Domestic Violence, Children and Parenting Plans
Policy Considerations • What’s Old: • Statutory Best Interest factor • Nicholson v. Scopetta • Permitting Child Abuse • Enhancement of Penalties-if DV within sight or sound of a child • What’s New: • Cuyahoga County Domestic Relations Court-DV Dep’t. • HB 3 • HB 429
How the parents look to the system AND how they look to each other 3
• Attempts to present as the true victim • Angers easily • Claims the other parent is stupid or inflexible Demeanor of • Appears vulnerable or attempts to engender the Abuser: empathy with the court • Unwilling to understand the other parent’s Undermining perspective child-parent • ***Attempts to create alliances with third parties relationship • Patronizes the other parent, attorney or court • Minimizes, blames the other for or excuses inappropriate behavior 4
Demeanor of the Abused • Has difficulty in presenting evidence from fear or cognitive impairments resulting from abuse • Demonstrates inappropriate affect resulting from fear, depression, PTSD or other responses to abuse • Appears extremely anxious and unfocused • Appears numb, unaffected or disinterested • Acts aggressive or angry when testifying • Shows signs of distress when listening to abuser’s testimony 5
Faced with parenting decisions Domestic Violence vs. the System 6
Family Court Perspective • Joint decision making and equal access is best for • Parents who seek and children and both parents should be involved with the “demand” sole custody or decision making who seek to restrict other parent’s access do not act in the best interests of the children- • Parental alienation • Friendly parent provisions 7
The System’s Dilemmas: • Who to believe? • What to do? • Conflicting experts about • Try to protect children and DV and PAS non offending parents (mothers) • He said/she said • Refrain from violating the civil • Few social service liberties of accused fathers resources • Worry about a tragic outcome • Homicide of the victim • Death of the child by an abusive parent 8
• Joint decision-making is best • Parental involvement is safe for both parents- (or not considered at all) Assumptions • Parents are child focused or will be in parenting if permitted joint decision making decisions • Abuse to a parent is unrelated or does not impact the children • BUT WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THERE IS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE? 9
Why is the issue so difficult? The Assumption The effect of DV • Post separation abuse often • Parental involvement is Increases (Bancroft & Silverman, (2002)) safe for both parents • Child exposure to DV affects • Parent child relationship with both relationships are safe abusive and non abusive and healthy and parents; abusers often use parents are child- children to maintain power and control after separation focused (Bancroft & Silverman (2002)) 10
Why? Assumption Effects of DV • Abuse and threats of abuse may • All parents can make communication communicate effectively impossible (Jaffe, et all 2006) • Abuse of a parent is • Abuse can significantly impair unrelated to/does not victim’s parenting (Stark (2009); Jaffe significantly impair the & Crooks (2005) **Bancroft & Silverman (2002) parent/child relationship • Children may resist relationship with abuser due to hyper- vigilance/ fear ( Drozd & Olesen (2004) 11
Why? • Abuse may be difficult to identify: • Stereotypes of abusers are often wrong • Abusers present well/elicit sympathy (Research by Peter Jaffe, Claire Dalton, Lundy Bancroft) • Victims often present poorly or be hesitant to disclose to court • Effects of DV often counterintuitive (children often express love for abusive parent, victims stay in relationships/accommodate abusers 12
Why? • Misconceptions about DV: • Parents (mostly mothers) fake abuse to gain advantage in custody disputes. • If DV not immediately alleged, it is not real or present in the relationship. • Parents (mothers) actively alienate the other parent from kids. • Even if there is abuse, if it is not directed at child, it shouldn’t affect custody. 13
Misconceptions v. Truth Truth Misconception • Research shows false allegations not • Parents fake abuse prevalent (2%-12%; more likely that allegations to gain non-custodial fathers often fabricate (Trocme & Bala (2005); Thoennes & Tjaden advantage (1990); Bala % Schuman (2000)) • Victim and attorneys hesitant to raise • If DV not alleged or alleged issues, court may not ask right late, there is no DV questions. (Frederick (2008)) • PAS has been discredited-not listed in • Parents alienate other DSM by APA ( NCJFCJ Guide) parent from children • Children are affected by exposure to • Abuse of parent not DV (Jaffe, et al. (2006); Wolfe, et al. (2003); Edelson, (1999 ) relevant in custody decision 14
Making sense of the allegations What victim/abuser says How victim/abuser acts • Drill down when questioning • Observe demeanor of • Listen to what the victim says both victim and abuser • Ask questions about the DV • Assess for threat • Consider behavior of • Remember to consider lethality both in response to factors your questioning in light • Consider “context” of both the incident and the threat of myths, assumptions and fears 15
Mother’s demeanor matters. Hostility + DV= 5 times more likely to award sole What does the custody to father. research show? Hostility + documentation of DV= 3 times more likely. Severity/type of violence not predictive of recommendations 16
• Psychologists more likely to believe DV irrelevant. • Gender of evaluator often predictive of recommendations. What does the research show? • Daniel Saunders, presentation at NCJFJC Annual conference, “New Research on Child Custody Evaluations and Domestic Violence: Implications for the Bench (2011); Custody Evaluations in cases with Domestic Violence research by Michael S. Davis, Chris O’Sullivan, Kim Susser, and Marjory Fields (National Institute of Justice); Custody Evaluators’ beliefs about Domestic Abuse in Relation to Custody Outcomes, research by Daniel Saunders, Kathleen Faller, and Richard Tolman (NIJ); The Effect of Domestic Violence Allegations on Custody Evaluator’s Recommendations, research 17
• Abuse does not end with separation • It often ESCALATES Why is • Overlap between DV and child abuse domestic • Children’s exposure to an violence inappropriate role model • Undermining of non-offending parent relevant in • Perpetual litigation as a form of on- custody going control disputes • Extreme cases lead to homicide/suicide and abductions 18
• Domestic violence is often not detected in disputed child custody cases • Screening for physical abuse alone is insufficient to detect coercive controlling behaviors What does the Practitioners who do not use systemic methods such as lethality, research show? dangerousness and risk assessments tend to under-detect DV between parents • Even when DV is detected, cases often proceed without accommodations for safety or power differentials-mediation is such an example 19
• To adequately address parenting issues: • Routinely screen for DV • If present, identify who the DV offender is and who the adult Take Aways… victim is and • If present, need for a specialized assessment of DV risks to children, non-offending parent and parenting arrangement • Domestic Violence, Parenting Evaluations and Parenting Plans, 20 (Anne L. Ganley (2009))
What’s a Court to do? CRAFT SAFETY FOCUSED AND WORKABLE PARENTING PLANS THAT ACCOUNT FOR THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN THE RELATIONSHIP
No abuse Abuse in the past, acknowledged DIFFERENTIATE Isolated / Situational violence or DOMESTIC threats, acknowledged ABUSE Reactive or Resistive, acknowledged On-going and History of Abuse or threats maybe with Coercive Control Significant History of Abuse with Coercive Control, maybe with attacks directly on children 22
Parenting Paradigm • NO VIOLENCE SHARED PARENTING • NO CURRENT VIOLENCE Level of PARALLEL PARENTING • NO CURRENT Violence VIOLENCE, BUT CAN’T WORK TOGETHER • CONTACT VIOLENCE SUPERVISED EXCHANGE • ON –GOING ABUSE, THREATS, COERCIVE CONTROL ON-GOING ABUSE, THREATS SUPERVISED • COERCIVE CONTROL PARENTING Appropriate INCLUDES CHILD OR Parenting OTHER ABUSE OF CHILD plan NO CONTACT 23
Shared parenting: Flexibility • SHARED DECISION MAKING • No significant history of violence, abuse or threats • Cooperation and Communication • Remorse if there has been violence or threats • Parents put child’s need first • Generally not appropriate for parents with coercive control history or mentally ill and substance abusers 24
Parallel Parenting : Clear Boundaries • DIVIDED DECISION-MAKING POSSIBLY DIFFERENT ISSUES ASSIGNED TO EACH PARENT • Isolated incidents of violence, no coercive control • No current violence • Offending parent took responsibility • Incompatible child rearing styles • Appropriate where each parent has a positive contribution to make but direct contact with other parent creates acrimony • Not appropriate for infants and very young children or special needs children or one parent poses a threat to child or ongoing threat of violence to other parent 25
Recommend
More recommend
