Perpetrators' Perspectives on Family Violence: An Event Process Model.

Offense process models are descriptive theories that provide a temporal outline of an offense-including its cognitive, behavioral, contextual, and motivational components-from a perpetrator's perspective. Offense process models have been developed for a wide range of criminal offending (e.g., alcohol-impaired driving, child sexual offending, rape, aggravated robbery, homicide), but remain underdeveloped for family violence. The purpose of this study was to develop an offense process model of family violence. We conducted individual semistructured interviews with 27 participants-14 men and 13 women-completing community-based family violence perpetrator treatment programs, and systematically analyzed participants' narratives of family violence events using grounded theory methods. The resulting event process model of family violence (FVEPM) contains four sections, arranged temporally from the most distal to the most proximal factors in relation to the family violence event: (1) background factors, (2) event build-up, (3) event, and (4) post-event. Each section outlines the cognitive, behavioral, contextual, and motivational factors that contribute to family violence perpetration. The FVEPM is the first attempt to consider whether a single offense process model can account for a broader range of family violence than that used solely by men toward their female intimate partners. Furthermore, the FVEPM highlights the dynamic nature of family violence events (FVEs), and the salient role of situational and interpersonal factors in contributing to family violence perpetration. We argue that the FVEPM has the potential to accommodate a range of types of family violence perpetration, and makes a useful contribution to theory and research on event-based models from a perpetrator perspective.

Pathways to Family Violence: Investigating Patterns in the Event Process of Family Violence Perpetrators.

This study is part of a larger research project that developed the event process model of family violence (FVEPM). The FVEPM was developed by applying grounded theory methods to the event narratives of 14 men and 13 women completing community-based family violence (FV) perpetrator treatment programs. The current study extends this work with the original sample, by examining the routes individual events take through the FVEPM. Three main pathways-comprising 93% of event narratives-were identified: a conflict escalation pathway (n = 14), an automated violence pathway (n = 6), and a compliance pathway (n = 6). Our findings extend existing FV typologies and theories by identifying patterns of features pertaining to the individual, the relationship, and the situation that converge to result in FV perpetration during a FVE. Further validation and development of the pathways may provide FV practitioners with an organizing framework from which to identify more nuanced assessment, treatment planning, and risk management processes for the diverse range of FV perpetrators they are tasked with treating.

Testing the Generalizability of the Event Process Model of Family Violence With an Incarcerated Sample.

The event process model of family violence (FVEPM) presents a descriptive theory of a family violence (FV) event from the perpetrator's perspective. Developed in a community setting, the FVEPM is comprised of four interrelated sections and describes three pathways to FV perpetration (Pathway 1: Conflict escalation, Pathway 2: Automated violence, and Pathway 3: Compliance). This study further developed the FVEPM by testing the generalizability of the model and its pathways with an incarcerated sample of eight men with extensive histories of violent and other offending. Event narratives were gathered during individual semi-structured interviews, and were systematically analyzed using grounded theory methods. Overall, findings suggest that the FVEPM and its pathways can accommodate an incarcerated sample. However, several inconsistencies were found: Event narratives were better represented by splitting Pathway 1 into two sub-types, and no event narratives were assigned to Pathway 3. Implications for FV theories and treatment are discussed.