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
Bala, N., & Ebsim, Y. (2022, March). The 2021 Canadian parenting reforms: Is shared parenting the new normal? Queen's Law Research Paper Series, 1-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4058375
Gilbert, B., Stewart, A., Hurren, E., Little, S., & Allard, T. (2021). Exploring dual-system involvement for domestic violence victimisation and child maltreatment perpetration: An exploration by gender and race/ethnicity. Child Abuse & Neglect, 124, 105440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2021.105440
Abstract There is an historical separation between system responses to domestic violence (DV) and child maltreatment. Concerns have been noted that DV victims may be over-represented as parents responsible for harm to children in the child protection system. Although there is a growing acknowledgement of the high overlap between DV and child maltreatment within families, little empirical research has been conducted on this relationship. This study aims to longitudinally examine the overlap of being a victim of DV and a perpetrator of child maltreatment, along with the impact of dual-system involvement on the nature and frequency of the violence experienced. The data are linked longitudinal administrative data from the Queensland Cross-sector Research Collaboration (QCRC) repository. These data contain each contact every individual born in Queensland in 1983 or 1984 had with the Queensland DV civil court system and the Queensland statutory child protection system. Of individuals identified as a perpetrator of child maltreatment, 45% have also been a victim of DV and approximately 22% of DV victims were identified as a perpetrator of child maltreatment. Our results also show differences based on Indigenous status, gender, parental status, number of substantiations, frequency of violence, harm type, and number of domestic violence orders. There is considerable overlap between individuals who are victims of DV and individuals who perpetrate child maltreatment. This overlap was influenced by both gender and race/ethnicity. The implications of this study for both policy and practice are discussed. Request a full-copy of the article here: Exploring dual-system involvement for domestic violence victimisation and child maltreatment perpetration: An exploration by gender and race/ethnicity | Request PDF (researchgate.net) Meier, J. S., & Sankaran, V. (2021). Breaking down the silos that harm children: A call to child welfare, domestic violence and family court professionals. GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works. 1553. https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/faculty_publications/1553/
Abstract The intersection of domestic violence and child maltreatment has been the subject of research and reform efforts focused on the need to integrate a better understanding of domestic violence into child welfare system practice. But a similar effort at integration of domestic violence and child maltreatment concerns has never been directed at family courts adjudicating private custody litigation. And while such courts’ responses to domestic violence have been analyzed and discussed extensively in the literature, legal discussions of custody courts’ responses to child maltreatment are few and far between. At the same time, there has been an explosion of traumatic narratives on social media and in the literature describing family courts’ refusals to keep children safe from a parent alleged to be dangerous. This article examines the legal system’s siloed responses to domestic violence and child maltreatment, with a focus on family courts in custody cases. Newly published data have affirmed the growing outcry about family courts frequently rejecting child maltreatment allegations and removing custody from mothers who make such allegations. Custody court judges’ resistance to adjudicating child maltreatment is widespread and helps explain these patterns. Yet child welfare agencies, as well as reformers seeking to reduce reliance on foster care, trust family courts to protect children that come before them. We argue that systemic changes are needed to break down the silos between family courts and child welfare agencies to better protect children. We propose three practicable, concrete reforms to achieve this. We hope that this article will awaken those who care about children’s safety to the real dangers in family court adjudications, and encourage specialists in domestic violence, family court, and child maltreatment to collaborate in effectuating these much-needed changes. Obtain a full copy here: "Breaking Down the Silos that Harm Children: A Call to Child Welfare, " by Joan S. Meier and Vivek Sankaran (gwu.edu) 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 Morton, M., Samardzic, T., Cross, P., Johnstone, S., Vesely, L., & Choubak, M. (2021). The degendering of male perpetrated intimate partner violence against female partners in Ontario family law courts. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 43(1), 104-118. https://doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2021.1917711
Abstract n this paper, we conducted a critical community-engaged Ontario family law case review of 46 cases from 2019 where intimate partner violence was identified. We explored the extent to which judges identified and addressed intimate partner violence and whether the gender of judges impacted on trial outcomes and judges’ parental assessments. We found that judges de-gendered the language of violence, which impacted trial outcomes (e.g., more rulings of unsupervised access for fathers despite them having been violent) and a mutualisation of responsibility by referring to the violence as ‘conflict.’ We also found that male judges were more likely to negatively assess the mothers as both parents and witnesses. We call for more research that explores whether the changes to the Canadian federal Divorce Act (which includes ‘family violence’) will have an impact on the manner in which intimate partner violence is identified and/or referred to by family law judges, and if and how this influences the weighting of salient outcomes in Ontario family court cases. Request a full-copy of the article here: The degendering of male perpetrated intimate partner violence Against female partners in Ontario family law courts | 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) Khaw, L., Bermea, A. M., Hardesty, J. L., Saunders, D., & Whittaker, A. M. (2021). “The system had choked me too”: Abused mothers’ perceptions of the custody determination process that resulted in negative custody outcomes. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(9-10), 4310-4334. DOI: 10.1177/0886260518791226Click
Abstract Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a public health problem that continues to affect abused mothers after separation from an abusive partner. In addition to the risk of ongoing control and violence by abusers, the custody determination process may present challenges for mothers who end up with negative custody outcomes (e.g., share custody with abusers or lose custody). Using constructivist grounded theory techniques, we conducted a qualitative analysis of interviews with 24 abused mothers with negative custody outcomes to understand how they perceive and make sense of the process as a whole, and how they cope with these outcomes. The custody determination process was reportedly complex and stressful, and most mothers did not anticipate a negative custody outcome. Mothers’ perceptions and experiences followed three phases: “trusting “the system” to protect them and their children, adapting to “the system” in search of positive outcomes, and, once custody decisions were determined, coping with the aftermath of the judicial system process, either by accepting or resisting the outcome. This study echoes previous calls for further training and policies that make the custody determination process less burdensome and harmful for survivors and their children. Request a copy of the full article here: “The System Had Choked Me Too”: Abused Mothers’ Perceptions of the Custody Determination Process That Resulted in Negative Custody Outcomes | Request PDF (researchgate.net) Miller, S. L., & Manzer, J. L. (2021). Safeguarding children’s well-being: Voices from abused mothers navigating their relationships and the civil courts. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(9-10), 4545-4569. DOI: 10.1177/10886260518791599
Abstract Battered mothers often go to great lengths to protect their children from abuse. Most of these efforts play out in private settings such as the home. After their relationships end, women’s actions shift to the public sphere for judgment by the courts. Abusers’ strategies utilize the courts as another tool with which to call into question and challenge their former partners’ parenting. Images of “good mothers” who behave passively are favored by officials who often have incomplete understandings of the dynamics of intimate partner violence and abuse. Existing studies about justice-involved mothers insufficiently portray women’s experiences managing both continued abuse from past partners as well as discriminating treatment by the courts. Semistructured interviews with 25 women in the United States who have terminated their abusive relationships reveal strategies of negotiation and resistance used to protect their children both during and after their relationships; the women also recount instances of paternalism and naïveté present in civil and criminal courts. While their male abusers seemed to receive leniency from court officials, despite, in some cases, violating judges’ direct orders, the women’s efforts were sometimes interpreted as recalcitrance and disobedience when they challenged unfair labels, visitation, and custody decisions. This qualitative study contextualizes women’s efforts and actions taken to safeguard their children during and after their relationships to highlight women’s experiences the courts overlook and misconstrue as well as what happens when women engage with the courts. Policy suggestions include ways to prevent the continued victimization of battered women by the courts, to challenge the pejorative assessment of mother’s protective behaviors, and to illuminate court officials’ malfeasance and toleration of fathers’ tactics. Request a full-copy of the article here: Safeguarding Children’s Well-Being: Voices From Abused Mothers Navigating Their Relationships and the Civil Courts (researchgate.net) |
Archives
May 2022
|