Nonjudicial Influence on Family Violence Court Cases

Abstract

Family courts have rarely considered how their decisions are perpetuating domestic violence and child abuse in the many cases where custody disputes are before them. Rather than judges playing King Solomon themselves, they frequently leave the decision making to mental health professionals and lawyers whose credentials rarely include an understanding of what is needed to recognize, stop current abuse and prevent future violence. This article employs a literature review to examine the consequences of this decision making. Research shows that both male and female judges are skeptical of mothers’ claims of abuse and that their opinions contain negative stereotypes of women on which theories of parental alienation are based. More frighteningly, when guardians-ad-Litem or Custody Evaluators were entrusted with these decisions, research shows an intensification of the courts’ skepticism toward mothers’—but not fathers’—claims of abuse. Traditional family court procedures continue the serious risk of harm to women and children by minimizing domestic violence and child abuse, often using unproven and unscientific alienation theories as an excuse not to protect them. The article concludes with a discussion of the role specialty courts that employ therapeutic jurisprudence can play in improving this process for children.

Practitioners conducting interpersonal violence forensic evaluations.

“…This is even more likely to occur if the abusive father cross-claims that the mother is alienating him from the child. For more examples and an overview of nonjudicial influences in family violence cases, readers are encouraged to review Walker and Diaz (2022). The American Psychological Association (APA) has recently cited the disparities in health care for all marginalized people, especially women from lower economic communities.…”

“…The second portion utilizes a weighted system assessing risk factors associated with intimate partner homicide (Campbell, 2003). Walker and Diaz (2022) found that in a sample of BW who killed their abuser in self-defense, a majority of the women's DA scores suggested their level of perceived danger fell within the Extreme range prior to the incident.…”

A survey of mothers' experiences of shared parenting and domestic violence

“…The current study reports on the impacts of shared parenting arrangements on young children (0-4 years) when domestic violence has occurred. Domestic violence, also known as intimate partner violence (IPV), is gaining acceptance across many jurisdictions as more than just physical violence (Elizabeth, 2015), for example, in New Zealand (Elizabeth, 2017), Australia (Douglas, 2018), UK (Barnett, 2015), Hungary (Galátai et al, 2019), Canada (Fotheringham et al, 2013), and in the United States (Gutowski & Goodman, 2020;Walker, 2020). Domestic violence is defined in research literature as both physical violence and coercive control (Treloar & Boyd, 2014;Elizabeth, 2015), and is understood this way for our study.…”