Efficacy of family mediation and the role of family violence: study protocol

Abstract

BackgroundFamily law reforms in Australia require separated parents in dispute to attempt mandatory family dispute resolution (FDR) in community-based family services before court attendance. However, there are concerns about such services when clients present with a history of high conflict and family violence. This study protocol describes a longitudinal study of couples presenting for family mediation services. The study aims to describe the profile of family mediation clients, including type of family violence, and determine the impact of violence profiles on FDR processes and outcomes, such as the type and durability of shared parenting arrangements and clients’ satisfaction with mediated agreements.MethodsA mixed method, naturalistic longitudinal design is used. The sampling frame is clients presenting at nine family mediation centres across metropolitan, outer suburban, and regional/rural sites in Victoria, Australia. Data are collected at pre-test, completion of mediation, and six months later. Self-administered surveys are administered at the three time points, and a telephone interview at the final post-test. The key study variable is family violence. Key outcome measures are changes in the type and level of acrimony and violent behaviours, the relationship between violence and mediated agreements, the durability of agreements over six months, and client satisfaction with mediation.DiscussionFamily violence is a major risk to the physical and mental health of women and children. This study will inform debates about the role of family violence and how to manage it in the family mediation context. It will also inform decision-making about mediation practices by better understanding how mediation impacts on parenting agreements, and the implications for children, especially in the context of family violence.

Secondary Victimization: Domestic Violence Survivors Navigating the Family Law System

“…In the United Kingdom, for example, Trinder, Firth, and Jenks (2010) found that mediators marginalized allegations of violence and responded punitively when women were persistent in raising issues that affected children's safety. The introduction of mediation as a core element of the new policy lacked an evidence base about the impact of mandating mediation to a client group in which high rates of domestic violence could be anticipated but may not be readily identified (Cleak, Schofield, & Bickerdike, 2014).…”

Screening for Partner Violence Among Family Mediation Clients: Differentiating Types of Abuse

“…This article is based on analysis of baseline data from a longitudinal project designed to evaluate the relationship between IPV and family mediation process and outcomes (Cleak, Schofield, & Bickerdike, 2014). Family mediation clients were recruited from nine FDR centers run by Relationships Australia Victoria (RAV), in both metropolitan and rural Victoria.…”

Exploring Family Conflict: Issues Social Workers Deal within Jimma City Woreda Court, Ethiopia

“…Despite the fact that many families try to suppress or avoid conflict, it might lead to divorce (Aye, et al, 2016). Family disagreements can lead to parental disengagement and negatively impair children's cognitive competency via intensifying disruptive conduct (Cleak, Schofield, & Bickerdike, 2014). It can also lead to emotional, financial, and parental problems.…”

“…It can also lead to emotional, financial, and parental problems. Family disagreement, in severe circumstances, can lead to violence, causing physical, psychological, and social problems for family members, particularly children and parents (Cleak, Schofield, & Bickerdike, 2014). Both formal and informal strategies are effective in resolving family issues.…”

“…When disagreement persists at home, though, it can harm relationships and produce stress, sadness, anxiety, and resentment (Estevez, 2019). Family conflicts that are not peacefully handled can escalate to more serious types of disruptive behavior and parental disengagement, both of which have negative consequences for the entire family and children (Cleak, Schofield, & Bickerdike, 2014).…”