|
BCIFV home
> Newsletter > 1999
Archives > Summer 1999 articles
by Penny Bain
(Excerpted from a presentation made by the author at the Association
of Family and Conciliation Courts Conference on June 3, 1999
in Vancouver.)
Definition of family violence
The BC Institute Against Family Violence was created by the
BC Ministry of Health in 1989 with a mandate to work toward
the elimination of family violence through research and education.
We define family violence broadly as including all violence
against spouses, children, elderly parents and others between
parties to intimate relationships. The term violence for these
purposes includes all forms of physical, sexual, psychological
and financial violence, including homicide. Domestic violence
is not just about physical violence. Domestic violence is
a pattern of physical, sexual, economic, social and emotional
violence, coercion, manipulation and mistreatment or abuse.
Physical violence and the threat of such violence is the part
of the pattern that is the most visible and makes the other
parts of the pattern difficult to defend against. Once violence
is used, its threat is never forgotten. Even when the violence
is stopped by threat of legal action or by physical separation,
the coercion, manipulation and abusiveness can continue. Separation
does not usually put an end to violence and, in fact, the
violence may escalate.
For the purposes of this talk I will be addressing acts of
serious physical, sexual or psychological violence between
partners, which result in an impact on the physical or mental
health of the victim, and which may or may not have been witnessed
by children within the family. I will not be addressing the
instances where the violence between the spouses results in
the physical or sexual assault of the children. In other words,
my comments are directed toward the role of mental health
professionals in assessing allegations of partner assault,
not in assessing allegations of direct child abuse.
Incidence of family violence
Statistics Canada conducts periodic victimization studies
to determine the incidence of domestic violence in the general
Canadian population. The latest study is currently underway
and the results should be available in Spring 2000. A 1994
Statistics Canada national survey among ever-married women
18 years and over found that 36% had been assaulted in marriage
at least once; only 26% of those assaults were reported to
the police. One-fifth of those assaulted sought medical help
as a result of the injury.
Failure to report to police
In 1996, 21,901 reports of domestic violence were made to
154 police forces in Canada, in which 89% of victims were
women. However, victimization studies indicate that reports
to police significantly under estimate the true picture of
the actual incidence of domestic violence. Victim studies
have documented the reason that they are reluctant to report
domestic violence to the police, including: situational barriers,
such as being physically prevented from using the telephone
or being threatened with more violence, and having a previous
negative experience with the police. (Fleury, 1998).
Potential lethality of domestic violence
upon separation
The seriousness of family violence is best envisioned on
a continuum which can culminate in homicide. Between 1977
and 1996 in Canada over 4,000 partners were murdered by a
spouse. In 76% of these cases the victim was female.
In 1994, the Institute published Mary Cooper's study Wasted
Lives: The Tragedy of Homicide in the Family, which examined
the prevalence and nature of family homicides committed in
the Lower Mainland of British Columbia. The study examined
124 cases of family homicides of which 44% involved the killing
of a partner, 27% involved the killing of a child and 21%
involved the killing of the entire family. Sixty-nine per
cent of the intimate partners killed were female. The study
found that the main precipitating factor in 31% of all of
these cases was separation, resulting in 45 deaths, including
13 children. Eighty-four per cent of the perpetrators of separation
related homicide were men. Over half of the men were chronic
wife batterers whom the women were leaving them because of
the abuse. Children constituted one quarter of the victims
killed by men whose partners left them because of violence.
Many legal and mental health professionals do not sufficiently
consider the potential dangerousness or lethality of domestic
violence by assessing the presence of weapons, fantasies of
homicide or suicide, stalking and prior police involvement.
Impact of Child Witnessing Violence
39% of Canadian women who experience marital violence report
that their children witnessed the violence. However, studies
suggest that this is a modest estimate as parents tend to
underestimate the probability of children's exposure of inter-parental
violence. Children are more likely to witness extreme violence
than mild violence. Research consistently shows that children
who observe one parent abuse another exhibit significantly
greater psychological and psychosomatic problems than children
from homes without violence.
The effects on children exposed to family violence include:
aggressive and non-compliant behaviour; emotional and internalizing
problems such as depression, anxiety, suicide attempts, low
self esteem, shame, and guilt; effects on social and academic
involvement including poor school performance and lowered
social competence; and symptoms similar to adult post traumatic
stress disorder. Children under two years old can experience
attachment problems, resulting in permanent negative changes
to the child's brain which predispose them to greater impulsiveness
and violent behaviour. Children who witness violence are also
predisposed to repeat the pattern because they learn by modeling
the effectiveness of the use of coercion. (Sudermann and Jaffe,
1998; Tomkins et al; Henning et al, 1997).
Risk of Physical Abuse to Children
of Spouse Abusing Parents
Studies indicate that a high percentage of fathers who abuse
their wives also abuse their children. (Walker and Edqall,
1987) A study of a sample of 3,363 American parents interviewed
for the 1985 National Family Violence Survey showed that marital
violence is a statistically significant predictor of physical
child abuse. The greater the amount of violence against a
spouse, the greater the probability of physical child abuse
by the physically aggressive spouse. This relationship is
stronger for husbands than for wives. The probability of child
abuse by a violent husband increases from 5% with one act
of marital violence to near certainty with 50 or more acts
of marital violence. The predicted probability of child abuse
by a violent wife increases from 5% with one act of marital
violence to 30% with 50 or more acts of marital violence.
(Ross, 1996)
Need for screening for domestic violence
As a result of the high incidence of family violence, particularly
in relation to marital separation, Family Court staff or psychologists
who are required to carry out custody and access assessments
on behalf of the Court require effective screening tools.
In British Columbia, effective September 1995, Family Court
counsellors and Family Justice counsellors must screen for
violence and power imbalance using a prescribed screening
procedure in every new Family Court case.
Role and limitations of psychologists
in assessment
Psychologists can play an important role in explaining to
the Court the dynamics of family violence, the typical defences
of abusers, and the impact of abuse on parenting ability and
on the psychological and emotional well-being of the children.
The goal of a mental health professional's custody and access
assessment is to help the Court determine both the impact
of domestic violence on the children and on each parent's
capacity to care for the children.
In British Columbia, either the Court may order or the parties
may retain the services of psychologists to prepare custody
and access assessments. Psychologists are subject to the guidelines
for child custody evaluations of the BC and Canadian Psychological
Associations. The primary aim of the psychologist's evaluation
is to assist in determining the best psychological interests
of child and the parenting capacity of the parents.
The constraints of data gathering are a significant limiting
factor in the psychologist's assessment. The task of the mental
health professional is to provide an expert opinion to the
Court which is arrived at based on the data available. If
the facts on which the allegations are based have not been
investigated in a criminal proceeding or if the police failed
to carry out a thorough investigation of the incidents, the
expert conclusions of the mental health professional may be
compromised. Psychologists are not trained investigators.
They have no special ability at knowing who is telling the
truth. They can only provide assessments based on the facts
available to them.
Dr. Paul Ekman, a professor of psychology in the School of
Medicine at the University of California, has conducted tests
that show that the average person scores chance levels or
slightly higher in detecting deception. Forensic psychologists
without expertise in deception score only slightly higher
than average whereas trained investigators score significantly
above average.
In order for the Family Court to receive a psychologist's
report based on a professional investigation of the facts,
the justice system needs to address the reasons why family
violence is not reported to the police and why police investigations
may be incomplete. Two possible strategies are to address
the situational barriers to calling the police and to increase
the availability of specialized police domestic violence investigation
units.
Risk assessment
Another way in which psychologists can assist the Court is
by assessing the risk of future family violence based on the
available data. The BC Institute Against Family Violence publishes
the Spousal Assault Risk Assessment Guide, a clinical checklist
of 20 key variables which might accentuate or diminish the
possibility of future violence. Risk assessment tools provide
a framework for collecting, weighing and reporting background
data and professional judgments. However risk assessment tools
are checklists, not psychological tests, and can only predict
reoffence. They are not designed to assess the credibility
of the underlying data or to detect deception.
Use and misuse of psychological testing
The Court should be aware of the limitations of psychological
testing. The types of measures routinely taken in psychological
testing include: intelligence, academic functioning, personality
functioning and/or dimensions of psychopathology, and attitudes
and behaviour, including the child's behaviour and the parents'
parenting styles. Although psychological testing can play
an important role in custody and access evaluations, studies
indicate that psychologists inadvertently misuse test data
in this type of forensic case. Although psychologists are
required to collect data from multiple sources, opinions offered
by mental health professionals in court often exceed the limitations
of the empirically based data. Again, this is a problem related
to the lack of uniform availability of thorough police investigations
by specially trained domestic violence units.
Many psychological tests used in custody determinations are
developed for clinical decision making, not to answer questions
such as how a child will adjust to a court ordered custody
arrangement. The Court may assume that testing provides a
scientific basis for a forensic evaluation when the conclusions
of testing relate only indirectly to the issue before the
Court (Brodzinsky; Deed, 1991; Saunders, 1994). In response
to criticisms regarding the use of traditional assessment
techniques in custody determinations, alternative measures
have been developed by a number of professionals. These include
measurements such as the Ackerman-Schoendorf Parent Evaluation
for Custody Test (ASPECT) and the Brinklin Perceptual Scales
(BPS). Mental health experts do not agree on what should constitute
appropriate criteria for assessing the validity of custody
decision making instruments. (Brodzinsky).
Incidence of false allegations
No psychological test can conclusively determine whether
an accuser is telling the truth about an allegation of family
violence. However, there are few documented cases of false
allegations in Canada. For example, child sexual abuse allegations
are only raised in 2% of divorce cases in Canada and are proven
in 70% of those cases. Of the 30% of allegations which are
unproven, few are positively proven to be false. A 1990 US
study of over 9,000 custody/access disputes found 2% involved
allegations of child sexual abuse and the allegations were
substantiated at the same rate as other protection cases.
(Penfold, 1997; Humphreys, 1997)
Proposals for law reform
In Canada, the federal government is currently considering
proposals for law reform which seek to balance the principle
that children must be protected from violence, threats of
violence and continued exposure to conflict with the principle
that children benefit from the opportunity to develop and
maintain meaningful relationships with both mothers and fathers.
Psychologists can assist the debate by providing expert evidence
in relation to the risk and impact of continued family violence
on the children. Joint custody or shared parenting can be
unsafe for the abused parent and children because most batterers
continue their abusiveness after separation. (Jaffe and Lemon,
1998) The federal government has indicated that ensuring the
safety of all parties involved must be the guiding principle.
Conclusions
We have discussed how battered parents fear losing children
in a custody dispute. They fear the impact of the "friendly
parent rule" in Canadian divorce proceedings. They fear
that they will be accused of making false allegations in order
to gain custody, or that they will be considered a malicious
parent. We have also discussed how battered parents face situational
barriers to informing the police of incidents of family violence.
Therefore, psychologists do not always have multiple sources
of information, including the reports of the parents, on which
to base their custody and access evaluations. In the experience
of psychologists who specialize in custody and access evaluations
the nonidentification of domestic violence in divorce cases
is the major source of poor assessments. (Jaffe & Geffner,
1998)
Spousal maltreatment is relevant in assessing parenting abilities.
Battering a child's parent ignores the needs of the child,
sets a poor example of conflict resolution, emphasizes use
of power to get one's needs met at the expense of someone
else, and increases the probability of that child's adult
use of violence.
References
Bala, N.M. et al. Spousal Violence in Custody and Access
Disputes: Recommendations for Reform. Status of Women
Canada, Ottawa, 1998.
Brodzinsky, David. "On the Use and Misuse of Psychological
Testing in Child Custody Evaluations", International
Psychology Research and Practice. 24, 213-219.
Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics. Family Violence
in Canada. Statistics Canada, Ottawa, 1994
Cooper, Mary. Wasted Lives: The Tragedy of Homicide in
the Family. BC Institute Against Family Violence, Vancouver,
BC, 1994.
Deed, Martha. "Court-Ordered Child Custody Evaluations:
Helping or Victimizing Vulnerable Families." Psychotherapy.
28, 76.
Fleury, Robert et al. "Why Don't They Just Call the
Cops?: Reasons for Differential Police Contact Among Women
with Abusive Partners." Violence and Victims.
13, 333 - 346.
Humphreys, Catherine. "Child Sexual Abuse Allegations
in the Context of Divorce: Issues for Mothers." British
Journal of Social Work. 27, 529-544.
Jaffe, P & Lemon, N. Domestic Violence & Child
Custody Disputes: Addressing the Essential Clinical and Legal
Issues. Sage, 1998
Jaffe, Peter and Geffner, Robert. (1998). "Child Custody
Disputes and Domestic Violence: Critical Issues for Mental
Health, Social Service and Legal Professionals". Children
Exposed to Marital Violence. American Psychological Association.
Kropp, Randall et al. Manual for the Spousal Assault Risk
Assessment Guide (2nd Edition). BC Institute Against Family
Violence, Vancouver, BC, 1995.
Pagelow, M.D. "Justice for Victims of Spouse Abuse in
Divorce and Child Custody Cases" Violence and Victims.
8, 69-83.
Penfold, Susan. "Questionable Beliefs About Child Sexual
Abuse Allegations During Custody Disputes", Canadian
Journal of Family Law. 14(1).
Ross, Susan. "Risk of Physical Abuse to Children of
Spouse Abusing Parents", Child Abuse and Neglect.
20, 589-598
Saunders, Daniel. "Child Custody Decisions in Families
Experiencing Woman Abuse", Social Work. 39, 51.
Taylor, G. In Whose Best Interest? A Working Report on
Women's Experience in Custody and Access Disputes. BC
Ministry of Women's Equality, Vancouver BC, 1992.
Taylor, G., Barnsley, J, & Goldsmith, P. Women and
Children Last: Custody Disputes and the Family "Justice"
System. Vancouver Custody and Access Support and Advocacy
Association, Vancouver, BC, 1996.
|
