There is a strange, persistent reluctance in the domestic violence sector to explore the most obvious question: What drives perpetrator behaviour?
Whenever anyone tries, the backlash is immediate.
“Don’t spend money on perpetrators. Focus on victims.”
“Exploring perpetrators is excusing violence.”
I get it. People want moral clarity. A simple story. A clear enemy. The sector is also chronically under-funded so economic competition is a major factor. But how will anything change if we refuse to look at the group doing the harm?
Domestic Violence Is Not a One-Note Story
With national policy focusing on gender inequality and disrespect for women as the basis of violence for over a decade, there has been an oversimplification of an extremely complex problem.
Domestic violence takes place against a backdrop of social, biological, psychological and cultural phenomenon. It’s occurrence is amplified by histories of childhood maltreatment, substance abuse, a culture of parental dominance, poverty, gambling, head injury, intergenerational trauma, mental health issues, military trauma, unhealed nervous system dysregulation and lack of capacity to self-regulate.
I speak from experience as the child of a violent father who was also a traumatised human being. Yes, there were rigid gender roles in my house. But my dad was also a Vietnam veteran who returned from war with a nervous system stuck in fight mode. The cultural factors matter. But so does the biology. Hypervigilance, unprocessed terror, adrenaline-saturated nervous systems, the absence of regulation skills, these are all factors.
A World-First Study has given us new information
A decade-long, world-first trial has just shown that a common antidepressant, sertraline, led to a 21% reduction in domestic violence reoffending compared to placebo. Among men who took the medication consistently, the reduction was 30%. Among those with severe psychological distress, it was 52%.
While men’s behaviour change programs have been shown not to have a meaningful effect on DV reoffending, this study showed real, measurable improvements to reoffending rates.
And yet when the trial was first announced, the response was immediate and fierce. Not debate, hostility. Critics attacked the ethics, the funding, and even the idea of examining perpetrators’ mental health.
Some resistance came from fear that focusing on perpetrators would divert attention and funding away from victims and have a negative impact on this group. But the results showed a different outcome. The study didn’t excuse perpetrators. It reduced harm to women and children.
This isn’t about giving perpetrators excuses. It’s about recognising that nervous system dysregulation is a real, measurable contributor to violence. This is something I know personally.
I Came Very Close to Hitting My Son
When my son was two, he went through a phase of hitting. Though I’ve done decades of healing work from my childhood, I came very close to hitting him back. Very, very close.
In those moments my body was flooded with cortisol and adrenaline. My heart pounded. My rage surged. It took every ounce of awareness I had to walk away.
This is why part of what I do is to teach people how to recognise when they are triggered and regulate their nervous systems. This is why I want to integrate these practices in schools, defence and first responder cultures. I want potential offenders to be able to not act on the impulse. I want them to walk away too.
Will this approach help everyone? Will it stop all domestic violence? Absolutely not. But it will help some people. It will help some children like I was. And that is what I care about.
I Don’t Care How We Get There
I don’t care whether the solution is medication, trauma therapy, poverty reduction, addiction treatment, nervous system regulation training, cultural change, parenting support, or all of these combined. I don’t care whether the solution is ideologically tidy or politically fashionable.
I want something that works. I don’t care how we get there. I just want it to change.
