According to a recent publication by the national charity Women’s Aid, domestic violence remains a shockingly common experience in Britain. It quotes a body of research showing that it can affect one in four women in their lifetime, regardless of age, social class, race, disability or lifestyle.

Domestic violence accounts for between 16 to 25 per cent of all recorded violent crime, and these figures don’t include wider definitions of abuse, such as sexual abuse.¹ A report from the University of Bristol and the NSPCC, published in September this year, researches the little known issue of partner violence in teenage intimate relationships. The worrying findings clearly show that violence in these relationships should be viewed as a significant child welfare problem.²

The UK Government, in line with the United Nations and World Health Organisation, has not been ignoring this phenomenon and in 2005 launched a national delivery plan to reduce domestic violence. Amongst initiatives involving the criminal justice system, this plan also required agencies which may come into contact with a person experiencing domestic violence and abuse (‘DVA’) to facilitate safe disclosure by their clients and to offer interventions in ways that are appropriate and effective.

Relate’s response to DVA
Relate, as most readers will know, is a national federated charity with over 70 years’ experience of supporting the nation’s relationships through advice, relationship counselling, sex therapy, education and learning services, mediation, consultations and support. Its services are delivered all over the UK at over 600 locations to couples, individuals and families. It has long taken DVA very seriously and has been responding to the problem more particularly since 2002 when it received funding from the Lord Chancellor’s department. Thinking from the specialist agencies working with victims and survivors of DVA, along with specialist agencies that work with those who use violence and abuse against their partner (such as Respect), has fine-tuned Relate’s response to DVA in recent years.

A consistent view had emerged about the inappropriateness of conventional couples work as an intervention. It became clear that to address DVA appropriately, a thorough assessment was necessary to ensure that previous behaviour was not still impacting on the relationship in the present. Relate, facing an approximate 30 per cent of clients for whom DVA is an issue, felt it had to take this idea on board: if a couple intervention is the only intervention offered, individuals may not be able to talk fully or freely about what is happening to them.

The Relate Responsive Model
The ‘Responsive Model’ has been developed as a result of this thinking. It aims to create a context within which individuals can disclose DVA in more detail and with greater clarity, and from which Relate can offer a response to each partner appropriately, while prioritising the safety of the vulnerable adult and children. At the recent BACP Annual Conference in Newcastle, the model won an Innovation in Counselling and Psychotherapy Award, having successfully demonstrated ‘new ideas or techniques which are likely to have lasting effects on the evolution of counselling and psychotherapy’.

Rose Mary Owen is the principal consultant for practice development at the Relate central office and Relate Institute, UK, and received the award on behalf of Relate, having been deeply involved in its evolution and implementation. In recent years, she has also taken a leading role in creating and developing practice in relation to DVA and child protection within Relate more generally. She has extensive clinical experience in relationship counselling, sex therapy and supervision, and is a trainer and part of the team that developed Relate’s postgraduate diploma and MA in couple therapy with the University of East London.

I spoke to Owen about her work, and in particular how the Responsive Model signifies, in some ways, an important departure for Relate. ‘This work has grown out of Relate paying attention to a wake-up call in society. As an agency our work pays attention to the external world and not just our own views. It feels important that Relate be seen, and sees itself as part of society. We are not a specialist DVA agency and we need to inform ourselves and work out how best to respond to a recognised issue.’

Three-stage roll out
The Responsive Model has been rolled out in three stages across the organisation. Stage one involves paying attention to and adjusting the information and recording systems in place when couples arrive for help. This means confidentiality and safety are reiterated to clients in writing, and verbally on every first contact. Information materials are used as an intervention, and positive responses given to a client asking to be seen alone. Individual contact details are taken at registration and a systematic recording of all contacts about clients introduced. A clearer structure for signposting and referrals to national and local resources has also been set up.

Stage two involves training for all Relate staff. Not only does this involve DVA awareness, but the use and understanding of two new crucial frameworks for responding to the disclosure of DVA – ‘Bridging to Safety’ and ‘Bridging to Change’. The former relates to cases where a client is experiencing DVA, and the focus of the work becomes their safety and that of any children. It usually involves a small number of sessions offering listening and support, while ensuring that the client has the information and practical support needed to ensure safety, including contact with DVA agencies. ‘Bridging to Change’ operates where a client acknowledges their use of violence and abuse, and expresses a clear desire to change their behaviour. One or two sessions focus on helping a client to acknowledge that their behaviour is harmful and unacceptable, and encourages them with motivation to change. A referral to Respect (UK membership association for domestic violence perpetrator programmes and associated support services) may be suggested. Relate now has Respect programmes in three of its centres.

The third and final stage of the Responsive Model may be its most crucial one. It is due to be completed across the organisation by the end of this year and involves the use of the ‘individual structured interview’ (ISI) – an eight-page schedule of carefully devised questions for a client to answer. It is from the ISI that an appropriate response to DVA can be devised – including the ‘Bridging to Safety’ or ‘Bridging to Change’ frameworks.

Individual structured interview
Owen explained that devising the ISI involved a number of potential challenges since, with over 2,000 counsellors and 77 centres operating in over 600 locations, any changes Relate makes to practice have to be replicated consistently.
 
Relate’s well-known heritage resides in couples and family work, so, as Owen explains, ‘A big question for us was whether we could offer individual sessions. Also, theoretically, our counselling has roots in psychodynamic, systemic and CBT work. Working with a “schedule” involved a big departure from our skills set.’

Thorny ethical issues emerged too – does the ISI impose upon clients or threaten their right to autonomy, a BACP ethical guideline that Relate integrates as a core value? Indeed, experience shows Owen that, ‘Often clients can couch their reasoning in autonomous terms, such as: “I get jealous when my partner speaks to others and I need to make my partner comply to protect myself from this”, and we need to be aware of imposing something on someone else.’

Belinda Priestly has worked for Relate for over 20 years, and is heavily involved with Relate’s DVA initiatives. She has been using the ISI in her practice as a counsellor and supervisor in Greater Manchester South for over two years. ‘The ISI gives me confidence in navigating through a very difficult and complicated dynamic. It helps me work through what is a safe and appropriate response, especially where the risk and safety of a vulnerable adult and child are present. It also allows me to take a stance with clients.’

Owen agrees with the importance of communicating a ‘higher domain’ here. ‘While we need to be with our clients in a free way, we also need to have leadership and a thought-through policy and stance – coercion and violence are not OK in a healthy relationship. We no longer become engaged with our client in the same way when DVA is an issue; relational work is a mismatch here when safety and vulnerability are key.’

With this in mind Priestly has noted how clients can arrive with expectations of the counselling, often including the idea that Relate could be enlisted to ‘get a partner back’.

‘Clients often want to go down the route of cause and fault. If you follow them there you can easily get lost among explaining and excusing behaviours. The ISI takes the position that no one wins, and doesn’t dismiss the person using violence.’

The neutral language of the ISI is fundamental to its core aim of providing an opportunity for each client to explore what is and what is not happening in terms of DVA. Owen emphasises how important it is to develop questions that are as neutral as possible – reflected in the comprehensive and painstaking development and trial of the ISI. ‘We paid huge attention to what clients and practitioners said. The questions are entirely directed at behaviours – what clients are doing or experiencing. We consciously abandoned perpetrator/victim language as this could fix a counsellor from the outset into a position. We aim for a respectful conversation between two people, involving a sophisticated balance of empathy while engaging with the adult in the room.’ Very careful thought went into describing the parties involved in DVA. The model now uses: ‘person using violence or abuse and person experiencing violence or abuse’.

While focussing on behaviours, the ISI enables a better understanding of how they are played out, as Priestly explains. ‘Once you hear of abuse, it’s really important to understand its wider behaviour. It’s very difficult to work out what’s happening in one session, and for us to respond appropriately we need to understand a pattern. There are so many ways a pattern could emerge – through conflict, alcohol misuse or retaliation for example.’ Indeed, I am struck by the detail the ISI goes into, aiming objectively to quantify ‘pushing’, ‘spitting’, ‘choking’, ‘pinching’ and scores of other unacceptable behaviours that can go on between a couple.

In talking with Owen and Priestly, an analogy came to mind of working with suicidal clients at a counselling service I used to work for. If a client disclosed a suicidal idea or intent, I was duty-bound to interrupt our work and use a detailed risk assessment form. This form – like the ISI – was structured and contained an ethical and effective response to such a disclosure. While not taking away choice, the form (and my use of it), communicated that I had registered something serious was taking place – something approximating to ‘you matter and your safety matters’. It also gave me something to rely upon in the face of what could be a frightening and emotive issue for me. As Owen explains: ‘The name “Responsive” came about to reflect our aim of providing a response, rather than a reaction. Commonly, a practitioner can under-react or over-react in this work, taking over and being directive.’

Adapting the model to other settings
The Responsive Model is not just the preserve of Relate. ‘We’d very much like to share it,’ says Owen. ‘We would love to talk to GPs and social workers about our learning, hoping that they would adapt the model to their setting. You don’t need to be a specialist domestic violence/abuse agency, as we aren’t, but you do need knowledge and skills to create a safe space for disclosure and to be connected to support agencies.’

Priestly reflects upon the potential future impact this model may have upon Relate as an organisation. ‘Working in this way has shifted me to think more about each individual’s personal responsibility for their behaviour within a complex relationship dynamic, rather than my focus being on a complex relationship dynamic alone. I wonder if there may be more opportunities for Relate to do individual work within relationship work, in particular where there is challenging behaviour involved.’

1. Home Office, 2004; Dodd et al, 2004; Dobash and Dobash, 1980; Walby and Allen, 2004. Referred to by Women’s Aid Domestic Violence FAQs 2009 on www.womensaid.org.uk
2. Barter C, McCarry M, Berridge D, Evans K. Partner exploitation and violence in teenage intimate relationships: executive summary. University of Bristol and NSPCC; 2009.