Interview with BAG perpetrator work: “There is no emotion”

FHK: Most readers are probably familiar with the Federal Office for Offender Work. Could you briefly introduce yourselves for everyone else?

We are the umbrella organization for institutions that work with violent individuals in intimate relationships. After our founding in 2007, we developed the first perpetrator work standard for Germany and then completely revised it again in 2014, working with, among others, the FHK.

I am proud that we were able to develop a relatively high level of trust and understanding between us even back then.

We are a young association and face the same problems that women's support also faces: a lack of funding and the unwillingness of the federal states to even establish nationwide perpetrator work centers or women's protection centers. For example, membership in the Federal Working Group (BAG) requires, if possible, implementation of our standards, but this very often fails in practice because the people or the facility are not sufficiently funded.

And we're a feminist umbrella organization, founded because of male domestic violence. I make that very clear to the outside world, which hasn't exactly made us popular with the men's organizations.

FHK: What does that mean specifically?

Men's organizations often fail to understand that the Istanbul Convention primarily addresses women and children affected by violence. The Convention doesn't just address domestic violence; it also covers sexual violence, human trafficking , female genital mutilation, and stalking. And the gender disparity among those affected is simply massive.

Men's associations in Germany are currently taking a hard confrontational stance on violence against women.

I can say from my experience: We have never had the supposed 20 percent of female perpetrators that the crime statistics assume.

My colleagues and I have handled approximately 12.000 cases and make around 700 home visits a year. That's my area of expertise. I don't think anyone in Germany has handled more cases than we have. And we always have between 5 and 8 percent of female perpetrators of violence. That's why the police crime statistics on intimate partner violence are extremely annoying to me, because every police officer knows that at least half of those 20 percent are counter-complaints from violent men or are complaints filed when women defend themselves.

The PKS also doesn't distinguish whether female violence is actually the cause of male victims. I'm not saying women don't commit violence. In our scientific study, the women also admitted that they do commit psychological violence.

But it has been shown that the more physical violence becomes, the more masculine it also becomes. Women also commit acts of violence, but men commit acts differently.

They kick until the women stop moving. Thanks to our rapid intervention when people are evicted – within 36 hours of the situation escalating – we see women who look as if they've been run over by a tractor. I've never seen a man who looks even remotely like that. It annoys me when men's organizations come along and say: women are just as violent. This myth needs to be debunked immediately; there's very little substance behind it. But to do that, we need to develop a much better understanding of statistics and of the fact that we can't simply lump female violence and male violence together.

FHK: What criteria must perpetrator work meet to be part of the Federal Working Group on Perpetrator Work?

It is crucial that we work in cooperative alliances, that is, with the entire local network. In my opinion, the willingness to do this is often lacking in practice, even though it has been clearly proven that the greatest successes are achieved through cooperative alliances.

Another key point is that men must take responsibility and critically examine their attitudes toward women: gender, their perceptions of men and women. I see many men in counseling who say, "My wife provokes me, and that's why I resort to violence," or "My wife should actually be sitting here." It's about every man taking responsibility for his own violent behavior.

FHK: What role does perpetrator work play in the prevention of gender-based violence?

Offender work plays a major role in prevention: it is intended to prevent recidivism in the future.

I want to make it very clear: There's no emotion involved. Men know full well: Now I'm going to punch her in the face and then it'll be quiet.

99,9% can describe exactly what they experience prior to this physical violence. There's a buildup of tension, a discussion, the woman contradicts him, and then he starts shaking or sweating or becoming restless.

We aim to help men gain better access to their feelings and recognize such signals. It's social training, not therapy. It's about behavioral change. The perpetrator must learn to react in an "unmanly" way; he must remove himself from the situation. This includes an emergency plan, which the women's support team also discusses with the woman.

FHK: How do you achieve such behavioral changes?

In the logic of violent offenders, the constellation of tall man and short woman is often, from their perspective, a situation of equality. When women become too powerful, which often happens in young relationships, the men feel inferior. They must then use violence to restore what they see as an equal situation. We must address this logic.

I'm a fan of role-playing because I believe we need to experience it all, especially when it comes to children. When reconstructing a crime, I have the perpetrators act it out from three perspectives: their own, the woman's, and the child's. This way they can get a sense of what the children experience when they have to watch it. I also show the men pictures that children in our project have drawn of how they experience their father: as an angry dad. That way you can get most of them back, through the children. Often the men have no idea at all that the children are aware of it all. But women often don't either. The children see everything. Up until I was eight years old, I had to witness firsthand how my university-educated father abused my mother when he was drunk. I experienced it all. So I know what I'm talking about.

Scientific research shows that children who are also affected later become victims themselves or commit violence themselves. This is one of the reasons why prevention should actually begin much earlier, not just in adulthood.

FHK: Do you have any facilities that practice primary prevention, i.e. work with children and adolescents?

There are very few at the federal level that specifically work with children. This is a very new field, but in my opinion, the most important one.

When we talk about violence, we have to talk about a violent family system.

We have a family, we have a couple, and we also have children. We have to look at what the system actually needs. When we talk about prevention, work with perpetrators is only one part.

FHK: What does a successful outcome mean when someone participates in your program?

I wouldn't even say successful; I'm very cautious about that. I'd say "completed properly." Our experience shows that there are quite a few men who have completed everything properly and then call after a year, two years, or three days and say: "I have a problem that's been brewing again. Can I have another three or four meetings?" I actually think that's the right approach, for the men to react on their own, not as a sanction.

If you offer support, you can also reach men whose women aren't interested in prosecuting them. 80 percent of women aren't interested in prosecuting them. But they want the man to change. And you can confront them empathetically. You can say: "I accept you as a human being, but we condemn what you do to your wife or children."

We must accept people as clients, not as perpetrators.

These are offers of help: The man needs help and, according to our legal understanding, is not yet a perpetrator. At some point, we must stop talking about a perpetrator program and find other terms.

FHK: Who is looking for your offers?

All social classes, all educational levels. I've had pastors, engineers, tax consultants, managers, and of course, even police officers in my courses—everything was there. Sometimes they come voluntarily, sometimes under obligation. It's a bit harder to reach the upper classes because they usually seek therapeutic help right away. The problem with therapists is that they often play the role of the understander. But for the majority of men, it's a social problem that needs to be addressed.

In 2020/2021, the majority of our cases involved couples in their 20s and 30s. That made me a little sad because the violence came from such young men.

We consider ourselves relatively emancipated, we talk about equality, and yet the majority of young men still live according to such patriarchal role models.

FHK: Are there target groups for whom the program's goals are more difficult to achieve?

It becomes difficult when men are also massively violent in other areas of life and resolve every conflict with violence. Our scientific support has shown that separation is practically impossible for women in such situations, and they are essentially in constant fear for their lives. Working with these men is difficult. I wouldn't even initially include them in a group setting, because that involves violence in everyday life and the principle of conflict resolution through violence.

FHK: How is the success of the work with the perpetrators evaluated?

We conducted an evaluation study. Both women and men reported that physical violence significantly decreased in the first three months of the program. However, as the program progressed, there was a shift toward verbal and psychological violence. The decisive processes for men only took place after seven to nine months, which is certainly related to the modules: partnership, communication, and the role of father. Therefore, a long-term approach is extremely important here.

FHK: Who covers the costs of participation?

We have dedicated coordination centers, funded by the state, for both intervention centers and perpetrator work. Rhineland-Palatinate placed women and children under state protection as early as 1999. Since 2005, there have been 18 state-funded intervention centers, and since 2007, state-funded perpetrator work in eight regional court districts. Since 2014, we have also had a high-risk management guideline throughout Rhineland-Palatinate. High-risk case conferences are held at every police headquarters. With RIGG, the Rhineland-Palatinate intervention project against violence in close social relationships, we have a statewide roundtable, where everyone who needs a listening ear participates—ministry, institutions, and sponsors. This, of course, allows for a completely different approach to politics. I believe this would be a model for all of Germany.

FHK: What are the biggest obstacles to your work right now?

The finances. And the inability of some states to recognize that perpetrator work is not a federal or local concern, but also a state responsibility. In Baden-Württemberg, for example, we don't have a single state-funded facility, neither in women's support nor in perpetrator work.

The Istanbul Convention requires preventive measures. We received a really poor report card from GREVIO. I now expect the federal states to get moving.

From ten years in the federal-state working group, I know: The federal government wants it. It's the states that are holding it back.

For me, it's shocking that every federal state is doing its own thing. No one is willing to take a look at how they're doing it and whether it's successful. Instead, it's always just about money. That's annoying because the damage to the economy and public health is immense.

Otherwise, I would say that the judiciary, with its family courts, is the weakest part.

FHK: In Austria, participation in six hours of offender work is now mandatory if restraining orders are issued. Would you like to see a similar regulation in Germany?

That's a great idea – but I don't know if it would work in Germany. Here, a lawyer would come and say: "He's not going there, he's not saying anything more. Going for perpetrator work would be an admission of guilt." Or the question: What do we do if he doesn't go? The public prosecutor's office can't do anything about it; they have to conduct an objective investigation first. And the real challenge will be to convince the men after the six interviews not to say: "Conditions met, now I'm going," and to ensure that they end up in victim-oriented perpetrator work afterwards. That's why I think we need a different approach.

FHK: What would you say: How is Germany positioned in terms of prevention?

Not good. We should not only focus more on the issue of domestic violence, but we also need to work preventively on our entire understanding of gender roles, starting with our children in kindergarten and school, so that true equality can emerge. If we're honest, we still have patriarchal conditions. This is very clear in the procedures we have in place.

We also need many young women who share this self-understanding of equality between men and women. We have a severely disabled daughter who uses a wheelchair and is mentally perfectly fit. She always says, "Integration must be lived, not talked about." The same applies to equal rights: We don't have to talk about equality; we have to live it.

The interview was conducted as part of the FHK specialist information “Prevention. Sustainably countering gender-based violence” (2023)

About the interviewee: Roland Hertel has been chairman of the Federal Working Group on Offender Work since 2013.