IPV and Fatherhood Intervention in Residential Substance Abuse Treatment

 描述（由申请人提供）：拟议的第一阶段干预发展研究旨在解决有药物滥用（SA）问题的父亲同时发生的两个重要问题：亲密伴侣暴力（IPV）和虐待儿童（CM）。 SA 治疗计划是减少家庭暴力的重要途径，因为仅靠 SA 治疗并不能消除这些行为。目前可用的干预措施在减少男性 IPV 方面收效甚微。变革之父 (Fathers for Change) 是一种综合门诊干预措施，作为针对 SA、IPV 和 CM 交叉点的干预模型显示出前景。该干预措施利用男性作为父亲的角色作为变革的动力，并针对已知触发 SA、IPV 和 CM 的因素：敌对认知和不良情绪调节。此类干预措施尚未作为男性住宅药物滥用计划的一部分进行整合和测试。该项目将按照心理治疗发展指南分为四个阶段： (a) 改编《Fathers for Change》门诊手册，以纳入住院 SA 治疗和善后护理； (b) 对 10 名接受 SA 住院治疗的父亲进行“改变父亲”的公开试验， (c) 完成培训手册和忠诚工具，以及 (d) 一项试点研究，将 60 名父亲随机分配到父亲变革组织或家长教育计划 (PE) 进行比较。变革之父的初步可行性将通过将其与 PE 在以下方面进行比较来评估：参与者完成率、敌对认知、情绪调节、SA 复发、IPV 和 CM 风险行为（消极养育）。敌对认知和情绪调节的改变将被视为变革之父减少复发、IPV 和 CM 风险行为的机制。如果“变革之父”能够有效减少敌意认知和负面情绪调节，从而减少 SA、IPV 和 CM，那么该干预措施就可以很容易地融入 SA 住宅护理机构。 IPV 和药物复吸的减少将对公共卫生和刑事司法产生重大影响。该 R34 的初步调查结果将为在佛罗里达州治疗法院委托客户的住宅环境中实施 Faters for Change 第二阶段随机对照试验提供理由。

 DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): The proposed stage 1 intervention development study is designed to address two significant co-occurring issues for fathers with substance abuse (SA) problems: Intimate partner violence (IPV) and child maltreatment (CM). SA treatment programs are an important avenue to reduce family violence because SA treatment alone does not result in an end to these behaviors. Currently available interventions have had little success in reducing male IPV. Fathers for Change, an integrated outpatient intervention, shows promise as an intervention model targeting the intersection of SA, IPV, and CM. The intervention uses men's roles as fathers as a motivation for change and targets factors that are known to trigger SA, IPV and CM: hostile cognitions and poor emotion regulation. An intervention of this sort has not been integrated and tested as part of a residential substance abuse program for men. This project will have four phases following the psychotherapy development guidelines: (a) Adaptation of the outpatient manual for Fathers for Change for integration in residential SA treatment and aftercare; (b) Open trial of Fathers for Change with 10 fathers in residential SA treatment, (c) Completion of a training manual and fidelity tools, and (d) A pilot study of 60 fathers randomly assigned to Fathers for Change or a Parent Education Program (PE) comparison. The initial feasibility of the Fathers for Change will be assessed by comparing it to PE in the areas of: participant completion rates, hostile cognitions, emotion regulation, SA relapse, IPV, and CM risk behaviors (negative parenting). Change in hostile cognitions and emotion regulation will be examined as the mechanisms through which Fathers for Change reduces relapse, IPV and CM risk behaviors. If Fathers for Change demonstrates efficacy in reducing hostile cognitions and negative emotion regulation leading to reduce SA, IPV and CM, the intervention can readily be integrated into residential SA care facilities. Reductions in IPV and drug relapse will have major public health and criminal justice implications. The initial findings of this R34 will provide justification for a Stage II RCT of Faters for Change in residential settings treating court mandated clients in FL.