Billions Are Being Wasted on Junk-Science Domestic Violence Programs

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Henry Herrera

Telephone: +1-301-801-0608

Billions Are Being Wasted on Junk-Science Domestic Violence Programs

June 30, 2025 – Each year, billions of euros and dollars are spent on domestic violence programs. So how many lawmakers in those countries are aware that these programs are flatly ineffective in curbing partner abuse? These are three of many examples:

The European Court of Auditors evaluated the 27-country Spotlight Initiative, concluding, “There is no evidence of violence against women and girls having decreased in the various countries covered by the Spotlight Initiative.” (1)
One meta-analysis concluded, “studies using gold standard [intimate partner violence] assessment methods, using reports from survivors, show no significant reductions in IPV.” (2)
In the United States, a Department of Justice official declared, “We have no evidence to date that [the Violence Against Women Act] has led to a decrease in the overall levels of violence against women.” (3)

There is a simple reason why standard domestic violence programs have been consistently ineffective: they have not addressed the known causes of partner abuse. These causes include alcohol abuse (4), marital breakdown (5), mental health disorders (6), and other reasons (7).

Instead, the traditional abuse reduction programs have relied on the discredited Duluth Model, which focuses on power and control dynamics in the relationship (8).

Some may find it difficult to understand why domestic violence programs have failed to address the known causes of partner abuse — until they appreciate the true meaning of “feminist scholarship.”

Feminist Adrienne Barnett, a Reader in Law at the University of London (9), has revealed how feminism openly rejects the scientific method because, in her words, it “implicitly values a masculine knowledge which either overlooks or silences or excludes women.” (10)

Ridiculing the notion that researchers should be objective and neutral, Barnett describes the characteristics of feminist scholarship:

“Feminist research is not just about understanding society, it’s about changing society. It has emancipatory and liberatory goals for women.”
“We don’t go out and collect data; we create data.”

In other words, feminist researchers consider it acceptable to fabricate data and invent far-fetched conclusions, as long as they somehow support the “emancipatory and liberatory goals for women.”

Each year, many billions are spent around the world for domestic violence programs. In 2023, France bolstered its gender equality budget to 2.4 billion euros (11). In the United States, federal funding for the Office on Violence Against Women increased to $670 million in 2023 (12).

Lawmakers now face a dilemma. If their goal is to gain favor with feminist activists, they should continue to support the junk-science “power and control” model of DV programs.

On the other hand, if policy-makers aspire to create domestic violence policies that are effective in curbing abuse, they should assure their programs are based on credible research and solid science.

The Domestic Abuse and Violence International Alliance – DAVIA — consists of 189 member organizations from 39 countries in Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, Latin America, and North America. DAVIA seeks to ensure that domestic violence and abuse polices are science-based, family-affirming, and gender-inclusive. https://endtodv.org/davia/

Citations: