Progress 09/01/09 to 08/31/14
Outputs
Target Audience: Target audiences for this reporting period include scholars and practitioners in the fields of violence against women, family law, and/or civil or criminal justice. It also includes undergraduate students at MSU both through classroom experience and experiential learning as research assistants. Efforts include formal classroom instruction, the submission of manuscripts to scholarly peer-reviewed journals, and conference presentations. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? The graduate student who assisted in the project, Echo Rivera, used the opportunity for training and professional development. Her dissertation research was conducted with data from this study and was a longitudinal examination of whether fathers' harm to their children impacted women's levels of depression and PTSD. She found that, in general, higher levels of physical IPV and nonphysical IPV were related to higher levels of depression and PTSD; however, once men’s harm to the children was entered into the model, only men’s harm to the children remained significant. Men’s physical abuse perpetration over time was related to subsequent increases in depression and PTSD over time. A medium effect was found for men’s harm to the children over time, however, this finding did not reach statistical significance. The results of this study provide preliminary evidence that men’s harm to the children is an important form of IPV and should be included in future research. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? We have submitted multiple manuscripts for publication in peer-reviewed journals and are preparing additional mansucripts for publication. Additionally, we will be presenting results at the 2014 Amerian Society for Criminology conference in November. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?
Nothing Reported
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Mothers who leave partner-abusive men often must continue to interact with them due to shared children. Unfortunately, partner-abusive men use contacts with victimized mothers about shared children, including child exchanges for visitation or shared custody, as opportunities to continue perpetration of abuse, including physical violence, verbal and emotional abuse, threats, intimidation, harassment, and stalking. This study followed 41 partner-victimized mothers for one year after they decided to initiate a child custody case in family court to determine their safety levels; their experiences with family court; family court decisions in light of intimate partner violence and other allegations; and whether interventions for reducing violence were effective. We found that all women experienced some form of ongoing abuse from their ex-partners, with the common type being emotional abuse (n=41). While not all women in the study received custody orders during the study period, for those that did, 12 received sole physical custody; 10 received joint physical custody; and four received no custody (fathers received sole physical custody). Most fathers who received no physical custody were granted visitation rights, meaning that the majority of mothers in the sample experienced child exchanges. Partner-abuse fathers particularly used child exchanges as opportunities to abuse mothers. The common form of intervention for violence used at child exchanges was to have exchanges supervised in some way. During the course of the study, seven mothers held exchanges in public, two exchanged children at police stations, and eight used family members or friends to supervise the exchange. Twenty-nine of the mothers conducted unsupervised exchanges at some point during the study period. Fathers committed abuse (including emotional abuse, physical abuse, stalking, and threats of violence and death) at exchanges regardless of whether they supervised. Fathers who exchanged children at police stations, however, did not commit physical violence or make death threats to mothers. Interpretation of results must be conservative due to the small number of participants. However, the results suggest that courts may safeguard women from partner abuse by ordering child exchanges to occur at police stations. Objective 1: Determine the safety and the experience of court processes for IPV-victimized women who have undergone divorce and child custody determinations. 1) Major activities completed: data was cleaned and analyzed 2) Data collected: data collection was complete before the reporting period. 3) Summary statistics and discussion of results: All study participants experienced ongoing emotional abuse from their ex-partners. Participants also experienced physical abuse, stalking, and threats of violence and death. Women reported that fathers committed fewer abusive acts over time. While all of the study participants indicated that they were going to engage family court for custody orders, not all did so. During the 12-month study period, 26 of 41 participants filed for custody and received an initial or final custody order. Mothers found the child custody process confusing, often not knowing where in the process they were or whether they had a final order. 4) Key outcomes or other accomplishments: The research suggests that partner-abusive fathers continue to abuse mothers after separation. Objective 2: Examine whether and how the family court system determines which cases include IPV. 1) Major activities completed: data was cleaned and analyzed 2) Data collected: data collection was complete before the reporting period. 3) Summary statistics and discussion of results: Twenty-three (88%) of the 26 mothers who filed for custody and received an initial or final order voluntarily informed the court that their ex-partners had committed intimate partner violence against them. These mothers did so on court forms petitioning for custody orders and during alternative dispute resolution sessions for custody decisions. Mothers did not report investigations into their allegations. 4) Key outcomes or other accomplishments: The research suggests that mothers are willing to disclose abuse to family courts. Objective 3: Examine how the family court system manages the problem of IPV among child custody and visitation cases and determine if this affects the court-ordered custody and visitation plan. 1) Major activities completed: data was cleaned and analyzed 2) Data collected: data collection was complete before the reporting period. 3) Summary statistics and discussion of results: During the study period, the court ordered that five of the 26 partner-abusive fathers were not allowed contact with their children, and that six partner-abusive fathers were required to have supervised exchanges and visits with their children, however supervisors were allowed to be fathers’ family members. Fathers who were under or had recently been under a protection order were less likely to gain physical custody of their children (OR: 0.10, p<.05), as were fathers who had been arrested for assaults against mothers (OR: 0.15, p<.05). However, even when controlling for protection orders and arrests, fathers were more likely to gain joint or sole physical custody when they alleged that mothers were unable to provide stable environments or basic needs for their children. 4) Key outcomes or other accomplishments: This research suggests that courts are willing to deny fathers contact with their children or require supervised visitation to safeguard them when fathers have a demonstrated history of violence. However, commission of violence may not be the factor given the most weight in custody decisions. There is some evidence that the ability of the mother to provide a stable environment and basic needs for the children may be weighted more heavily than fathers’ commission of intimate partner violence. Objective 4: Determine the effectiveness of existing interventions or custody and visitation arrangements in increasing the safety of women and children and make recommendations for improved or additional interventions. 1) Major activities completed: data was cleaned and analyzed 2) Data collected: data collection was complete before the reporting period. 3) Summary statistics and discussion of results: The most common form of intervention for violence prevention used at child exchanges was to have exchanges supervised in some way. During the course of the study, seven mothers held exchanges in public, two exchanged children at police stations, and eight used family members or friends to supervise the exchange. Twenty-nine of the mothers conducted unsupervised exchanges at some point during the study period. Fathers committed abuse (including emotional abuse, physical abuse, stalking, and threats of violence and death) at exchanges regardless of whether they supervised. For exchanges that were supervised by family members or friends, for example, 6 (75%) of fathers committed emotional abuse; 2 (25%) committed physical abuse, with one causing injuries; four (50%) stalked women after the exchange; seven (88%) threatened mothers; three (38%) threatened mothers with death; and five (63%) made threats against others, including the children. Fathers who exchanged children at police stations, however, did not commit physical violence or make death threats to mothers. 4) Key outcomes or other accomplishments: Interpretation of results must be conservative due to the small number of participants. However, the results suggest that courts may safeguard women from partner abuse by ordering child exchanges to occur at police stations.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Submitted
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Parental allegations in child custody cases involving partner-abusive fathers. Submitted in 2014.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Submitted
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Women's safety during child exchanges: An application of Routine Activities Theory to explore men's post-separation violence perpetration. Submitted in 2014.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2013
Citation:
Zeoli AM, Rivera EA, Sullivan CM. Judicial decision-making in child custody cases involving partner-abusive fathers. Panel presentation on She said, he said, Judge said: Decision-making in intimate partner violence cases. American Society of Criminology Annual Meeting, Atlanta, GA. November, 2013.
|
Progress 01/01/13 to 09/30/13
Outputs
Target Audience: Target audiences for this reporting period include scholars and practitioners in the fields of violence against women, psychology, and/or family law. These audiences were reached through presentations at national and regional conferences. The target audience for this reporting period also includes undergraduate students at Michigan State University. Undergraduates were exposed to the project both through classroom experience and experiential learning as research assistants. Knowledge generated by the project was presented to students in an undergraduate course on violence against woman. Undergraduates in Michigan State University's College of Social Science also acted as research assistants for the project. Changes/Problems: Changes to two of the project objectives were made. Objective 2 was removed from the study. To be accomplished, objective 2 required that we access confidential court records regarding the custody case and court decisions. It was decided that we not pursue this data collection method because of human subjects concerns regarding obtaining confidential court records that include information about a third-party participant (e.g., the partner-abusive father). Similarly, objective 3 has been altered to reflect that are not collecting data from court records. The objective is now to examine court ordered custody arrangements and parenting plans, child support, parental cooperation orders, and supervised visitation/exchange orders in custody arrangements and analyze what factors impact those decisions. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? Training opportunities have been provided for undergraduate and graduate students. Undergraduate students received course credit for work as research assistants on the project. They were trained in qualitative interviewing techniques and also gained experience in interviewing using quantitative instruments as this is a mixed methods project. Undergraduate students were also trained in qualitative data coding, quantitative data entry and data cleaning. Participant interviews were digitally audio recorded and students were given feedback and instruction on their interviews. Supervision and training was provided at a specific 20 hour training session and in weekly meetings, and also happened organically in the project office. Undergraduate students were also given the opportunity to develop a conference presentation based on their experiences in the project, which they took advantage of and presented at a regional conference. Graduate students were trained in project management, participant retention efforts, management of undergraduate research assistants, data analysis, and publication and presentation preparation. Supervision and training occurred in weekly meetings separate from the undergraduate meetings. Professional development occurred in the form of the PI, April Zeoli, keeping up to date on the state of research of child custody cases involving domestic vioence. Zeoli also studied child custody law to become more familiar with policies governing child custody outcomes in family court. Finally, she increased her knowledge of statistical methods to use with small sample data sets, as the number of participants in the study is 41. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? During this reporting period, the results have been disseminated through formal classroom instruction to undergraduate students in a course on violence against women; in a peer-reviewed publication in a leading journal on violence against women; and through conference presentations. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? During the next reporting period, efforts will focus on data analysis and preparation of peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national conferences.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
The major accomplishment during this reporting period was completion of data collection and cleaning, allowing for the data anlyses to begin. While no specific objectives have been fully met, preliminary analyses for Objectives 1, 3 and 4 have been conducted (read changes for information on Objective 2). Final data analysis and completion of goals is forthcoming. Under objective 1, preliminary analyses have been conducted that show that most women experience some form of continued abuse, and that abuse often occurs when victims are exposed to perpetrators at child exchanges or visitations. For objective 3, preliminary analyses of court outcomes indicate that most women who engaged family court for custody orders disclosed domestic violence to the court and the majority of custody arrangements ordered by the court were for sole physical custody to the mother. Allegations made against the mother by the father that she was unloving, unable to provide for the children’s basic needs, provided an unstable environment for the children, had a criminal history, or that the children did not want to be with her increased the likelihood that the father was awarded joint or sole physical custody. Under objective 4, preliminary analyses suggest that post-separation abuse frequently occurs at child exchanges. Preliminary analyses suggests that supervision of exchanges may not protect from certain types of abuse at exchanges, such as emotional abuse or threats of violence. However, a protection order may protect against stalking. Again, these are preliminary results. Objectives will be accomplished within the next reporting period.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2013
Citation:
Zeoli AM, Rivera E, Sullivan C, Kubiak S. Post-separation abuse against women and their children: Boundary-setting and family court utilization among victimized mothers. Journal of Family Violence. August 2013; 28(6): 547-560.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Accepted
Year Published:
2013
Citation:
Rivera EA, Sullivan CM, Zeoli AM. Secondary victimization of abused mothers by family court officials. Panel presentation on Conceptualizing and measuring constructs related to domination and marginalization of oppressed populations. Society for Community Research and Action 2013 Bienniel Conference, Miami, FL. June 2013.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Accepted
Year Published:
2013
Citation:
Vandegrift C, Wright S, Dioso F, May A, Almendinger M, Rivera EA, Zeoli AM. Avoiding research assistant burnout: Prevention at the individual- and team-level. Roundtable discussion. 85th Midwestern Psychological Association Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL. May 2013.
|
Progress 01/01/12 to 12/31/12
Outputs
OUTPUTS: During the calendar year 2012, we made major progress on the Child Custody Experiences Study II. In March, we completed recruitment of participants for this longitudinal study of intimate partner victimized mothers going through custody disputes with abusive former partners. We are following our participants for 12 months, interviewing them every four months. We completed the baseline, 4-month, and 8-month interviews, and the 12-month interviews are underway. We also added a new component to the study designed to examine women's alcohol use over the 12-months of the study. This new arm of the research is administered at the 12-month interview for those eligible women who consent. We have begun preliminary analyses of the data from the baseline and 4-month interviews, focusing on the safety of mothers at the time of child exchanges, and on mental health symptoms experienced by the mothers. Results have been disseminated in multiple settings at the international, national, and local levels. We conducted an oral presentation at the Seventeenth International Conference on Violence, Abuse and Trauma; and presented two distinct posters at the Sixth Biennial National Conference on Health and Domestic Violence and at the 2012 Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health (BIRCWH) Directors and Scholars Meeting. Locally, we gave oral presentations at the Michigan State University Women's Health Research Conference, and at the Turning Point-MSU Collaboration Conference, which was a conference organized by MSU and a local domestic violence service agency and was attended by personnel from other service agencies, funding agencies, and Michigan government. PARTICIPANTS: April M. Zeoli: Principal Investigator. Zeoli has overseen the ongoing data collection for the Child Custody Experiences Study II. Zeoli has also designed supervised research assistants, carried out preliminary data analyses, wrote research articles for submission to peer-reviewed journals, prepared study findings for presentation at conferences, and presented findings. Cris M. Sullivan: Co-Investigator. As part of the collaborative team, Sullivan has consulted on numerous aspects of the study, assisted in writing manuscripts, and presented findings. Sheryl Kubiak: Co-Investigator. As part of the collaborative team, Kubiak has assisted in writing manuscripts and presentation of results. Echo Rivera: Research Assistant. As part of the collaborative team, Rivera has both taken the lead on and assisted in writing manuscripts. She is responsible for the day-to-day management of the data collection. Megan Almendinger: Research Assistant: Megan's responsibilities include supervision of interviewers and interfacing with participants. Amelia Levett,, Lindsey Lewis, Abby Craft, Rachel Kollin, Stephanie Fluegeman, Madilyn Sherbrooke, Amy Shelle, Cortney Vandegrift, Marjorie DuBoise, Carson Hamel, and Samantha Wright: These students have acted as research assistants during 2012. Their main responsibilities are to conduct participant interviews and enter and clean the data. TARGET AUDIENCES: Our target audiences have included academics and practitioners in the fields of criminal justice, public health, and psychology, as well as specialists in trauma and abuse. We have also targeted community service organizations and local government personnel. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: We have added an arm to our study, designed to examine women's use of alcohol over the 12-month study period. Alcohol use has been linked with intimate partner victimization and we are analyzing the timing of drinking events through the use of a Time Life Follow-Back calendar for alcohol use. Mothers who reported using alcohol during the 12-months of the study are considered eligible and offered the opportunity to participate in the new study arm. Participants provide consent to participate.
Impacts
The intimate partner survivors in our study experienced a cluster of abusive tactics from their children's fathers in the six months leading up to recruitment. 100 percent of survivors experienced psychological abuse, 90 percent were physically abused (78 percent of those were physically injured), 73 percent were stalked, and 46 percent were sexually abused. 90 percent of participants screened positive for depression, 88 percent screened positive for anxiety disorder and 76 percent screened positive for posttraumatic stress disorder. We focused our preliminary analyses on safety during child exchanges, which are the times during which the child is passed from one parent to another due to joint custody arrangements or parenting time visits. Child exchanges proved a dangerous time for mothers. Assailants used child exchanges to emotionally abuse mothers (85 percent), threatened mothers (76 percent), threaten their children or mothers' families (50 percent), make death threats against mothers (29 percent), follow or spy on mothers (29 percent), physically abuse mothers (29 percent), and physically injure mothers (24 percent). We analyzed whether supervision of exchanges or orders of protection against fathers impacted abuse and threats during child exchanges. Results do not support the hypothesis that supervision of child exchanges protects against any of the abuse types measured. Results suggest that orders of protection may protect against stalking (being followed or spied on) during child exchanges. Results must be considered preliminary and subject to change as we incorporate data from the 8- and 12-month interviews into the analyses, thus improving statistical power and our ability to detect impacts. Still, women perceived child exchanges as a very risky time, with 88 percent stating that there was at least a little risk to themselves during the exchanges and 26 percent stating that the risk to self was extreme.
Publications
- Zeoli AM, Rivera E, Sullivan C, Kubiak S. 2012 (In press). Post-separation abuse against women and their children: Boundary-setting and family-court utilization among victimized mothers. Journal of Family Violence.
- Rivera E, Zeoli AM, Sullivan C. 2012. Abused mothers safety concerns and court mediators custody recommendations. Journal of Family Violence, 27(4), 321-332.
- Published abstract: Zeoli AM, Rivera EA, Sullivan CM. 2012. The safety of mothers during child exchanges with former abusive partners. Journal of Womens Health, 21(10), 1003.
|
Progress 01/01/11 to 12/31/11
Outputs
OUTPUTS: During the year 2011, I was awarded an internal K-award through the National Institutes of Health K12 mechanism Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health (1K12HD65879-1). This award provides $25,000 in research funds per year, to be used on the Child Custody Experiences Study II (also referred to as the Women's Experiences Study). My team and I, therefore, redesigned the research to reflect available resources (see section on project modifications). We partnered with multiple intimate partner violence service agencies in different communities to recruit participants for the redesigned study. We began recruitment of participants in June 2011, and are still recruiting. We are following participants longitudinally, and while we are still recruiting, we have also begun the second of four data collection waves. We are recruiting intimate partner violence-victimized women at the time of initiating a child custody case in family court, and following them for 12 months. This will help us fulfill our primary goal of identifying ways to increase the safety of women and children who have undergone child custody cases in the context of intimate partner violence. Through our interviews with women, we will fulfill our objectives of determining the safety and experience of court processes for intimate partner violence-victimized women who have undergone child custody determinations and determining the effectiveness of existing interventions or custody and visitation arrangements in increasing the safety of women and children. We have also presented findings from the original pilot study, the Child Custody Experiences Study I, to multiple community and local governmental groups, including officials from the Friend of the Court in the county in which the study took place. We have disseminated results in the form of oral presentations, but also provided briefs on the study results. In 2011, we also presented findings at two national conferences, the Annual Meeting of the American Public Health Association and the Eighth Annual Interdisciplinary Women's Health Research Symposium. PARTICIPANTS: April M. Zeoli: Principal Investigator. Along with her collaborative team, Zeoli designed the Child Custody Experiences Study II; worked with community agencies to implement recruiting strategies; managed research assistants; wrote research articles for submission to peer-reviewed journals; prepared study findings for presentation at conferences, and presented findings. Cris M. Sullivan: Co-Investigator. As part of the collaborative team, Sullivan designed the Child Custody Experiences Study II; worked with community agencies to implement recruiting strategies; mentored April Zeoli; and wrote research articles for submission to peer-reviewed journals. Sheryl Kubiak: Co-Investigator. As part of the collaborative team, Kubiak designed the Child Custody Experiences Study II; and wrote research articles for submission to peer-reviewed journals. Echo Rivera: Research Assistant. As part of the collaborative team, Rivera assisted Zeoli with all aspects of the research; first-authored a paper on the segment of the study from which she conducted her thesis; and acts as the project director. Amelia Levett, Lindsey Lewis, Abby Craft, Rachel Kollin, and Stephanie Fluegeman: These five students conducted interviews with study participants. Community partners: We are working with multiple community intimate partner violence service agencies to recruit participants for the research. TARGET AUDIENCES: Our target audiences, thus far, have included academics and practitioners in the fields of criminal justice, public health, and psychology, as well as specialists in trauma and abuse. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: In analyzing our findings from the pilot study, we determined that the initial custody arrangements women receive seemed to dominate their future interactions with the court and their children's fathers. We therefore decided to enroll women at the initiation of their custody cases instead of only enrolling women who already had custody and visitation orders from the court. Additionally, we have multiple modifications to the project due to funding limitations: 1) While we are still recruiting women from multiple counties in the state of Michigan, we are now conducting more targeted recruiting through intimate partner violence service agencies instead of family court locations. 2) We chose not to conduct qualitative interviews with a random sample of our participants and instead have added qualitative questions to the interview protocol for each participant. 3) We will not analyze women's court records concerning their custody and visitation cases. The result of this modification is that our original objectives regarding the examination of whether and how the family court system determines which cases include intimate partner violence and how the family court system manages the problem of intimate partner violence (original project objectives 2 and 3) have been removed.
Impacts
While we are in the early stages of data collection for the Child Custody Experiences Study II, we have used the outcomes from the pilot study, the Child Custody Experiences Study I, to inform its design. The main outcomes from the pilot study were reported on the 2010 AD-421 form. However, three of the previously reported outcomes have been refined. Through our qualitative interviews with 19 intimate partner violence-victimized women who had undergone child custody cases with their abusive former partners, we learned much about their experiences with safety and attempts to keep themselves and children safe. The following three qualitative assertions have been refined since the previous reporting. Assertion 1: In those cases where the ex-husband neglects or harms the child(ren) and/or there is a perceived likelihood of future neglect, physical harm, or parental kidnapping, the mother will perceive that family court does not make decisions that are in the best interests of the children. This will manifest in one of three different ways: 1) she will not go to family court for assistance; 2) she may attempt to use family court for assistance, but find that they do not support her; or 3) she may gain support from family court after extreme harm to the child occurs. Assertion 2: In those cases where the ex-husband contacts the ex-wife, or uses times at which he has contact with her, to attempt to maintain control over her, she will make efforts to limit her contact with him. Assertion 3: Mothers want to maintain relationships between children and their fathers on the condition that fathers are responsible parents.
Publications
- Rivera, E., Sullivan, C., Zeoli, A.M. 2011 (In press). Secondary victimization of abused mothers by family court mediators. Feminist Criminology.
|
Progress 01/01/10 to 12/31/10
Outputs
OUTPUTS: During the year 2010, we analyzed the data collected for the pilot research, the Child Custody Experiences Study I, which is a study on women's experiences of child custody and visitation arrangements in the context of domestic violence perpetration by the child's father. We interviewed 23 women for the study, recording our semi-structured interviews with them. The verbatim transcription of the interviews that was begun in 2009 was completed in 2010. We also developed a qualitative coding scheme for the interviews to aid in the analysis of the interview data collected. The technique of Analytic Induction was used to analyze the data and, in keeping with this technique, six assertions were made that the qualitative data could confirm, disconfirm, or lack relevance to. Throughout the data analysis, or assertions were adjusted appropriately or added to as new themes emerged from the data. The conclusions have been shared through conference presentations at the American Society of Criminology Annual Meeting, the Annual Meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, and at the 15th International Conference on Violence, Abuse, and Trauma. I also wrote, submitted, and am awaiting a decision on a grant proposal to Michigan State University's Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health program, funded by an NIH K12 mechanism, to extend this line of research with a larger, more rigorous study. PARTICIPANTS: April M. Zeoli: Principal Investigator. Along with her collaborative team, Zeoli developed the qualitative coding scheme for the interview data; analyzed interview data; managed research assistants; managed and secured data collected by the research assistants; prepared study findings for presentation at conferences, and presented the findings. Zeoli also wrote and submitted a grant proposal for funding of a larger research study on this topic. Cris Sullivan: Co-Investigator. As part of the collaborative team, Sullivan developed the qualitative coding scheme for the interview data; analyzed interview data; provided mentoring for Zeoli; and aided in Echo Rivera's thesis research, which was conducted on a subset of these data. Sheryl Kubiak: Co-Investigator. As part of the collaborative team, Kubiak developed the qualitative coding scheme for the interview data and analyzed interview data. Echo Rivera: Research Assistant. As part of the collaborative team, developed the qualitative coding scheme for the interview data; analyzed interview data; and conducted an analysis on a subset of the data for her thesis research in completion of her master's degree. Alexis Norris: Research Assistant. Norris developed the qualitative coding scheme for the interview data and analyzed interview data. TARGET AUDIENCES: Our target audiences during the year 2010 have included academics and practitioners in the fields of criminal justice and psychology, as well as specialists in trauma and abuse. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.
Impacts
Through our research with women who have divorced abusive husbands with whom they have a child, we learned much about how allegations of domestic violence are treated by family court representatives, women's experiences of custody and visitation, and women's and children's safety during and post-divorce. In Michigan, parents first go through a process called conciliation to determine the custody arrangement. We found that conciliators rarely took domestic violence into account in their custody recommendations. Far more heavily weighted were whether the father stated he did not want custody and whether the father acted belligerently in front of the conciliator. On a whole, women found the conciliation experience to be re-victimizing. We also found that abuse against women during separation and after the divorce were high, with every one of our participants having experienced some type of abuse during or post-separation. The most common type of abuse experienced was emotional, however physical abuse was also experienced. Fourteen of our mothers had children who experienced some form of abuse during separation or post-divorce, with emotional abuse again being the most common form. We confirmed the following assertions: 1) Women who experienced domestic violence have specific safety issues around themselves and their children when they go through the divorce process; 2) Those court officials that are unfamiliar with, unable to detect, or lack a sufficient amount of concern for domestic violence do not make judgments that take the safety concerns of the mothers into account; 3) In those cases where the ex-husband neglects or harms the children, or there is a perceived likelihood of harm, the mother will make efforts to protect the children that may not be supported by the system; 4) In those cases where ex-husbands attempt to main control over the mothers, mothers will make efforts to set boundaries to limit their contact with ex-husbands. Two of our assertions were disconfirmed by at least one participant, namely 1) Courts will mandate a variety of orders that must be followed to gain or increase access to the child(ren) and these orders will be differentially enforced with women and men; and 2) Mothers want to maintain relationships between their children and the children's fathers on the condition that he is a responsible parent.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
Progress 01/01/09 to 12/31/09
Outputs
OUTPUTS: The research conducted to date is the first phase of a larger study on women's experiences of custody and visitation in the context of domestic violence. Completed outputs include the finalization of the research design; the creation of a screening tool to identify our target population; the creation of two data collection instruments; IRB approval; data collection; data entry; and preliminary analyses. We used a mixed-methods study design to examine the experiences of our population. Due to the dearth of information on this topic, we used qualitative interviews to more fully elucidate the issues and safety concerns facing our population. We also pilot-tested a quantitative scale. We created a screening tool used to identify respondents who met the study inclusion criteria, and to invite them to participate in the study. The screening tool was administered over the telephone, and respondents who met the inclusion criteria were asked if they were willing to share their experiences with child custody cases and safety issues. Those who agreed were enrolled in the study. The first instrument created for our study was a semi-structured interview protocol entitled "The Child Custody Experiences Study Interview Guide." We designed the Interview Guide to elicit information regarding abuse history, experiences with court processes, custody and visitation arrangements, and safety concerns. The second instrument created for our study was the "Conciliation Experiences Survey" (CES). The CES is a quantitative scale designed to gather information on the participants' experiences of secondary victimization, or revictimization, during conciliation, which is where the first custody arrangement is developed. The CES was developed based on existing scales regarding secondary victimization in the sexual assault and crime victim literatures (Campbell, 2005; Campbell & Raja, 1999; Orth, 2002; Orth & Maercker, 2004). It is the first scale to examine secondary victimization of domestic abuse survivors. Once IRB approval to conduct human subjects research was granted, we proceeded to identify our target population through the examination of publicly available court records. Research assistants called all prospective participants and screened them for inclusion. In all, 23 participants were recruited for the study. Participants ranged from 23 to 52 years old, with a mean of 40 years old. Eighty-seven percent of participants were White, 8.7 percent were Latina, and 4.3 percent were African American. Interviews ranged from 35 to 240 minutes, averaging 108 minutes. The interviews were recorded with digital audio recorders. Given our knowledge of the literature and of the interviews, we have developed working hypotheses to be tested using the qualitative data analysis technique of Analytic Induction. Quantitative data from the CES will be used to triangulate participants' experiences regarding conciliation, as well as to refine the scale for use in future research. Verbatim transcription of the interviews has begun, as has preliminary coding of the interviews. Entry of the quantitative CES data is complete, and preliminary data analysis has commenced. PARTICIPANTS: April M. Zeoli: Principal Investigator. Along with her collaborative team, Zeoli developed the research questions; designed the research and its protocol; created the screening tool and Child Custody Experiences Study Interview Guide; recruited and managed research assistants; obtained IRB approval; managed and secured data collected by the research assistants; created a secure website for exchange of confidential data with approved persons; and developed the data analysis plan. Cris Sullivan: Co-Investigator. As part of the collaborative team, Sullivan developed the research questions; designed the research and its protocol; created the screening tool and Child Custody Experiences Study Interview Guide; oversaw the creation of the Conciliation Experiences Survey; trained research assistants to conduct screenings and interviews; and developed the data analysis plan. Sheryl Kubiak: Co-Investigator. As part of the collaborative team, Kubiak developed the research questions; designed the research and its protocol; created the screening tool and Child Custody Experiences Study Interview Guide; and developed the data analysis plan. Echo Rivera: Research Assistant. As part of the collaborative team, Rivera developed the research questions; designed the research and its protocol; created the screening tool and Child Custody Experiences Study Interview Guide; identified, screened and interviewed research participants; transcribed interviews; and developed the data analysis plan. Rivera was also responsible for the creation of the Conciliation Experiences Survey. Alexis Norris: Research Assistant. Norris identified, screened and interviewed research participants and, as part of the collaborative team, developed the data analysis plan. TARGET AUDIENCES: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.
Impacts
While we have not completed data analysis, we have learned much about identifying our target population. Our method of identifying prospective participants through publicly available court records resulted in recruitment of 23 participants out of 29 eligible women, but out of 174 potential participants identified in court records. Over half of the phone numbers collected were disconnected or wrong numbers, despite having accessed court records filed within the previous three years. This is likely because people undergoing divorce do not remain in the same residence after filing. Another factor potentially reducing the number of working phone numbers for our participant pool is the increasing popularity of cell phones and diminishing number of land lines. Of the 23 participants in the study, few experienced the physical violence that is often commonly considered to constitute "domestic violence." Instead the majority experienced emotional abuse and controlling behaviors, which are less likely to receive attention but are generally considered by women to be even more devastating than physical violence. This sample, then, allows us to contribute to the literature about these more "hidden" forms of domestic abuse. In future studies, we intend to recruit a larger sample that includes more women experiencing physical violence. We learned through this study that it is difficult and time-consuming to recruit this group of women, in part likely due to their not listing their phone numbers and/or moving frequently to avoid their perpetrators. In light of this information, the recruitment technique for the next phase of the research will be altered to increase both the likelihood of successfully contacting prospective participants, and of including more women who have experienced physical violence.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
|