ADVIP 2020 World Conference

Conference Videos Available to ADVIP Members

Enter Password Below
(Click HERE for info on how to become an ADVIP member)


Protected Area - Members Only

This content is password-protected. Please verify with a password to unlock the content.



AM1 – 37 minutes (start to 0:37 on timeline)
BIP Group Engagement:  Results from an Exploratory StudyPresenter:  John Hamel & Fred Buttell

AM2 – 45 minutes (0.37 – 1:22 on timeline)
Implications of Attachment Theory for Perpetrator Intervention Presenter:  Daniel Sonkin

AM3 – 43 minutes (1:22 – 2:05 on timeline)
The Use of Safety Planning with IPV PerpetratorsPresenters: Tom DiBlasi, Kelly Smith & Taylor Lupo

AM4 – 43 minutes (2:05 – end on timeline)
Washington State Standards for Batterer Intervention ProgramsPresenter:  Amie Roberts


PM1 – 18 minutes (start to 0:18 on timeline)
Restorative Justice and Court-Mandated Treatment for Domestic Violence CrimesPresenter:  Briana Barocas

PM2 – 44 minutes (0: 18 – 1:02 on timeline)
Views of BIP Facilitators and Other Stakeholders on IPV Treatment:  A Qualitative StudyPresenter:  Normand Brodeur & Valerie Roy

PM3 – 43 minutes (1:02 – 1:46 on timeline)
 2019 BIP Survey:  ADVIP and Evidence-Based PracticePresenter:  John Hamel & Clare Cannon

PM4 – 41 minutes (1:46 – end on timeline)
PM4:  Intimate Partner Violence in the LGBTQ CommunityPresenter:  Brenda Russell


AM1: BIP Group Engagement: Results from an Exploratory Study

Given that most perpetrator treatment programs identify with multiple theoretical models, reports of BIP group ineffectiveness cannot be explained solely on the basis of treatment model, or what curriculum is used.  A consensus has emerged over the past few years among IPV scholars that it would be more productive to identify the treatment factors that predict lower recidivism rates across treatment models, and that different client populations have different needs and require differing approaches – in terms not only of the particular risk factors addressed, but the length and intensity of the treatment and the way treatment is delivered Elements of the latter principle (responsivity) are reflected in the second part of the American Psychology Association’s definition of evidence-based practice: “integration of the best available research with clinical expertise in the context of patient characteristics, culture and preferences.  Research now indicates that adding an initial Motivational Interviewing component to a traditional Duluth or CBT psychoeducational group helps to increase responsivity and better addresses client preferences.  MI acts to strengthen the working alliance between client and worker, and with IPV perpetrators predicts greater group compliance in terms of preventing premature drop-outs, the completion of homework assignments, and productively engaging with the leader and the other group members.

A separate line of qualitative research studies, conducted by various investigators in which male BIP clients were asked about their group experiences, has yielded valuable information about group processes and the facilitator’s role in helping clients become engaged and motivated to change.  Although not yet empirically tested in any outcome studies, these characteristics are remarkably similar to those from the broader group counseling literature, and dovetail with MI research as well as general psychotherapy outcome studies.  In this presentation, Dr. Hamel reports on results from an exploratory study of BIPs in the Greater San Francisco Bay Area in which group facilitators were asked to rate their clients’ degree of engagement, based on an existing questionnaire, the Group Engagement Measure; and clients were asked to indicate how well their facilitators helped to engage them in the group process and the extent to which the clients felt they had benefited from their experience, based on two new measures created specifically for the study. Implications for clinical practice, supervision and training will be discussed.

John Hamel, Ph.D., LCSW, has a Masters in Social Welfare from U.C.L.A., and a Ph.D. from the University of Central Lancashire, U.K.  He has worked with family violence perpetrators and victims since 1992, and is a court-approved provider of batterer intervention and parent programs in four San Francisco Bay Area counties.  Mr. Hamel is the editor or co-editor of two books on family violence, and the author of Gender-Inclusive Treatment of Intimate Partner Abuse, 2nd Edition:  Evidence-Based Approaches, (Springer, 2014)  He also has had dozens of his research articles published in various peer-reviewed scholarly journals, and is Editor-in-Chief of Partner Abuse, a journal published quarterly by Springer Publishing.  Mr. Hamel regularly speaks at conferences on domestic violence, provides professional trainings to various organizations, and has provided case consultation and expert witness testimony.  He is a founding member of the Association of Domestic Violence Intervention Programs (ADVIP), an organization of mental health professionals and researchers dedicated to evidence-based practice (

Frederick Buttell, PhD, LCSW, BACS, is a tenured professor at the Tulane School of Social Work, where he teaches courses in clinical practice, HBSE, and research methods. He has twice been honored as the commencement speaker at the School of Social Work and was awarded the Tulane University Provost’s Award for Excellence in Research and Scholarship in 2005. Since 2013, he has served as the chair for Tulane University Social/Behavioral IRB and was the founding Program Director for the Doctorate in Social Work. For nine years, Dr. Buttell served as the director for the Elizabeth Wisner Center for Research on Children and Families, a center that aims to support research in social work fields and address the problem of violence against women and families. Dr. Buttell is the co-editor of Women Who Perpetrate Relationship Violence: Moving Beyond Political Correctness (2005), published by Haworth Press. He has extensive experience in providing social work intervention services to clients in community-based correction programs and evaluating the effectiveness of those interventions. Dr. Buttell’s research agenda focuses on improving family functioning through the elimination of domestic violence. His primary expertise involves improving the effectiveness of batterer intervention programs. Most recently, he has been publishing on the intersection between IPV and LGBTQ offenders and ethical considerations of conducting research in a post-disaster context

AM2: Implications of Attachment Theory for Perpetrator Intervention

Treatment for court-mandated perpetrators is regulated on a state level, and typically consists of a specified number of same-sex psycho-educational group sessions that is based on a combination of feminist theory and CBT (cognitive behavioral therapy) techniques.  Intervention outcome research suggests that these models only have a moderate effect on outcome.  Given the risk for continued serious physical injury and emotional trauma, its important that intervention program utilize evidence-based treatment to increase positive outcomes.  This workshop provides an overview of how programs can integrate various principals of attachment-based treatment to expand effectiveness of domestic violence programs.

Daniel Jay Sonkin, Ph.D. is a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist in an independent practice in Sausalito, California. Since 1981, his work has focused on the treatment of individuals and couples facing a variety of interpersonal problems, including domestic violence. In addition to his clinical experience, he has testified as an expert witness since 1977 in criminal cases where domestic violence is an issue. He has also evaluated defendants facing the death penalty conducting social histories with a focus on their childhood abuse and its impact on adult criminal behavior.  As one of the early specialists in the field of family violence, Dr. Sonkin has developed a widely used protocol for treating male batterers. His book, Learning to Live Without Violence:  A Handbook for Men, has been published in English, Spanish and Japanese and is utilized by treatment programs around the world. He is also the author of numerous articles and books on domestic violence and child abuse including, The Male Batterer: A Treatment Approach; Domestic Violence on Trial: Psychological and Legal Dimensions of Family Violence; and Wounded Boys/Heroic Men: A Man’s Guide to Recovering from Childhood Abuse.  He is the co-editor of Intimate Violence: Contemporary Treatment Innovations and Domestic Violence:  The Court-Mandated Perpetrator Assessment and Treatment Handbook.  Dr. Sonkin has coauthored several articles on the integration of attachment theory into domestic violence treatment.

AM3: The Use of Safety Planning with IPV Perpetrators

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is considered a major public health issue. Survivors of IPV suffer from short- and long-term mental and physical health issues, including chronic pain, head injuries, broken bones, posttraumatic stress, substance abuse, and suicidality. Some of the worst outcomes are associated with the perpetrator physically aggressing on their partner. As a result, it is imperative to decrease physical aggression in IPV. Clinically, we found a safety (crisis) plan to be helpful in reducing physical aggression. Safety planning is widely used with victims of IPV as well as those experiencing suicidal ideation. Safety planning refers to creating an actionable plan when faced with the physical urges to aggress. We would complete a safety plan with our clients (the perpetrators) and find that it although it did not reduce urges to physically aggress, it reduced the likelihood of them acting on the urge. As a result of these clinical findings, we began a research study examining the efficacy of safety planning with IPV perpetrators. We hypothesize that utilizing a crisis response plan with perpetrators of IPV will result in reducing urges to commit abusive acts. The presentation will consist of a case study regarding the use of safety planning, our preliminary research findings and instructing the audience how to safety plan.

Kelly Smith, PhD, LPC, ACS, CPAIP, is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Counseling at Springfield College where she teaches graduate students in the counseling program. She is a past-president of the Wisconsin Counseling Association. Dr. Smith is the former Director of Abuse Intervention Services at a Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Crisis Center in the Midwest. She has spent over a decade working with victims and perpetrators of abuse in a variety of roles, and is now engaging in research projects related to intimate partner violence.

Thomas DiBlasi, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor at St. Joseph’s College where he teaches undergraduate students, and researches anger, aggression, domestic violence, and revenge. Dr. DiBlasi has given over 25 presentations locally, nationally, and internationally. In addition, he has nearly ten publications, predominantly focusing on anger and aggression. He is a member of APA (specifically Divisions 1, 2, 12, and 19), National Anger Management Association (NAMA), New York City- Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (NYC-CBT), Association of Domestic Violence Intervention Providers, EPA, and ABCT, where is he also on the leadership committee for the special interest group of Forensic and Externalizing Behaviors. He is currently working on research related to motivational interviewing, anger, revenge, and intimate partner violence.

Taylor Lupo, MFT, is the Director of Abuse Intervention Services at Safe Passage, a domestic violence and sexual assault crisis center, where she primarily works with perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Ms. Lupo is obtaining her master’s degree in Marriage and Family Therapy at Northern Illinois University. During her undergraduate career, she was chosen to be a member of a research team where she assisted in conducting qualitative research on commitment, divorce, and domestic violence. During her graduate career she has served as a research assistant and a teaching assistant for an undergraduate course – Domestic Violence in the Family. Ms. Lupo has several presentations, including at the Illinois Council of Family Relations Conference and the Undergraduate Research and Artistry Day at Northern Illinois University.

AM4: Washington State Standards for Batterer Intervention Programs

Due to concerns over the effectiveness of domestic violence treatment, the State of Washington recently underwent a considerable change in domestic violence intervention treatment (DVIT) standards and practices. Programs that administer domestic violence treatment follow new rules, which went into effect on June 29, 2018. The rules reflect a major shift in treatment approach and measured outcomes. This presentation will include information about the sequence of events that happens in domestic violence treatment, the standards for assessment and treatment, as well as requirements of quality management and data collection.  The State of Washington received input from contracted national advisors, an advisory committee, and statewide stakeholders in the process of making these major changes. There was consensus to move away from a ‘one-size-fits-all’ model to a differentiated treatment model. This presentation will explain the levels of treatment, placement criteria, and options for treatment delivery. Perhaps the biggest change in the standards, is the requirement for programs to document the cognitive and behavioral changes made by participants in domestic violence treatment in all areas of treatment focus. This presentation will share what that looks like practically for the programs.

Amie Roberts, Domestic Violence Perpetrator Treatment Program Manager at the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services Community Services Division, is originally from the Los Angeles area. She attended college and lived and worked in Utah for almost 20 years before moving to Washington State in 2011. Amie started her career working with victims of domestic violence and sexual assault. She has held many jobs in the victim services field. Amie earned her BA in Spanish Literature, her MA in Counseling and is a Certified Public Manager. She is also a licensed mental health counselor with experience working in substance use, mental health and domestic violence offender treatment. Amie created a DV offender program from the ground up while working in Utah. This is where she discovered a passion for domestic violence intervention treatment.

Amie worked for over four years as a Mental Health Program Administrator with the review team at the Division of Behavioral Health and Recovery in Washington State prior to her current position. Amie is currently working at the Department of Social and Health Services as the Domestic Violence Perpetrator Treatment Program Manager. She spearheaded the effort to revise the Washington Administrative Code for domestic violence treatment providers, serves on the house bill 1517 workgroup, chairs the domestic violence treatment advisory committee, conducts reviews and investigations of certified domestic violence programs, and has presented at multiple conferences.

PM1: Restorative Justice and Court-Mandated Treatment for Domestic Violence Crimes

Rigorous studies of BIPs have shown varying rates of effectiveness. More recently, there is new evidence to suggest that combining BIPs with other treatment elements can improve overall effectiveness. A number of states now allow providers to offer alternative treatment approaches for domestic violence crimes, sometimes using hybrid approaches with BIP and sometimes allowing for “pure” alternatives, and victims across the country are seeking alternative treatment options in court. Circles of Peace (CP), a restorative justice-based treatment approach for domestic violence crimes, was developed in 2004 as a response to an emerging interest in alternative treatment that included victim participation (when the victim chooses to participate). The CP model, developed at New York University’s Center on Violence and Recovery (CVR), is the first of its kind in the US to use restorative justice principles to treat those arrested for domestic violence crimes; it is flexible, culturally sensitive, and works with the criminal justice system to break patterns of abuse.

CVR has collaborated with local judges and other court personnel, treatment providers, victim advocates, and community members in implementing and studying the model in the criminal justice systems in Nogales, Arizona and Salt Lake City, Utah, and more recently, in Windsor County, Vermont. The National Science Foundation funded studies in Arizona and Utah used randomized controlled trial designs – in Arizona, we compared a traditional BIP to a CP-only model and more recently, in Utah, we compared a traditional BIP to a hybrid BIP-plus-CP model. The Arizona study revealed that victims can participate safely in domestic violence CP treatment. The Utah study (Part 1) shows that a court-mandated treatment that combines BIP with CP is more effective than a typical BIP, resulting in significant reductions in new arrests (53%) and severity of crime (52%) Furthermore, in Utah, a qualitative study funded by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) highlights the promise of this model. The Vermont study is currently underway.

This presentation will focus on court mandated treatment for misdemeanor domestic violence crimes, the Circles of Peace model, the related studies, and the potential of this work in offering a more just, compassionate, and effective response for combating domestic violence. It will also highlight university, criminal justice system, and community-based agency partnerships in domestic violence practice, research, and policy.

Briana Barocas, PhD, is the Director of Research of New York University’s Center on Violence and Recovery and a Research Associate Professor at New York University’s Silver School of Social Work. Her interests in trauma, resiliency, and recovery have led to research on first responders, individuals and families affected by domestic violence, and survivors of 9/11. Her research has been supported by the National Institute of Justice, the National Science Foundation, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of Defense. Additionally, she was the Principal Investigator on a National Science Foundation Innovation Corps (I-Corps) team to develop an online capacity-building platform for domestic violence service providers. She is committed to developing and researching programs and services that better the lives of individuals, families, and communities and has 15 years of research experience in the specific field of restorative justice applications to domestic violence practice. Her published work has appeared in Nature Human Behaviour, Social Work with Groups, Journal of Experimental Criminology, Journal of Family Violence, Criminal Justice and Behavior, and International Journal of Emergency Mental Health. She holds a Ph.D. in Social Policy and Policy Analysis from Columbia University, a M.S. in Gender Studies from the London School of Economics and Political Science, and a B.S. in Human Development and Family Studies from Cornell University.

PM2: Views of BIP Facilitators and Other Stakeholders on IPV Treatment: A Qualitative Study

Collaboration is a fundamental strategy for a coordinated and effective response to intimate partner violence. However, working together may be difficult when collaborators hold different views of the problem, including the way they define it (diagnostic framework), the portrait they draw of perpetrators and victims (motivational framework), and the solutions they promote (prognostic framework). To address this issue, we undertook an action research in Quebec, Canada, in partnership with the Réseau à coeur d’homme, a provincial association of batterer intervention programs (BIP). In the first phase of the study, we interviewd BIP practitioners and program managers to assess their viewpoints on IPV. In the second phase, we obtained feedback from a variety of other stakeholders including victims’ advocates, members of para-judicial institutions, social and community service workers, and batterers themselves. This presentation will outline the similarities and differences between BIP personnel’s views and those of their counterparts. Implications for future collaboration will be discussed.

Normand Brodeur, Ph.D., is a professor at the school of social work and criminology of Université Laval since 2006. He is involved in the field of intimate partner violence as a practitioner, research professional and researcher since 1989. His research has focused on ethical dimensions of practice with perpetrators of domestic violence, intervention models, public funding of BIPs, and the adaptation of intimate partner violence services to immigrants.  Co-authors on this research are: Valérie Roy, School of social work and criminology, Université Laval; Tatiana Sanhueza, Department of social work, Universidad de Concepcion; Michel Labarre, School of social work and criminology, Université Laval.

Valérie Roy Ph. D. is a professor at the School of social work and criminology of Université Laval since 2007. She has been involved in the field of intimate partner violence for more than 20 years as a practitioner and a researcher. Her research has focused on group work practice with male perpetrators, on services to female perpetrators and on violence in the LGBT community.

PM3: 2019 BIP Survey on ADVIP and Evidence-Based Practice

A debate persists regarding the effectiveness of batterer intervention programs, the predominant form of intervention for individuals who have perpetrated intimate partner violence (IPV).  Social science research has identified some promising research trends – e.g., the effectiveness of Motivational Interviewing and process factors that maintain an effective therapist-client alliance, what clients say facilitators can do to keep them engaged and motivated, and, for certain low-risk populations, the viability of couples counseling.  Unfortunately, most front-line treatment providers lack access to much of this research, which appears primarily in peer-reviewed journals. A previous national survey of BIPs reported that, on the whole, BIP group facilitators have ample clinical experience, but are poorly informed about IPV risk factors and dynamics; and while they report substantial training, the nature of that training, and the extent to which the training accurately reflects current research, remains unknown.  BIPs, and most treatment providers, including licensed mental health professionals, depend on organizations who too often lack reliable, up-to-date information about domestic violence.  The Association of Domestic Violence Intervention Providers (ADVIP) was created by the first author to provide a platform where researchers and providers could cooperate by exchanging information and resources.  In the first part of this presentation, Dr. Hamel reports on findings from a larger follow-up to the previous 2016 survey, that sought to elicit views on how to increase cooperation between domestic violence scholars and treatment providers and advance evidence-based practice (EBP), and to gauge the role of ADVIP in this effort.  In the second part of the presentation, Dr Hamel will moderate a panel of BIP program directors for a broad discussion on ways to advance evidence-based practice.

John Hamel, Ph.D., LCSW, has a Masters in Social Welfare from U.C.L.A., and a Ph.D. from the University of Central Lancashire, U.K.  He has worked with family violence perpetrators and victims since 1992, and is a court-approved provider of batterer intervention and parent programs in four San Francisco Bay Area counties.  Mr. Hamel is the editor or co-editor of two books on family violence, and the author of Gender-Inclusive Treatment of Intimate Partner Abuse, 2nd Edition:  Evidence-Based Approaches, (Springer, 2014)  He also has had dozens of his research articles published in various peer-reviewed scholarly journals, and is Editor-in-Chief of Partner Abuse, a journal published quarterly by Springer Publishing.  Mr. Hamel regularly speaks at conferences on domestic violence, provides professional trainings to various organizations, and has provided case consultation and expert witness testimony.  He is a founding member of the Association of Domestic Violence Intervention Programs (ADVIP), an organization of mental health professionals and researchers dedicated to evidence-based practice (

Clare Cannon, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Human Ecology at the University of California, Davis. Dr. Clare Cannon is excited to continue her research into social inequality and health disparities, with an emphasis on feminist theories and methods. Her research areas include intimate partner violence, sex and gender minorities, gender and society, socio-environmental inequality, and climate change.  She is the co-investigator and author on two groundbreaking national surveys of batterer intervention programs in the United States and Canada.

PM4: Intimate Partner Violence in the LGBTQ Community

The disparity of identification and response to incidents of intimate partner violence (IPV) within the LGBT+ community can be boiled down to discretion. From healthcare providers to social service professionals to police, the use of discretion is rampant and can lead to inconsistent and often detrimental services to the LGBT+ community. For instance, Healthcare workers decide whether to screen an individual for intimate partner violence. Social service professionals can choose whether to allow transgender victims stay in shelters based on their gender identity. Law enforcement officers and legal actors can decide whom to arrest or whether charges will be pressed against perpetrators or IPV victims. At each recommended step for help-seeking victims of IPV, professionals positioned to help this vulnerable community can lack the training, awareness, sensitivity, or policies to guide decision-making processes when assisting members of the LGBT+ community. Previous research has noted a consensus of equivalent, and sometimes higher, rates of IPV within the LGBT+ community compared to the heterosexual community. Thus, the disparity in service provider and criminal justice practices calls for reform designed to combat potential biases to better assist the LGBT+ community when they are most vulnerable. By eliminating ambiguity of policies and practices involving the LGBT+ community, requiring frequent training for law enforcement/health care professionals/social service providers, and creating comprehensive and generalizable screening tools to detect IPV within LGBT+ relationships, we can begin to properly treat victims and punish perpetrators of LGBT+ intimate partner violence.

Dr.Brenda Russell is a Professor of Psychology at The Pennsylvania State University, Berks. Her scholarly interests include psychology and law, perceptions of victims and perpetrators of domestic violence, homicide defendants, and the social psychological and cognitive aspects of jury decision making. She is particularly interested in how gender and sexual orientation play a role in evaluating and responding to perpetrators and victims in cases of intimate partner violence, rape, sexual coercion, and sexual harassment. She is a fellow at the Midwestern Psychological Association and received the Eisenhower Award for distinguished teaching at Penn State University. Dr. Russell also provides expert testimony in homicide cases and serves as consultant and program evaluator for various federal and state educational, law enforcement, justice, and treatment programs.