a cultural challenge to psychologists

I was recently reading a post about domestic violence in Syria and the article it links caught my eye. The article states,

"Muna Al Assad, a lawyer volunteering at Good Shepherd, says its counseling--for both Muslim and Christian women--often focuses on reconciliation because divorce has such negative consequences in Syrian society. Few battered women, she said, choose to take their cases to court.

"Even if the woman considered going to the legal system, where she might get partial fairness, people around her will resent her if she is strong enough to do it," Al Assad says. "They will outcast her because normally the person who committed the violence is her husband, father or brother."

Al Assad has worked on 13 domestic violence cases in 17 months. Of these, only one resulted in divorce. In that case the victim's family supported her."

Women's shelters in the States often focus on empowering the victim to leave the abuser but in this case it seems that the situation would render that approach ineffective. On the other hand, I could not imagine anyone who handles these cases ever recommending that the victim returns to the abuser to try to reconcile with them. Although I'm sure there are plenty of psychologists here in the States who would love for nothing more to go to Syria and impose American methods for dealing with domestic violence, I'm sure that that would cause more harm than good in the end as it sometimes does in situations when help is forced on people whether they ask for it or not.

So are there any alternative ways to deal with this? Or is this another situation where only two mutually-exclusive choices exist (i.e. American methods or Syrian methods)? I've thought about it a lot but I'm just not sure. What do you think?