Gutowski, E. R., & Goodman, L. A. (2022). Coercive control in the courtroom: The Legal Abuse Scale (LAS). Journal of Family Violence, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-022-00408-3
Abstract: Intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors seeking safety and justice for themselves and their children through family court and other legal systems may instead encounter their partners’ misuse of court processes to further enact coercive control. To illuminate this harmful process, this study sought to create a measure of legal abuse. We developed a list of 27 potential items on the basis of consultation with 23 experts, qualitative interviews, and existing literature. After piloting these items, we administered them to a sample of 222 survivor-mothers who had been involved in family law proceedings. We then used both exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and Rasch analysis (RA) to create a final measure. Analyses yielded the 14-item Legal Abuse Scale (LAS). Factor analysis supported two subscales: Harm to Self/Motherhood (i.e., using the court to harm the survivor as a person and a mother) and Harm to Finances (i.e., using the court to harm the survivor financially). The LAS is a tool that will enable systematic assessment of legal abuse in family court and other legal proceedings, an expansion of research on this form of coercive control, and further development of policy and practice that recognizes and responds to it. To request a full-copy of the article, visit here: Coercive Control in the Courtroom: the Legal Abuse Scale (LAS) | Request PDF (researchgate.net)
0 Comments
Smyth, C., Cullen, P., Breckenridge, J., Cortis, N., & Valentine, K. (2021). COVID-19 lockdowns, intimate partner violence and coercive control. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 56, 359-373. DOI: 10.1002/ajs4.162
Abstract: 2020 was a year like no other, with the COVID-19 virus upending life as we know it. When governments around the world imposed lockdown measures to curb the spread of COVID-19, advocates in the domestic and family violence (DFV) sector recognised that these measures were likely to result in increases in violence against women, particularly intimate partner violence (IPV). IPV can take many forms, including physical, emotional, psychological, financial, coercive controlling behaviours, surveillance and isolation tactics. Lockdown conditions provide fertile ground for the exercise of coercive control by encouraging people to stay at home, limiting social interactions to household members, reducing mobility and enabling perpetrators to closely monitor their partner's movements. However, media reports and awareness of IPV are generally dominated by a focus on physical violence and lethality, which are easily defined and measured. By contrast, coercive control as a concept is difficult to operationalise, measure and action in law, policy and frontline interventions. This paper discusses the challenges inherent in measuring coercive control and engages with current debates around the criminalisation of coercive control in NSW. Such reflection is timely as the conditions of COVID-19 lockdowns are likely to lead to an increase in coercive controlling behaviours. Request a copy of the article here: COVID‐19 lockdowns, intimate partner violence and coercive control | Request PDF (researchgate.net) Clements, K. A. V., Sprecher, M., Modica, S., Terrones, M., Gregory, K., & Sullivan, C. M. (2021). The use of children as a tactic of intimate partner violence and its relationship to survivors’ mental health. Journal of Family Violence. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-021-00330-0
Abstract Although prior research has established that intimate partner violence (IPV) often leads to increased depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), little is known about how often abusive partners and ex-partners use survivors’ children as an abuse tactic, nor whether this form of IPV also is detrimental to survivors’ mental health. The current study interviewed 299 unstably housed survivors of intimate partner violence shortly after they sought services from a domestic violence agency. All participants were parents of minor children. In-person interviews asked about abuse experienced in the prior six months, including the ways children were used as a form of IPV. Participants were also asked about their current depression, anxiety, and symptoms of PTSD. As hypothesized, the majority of parents reported their abusive partners and ex-partners had used their children as a form of IPV to control and hurt them. Further, after controlling for other forms of IPV, use of the children significantly predicted both increased anxiety and greater number of PTSD symptoms. Results show the importance of focusing on the use of children as a common and injurious form of abuse used against survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV). Obtain a full copy of the article here: (PDF) The Use of Children as a Tactic of Intimate Partner Violence and its Relationship to Survivors’ Mental Health (researchgate.net) Lux, G., & Gill, S. (2021). Identifying coercive control in Canadian family law: A required analysis in determining the best interests of the child. Family Court Review, 59(4), 810-827. DOI: 10.1111/fcre.12540
Abstract Amendments to the Canadian Divorce Act have required that family violence, specifically coercive controlling behaviour, be considered when making best interest determinations for children. This paper (1) outlines how this concealed, patterned, and harmful behaviour presents in family law disputes and (2) sets out considerations for parenting arrangements. It identifies the perils of subjective impressions as well as where the legal system and its interventions may be vulnerable to misuse. Children in families where coercive control is occurring are at risk of harm. The lack of intentional analysis of coercive control does not serve the best interests of the child. Practitioner’s Key Points: - Coercive Controlling violence is generally the most serious type of violence in family law. - Children are directly impacted by coercive control even after separation. - The subjective perceptions made by Family law and mental health professionals about family violence impacts the identification of this harmful conduct. - Family Law and allied professionals need to identify and understand how the subtle and often concealed patterns of coercive controlling behaviour can present in their files. - Family Law and allied professionals need to understand where the legal system and its interventions may be vulnerable to misuse by a perpetrator of coercive control. - Best Interest Determinations require an intentional analysis of the presence of coercive controlling behaviours on the part of a parent. Request a full copy of the article here: www.researchgate.net/publication/354781515_Identifying_Coercive_Control_in_Canadian_Family_Law_A_Required_Analysis_in_Determining_the_Best_Interests_of_the_Child Ellis, D., Lewis,. T., & Nepon, T. (2021). Effects of historical coercive control, historical violence, and lawyer representation on post-separation male partner violence against mother litigants who participated in adversarial family court proceedings. Violence Against Women, 27(9), 1191-1210. DOI: 10.117/10780122921939
Abstract The primary objective of this study was to test the effects of historical male partner violence and lawyer representation on post-separation male partner violence and coercive control against mother litigants participating in adversarial family court proceedings. Toward this end, staff at two women’s shelters administered a questionnaire to 40 former residents who met the sample selection criteria. Two findings are noteworthy. First, there was a decrease in mother litigant reports of post-separation physical violence requiring a visit to a hospital. Second, post-separation male partner coercive control “most/some of the time” was reported by 97.5% of all 40 separated mother litigants who also reported experiencing historical coercive control by their male partners. Recommendations and limitations are described in the final two pages. Obtain a full copy of the article here: www.researchgate.net/publication/342375380_Effects_of_Historical_Coercive_Control_Historical_Violence_and_Lawyer_Representation_on_Post-Separation_Male_Partner_Violence_Against_Mother_Litigants_Who_Participated_in_Adversarial_Family_Court_Proc Dragiewicz, M., Woodlock, D., Salter, M., & Harris, B. (2021). "What's mum's password?": Australian mothers' perceptions of children's involvement in technology-facilitated coercive control. Journal of Family Violence. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-021-00283-4
Abstract This is the first article to analyze children’s involvement in technology-facilitated coercive control in Australia. The primary research question was ‘‘How do mothers describe their children’s involvement in technology-facilitated coercive control?”. This article is based on incidental findings from a larger study on Australian women’s experiences of technology-facilitated abuse in the context of domestic violence. Although children were not the focus of the study, semi-structured interviews with twelve mothers yielded discussion of children’s involvement in the abuse. We used thematic analysis to identify key dynamics and contexts of this abuse. We found that mothers and their children are co-victims of coercive control. Mothers interviewed for the study reported that children were involved in technology-facilitated coercive control directly and indirectly. This study bridges the gap between the extant research on children and coercive control and technology-facilitated abuse by highlighting the ways children are involved in technology-facilitated coercive control. The social and legal contexts of co-parenting with abusive fathers exposed mothers and children to ongoing post-separation abuse, extending abusive fathers’ absent presence in the lives of children Request a copy of the full article here: (PDF) “What’s Mum’s Password?”: Australian Mothers’ Perceptions of Children’s Involvement in Technology-Facilitated Coercive Control (researchgate.net) Post-Separation Contact and Domestic Violence: our 7-Point Plan for Safe[r] Contact for Children10/11/2021 James-Hanman, D., & Holt, S. (2021). Post-separation contact and domestic violence: Our 7-point plan for safe[r] contact for children. Journal of Family Violence, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-021-00256-7
Abstract The impact of living with domestic violence and abuse has been recognised in policy and law in many jurisdictions as reaching the threshold of ‘significant harm’, with children’s exposure included in definitions of abuse and neglect that require mandatory reporting, alongside an emerging recognition of coercive control as central to both the perpetration of domestic violence and abuse, and how children experience it. Far from separation providing an end to this exposure, over two decades of research on child contact arrangements highlights how it can provide legitimate opportunities for abuse to continue. While the empirical evidence demonstrates that using violence against a partner impacts on men’s ability to parent their children pre-separation, and a burgeoning knowledge base and improved professional acumen appreciates the risk to children and mothers of ongoing and escalating abuse post-separation, the international practice of the presumption of contact continues to trump this empirical evidence in the overwhelming majority of cases. This not only fails to consider the risk that domestic violence and abuse poses to child safety, but serves further to marginalise children’s safety. Motivated by our collective experience across the domains of research, policy and practice, this commentary poses some difficult questions, challenging a conversation about both the risks and benefits of contact in the context of a history of domestic violence and abuse. In no particular order, this paper outlines our seven point plan, which, based on the evidence, we believe could make a significant difference to safe(r) post-separation contact for children To download a copy of the full article: www.researchgate.net/publication/349425541_Post-Separation_Contact_and_Domestic_Violence_our_7-Point_Plan_for_Safer_Contact_for_Children Heward-Belle, S. (2017). Exploiting the 'good mother' as a tactic of coercive control: Domestically violent men's assaults on women as mothers. Affilia: Journal of women and Social Work, 32(3), 374-389. DOI: 10.1177/0886109917706935
Abstract: This article examines the ways that domestically violent men assault women as mothers and their mothering. Drawing on in-depth interviews with 17 Australian men who had perpetrated domestic violence, this article reports their accounts of using this tactic. This tactic was found to be particularly pernicious and grounded in hegemonic representations of the “good mother.” Domestically violent men deployed this tactic instrumentally to exert power and control over women and children. Raising awareness of private and public assaults on women as mothers and their mothering is a critical step toward countering oppressive constructions of women mothering through domestic violence. Obtain a fully copy of the article here: Exploiting the ‘good mother’ as a tactic of coercive control | Request PDF (researchgate.net) Brinig, M. F., Frederick, L. M., & Drozd, L. M. (2014). Presumptions on joint custody presumptions as applied to domestic violence cases
Abstract Despite the trend toward statutory presumptions in favor of joint legal and physical custody, practitioners increasingly recognize that domestic violence has serious implications for the efficacy and safety of parenting and shared care. This article explores the implications of domestic violence for shared parenting and for the statutory legal and physical custody presumptions and exceptions which are triggered by or are applicable to domestic violence. This article proposes that a better framework for addressing intimate partner violence–related custody cases is one that guides practitioners toward fact-based determinations of the implications of the violence for parenting and co-parenting in individual cases. Key Points for the Family Court Community: • Parents who are coercive controlling abusers frequently exhibit the types of problematic parenting behaviors which make shared parenting unrealistic. • Instead of applying blanket joint custody presumptions, all family court practitioners, including judges, should: (1) be alert to signs that domestic violence may be an issue; (2) understand the nature and context of any abuse; (3) determine the implications, if any, of the abuse for parenting and co-parenting; and (4) account for the violence and its implications in their handling of cases. • Exceptions for domestic violence cases fail to prevent the inappropriate application of joint custody presumptions to many families for whom domestic violence is a significant issue because: (1) abuse is often not detected by the system, (2) victims have problems proving that the abuse occurred, and (3) many practitioners are disinclined to believe that the abuse occurred. Obtain a full copy of the article here: (PDF) Perspectives on Joint Custody Presumptions as Applied to Domestic Violence Cases (researchgate.net) Backes, B. L., Fedina, L., & Holmes, J. L. (2020). The criminal justice system response to intimate partner stalking: A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative research. Journal of Family Violence, 35, 665-678. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-020-00139-3.
Abstract Intimate partner stalking (IPS) is a significant public health and public safety issue, yet it remains a largely understudied area especially related to effective practices for victim engagement and response. This study uses systematic review methods to assess the range of criminal justice responses to IPS victimization and the extent to which these responses are successful in promoting survivor safety, well-being, and justice. Multiple scholarly and gray-literature databases were searched to locate studies on criminal justice responses to IPS. Over 336 records were reviewed dating back to 1993 and screened for inclusion in the study, resulting in a final sample size of 22 studies. Findings identify both formal and informal strategies used by the criminal justice system to address IPS. However, pervasive barriers exist including a lack of knowledge and training on stalking, difficulties in investigation and prosecution, and negative perceptions of victims. Successful strategies for mitigating IPS were linked to increased training of law enforcement and prosecution and the granting and enforcement of civil protective orders. Complexity of charging decisions was identified as a challenge for criminal justice entities and methodological and definitional issues make stalking a difficult area to study. Despite numerous barriers in effectively responding to victims of IPS, recommendations for improving responses across the criminal justice system include enhanced training and periodic refreshers across criminal justice entities, coordinated reviews of IPS cases, and better incorporation of the stalker’s criminal history to strategically pursue charges. Obtain a full copy of the article here: (PDF) The Criminal Justice System Response to Intimate Partner Stalking: a Systematic Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Research (researchgate.net) |
Archives
May 2022
|