Theoretical and research support for the Duluth Model: A reply to dutton and corvo

In a recent article, Dutton and Corvo denounce and reject the so-called Duluth Model of batterer intervention based on cognitive–behavioral counseling, reinforcement from the criminal justice system, and coordination of additional community services. They not only accuse it of being ineffective and detrimental to progress in the field, but assert that its supporters are merely acting out of ideological and activist motivations. These authors call for research-based treatment that is more psycho-therapeutic in nature, along with a diminished role of the criminal justice system and more attention to women's violence. The authors, however, are highly selective in the research they use to substantiate their position and apply their own activist biases to its interpretation. Their portrayal of the Duluth Model, and the fundamentals it represents, is a distorted caricature of its current conception. There is psychological theory and criminal justice research that support the Duluth Model and its utility. Moreover, developments in the field contradict the claims that the Duluth Model has an “iron-clad” hold that is impeding progress. The categorical condemnations in the Dutton and Corvo article shut-off needed dialogue and debate rather than further those developments.