Download Beliefs & Practices on False Allegations in Child Custody and more Study Guides, Projects, Research Psychopathology in PDF only on Docsity!
The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S.
Department of Justice and prepared the following final report:
Document Title: Child Custody Evaluators’ Beliefs About
Domestic Abuse Allegations: Their Relationship
to Evaluator Demographics, Background,
Domestic Violence Knowledge and Custody-
Visitation Recommendations
Author: Daniel G. Saunders, Ph.D., Kathleen C. Faller,
Ph.D., Richard M. Tolman, Ph.D.
Document No.: 238891
Date Received: June 2012
Award Number: 2007-WG-BX-
This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice.
To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally-
funded grant final report available electronically in addition to
traditional paper copies.
Opinions or points of view expressed are those
of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect
the official position or policies of the U.S.
Department of Justice.
Child Custody Evaluators’ Beliefs About Domestic Abuse Allegations:
Their Relationship to Evaluator Demographics, Background, Domestic Violence
Knowledge and Custody-Visitation Recommendations
Final Technical Report Submitted to the
National Institute of Justice,
U.S. Department of Justice
October 31, 2011
Principal Investigator: Daniel G. Saunders, Ph.D.,
Co-Investigators: Kathleen C. Faller, Ph.D. and Richard M. Tolman, Ph.D.
University of Michigan, School of Social Work,
1080 S. University Ave., Ann Arbor MI 48109-1106 USA
This project was supported by Grant No. 2007-WG-BX-0013 awarded by the National Institute of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Findings and conclusions of the
research reported here are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official
position of the U.S. Department of Justice.
been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
**5. Recommendations for Sole Legal and Physical Custody to Mother in Vignette, by Role
- Recommendations for Sole Legal and Physical Custody to Father in Vignette, by Role
- Recommendations for Joint Legal and Physical Custody (shared parenting) in Vignette, by Role
- Means for Evaluators’ Estimated Rates of False Allegations and Domestic Violence
- Means for Estimated Rates of Child Abuse: Evaluators
- Means for Estimated Rates of Parental Visitation Recommendations: Evaluators
- Means of Custody Recommendation Responses to Vignette: Evaluators
- Means of Visitation Recommendation Responses to Vignette: Evaluators**
List of Tables
**1. Demographics and Experiences of Professional Groups
- Experience with Custody Cases by Primary Role
- Areas of Knowledge Acquired by Professional Group
- Personal Knowledge of Victims/Survivors of Domestic Violence by Professional Role
- Frequency of Custody Recommendations by Evaluators
- Bivariate Correlations: Beliefs Among Custody Evaluators About False Allegations of Abuse, Parental Alienation, and Parental Action in Vignette
- Bivariate Correlations between Beliefs and Custody-Visitation Recommendations in Past Cases
- Bivariate Correlations between Beliefs and Vignette Custody-Visitation Responses
- Custody-Visitation Recommendations and Beliefs by Evaluator Gender and Setting
- Custody Beliefs and Recommendations by Types of DV Knowledge Areas Acquired
- Pearson Correlations Between Evaluator Beliefs and Methods of Knowledge Acquisition
- Use of DV Assessment Instruments by DV Knowledge Acquisition
- Bivariate Correlations Between Core Beliefs and Custody Beliefs and Recommendations
- The Amount of Variance Explained (R Squared) by Separate Sets of Variables in Predicting Major Outcomes
- Hierarchical Multiple Regression Predicting Major Outcomes: R Squared Increase with the Entry of Each Block
- Bivariate Correlations between Beliefs and Vignette Custody-Visitation Responses: Judges**
been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
High rates of domestic violence exist in families referred for child custody evaluations. These evaluations can produce potentially harmful outcomes, including the custody of children being awarded to a violent parent, unsupervised or poorly supervised visitation between violent parents and their children, and mediation sessions that increase danger to domestic violence victims. Past research shows that domestic violence is frequently undetected in custody cases or ignored as a significant factor in custody-visitation determinations. Previous research also indicates that violence—and its harmful effects on victims and children—often continues or increases after separation. Little is known, however, about child custody evaluators’ beliefs, background, knowledge about domestic violence, and other factors that may shape their recommendations^1 regarding custody and parent-child visitation arrangements.
The purpose of this study was to further our understanding of what child custody evaluators and other professionals believe regarding allegations of domestic abuse made by parents going through a divorce. The study had several major goals:
to investigate the extent to which child custody evaluators and other professionals who make court recommendations believe allegations of domestic violence are false;
to explore the relationship between these beliefs and (a) knowledge of domestic violence and (b) recommendations about custody, supervised visitation, and mediation;
to examine whether beliefs about false allegations of domestic violence are related to beliefs that false allegations of child abuse are common; abuse of parents should not be a criterion in custody and visitation decisions; and that parents often alienate their children from the other parent;
to examine the relationships between beliefs about false allegations and beliefs about patriarchal norms, social dominance, and justice in the world.
We also conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with 24 domestic abuse survivors^2 who experienced negative custody-visitation outcomes, such as losing custody of their children. The information gathered helped us interpret our quantitative findings, uncover new areas of concern, and learn of recommendations the survivors had for changing the custody determination process.
(^1) The term recommendation includes recommendations that professionals actually made or would have made if in a position to make recommendations in custody or visitation cases. In line with some professional standards and the 2 The term survivor is used interchangeably with the term victim to refer to those victimized by domestic violence.
been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Findings
We first present findings that compare how the five professional groups acquire knowledge about domestic violence and their beliefs about false domestic violence allegations. We then examine the extent to which each of the professional groups recommended different custody and visitation arrangements. Finally, we focus on findings for the custody evaluators, specifically the relationships between their backgrounds, knowledge, and beliefs, and their custody and visitation recommendations.
Domestic Violence (DV) Knowledge
The most common areas of knowledge across professional groups were children’s exposure to domestic violence and prevalence of domestic violence. The least common areas—especially among judges, evaluators, and private attorneys—were knowledge of post-separation violence, screening for domestic violence, and assessing dangerousness (although the majority still acquired knowledge in these areas). Domestic violence workers had the highest rates of knowledge regarding all topics.
Belief in False Allegations of Domestic Violence and Child Abuse
Professionals were asked to estimate what percent of domestic violence allegations by mothers and fathers they believed to be false. Among the major findings:
Judges, private attorneys, and custody evaluators were more likely than domestic violence workers and legal aid attorneys to believe that mothers make false allegations.
After we controlled for background (number of custody cases, survivors known, and training) and demographic variables (age and gender), judges did not differ from legal aid attorneys and domestic violence workers regarding their estimate of what percentage of mothers’ domestic violence allegations were false.
Domestic violence workers and legal aid attorneys gave the highest estimates of the percentage of fathers’ making false domestic violence allegations, while judges and custody evaluators gave the lowest estimates.
On average, evaluators estimated that one fourth to one third of child abuse allegations were false.
On average, evaluators estimated that 26 percent of mothers’ domestic violence allegations were false and 31 percent of fathers’ allegations were false.
been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Evaluators “supported” the allegations of domestic violence in approximately half of their cases alleging domestic violence.
Among domestic violence cases, evaluators were more likely to estimate that fathers try to alienate children from mothers than the reverse.
Custody Evaluators’ Custody Recommendations
Evaluators were asked to estimate how often they recommended seven different custody arrangements when “one parent was clearly the perpetrator” of domestic violence. Of those surveyed, 65 percent reported recommending sole legal and physical custody to victims “half of the time” to “always.” Approximately 40 percent of evaluators recommended joint legal custody, with sole physical custody to victims, at least “half of the time” to “always.”
Ten percent of evaluators estimated that at least “half of the time” they recommended joint physical and legal custody to the couple. Another 10 percent estimated they recommended joint physical custody and sole legal custody to the victim at least “half of the time” or more. Legal or physical custody to the perpetrator was rarely recommended: 49 to 70 percent reported “never” making this recommendation and 26 to 41 percent reported “seldom” doing so.
In response to the case vignette of domestic violence, evaluators reported the highest likelihood (47% on average) that the best interests of the child would be served by awarding legal custody to both parents and physical custody to the battered mother. Awarding the mother sole legal and physical custody was chosen almost as often (40% average likelihood). Joint legal and physical custody was chosen at a somewhat lower average likelihood of 30%.
Visitation Recommendations
We asked custody evaluators to report on the visitation recommendations they made in past custody cases that involved domestic violence. Evaluators reported that, when recommending visitation for a parent who was “clearly the perpetrator,” they recommended supervision by a professional or paraprofessional in nearly half of the cases, supervision by a friend or relative in one fourth of the cases, and no supervision in nearly one third of the cases.
In response to the case vignette depicting serious domestic violence, unsupervised visitation was recommended the most (47% average likelihood), with supervision of visits by friends and relatives
been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
the father in the vignette minimized his violence;
the mother in the vignette did not exaggerate her reports of abuse.
Evaluators who made initial hypotheses about coercive-controlling behavior were more likely to believe fathers make false DV allegations.
Beliefs About Custody Related to Custody Recommendations
Among evaluators, beliefs about custody were related to the two measures of custody recommendations: past case recommendations and the recommendations for the domestic violence case vignette. Favoring the offender over the victim in custody arrangements was significantly related to several beliefs: (1) DV victims alienate children from the other parent; (2) DV allegations are typically false; (3) DV victims hurt children if they resist co-parenting; (4) DV is not important in custody decisions; and (5) coercive-controlling violence in the vignette was not a factor to explore. These same beliefs were related to the belief that the couple in the vignette would benefit from mediation. Recommending supervised parent-child visits for the offender in evaluators’ own cases and in the vignette case was related to evaluators’ beliefs that DV is important in custody decisions and DV caused the mother’s mental health problems in the vignette. Judges were also asked about their responses to the domestic violence vignette case. Findings similar to those for evaluators were found for the judges’ beliefs about DV and custody.
Gender Differences
Male evaluators were more likely than female evaluators to believe that DV allegations are false, DV victims alienate their children, DV victims hurt the children when resisting co-parenting, and DV is not an important factor in custody decisions.
Female evaluators were more likely to believe that perpetrators alienate children from their mothers. They were also more likely than male evaluators to believe that supervised visits for the father in the vignette case were in the best interest of the child and mediation would benefit the hypothetical couple.
Knowing or Being a Survivor
If the evaluator’s mother was a DV survivor, the evaluator was more likely to have recommended (or would have recommended) that the DV victim receive custody and that visits with the non-custodial parent be supervised. Having any family member who survived DV was related to the belief that domestic violence is an important consideration in custody-visitation determinations and that mothers do not make false DV allegations. Being a DV survivor was not related to beliefs or recommendations.
been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Knowledge of Domestic Violence Related to Custody-Visitation Recommendations
Possession of specific areas of DV knowledge was related to particular custody and visitation recommendations in evaluators’ actual cases and in the case vignette. First, we found that evaluators with knowledge of DV prevalence and DV danger assessment were more likely to recommend sole custody to DV victims. Those who knew about post-separation violence were more likely to believe the mother in the vignette should have sole custody. Finally, knowing about children’s exposure to domestic violence was related to recommendations for supervised visits. Most areas of knowledge were also related to the five beliefs about custody: allegations of domestic violence are likely to be true; DV victims do not alienate children from the other parent; victims do not harm children if they resist co-parenting; DV is an important factor in custody decisions; and fathers are likely to make false DV and child abuse allegations. Knowing how to screen for domestic violence and knowing about post-separation violence were the factors most strongly associated with these five beliefs about custody. Knowledge about screening was also related to considering the father’s controlling behavior in the vignette as an important factor in the evaluation process.
How Methods of Acquiring DV Knowledge Relate to Custody Recommendations
None of the methods of learning about domestic violence were related to actual custody and visitation recommendations made by evaluators. However, more frequent workshop and lecture attendance were related to recommending custody to the mother-survivor and supervised visits for the father-offender in the vignette. More frequent workshop and lecture attendance were also related to all four beliefs about DV and custody: false DV allegations are uncommon, victims do not alienate the children, domestic violence is an important factor in custody decisions, and children are not harmed if victims do not co-parent.
Professional consultations and reading books and articles were related to the beliefs that DV is important in custody decisions, false DV allegations are uncommon, victims do not alienate the children from the other parent, and the vignette mother’s psychological problems may be caused by DV. Learning about domestic violence by reading web sites was associated with the beliefs that DV is an important factor in custody decisions, the vignette offender’s visits should be supervised, and DV is a likely cause of the vignette mother’s psychological symptoms.
Court Versus Private Settings
Court-based evaluators were less likely than private evaluators to believe that false DV allegations are common, victims alienate children from the other parent, or victims hurt the children by being reluctant to co-parent.
been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
recommendations they had made for sole or joint custody to the perpetrator and to belief that mediation would be useful for the couple in the vignette. The belief that social hierarchies are good (social dominance) was not related to custody-visitation recommendations. However, belief in social dominance was related to the beliefs that alleged DV victims make false allegations and alienate their children, and that fathers do not falsely allege abuse.
The Impact of Groups of Variables
The core beliefs (patriarchal norms, just world, social dominance) and the custody beliefs contributed to recommendations independent of each other, although custody beliefs were partially explained by core beliefs. Thus, both types of beliefs are useful in understanding how professionals make custody and visitation recommendations. Overall, demographic and background variables had little effect on the relationship between the sets of core and custody belief variables and the four outcome variables.
Interviews with Survivors of Domestic Violence
Interviews with survivors who had negative experiences during the child custody process revealed several themes: Domestic violence was ignored or minimized in the evaluation; evaluators gave too much weight to survivors’ mental health or alleged mental health symptoms; and evaluators performed one-sided and rushed evaluations. Among other negative experiences, survivors mentioned being reprimanded for reporting child abuse. The survivors made recommendations in several areas. They specifically urged (1) fair and thorough custody evaluations, (2) expansion of supervised visitation and exchange programs, (3) thorough enforcement of child protection laws and investigation of all child abuse reports, and (4) mandatory DV training for custody evaluators, court professionals, and guardians ad litem.
Parallels between survivor reports and survey results appeared in a number of areas. For example, the survivors’ recommendations for training are consistent with the survey findings on the links between what evaluators know about domestic violence, and their beliefs and recommendations. Some survivors’ reports of a double standard regarding mental illness in mothers versus fathers suggest that mothers are being held to a higher standard. These survivor reports may illustrate the significant relationship between endorsing patriarchal norms and making custody recommendations that favor offenders. The survivors also highlighted the need for evaluators to understand the traumatic effects of the emotional abuse they suffered.
Limitations of Study
Limitations of this study include:
been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
It is not known the extent to which the samples of professionals are representative of each professional group. Therefore, the group comparison findings need to be interpreted carefully.
Reports of beliefs about controversial topics, even on anonymous surveys, may be influenced by social desirability response bias or by attempts to prove or disprove hypotheses.
Some measures were created for this study, and although they showed good construct validity, some internal reliabilities were at the low end of acceptability.
The study focused on all forms of domestic violence in order to build upon prior research. However, evaluators’ responses are likely to vary depending on the type and severity of domestic violence.
Implications for Practice
Despite the limitations described above, the results of this study have important implications for practice.
Knowledge of Specific DV Topics
The majority of professionals responding to the survey reported knowledge of post-separation violence, screening, and assessing dangerousness. However, judges, evaluators, and private attorneys reported the least amount of these forms of knowledge. More DV training for judges, evaluators and private attorneys on these topics would probably be helpful. Respondents who reported more knowledge of these topics were less inclined to believe that allegations of DV are false or that victims alienate the children. Workshop and lecture attendance were the methods of knowledge acquisition most often associated with positive outcomes such as believing DV is important in custody evaluations and recommending custody to the victim and supervised visits for the father in the vignette. Information obtained through web sites, a low-cost means of training, is also related to some positive outcomes, specifically the belief that DV is an important factor to consider when making custody determinations, recommending supervised visits for the violent parent in the vignette, and viewing DV as the likely cause of mental health symptoms of the mother in the vignette. All professional groups involved in custody evaluations need DV training prior to involvement in DV custody cases, as well as yearly continuing education.
been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
judges as well, since their beliefs about DV and custody were significantly related to the outcomes recommended in the case vignette.
Professional Degrees, Roles, and Settings
Information emerged from this study regarding differences in beliefs and recommendations based on evaluation settings, professional roles, and evaluators’ advanced degrees. If further analysis and research supports the findings of this study, important implications emerge: (1) legal aid attorneys and domestic violence workers hold very similar beliefs and are likely to collaborate well as individual and system advocates; (2) characteristics and methods of social work evaluators need to be studied more carefully to understand the reasons for their strong support of victims; (3) due perhaps to the high proportion of social workers employed in court-based settings, county-court evaluators’ beliefs supported survivors more than private evaluators’ beliefs. Additional analysis is required to determine whether county-court evaluators’ beliefs lead to supportive practices.
Inquiring About and Screening for Domestic Violence
We found it reassuring that almost all evaluators directly inquired about the presence of domestic violence when conducting a custody evaluation. However, only one third of evaluators consistently used a screening instrument or standard screening protocol. A more consistent use of instruments and standard protocols for DV screening is likely to increase the rate of DV detection, as they have in other settings (e.g., Magen, Conroy, Hess, Pandiera, & Simon, 2001).
Of evaluators who reported using an instrument to “assess domestic violence,” 15 percent reported using only general measures of personality-psychopathology. Although such measures can detect personality disorders that might help place known abusers into typologies useful for assessment and intervention, they may also lead to false conclusions about the psychopathology of abusers and survivors (Erickson, 2006). Evaluators using general measures of personality-psychopathology were more likely to recommend sole or joint custody to the abusive father in the case vignette.
Selection of Custody Evaluators by Judges
Judges can use the findings of this study as a guide for selecting child custody evaluators. For example, those who believed that domestic violence was an important factor in custody evaluations were characterized by having particular types of domestic violence knowledge. Guidance on selecting custody evaluators with adequate knowledge of domestic violence is available (Dalton, Drozd & Wong, 2006).
been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Expanding Supervised Visitation and Exchange Programs
Many evaluators reported never recommending supervised visitation by professionals. A possible reason is that supervised visitation programs are not available in evaluators’ communities. Survivors emphasized the need for more supervised visitation programs to help keep them and their children safe, both physically and psychologically.
In conclusion, this study reveals the extent to which evaluators and other professionals differ in their beliefs regarding false allegations, alienation of the children, the importance of DV in custody decisions, and the reasons that victims are reluctant to co-parent. Findings on the training methods and domestic violence topics likely to be most effective will improve the training of professionals. Such trainings are likely to lead to safer custody and visitation arrangements.
BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW
Although the prevalence of domestic violence and child maltreatment has decreased over the last three decades, both remain major crime and health problems affecting millions of families (Catalano, 2006; Finkelhor & Jones, 2006; Straus & Gelles, 1990). This violence also seriously affects victims’ mental health (Anderson & Saunders, 2007; Campbell & Kendall-Tackett, 2005; Wolfe,
, Crooks, Lee, McIntyre-Smith, & Jaffe, 2004). Early interventions for domestic abuse focused on victims’ immediate needs for safety through shelter, restraining orders, and arrest of offenders. Systems advocacy focused primarily on changing the criminal justice system. Today the family law arena is increasingly identified as needing reform to protect battered women and their children (Goodmark, 2011). Research has documented the ongoing and sometimes escalating dangers faced by victims and their children after they leave violent relationships. Homicidal threats, stalking, and harassment affect as many as 25 to 35 percent of survivors who have left a violent relationship (e.g., Bachman & Saltzman, 1995; Hardesty & Chung, 2006; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000a). In addition, as many as one fourth of battered women report their ex-partners threatened to hurt or kidnap their children (e.g., Liss & Stahly, 1993). Many abusers also use the legal system to maintain contact with and harass their ex-partners (Bancroft & Silverman, 2002).
Domestic abuse survivors and their children may experience serious harm as a result of family court decisions. Offenders may be able to continue their abuse of their ex-partners and children due to unsupervised or poorly supervised visitation arrangements (Neustein & Lesher, 2005; Radford & Hester, 2006); sole or joint custody of children may be awarded to a violent or potentially violent parent rather than a non-violent one; and mediation may be recommended or mandated in a way that compromises victims’ rights or places them in more danger. Tragically, in some cases post-separation contacts end in the homicide of a mother and/or her children
been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
bias in the courts, as revealed by many gender-bias commissions, almost always finds greater bias against women, which often increases risks to battered women and their children in the context of custody determinations (Dragiewicz, 2010; Meier, 2003);
women use violence more often in self-defense than men, especially in lethal situations;
women are more severely injured physically and psychologically than men;
women are sexually assaulted and stalked at much higher rates than men; and
women have more difficulty than men leaving violent relationships (Kimmel, 2002; Saunders, 2002).
In addition, some of the most rigorous studies show gender disparities. In a large-scale, representative study of the U.S. population, for example, 20 percent of women and 7 percent of men reported experiencing intimate partner violence during their lifetimes (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000b). Within the custody evaluation context, there is also evidence of some gender disparity. For example, custody evaluators, primarily psychologists in private practice, reported their cases to be comprised of the following types: 51 percent male instigator, 17 percent bidirectional mostly male, 14 percent bidirectional mutual (both male and female instigators), 11 percent female instigator, and 7 percent bidirectional mostly female (Bow & Boxer, 2003).
Gender Bias in the Courts
Battered women are at higher risk of negative custody-visitation outcomes due to gender bias by courts, as documented by many federal, state, and local commissions that have studied such bias since the 1980s (e.g., Abrams & Greaney, 1989; Czapanskiy, 1993; Danforth & Welling, 1996; Dragiewicz, 2010; Meier, 2003; Zorza, 1996)^4. Negative stereotypes about women seem to encourage judges to disbelieve women’s allegations about child abuse (Danforth & Welling, 1996; Zorza, 1996). A lack of understanding about domestic violence also leads judges to accuse victims of lying, blaming victims for the violence, and trivializing the violence (Abrams & Greaney, 1989; Maryland Special Joint Committee on Gender Bias, 1989).
Gender bias is frequently uncovered in custody disputes (Rosen & Etlin, 1996) and often leads to mistrust of women—in particular to the belief that they make false allegations of child abuse and domestic violence. Dragiewicz (2010) provides a comprehensive summary of gender bias reports pertaining to custody decisions. In addition to the tendency to disbelieve or minimize women’s reports of abuse, or to disregard evidence for it, Dragiewicz also describes other problems uncovered during investigations. These include mothers being punished for reporting abuse, unfair
(^4) See also a list of gender bias reports from 43 states and 7 federal districts at http://www.legalmomentum.org/our-work/njep/njep-task-forces.html
been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
financial settlements, and mothers being held to higher standards than fathers. In a study of appellate state court decisions, sole or joint custody was awarded to an alleged or adjudicated batterer in 36 of 38 cases, several of which involved severe battering and multiple convictions. However, two thirds of these cases were reversed on appeal (Meier, 2003).
Failure to Understand the Nature of Domestic Abuse
Judges, child custody evaluators, and others involved in determining custody and visitation arrangements may simply be unaware of the factors that indicate actual or potential harm. For example, they may be unaware that:
regardless of whether children are the direct targets of physical abuse, exposure to domestic violence often leads to serious psychological trauma for many children (e.g., Edleson, 1999; Graham-Bermann & Edleson, 2002; Kitzmann, Gaylord, Holt, & Kenny, 2003; Wolfe, Crooks, Lee, McIntyre-Smith, & Jaffe, 2004);
half of men who batter also physically abuse their children (Straus, 1983);
battered women’s risk of abusing their children is also above the norm, but is half that of men who batter and seems to be more situational (Saunders, 2007);
many men who batter, more than fifty percent in one study, become abusive in a subsequent relationship (Woffordt, Mihalic, & Menard, 1994); therefore, separation does not necessarily end children’s exposure to violence;
stalking, harassment, and emotional abuse often continue and may increase after separation (e.g., Bachman & Saltzman, 1995; DeKeseredy & Schwartz, 2009; Leighton, 1989; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000a); and
the risk of homicide increases after separation (Saunders & Browne, 2000).
Practitioners may also have serious misconceptions about custody cases and domestic abuse. For example:
Practitioners may not understand why survivors stay in the relationship. A woman might stay in the relationship because she believes that it is the best way to protect her children—a decision that can be interpreted as a failure to protect her children. Failure to protect is a claim that can be used against her in custody disputes. On the other hand, if she flees suddenly with the children or wants to live far from her abuser, her actions are often interpreted negatively (see Saunders, 2007, for a review). Researchers have found women may stay for a variety of reasons related
been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
