment tools. Many studies have consistently found the use of wellevidenced assessment tools to be more reliable in predicting recidivism than practitioners judgement, memory etc. Others suggest that blending practitioner judgement with assessment tools adds nothing to reliability. This goes against the professional grain and indeed some well used risk assessment tools actually ask practitioners to add in their own judgement.

Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 4

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

However, the more the tool has been simplified for practitioner use, particularly if it has been prepared with an aim of supporting work carried out by generic practitioners rather than specialists in domestic violence risk assessments, the more likely it is to be improved if the practitioner is experienced and knowledgeable. Risks from different courses of action Risk assessment should also include assessing the relative risks of the various possible responses, to take them into account when making decisions and to plan for them. For example, the risk of homicide increases when a woman separates from a violent male partner so she will need increased protection at and after the separation. Summary of risks for victims of domestic violence Domestic violence by definition always carries risks for the victims. These include: Risks that the domestic violence will continue. Risk that the domestic violence will escalate in severity or frequency or both. Risk that the domestic violence will widen in scope of abusive behaviours, for example, to include physical, sexual, financial, psychological or other forms of coercive control or physical harm. Risk that the victim will use force as self defence, which will increase the risk of harm from the perpetrator. There are then the risks of the consequences of the domestic violence. These include that the domestic abuse will cause one or more of the following: Pain, injury, disability, death. Homelessness, poverty, having to be a single parent, social stigma if they try to leave abuser. Depression, mental illness, trauma. Unwanted pregnancy, forced abortion, sexually transmitted diseases, miscarriage, post natal depression.

Summary of risks for children living with or witnessing domestic abuse For many practitioners, the key concern will be the impact on children of the domestic violence and abuse. The continued experience of living with or witnessing domestic abuse will have risks of shortterm and long-term impacts on the children.

Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 5

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

It is important to be clear that many, if not most, of these risks are not reduced by the couple separating some may actually increase after separation. Children living with or witnessing domestic violence risk many potentially damaging experiences as a result of the abuse, which include: Being traumatised by witnessing violence from one parent to another. Being injured if they try to defend the victim or are in the way or objects are thrown. Being abused directly, as part of the pattern of coercive control and abuse. Being treated strictly by the victim parent in order to keep them from doing something to anger the perpetrator and cause more abuse. Social restrictions, not being allowed out or being allowed to bring friends home or not feeling safe to bring friends home, not able to pay for trips and extra curricula activities.

Summary of risks for perpetrators of domestic violence Whilst it may not be the most urgent concern for many practitioners, there are also risks for the perpetrator of domestic violence. Risks of harm to the perpetrator may also have the effect of elevating the risk that he will be more dangerous to the victim and children. These risks include: Suicide/depression when relationship breaks down (increases risk of harm for victim/children). Homelessness. Injury if victim uses self defence or resistance. Criminal record, incarceration, fine. These risks also carry consequences for victim and children, such as lack of income if the perpetrator is paying fines, or missing dad if he is incarcerated.

Summary of risks for other people affected by domestic violence Other people can also be affected by domestic violence. They include: Other adults in the family who may try to intervene or mediate and get injured or threatened as a result. Other adults in the family who have to care for children if the victim and perpetrator are unable or not allowed to care for them. Professionals who may be threatened by the perpetrator or in some cases the victim.

Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 6

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

Risk assessment tools There is no perfect risk assessment tool. However, some are well tested and refined and based on rigorous and significant practice and research lessons and others are not so well grounded. It is often more effective and helpful for risk assessments to be carried out by specialist intervention programmes working with domestic abusers. The CAADA (Coordinated Action Against Domestic Abuse) risk identification tool and the Respect/Relate/CAFCASS amended version are now in widespread use by domestic violence specialists and non-specialists, particularly those involved with MARACs. This tool, called the DASH (Domestic Abuse, Stalking and Harassment) can be used by non domestic violence specialists for identifying the levels of risk of future domestic violence. Many Safeguarding Childrens Boards (SCBs) are in the process of drafting and implementing domestic violence risk assessment tools for use in child protection. There is a sample procedure to domestic violence for SCBs to adopt provided in the toolkit on children and domestic violence written by Greater London Domestic Violence Project and published by the then Department of Health (DoH, 2009).

Summary of risk factors and relevant tools for assessment for specific outcomes This is a summary of the various outcomes professionals may be concerned about, the relevant risk factors as identified by rigorous research for each of these outcomes and where possible a suggested tool or tools for assessing this specific set of factors and outcome.

Outcome Onset of IPV

Factors which increase the risk of this outcome Parental violence or harsh punishment in male family of origin (Ehrensaft et al, 2003). Conduct disorder (Ehrensaft et al, 2003). Alcohol misuse (Murphy et al, 2001; Sharps et al, 2001). Personality disorder, mood disorder, anger and hostility (Hanson et al, 1997). Gender stereotyped attitudes (Haggerman-White et al, 2010).

Relevant tools Propensity to Abuse Scale (Dutton)

Jealousy, insecure attachment and attitudes supportive of Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 7

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

Outcome

Factors which increase the risk of this outcome violence (Holtzworth-Munroe et al, 1997). Insecure attachment, borderline personality, childhood trauma (Dutton).

Relevant tools

Recidivism

Younger age, lower socioeconomic status of perpetrator, history of abuse, conflict and verbal abuse (Aldarondo and Sugarman 1996; Bennett et al 2000; Benson et al, 2003; Gondolf 2002). History of severe male-to-female IPV. Alcohol use (Gondolf, 2002; Fals-Stewart, 2003). Psychopathy (Hare, 2003). Victim predictions of abuse (Gondolf, 2002).

CAADA Risk Identification Tool Risk Identification Checklist (RIC) Spousal Assault Risk Assessment (SARA)

If they also commit other violent acts, particularly high risk of ODARA recidivism (Marshall and Holtzworth-Munroe, 20002). Increased frequency or severity Female victim/male perpetrator (Campbell et al 2007). Male jealousy/proprietary behaviour (Campbell et al, 2007). Victim prediction (Weisz et al, 2000). Similar characteristics to psychopaths (Hare, 2003) such as glibness, boredom, un-empathic callousness, impulsivity etc. Assault following perpetrator programme Assault during first 13 weeks of programme (Gondolf, 2002). Programme drop out Denial of problem, younger age, criminal history, continued Respect misuse of substances, severe violence in past (Dalton, suitability tool Continued alcohol misuse (Gondolf, 2002). Partners predictions of violence (Gondolf, 2002). Respect version of the RIC Children in the family (Campbell et al, 2007). Step children in the family (Campbell et al, 2007). Danger Assessment tool (DA)

2001; Daly, Power and Gondolf, 2001; Hanson and Wallace- (Calvin Bell) Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 8

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

Outcome

Factors which increase the risk of this outcome Capretta, 2004). Probation officers assessment of mens likely co-operation with programme is NOT associated with completion (Babcock and Steiner, 1999).

Relevant tools

Homicide/lethal Past male-to-female violence (Campbell et al, 2007). assault Access to or ownership of gun, use of weapons in abuse, threats with weapons, threats to kill, past serious injury, perpetrator threats of suicide, drug or alcohol abuse, sexual abuse of female, possessiveness/extreme jealousy (all Campbell, 2007).

Danger Assessment

Risk of children Separation and unsupervised contact (Hester and Radford, Cafcass witnessing IPV DATE). Possessiveness by perpetrator (HOMICIDE REFERENCES). process Specialist domestic violence risk assessments (see Respect register) Risk of harm to Domestic violence continues and in circumstances where children through the child is likely to be a witness. IPV Few protective factors. Victim has high level of fear/injury. Perpetrator is unwilling to change or take responsibility. Perpetrator is not subject to any criminal or civil court Barnardos assessment tool for children and domestic violence Specialist domestic

sanctions or these are not being implemented (Haggerman- violence risk assessments White et al, 2010). (see Respect Victim is being held responsible for the violence or for stopping the violence (perpetrator impunity) (HaggermanWhite et al, 2010). register)

Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 9

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

Legislation and guidance The Adoption and Children Act (2002) has clarified the definition of harm in the Children Act 1989 to include harm suffered from seeing or hearing the ill-treatment of another, so it includes harm caused by witnessing domestic violence. In effect this requires all child protection social work. Cafcass Safeguarding Procedure, updated 2010. This document includes a section on domestic violence and on risk assessment which requires Cafcass officers to carry out appropriate risk assessments when there are allegations or suspicions or evidence of domestic violence. Practice Direction: Residence and Contact Orders: Domestic Violence and Harm (Children Act Sub Committee)

Extracts from Cafcass Safeguarding Procedure (updated 2010) Initial risk identification private law 4.3.14 Where screening and/or risk identification information indicates a concern (but not of a level requiring immediate referral to children's services) the practitioner should advise the court of the need to implement a more detailed risk assessment before decisions relating to the child can be made safely.(x-ref to DV) Detailed assessment about risk and safety 4.3.15 In private law, the Cafcass assessment will sometimes be enhanced by additional risk assessment work undertaken by an external agency or independent expert. In these cases, as in public law, the practitioners duty is met by conducting screening and risk identification, and then working alongside the other relevant professionals to ensure that the final risk assessment addresses all the matters raised by the Cafcass risk identification. 4.3.16 The detailed assessment about risk and safety will be an integral part of the work in the case using the Cafcass Assessment workbook and record of assessment. 4.3.17 Some elements should always be present in an assessment of risk and safety, as follows: Identification of key risks. A brief chronology of previous concerns. Identification of other agencies who are involved, along with their assessment of risk and what work they are committed to doing. Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 10

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

The childs own views. Identification of the impact of race, culture, language and communication, or any other diversity factors.

The views both of parents and of any other relevant adults. Identification of factors which make the situation worse as well as those which safeguard the child.

A plan for improved management of risk in the future including any referrals.

When the above plan is dependent upon an individual protective adult, the assessment should record that the practitioner has spoken directly to that adult and that a plan is in place for communication to a named professional, if the adult is no longer able to fulfill the protective role. 4.3.18 A range of resources is provided on the intranet to assist the practitioner in undertaking an assessment of risk and safety. The practitioner should select those resources most relevant for the individual piece of work. Where domestic violence is a feature, the CAADADASH risk identification checklist should always be used. 4.3.19 The practitioner should: Record the outcomes of the assessment of risk and safety within the Cafcass Assessment workbook and record of assessment. The implications for future work should be recorded in the case plan. Incorporate key elements of it into the court report.

Additional extract from the Safeguarding Procedure, summarising the duties of the Practice Guidance:

The Practice Direction (President of the Family Division, January 2009) is also of relevance, setting out directions for the court where there is reason to suppose that the child or a party has experienced domestic violence perpetrated by another party or that there is risk of such violence. It stipulates that courts shall, for example: Upon receipt of an application for a residence or contact order, send a copy of the application and accompanying documents to Cafcass, to enable Cafcass to undertake screening. Put in place arrangements to ensure that information obtained by Cafcass is placed before the court. Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 11

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

Make special arrangements, if advised by Cafcass or otherwise, to secure the safety of any party or child attending a hearing. Determine as soon as possible whether it is necessary to conduct a fact-finding hearing. 6.4 The practitioner should be alert to the possibility of domestic violence in all proceedings, even when it has not been alleged. 6.5 The practitioner should safeguard children who are at risk from domestic violence, including harm from seeing or hearing the ill-treatment of another, in the same way as for all other forms of potential harm by adherence to the Safeguarding Framework. A referral to social care should be made if there is a single DV incident, if the child is under 12 months (WT P312, 11.88) and contact from an abusive partner must be risk managed (WT P313, 11.89). 6.6 The practitioner should also consider the needs of the victim of domestic violence as a vulnerable adult (see section 7). This may include a referral to a Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARAC) see section 8. 6.7 Where potential harm to a child from domestic violence has been identified the detailed assessment should always include use of the CAADA-DASH risk identification checklist.

Further information from the practice guidance: experts in family proceedings relating to children The guidance aims to provide the court in family proceedings relating to children with early information to determine whether an expert or expert evidence will assist the court to: Identify, narrow and where possible agree the issues between the parties. Provide an opinion about a question which is not within the skill and experience of the court. Encourage the early identification of questions that need to be answered by an expert. Encourage the disclosure of full and frank information between the parties, the court and any expert.

The court may ask for expert evidence in public or private law proceedings relating to a child, or in adoption or fostering proceedings. The guidance specifies what the duties of the expert witness are in child proceedings, how they should prepare their report and what this report should contain. Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 12

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

Role of the social worker Social workers in safeguarding children cases will usually be dealing with a complex set of problems with domestic violence as part of the problem. Sometimes this will be the main problem but it is unlikely to be the only one. In some cases it may also appear that there are risks from both parents, or parental figures. Social workers will usually be guided in their response to domestic violence by a specific section in their local Safeguarding Children Board (SCB) procedure or by a specific SCB procedure for responding to domestic violence, which many SCBs now have. This procedure may: Direct the social worker towards using a specific risk assessment instrument or process when there are allegations or suspicions of domestic violence. Recommend that a specialist domestic violence risk assessor is appointed in cases of likely significant harm due to domestic violence. Do neither of these things.

If the latter is the case, the social worker may end up using a generic risk assessment tool, which may be inadequate or even dangerously misleading. If no specific domestic violence risk assessment or indicator tool is suggested, the CAADA DASH is the most appropriate for identifying risk of future domestic violence or increase in level of harm to the victim. This will then provide the worker with initial assessment of evidence necessary to decide whether or not to make a referral to the Multi Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARAC specialist multi agency forum for assessing and managing risk from domestic violence). It will also assist the social worker in more generic assessments of risk of harm to the child, providing the social worker remains vigilant about the very specific risks and indicators for domestic violence, as they may not be as the social worker expects. If the social worker has scope in their agencys terms of reference to refer the case to a specialist domestic violence risk assessor who is also able to act as an expert witness in court, this can be done by consulting Respect, the national association for work with domestic violence perpetrators, who maintains a register of such assessors and monitors their work. If the social worker is directed to follow a specific procedure, this should be done bearing in mind the relevant impact of specific factors to specific outcomes, as described in the table above. Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 13

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

Chiefly, the social worker should be aware that separation of the perpetrator and victim is not in and of itself either a necessary or sufficient condition for the violence to stop or for the violence to stop affecting the child. In many cases, as identified above, separation will not stop the violence, it will actually increase the level of risk of harm and will increase the likelihood that the child will witness and be affected by it.

Key tasks for the social worker: a. Identify who may be a source of risk which may include step-father or father or in some cases mother or step-mother. b. Assess who is a source of risk to whom amongst the adults this can be aided by using the Respect matrix, helping professionals to identify where they are dealing with a perpetrator and also a victim who is sometimes using violent resistance, for example: a. Using this knowledge to identify who is a source of different risks to the children and in what circumstances for example, the victim will be unable to protect the children from inadequate care or harassment from the perpetrator on a child contact visit as she will not be present. c. Identify responses to provide the perpetrator with a way of changing behaviour to victim and to children bearing in mind that without addressing the violence to the victim the child is likely to continue to be affected by this, in the fathers continued abuse of their mother or in subsequent relationships with new partners; it is not sufficient to refer the perpetrator to a parenting programme, though this is also extremely useful. d. Identify responses to support the victim and protect children in the short and long term remembering that they cant change the perpetrators behaviour and that simple separation from the perpetrator will not stop their abusive behaviour. e. Request a specialist domestic violence risk assessment at any stage to identify the above and to identify the relative likelihood of various outcomes. f. Propose a plan incorporating all of the above to the safeguarding board and if necessary to court this should include dates for review. g. Monitor and review the plan. Specialist domestic violence risk assessors will look in more detail at a range of actuarial risk factors, dynamic and static, which help to make a more detailed assessment of the likely risks of future harm, protective factors, options for treatment or support to reduce risk. This will Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 14

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

usually take place over several interviews with both adults separately and where appropriate and possible, with children, and combining the findings of this from other information about the history of abuse (Radford, Blacklock and Iwi, 2006).

Role of the Cafcass officer In cases of contested child contact and residence, domestic violence is often a significant feature. There have been various significant developments in policy and research over the last decade to guide Cafcass officers attempting to identify, investigate and make recommendations about such cases. It is vital that a contact or residence order does not prejudice the safety of the children and that the care and supervision of children on contact visits is assured. However, it is also vital that victims are not put at risk from the arrangements for contact or residence. Their safety will affect the children if this is not attended to. Furthermore, the parent or parental figure who has allegedly used abuse has a right to make the application and for allegations to be treated fairly. However, the childrens welfare is paramount and courts rightly take a precautionary approach where there are allegations or evidence of domestic violence. Interim orders can be used. So too can findings of fact, or the possibility of ordering a specialist domestic violence risk assessment and assessment for suitability for a perpetrator programme. The 2005/2006 HMCS Inspection reports of Cafcass identified that there was too much focus on agreement seeking, rather than safeguarding children and their mothers from domestic violence. The 2007 Cafcass Safeguarding Framework involved screening, risk identification and safety assessment. During 2007, specialist staff from Cafcass, Respect and Relate worked together to produce an amended version of the domestic violence risk assessment tool. This was done with support from CAADA (coordinated action against domestic abuse) and all three agencies were involved in piloting the tool. Cafcass teams in Eastbourne, Tees Valley and Plymouth piloted the tool. They were asked to test use it and to explore the value of incorporating this tool into their work in their private and/or public law case work. The pilot didnt alter the teams existing protocols for referring to MARAC or information sharing. It was agreed that the risk identification tool would be filled out in every case where there is any indication or allegation of domestic violence.

Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 15

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

Final recommendations are that the tool is reviewed and amended in line with feedback from the pilot and then introduced for general use across Relate, Respect, Cafcass and Children's Services (Debbonaire, 2008). In May 2008 the President of the Family Division issued a practice direction on domestic violence and harm in hearings for residence and contact orders. This was updated in 2009 and the link to the full guidance is contained in the section above on legislation and guidance. In December 2008 Cafcass introduced compulsory screening for domestic violence in all contested contact and residence applications. Research (Harne, 2009) on the impact of using a consistent risk identification process in Cafcass disputed child contact and residence cases found that before the use of risk identification tools the safeguarding decisions were inconsistent. After the risk identification was instituted, she found: Considerable reductions in agreements for interim contact. Clear identification of risks in majority of forms. Increased recognition of harm to child, domestic violence and associated factors for example, abduction threats, alcohol and drug misuse and mental health risks. Increase in decisions to seek further information, further assessment, mental health reports. More use made of police screening information (80 per cent). Some recognition that women with a confidential address signified risk (two cases).

She also found that the significance of post-separation violence was under-estimated in three cases, including threats to kill. In two of these three cases decisions were made before the police checks were received. One of these involved counter-allegations of violence, although the police check subsequently showed that only the father had convictions. Key tasks for Cafcass officer: a. Follow the guidance for Cafcass officers where there may be domestic violence (see links). b. Be alert to the strong possibility of domestic violence as part of the context to a contested child contact application use screening procedures to guide this. c. Identify who may be a source of risk which may include step-father or father or in some cases mother or step-mother.

Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 16

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

d. Assess who is a source of risk to whom amongst the adults this can be aided by using the Respect matrix, helping professionals to identify where they are dealing with a perpetrator and also a victim who is sometimes using violent resistance, for example. e. Carry out risk identification as directed by the Cafcass procedure, using the risk identification form. f. Using this knowledge to identify who is a source of different risks to the children and in what circumstances for example, the victim will be unable to protect the children from inadequate care or harassment from the perpetrator on a child contact visit as she will not be present. g. Refer the perpetrator to a Cafcass Approved Provider of domestic violence perpetrator programmes to address his violent and abusive behaviour bearing in mind that without addressing the violence to the victim the child is likely to continue to be affected by this, in the fathers continued abuse of their mother or in subsequent relationships with new partners; it is not sufficient to refer the perpetrator to a parenting programme, though this is also extremely useful. h. Refer the victim and/or children to support services if necessary. i. Request a specialist domestic violence risk assessment at any stage to identify the above and to identify the relative likelihood of various outcomes. j. Propose a plan incorporating all of the above to the court this should include dates for review. k. Monitor and review the plan.

Resources Child contact between children and parents who are perpetrators of domestic violence Sample procedure for Safeguarding Childrens Boards to adopt for responding to children affected by domestic violence and abuse. For local SCB procedure on responding to domestic violence including any recommended risk assessment tool, use an internet search engine to search for NAME OF SCB procedure for responding to children affected by domestic violence. Improving safety, reducing harm: children, young people and domestic violence. This toolkit provides specific information about children, domestic violence and related issues; an Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 17

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

overview of Every Child Matters and the tiers of intervention; principles of commissioning services; risk assessment and safety planning information; guidance for schools; clear explanations of key standards and policies; sample forms and key fact sheets. Newcastle SCB guidance on responding to domestic violence Cafcass toolkit for responding to domestic violence (2007) including domestic violence risk identification tool. Cafcass Safeguarding Procedure, updated 2010. This document includes a section on domestic violence and on risk assessment which requires Cafcass officers to carry out appropriate risk assessments when there are allegations or suspicions or evidence of domestic violence. Practice Direction: Residence and Contact Orders: Domestic Violence and Harm (Children Act Sub Committee) Approved Providers of DVPPs for Cafcass Specialist Domestic Violence Risk Assessors Register

Bibliography CAADA (2007) CAADA Recommended Risk Assessment Checklist for IDVAs and other Agencies Campbell, J (ed) (2007) Assessing Dangerousness: Violence by Batterers and Child Abusers. New York: Springer. Campbell, J (2007) Prediction of Homicide of and By Battered Women. In Campbell, J (ed) (2007) Assessing Dangerousness: Violence by Batterers and Child Abusers. NewYork: Springer. Campbell, J (2003) Danger Assessment Scale. Capaldi, D. M., & Clark, S. (1998). Prospective family predictors of aggression toward female partners for at-risk young men. Developmental Psychology, 34, 1175-1188. Debbonaire, T (2008) The pilot of the Respect/Relate/CAFCASS domestic violence risk identification tool: evaluation report. London: Respect, Relate and Cafcass Dobash,R.P., Dobash, R.E., Cavanagh,K. & Lewis, R. (2001) Homicide in Britain: risk factors, situational contexts and lethal intentions. London: ESRC. Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 18

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

Dobash, R.E., Dobash R.P., Cavanagh, K. & Lewis, R. (2004) Not an Ordinary Killer Just an Ordinary guy. When Men Murder an Intimate Woman Partner. Violence Against Women, 10(6), 577 605. Dobash,R., Dobash,R. Cavanagh,K. & Medina-Ariza,J. (2007) Lethal and non-lethal violence against an intimate female partner. Violence Against Women, 13(4), 329 353. Dutton, D (1998) The abusive personality: violence and control in intimate relationships. New York: the Guildford Press Dutton, D (2002b) Psychiatric explanation of intimate abusiveness. Journal of Psychiatric Practice 8(4), 216 - 228 Ehrensaft, M.K.; Cohen, P.; Brown, J; Smailes, E; Chen, H; and Johnson, JG (2003) Intergenerational Transmission of Partner Violence: A 20-Year Prospective Study Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 2003, Vol. 71, No. 4, 74175 Fetzer, M (2010) Domestic Homicide in New York State. New York: Division of Criminal Justice Services Office of Justice Research & Performance Garcia, L; Soria, C.; Hurwitz, E. L (2007) Homicides and Intimate Partner Violence: A Literature Review in Trauma Violence Abuse 2007 8: 370 Gondolf, E (2002) Batterer Intervention Systems: Issues, Outcomes and Recommendations. California: Sage. Haggerman-White, C. et al (2010) Factors influencing perpetration of violence against women and children. Brussels: European Commission. Harne, L (2009)Domestic violence and safeguarding children: the use of systematic risk identification and assessment in private law proceedings by Family Court Advisors: a pilot study. Bristol: University of Bristol and Cafcass. Holtzworth-Munroe, A., Meehan, J. C., Herron, K., Rehman, U., & Stuart, G. L. (2000). Testing the Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart (1994) batterer typology. Journal of Consulting and ClinicalPsychology, 68, 1000-1019. Holtzworth-Munroe, A., Meehan, J. C., Herron, K., Rehman, U., & Stuart, G. L. (2003). Do subtypes of maritally violent men continue to differ over time? Journal of Consulting and ClinicalPsychology, 71, 728-740.

Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 19

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

Holtzworth-Munroe, A., Smutzler, N., & Bates, L. (1997).Abrief reviewof the research on husband violence. Part III: Sociodemographic factors, relationship factors, and differing consequences of husband and wife violence. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 2, 285-307. Holtzworth-Munroe, A., & Stuart, G. L. (1994). Typologies of male batterers: Three subtypes and the differences among them. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 476-497. Hoyle, C (2008) Will she be safe? A critical analysis of risk assessment in domestic violence cases. In Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 323 337 Humphreys, C., Thiara, R.K., Regan, L., Lovett, J., Kennedy, L., Gibson, A. (2005) Prevention Not Prediction? A preliminary evaluation of the Metropolitan Police Domestic Violence Risk Assessment Model (SPECSS+). Warwick: Centre for the Study of Safety and Wellbeing, University of Warwick Jaffe, P and Juadis, M (2006) Children as Victims and Witnesses of Domestic Homicide: Lessons Learned from Domestic Violence Death Review Committees. Juvenile and Family Court Journal Summer 2006 Kelly, L. (1994) The Inter Connectedness of Domestic Violence and Child Abuse in Mullender, A. and Morley, R. (eds.) Childrens experiences of domestic violence: Putting mens abuse of women on the child care agenda. Whiting and Birch. Koziol-McLain, J. et al (2006) Risk Factors for Femicide-Suicide in Abuse Relationships: Results from a Multisite Case Control Study. In Campbell, J (ed) (2007) Assessing Dangerousness: Violence by Batterers and Child Abusers. Springer. Previously published in Violence and Victims, 2006, Vol 21, no 1, pp 3-21. Laing, L (2004) Risk Assessment in Domestic Violence. Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse. OFSTED (2010) The Annual Report of Her Majestys Chief Inspector of Education, Childrens Services and Skills 2008/09 Radford, L. and Gill, A (2006) Losing the plot? Researching community safety partnership work against domestic violence. The Howard Journal, 45(4), 369-387 Radford, L., Blacklock, N. & Iwi, K. (2006) Domestic Abuse Risk Assessment and Safety Planning in Child Protection Assessing Perpetrators. In Humphreys, C. & Stanley, N. (eds) Domestic Violence and Child Protection. Directions for Good Practice. London: Jessica Kingsley Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 20

Research review: Domestic Violence risk assessment

Regan, L. , Kelly, L, Morris, A., Dibb, R. (2007) If only wed known: an exploratory study of seven intimate partner homicides in Engleshire. London: Child and Woman Abuse Studies Unit. Available: Robinson, A. (2004) Domestic violence MARACS (Multi-Agency risk Assessment Conferences) for very high-risk victims in Cardiff, Wales: A process and outcome evaluation. Cardiff: Cardiff University Roehl, J., & Guertin, K. (2000) Intimate partner violence: The current use of risk assessments in sentencing offenders, The Justice System Journal, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 171198. Smith, K et al (2011) Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2009/10. Supplementary Volume 2 to Crime in England and Wales 2009/10. London: Home Office. Websdale, N. (2000a) Lethality Assessment Tools: A Critical Analysis, [webpage]. National Electronic Network on Violence Against Women. Websdale, N. (2000b) In Brief: Lethality Assessment Tools: A Critical Analysis. National Electronic Network on Violence Against Women: Applied Research Forum. Websdale, N (2010) Familicidal Hearts: The Emotional Styles of 211 Killers. New York: OUP Websdale, N (2003) Reviewing Domestic Violence Deaths. NIJ Journal number 250.

2012 Reed Business Information Limited. All Rights Reserved.

Debbonaire, T. (2011) Domestic violence risk assessment. Research. Community Care Inform For more information, call Kim Poupart on 020 8652 4848 or email kim.poupart@rbi.co.uk Page 21