Citation

Crawford M, Harding R. J. Fam. Soc. Work 2000; 5(1): 37.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2000, Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1300/J039v05n01_04

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

There is considerable debate respecting clinical responses to the problem of woman abuse. One clinical approach to woman abuse, developed in the 1970s, is based on systems theory and offers counseling to couples thought to have difficulty communicating or problem solving. A second approach, based on a feminist analysis of woman abuse, emerged in the late 1970s and early 1980s and involved a gender-specific treatment method. Systemic therapists assert that, since the genesis of the problem lies in the relationship, couple counseling is the only logical modality of treatment. Feminists, however, see the partners separately to focus attention on the woman's safety and the man's acceptance of responsibility for violence. Recently other treatment approaches have emerged for working with couples experiencing woman abuse. These models offer an opportunity to bridge the chasm between the systemic and feminist positions provided they are based on clear principles that reflect the best practices developed on both sides of the debate. This article briefly highlights the strengths and limitations of the two traditional clinical responses to woman abuse and suggests principles to guide emerging practice models relating to victim safety and perpetrator accountability.