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
0 Comments
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) 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 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) Birnbaum, R., & Saini, M. (2015). A qualitative synthesis of children's experiences of shared care post divorce. The International Journal of Children's Rights, 23(1), 109-132. DOI: 10.1163/15718182-02301005
Abstract Objectives: Children’s views and experiences of shared care arrangements post separation were explored to provide their voices to the ongoing discussions of shared parenting. Methods: Qualitative synthesis included a systematic and transparent method for retrieval, screening, and analysing qualitative studies. The inclusion criteria accepted studies that were: qualitative in design; included children as participants in shared care parenting time post-separation. Results: Ten qualitative studies in six different countries with 466 children and young adults were included in the final analysis. Children’s experiences of shared care parenting post separation were mixed and varied depending on contextual factors related to their relationship with both parents, as well the quality of these relationships and the flexibility/rigidity of the parenting arrangement. Implications: Hearing from children and young adults directly helps to move the shared care debate away from binary arguments about sole versus shared care based on parents’ rights and advocacy views. Read the full article here: (PDF) A Qualitative Synthesis of Children’s Experiences of Shared Care Post Divorce (researchgate.net) Drozd, L. M., Deustch, R. M., Robin, M., & Donner, D. A. (2020). Parenting coordination in cases involving intimate partner violence. Family Court Review, 58(3), 774-792. DOI: 10.1111/fcre.12512
Abstract Parenting Coordination is a “hybrid legal‐mental health role that combines assessment, education, case management, conflict management, dispute resolution and, often times, decision‐making functions (AFCC, 2019, https://www.afccnet.org/Portals/0/PublicDocuments/Guidelines%20for%20PC%20with%20Appendex.pdf?ver=2020-01-30-190220-990). This article addresses issues that arise when the case has allegations or findings of intimate partner violence (IPV). Considerations of the type of IPV, the severity, timing, perpetrator and effects on coparenting are discussed in the context of the parenting coordinator's role. Through screening and assessment, we differentiate the kinds of cases with the presence of IPV where a PC may be effective as opposed to other IPV cases that may not predict success for retaining a PC. Request a full-text copy of the article here: Parenting Coordination In Cases Involving Intimate Partner Violence (researchgate.net) Birnbaum, R. (2019). "Virtual parenting" after separation and divorce. The Vanier Institute of the Family.
Introduction The rapid increase in the use of communication technologies, such as text messages, instant messaging, email, social networking sites, Skype, FaceTime and webcams, has provided a variety of new ways for parents to maintain their relationships with their children and manage family responsibilities after separation and divorce. At the same time, the increased use of these methods has also created a new area of discussion and debate about the risks and benefits of this type of “virtual parenting.” Issues such as safety and vulnerability, the ability to use technology, and privacy and confidentiality for the child and each parent are only some of the considerations both for the family justice professionals who recommend virtual contact and for the courts that decide on these types of parent–child contact orders. Retrieve the report here: “Virtual Parenting” After Separation and Divorce – The Vanier Institute of the Family / L’Institut Vanier de la famille Jaffe, P. (2014). A presumption against shared parenting for family court litigants. Family Court Review, 52(2), 187-192. Abstract Shared parenting is the most beneficial model for planning the future of many separating parents and their children. Shared parenting needs to be crafted, for appropriate cases, by willing parents on their own or through coaching by responsible lawyers, counsellors, or mediators. Shared parenting is not an outcome that should be forced on high‐conflict parents against their will as a compromise in the hopes that they will grow into the plan. Separating parents with a history of domestic violence need to receive appropriate screening and assessment on the nature of the violence, the impact of the violence on the adult victim and children, and the interventions required by the perpetrator before a safe parenting plan can be designed. The Think Tank Report on shared parenting is to be commended for its work. The Report acknowledges some of the limitations of shared parenting in situations that pose risks to children and/or inadvertently promote ongoing conflicts between parents. My concern is that domestic violence victims will be forced into shared parenting or fear being labelled as “hostile” and “unfriendly parents” or accused of alienation. There continues to be a need for much more professional education on the ongoing risks of domestic violence and the implications for differentiated parenting plans. Request a copy of the article here: A Presumption Against Shared Parenting for Family Court Litigants (researchgate.net) Campo, M., Fehlberg, B., Natalier, K., & Smyth, B. (2020). Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law. DOI: 10.1080/09649069.2020.1796218
ABSTRACT This paper explores 68 Australian children and young people’s understandings of what ‘home’ means for them after their parents’ separation. Home – a familiar yet complex concept of great personal and social significance – has been a research focus for many other disciplines but not family law. We found that home, as an idea and lived experience, was complex. Children and young people’s descriptions of home conveyed an interaction of tangible and intangible dimensions. Home was rarely defined by children and young people solely in terms of a physical residence; rather it was a fundamentally relational idea and experience, largely created through everyday interactions with significant others. Our study suggests that home is not simply the outcome of conforming to a defined list of ‘good’ post-separation parenting practices, or dependent on the amount of time spent at each parent’s residence: it has an existential significance for children and young people that matters deeply to them. Request a copy here: THE MEANING OF 'HOME' TO CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE AFTER PARENTAL SEPARATION | Bruce M Smyth | 7 updates | 1 publications | Research Project (researchgate.net) |
Archives
May 2022
|