Intimate partner violence that is situational tends to be more amenable to change following the passage of time especially if both partners get counseling. Which characteristic of IPV would would indicate that the violence is something more dangerous and therefore couple counseling should NOT be the first course of action?

Highly exploitative degree of violence forms

Explanation:

Intimate Partner violence is domestic violence by current or former partner, against his/ her spouse or intimate partner. It can in various forms of abuse : physical abuse, sexual abuse, verbal abuse , economic abuse, emotional abuse.

The decision for couple counselling or not is based on the nature & degree of abuse, its compromise on victim's safety, dignity.

If there is mild, certain particular situation based, non deliberate abusive action of one partner for other - eg emotional, economic abuse. If it might be solved by enhancing understanding between the couple. And, If there can be a scope of re developing mutual respect between partners, counselling can be considered.

However, in case of highly exploitative degree of violence forms - like intimate partner terrorism, coercive controlling violence. The risk assessment factor is very high, it takes a huge toll on victim's fundamental dignity. So, counselling should not be the first course of action. Protection & liberation of victim should rather be the desired step.

answer; i do believe that the employee must do the adjusting;