Position Statement Against Anger Management as a Response to Mens

Violence Against Women

By Gregory R. White, Director, Catholic Charities Domestic Violence Program for Men

Catholic Charities Domestic Violence Program for Men, Erie County Coalition Against Family Violence, New
York State Coalition Against Domestic Violence, Family Justice Center of Erie County, NOMAS (National
Organization for Men Against Sexism), strongly oppose the use of Anger Management or Anger Management
Programs as a criminal/civil disposition or means in which to deal with violence against an intimate partner.

Over the last thirty-plus years of experience working with men in batterer programs including the experience of
domestic violence advocates it is clear that men are not out-of-control, but in fact, use their ostensibly out-of-
control anger as a tactic to control, dominate, instill fear, and gain and maintain power over their partner. He is
out of control of her! Men who attend batterer programs, appear at domestic violence court hearings, or when
arrested by police who arrive at domestic violence calls, can and do, decide to manage their anger in ways that
will not cause them to incur additional consequences. Since 1988, Catholic Charities Domestic Violence Program
for Men has been a disposition and mechanism available to the court, or agents of the courts, for holding men
accountable for their acts of domestic violence against an intimate female partner and is available throughout the
eight counties of Western New York. Since the majority of domestic violence perpetration is committed by men
against their intimate female partners, issues for the LGBTQ community require separate considerations not
included in this statement.

Whenever men are ordered to complete an Anger Management Program, it is typically shorter in duration (13-
sessions) than most Batterer Programs (26 or 52 sessions) for lower-level criminal charges on an isolated incident;
those same men frequently are referenced as first time offenders. This practice excuses any and all previous
incidents; his behavior looks as if it was less serious, when in fact, the seriousness of his abusive behavior remains
unknown with the exception of the woman he has and may continue to abuse.

Anger Management Programs and practices place blame on the victim; its practices require her to participate and
take responsibility for managing his anger and behavior, simultaneously, diminishing his full accountability and
responsibility for his behavior. Anger Management Programs and practices (implies his inability to control his
anger whenever anger management practices are offered as the solution to his behavior) affords him an additional
opportunity to not take full responsibility for his behavior.

Anger Management practices collude with the batterer by disregarding and/or rejecting sexist, misogynist,
entitlement, privileged attitudes and beliefs, which perpetuates mens abuse of the woman in which they are
partnered. Anger Management does not take into account a mans premeditated controlling behaviors which
inflict increasing fear and terror in his partner over time. It is clear that Intimate Partner Violence is not driven by
a mans anger and lack of self-control; it is clearly driven by his imposing need to have power-over, in order to
maintain domination over his partner.

Anger Management practices psychologize a batterers abusive and controlling behaviors as an individual problem.
Its practices and strategies ignore the social and political contexts that have historically condoned and perpetuated
mens violence against women. In the end, society is not required to assume responsibility for addressing the
cultural, social, and political challenges when holding men accountable; society will not be required to achieve the
endemic social, political, and institutional changes essential to ending violence against women.

Batterer Accountability Programs that embrace a social-political/anti-oppression analysis can be an option as a

viable mechanism for holding offenders accountable in conjunction with the criminal and civil justice systems for
acts of domestic violence against an intimate female partner. Length of orders to programs should be no less than
26-session minimum and may be increased (40-sessions or 52-sessions) based on the seriousness of the offense as
determined by the court or agent of the courts. Non-compliance with orders must incur predictable consequences
from the court, or agent of the court, that conveys the seriousness of domestic violence.