Post on 10-Jan-2021
description
transcript
22nd Annual Children’s Law Institute January 9, 2015
Kelly Browe Olson
Domestic Violence Screening:
How Do You Know What You Don’t Know?
AGENDA
Audience Demographics & Most Pressing Questions
What is DV/IPV?
Screening for DV: When, Who and How? What Then?
Best Practices
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Discussion Questions
In small groups of 2 - 4
Discuss the following for 5 – 8 minutes:
How do you screen for intimate partner violence a part of your job? If you don’t screen, who do you expect to screen?
How much IPV have you seen in your cases? How was it identified, when did it surface?
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Five things you need to know about
DV/Intimate Partner Violence & Screening
•1. Every court program needs to incorporate an ongoing standardized screening protocol.
•2. Screening should be done with each party separately, preferably in person, before and throughout court or agency processes.
•3. There is not one type of victim. IPV victims and offenders are members of all socio-economic classes, all races, ethnicities and religions. Each victim has a distinct experience.
•4. Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) includes psychological, emotional and physical abuse. When deciding how to proceed on a case, it is important to look for patterns of fear, coercion and control, not just orders of protection or physical harm.
•5. Most parties, even parties represented by lawyers, have not been asked about IPV issues in their relationship or been adequately prepared for their role in the process.
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Domestic Violence (Model Code)
Attempting to cause or causing physical harm to another family or household member;
Placing a family or household member in fear of physical harm; or
Causing a family or household member to engage involuntarily in sexual activity by force, threat of force, or duress.
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
New Mexico and National Definitions
30-3-11. Household Members
As used in the Crimes Against Household Members Act (30-3-10 to 30-3-16 NMSA 1978), “household member” means spouse, former spouse or family member, including a relative, parent, present or former step-parent, present or former in-law, a co-parent of a child or a person with whom a person has had a continuing personal relationship.
Suggested Statutory Language
Interpersonal Violence involves the infliction of physical injury or the creation of a reasonable fear thereof and may include a pattern of coercive control involving tactics such as threats, intimidation, psychological and emotional abuse, sexual abuse, isolation of the victim, manipulation of children, and exercise of economic control.
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
INCIDENCE AND NATURE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN NEW MEXICO IX: An Analysis of 2008 Data from The New Mexico Interpersonal Violence Data Central Repository
1.The rates of domestic violence, intimate partner
violence and stalking in New Mexico are staggering; and
higher than national comparable rates found in the
National Violence Against Women Survey (NVAWS).
2. These interpersonal violence crimes are significantly under-reported to law enforcement;
3. There are significantly more victims of interpersonal
violence than ever identified by law enforcement or service providers statewide, especially
in the case of stalking;
4. There are significant co-morbidity and healthcare utilization associated with
interpersonal violence; and
5. There are significant differences between males
and females in the experience and adjudication of
interpersonal violence crimes.
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
1
New Mexico Statistics From NMCSAP
Statewide Victimization Survey 2010:
• Percent Those EVER a Victim of Domestic Violence That Filed Protection Orders 21%
• Percent Those EVER a Victim of Intimate Partner Violence That Filed Protection Orders 23%
• Percent Those EVER a Victim of Stalking That Filed Protection Orders 26%
District Court Protection Orders Issued Statewide 2010 3,638
Percent of Law Enforcement Identified Incidents 28%
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
http://www.nmcsap.org/DV_IN_NM_2010_Nov2011_FACT_SHEET.pdf
What is Domestic or Intimate Partner Violence?
Physical Violence
Sexual Violence
Emotional Abuse
Economic Abuse
Intimidation Isolation Minimizing, Denying & Blaming
Coercion & Threats
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
How are these visible in child welfare cases?
How Perpetrators Use Children
Using children to make victim feel guilty
Using children to relay messages
Using visitation to harass
Threatening to take children/report victim
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
The Who: The Abused Party
Found in all age, racial, socioeconomic,
educational, occupational, and
religious groups;
May or may not have been victimized as
children;
DV is under the control of the perpetrator, not
the victim.
Some very isolated; Isolation combined with
misinformation, Realistic fear of escalating
violence,
Worse when seek help, depending on response of
“system”.
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
What About the Children?
Trust and security necessary for healthy upbringing shattered.
Confused and terrified by abusive parent’s behavior;
Children frightened for their own safety;
Children are the silent victims;
Focus on perpetrators or their victims;
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
WHY DOESN’T SHE JUST LEAVE?
•Question erroneously implies that leaving the batterer necessarily increases the woman’s safety.
•Puts emphasis on what she didn’t do, rather that all that she has done.
•Why not ask “Why does he abuse his family?”
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Why Some Victims Stay
• Belief in cultural/family/religious values that encourage the maintenance of the family unit at all costs;
• Continual hope and belief in the perpetrator’s promises to change and to stop being violent;
• Lack of real alternatives for employment and financial assistance, especially for victims with children;
• Lack of affordable legal assistance necessary to obtain a divorce, custody order, restraining order, or protection order;
• Lack of affordable housing that would provide safety for the victim and children;
• Being told by others that the violence is the victim’s fault.
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
How might the following behaviors be used as a means to dominate and control a family member?
•Pushing a family member down a flight of stairs
•Throwing something at a family member
•Opening a family member’s mail
•Hiding a family member’s car keys
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Exercise 1
Exercise 1 continued
(CREATED BY LORETTA FREDERICK)
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
How might the following behaviors be used as a means of protection of self or others from or for a family member?
• Pushing a family member down a flight of stairs
• Throwing something at a family member
• Opening a family member’s mail
• Hiding a family member’s car keys
Exercise 2
Foster Parent (FP) who forbids visitation on a regular basis and it isn’t reported to authorities
FP reporting to case workers that mom or dad is acting erratically and may be using again
FP telling children that if their parent does what they are supposed to do, the children will get to go home
• How might the proceeding behaviors be used as a means to dominate and control a parent?
• How might these same behaviors be used as means of protection (of self and/or children)?
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
If ‘violence’ or ‘abuse’ is an issue in your case, would you know?
How would you know?
How could it affect what your client needs or wants?
What difference would it make to your representation if you know?
If you discover or are told that there is DV, what would you do with that information?
Take Five Minutes and talk in small groups about these questions.
• From Loretta Frederick CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Challenge assumptions
Screen on an ongoing basis for new issues or reoccurrence of older issues
Match families with appropriate procedures & services
Use of a Domestic Violence Typology
Need for Caution and Research
Typologies are theoretical in nature
All domestic violence must be taken seriously
Different ≠ less important
Typologies make distinctions look too simple (the lines are not so bright in practice)
Much more research is needed in this area!
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
“Coercive or Violent Relationship”
• Coercive controlling violence
• Violent resistance
Coercion with violent acts
• Incipient or nonviolent coercive control
Coercion without violent
acts
• Conflict-instigated violence
• Other violence
Violent acts without
coercion
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Coercive-Controlling Violence
Coercive Control
Escalates Over Time
Male Perpetrator
Violence as One Tactic
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Coercive-Controlling Tactics
Physical/sexual abuse
Economic control
Isolation
Manipulation of Children
Emotional abuse
Threats
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Coercion (Dutton & Goodman)
Setting the stage
Demand with threat
Surveillance
Consequence
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Changes Dynamics of Relationship
“Once the pattern of coercive control is established, both parties understand differently the meaning of specific
actions and words. Domestic violence is not simply a list of discrete behaviors, but is a pattern of behavior exhibited by the
batterer that includes words, actions, and gesture, which, taken together establish power and control over an intimate partner.” (Mary Ann Dutton)
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Coercive-Controlling Perpetrators
Possessive
Manipulative
Use children & court
Entitlement
Self-centered
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Victims of Coercive-Controlling Violence
Abuse
•PTSD
•Poor health
•Unemployment
•Housing issues
•Other cases??
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Victims of Coercive-Controlling Violence
Actively seek help
Likely to leave abuser
Recovery linked to safety
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Involvement of Children
Use child to communicate threats
Use access to child to coerce and harass
Reward child for rejecting or punishing other parent
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Interventions?
Contraindicated: anger management programs, joint legal or physical custody, unmodified mediation
Indicated: safety planning, supervised parenting time, accountability
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Victims of Coercive-Controlling Violence
Most Victims Use Some Violence to Protect Themselves
See Pattern
Resist
Placate
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Violent Resistance
Female victim of Coercive Controlling Violence defends against aggressive male partner
• Self-defense or pre-emptive violence
May be more likely to be injured
• Distinguish between female initiator of Conflict-instigated violence and defense against Coercive Controlling Violence
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Violent Resistance to Coercion
Violent
Controlling
Perpetrator
May be violent
Not controlling
Violent Resistor
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Things Are Not Always What They Seem
• A women wears the same outfit everyday, rarely goes out, and continually paces back and forth in a small space. How do you explain her behavior?
Context &
Patterns
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Is Control Part of Relationships?
“Normal”
• No violence
• Little or no control
• Little or no coercion
Incipient coercive-control
• No (recent) violence
• Pattern of control
• Pattern of coercion
Coercive-controlling violence
• Violence
• Pattern of control
• Pattern of coercion
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
NON-Coercive-Controlling Violence
Conflict-Instigated violence
Separation-Instigated violence
Violence stemming from severe mental illness
???
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Situational Couple Violence
Disagreement spirals into violent incident
• NO larger pattern of coercive control
Equally initiated by man or woman
• But women suffer more consequences . . .
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Situational Couple/Conflict Instigated Violence
Fewer per couple
incidents
Fewer & potentially less severe
injuries
Doesn’t escalate
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Conflict-Instigated Violence
•Sources of conflict
•Patterns of communication
•Individual factors
Risk Factors
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Victims of Situational Couple Violence
May attempt to negotiate with partner
Other strategies
More likely to work on relationship than leave
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Frequency and Severity
Coercive-controlling
• Very severe
• Severe
• Somewhat severe
Non-coercive-controlling
• Very severe
• Severe
• Somewhat severe
Other
• Very severe
• Severe
• Somewhat severe
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Research on Patterns
Useful to:
• Understand counterintuitive
• Ask questions
• Investigate
Do NOT use to:
• Diagnose
• Shortcut screening & assessment
• Label complex situations
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
DO YOU SEE WHAT YOU EXPECT TO SEE?
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Put DV/IPV In Context
Patterns of male and female violence within adult intimate relationships are usually very different;
Male and female violence happens within different contexts and generally has very different consequences;
Both the violence itself and the barriers to ending violence are strongly related to societal issues (economics, child care, transportation, etc.)
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Response to different types of violence
What court procedures and services are appropriate in cases of Coercive Controlling Violence?
• Safety
• Protection
What processes and services are appropriate in cases of Situational Couple Violence?
• Case by Case Analysis
Blanket prohibitions on some processes keep families from programs that would help
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Why is screening so important?
Some professionals believe that they will be able to easily identify victims and perpetrators of IPV, but studies have shown that most professionals are mistaken in this belief.
The media depictions of uneducated, lower socio-economic status women with hidden bruises who are abused by powerful menacing dominant men are not representative. IPV victims and offenders are members of all socio-economic classes, all races, ethnicities and religions. Each victim has a distinct story and handles her experience differently.
•Connie J. A. Beck, J. Michael Menke & Aurelio Jose Figueredo, Validation of a Measure of Intimate Partner Abuse (Relationship Behavior Rating Scale–Revised) Using Item Response Theory Analysis, 55 Journal of Divorce & Remarriage 54 (2013).
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Simplicity Nuance
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
The P5 Analysis
Potency: frequency and severity of violence
Pattern: history and context of violence
Primary Perpetrator: source of violence
Parenting Problems: capacities and deficits
Perspectives of the child: impact of violence
Janet R. Johnston, et al. “In the Name of the Child,” Springer Publishing Co., 2009
January 14, 2011 CLI 2011 DV Dynamics in Child Protection Cases
Important Elements of a Screening Protocol
Confidential face-to-face interviews
Written questionnaires
Continuing observation and check in
Documentary review
Risk assessment
Safety planning
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Face-to-Face Interviews
Confidential
Open-ended questions
At any time in process
Examples:
• ABA Commission on Domestic Violence
• MSBA Domestic Abuse Committee
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
What are you listening for?
How are decisions about money made?
What activities do you engage in outside the home?
Describe the relationship your children have with your partner.
What is the worst thing your partner will say about you?
(MSBA DA Committee)
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Written Questionnaires & Checklists
May use during interviews
Vary in purpose, length, validity
One-size-doesn’t-fit-all
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Wording matters
• Explicit questions led to answers that broader questions missed.
• Standardized interviews should include questions about safety, control, fear and the parties’ perceived ability to negotiate with each other.
• Amy Holtzworth-Munroe, Connie Beck and Amy Applegate, The Mediator's Assessment of Safety Issues and Concerns (MAS1C): A Screening Interview for Intimate Partner Violence and Abuse Available in the Public Domain, 48 Fam. Ct. Rev. 646 (2010).
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Screening instruments should
• Be focused on risk assessment
• Be gender neutral in choice of language
• Include questions for each partner about both partners' violence.
• Allow parties to respond individually outside the presence of the other party
Studies have shown that questionnaires alone are not as effective as a combined written and verbal interview or conversation.
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Why Is Screening So Important?
They do not all
create the same potential risks of further harm
have the same implications for how to handle the case
have same implications for visitation, services or a child
returning home
Every past, present or threatened act of intimate partner violence does NOT have the same SIGNIFICANCE…
Every act of intimate partner violence is NOT the same…
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Screening
Identification of adult domestic or family violence through careful intake screening and preliminary risk assessment, followed by thorough investigation, is essential if parents are to be afforded the life preserving assistance necessary for effective parenting and child protection.[iv]
[iv]National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, Family Violence: A Model State Code, p. 38 of the Commentary, (1992).
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
DV Screening by Attorneys
Interviews Show It Is Often:
• Limited to physical violence
• Needs to be recent to be deemed relevant
• Usually limited to one question
• Often reliant on “gut” feeling
• Based on a limited version of what a “true battered woman” looks like, i.e., Julia Roberts or Jennifer Lopez
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
“A guardian ad litem should have expertise in recognizing and understanding domestic violence and its effects on children and victim parents.”
Understanding how domestic violence affects children is critical to making decisions that prioritize children’s safety.
January 14, 2011 CLI 2011 DV Dynamics in Child Protection Cases
National Child Custody Differentiation Project
Identifying Domestic Abuse
• Determining Whether Domestic Abuse Is Or May Be An Issue In The Case
Understanding The Nature And Context Of Domestic Abuse
• Ascertaining Who Is Doing What To Whom, Why, And To What Effect);
Determining The Implications Of Abuse
• Establishing The Consequences And Realities Of Living With Abuse
Accounting For The Nature, Context And Implications Of Abuse In All Case-related Recommendations And Decisions.
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Battered Women’s Justice Project (BWJP), the Association of Family & Conciliation Courts (AFCC), the National Council of Juvenile & Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ), Praxis International, and the US Department of Justice Office on Violence Against Women
Research has identified:
•Lack Of Clarity Regarding Professional Roles And Functions
• Inconsistent screening, assessment and assumptions about domestic abuse
•Poorly informed decision-making
•Disconnected interventions and services
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Very little agreement exists among practitioners about the meaning of commonly used terminology like domestic violence, high conflict, parental alienation, and best interests
National Child Custody Differentiation Project
BWJP recommends that
Practitioners employ a screening device that is sensitive to a broad range of characteristics, including physical, sexual, emotional, economic and coercive controlling abuse.
This approach is consistent with the research that suggests that screening for multiple forms of abuse, including coercive control, is more likely to detect physical and sexual abuse, threats to life, and the kind of relational distress that makes co-parenting with an abuser especially difficult, dangerous, or even impossible than screening for physical violence alone.
Connie J.A. Beck & Chitra Raghavan (2010). Intimate Partner Abuse Screening in Custody Mediation: The Importance of Assessing Coercive Control, Family Court Review, 48: 555-565. Nancy Ver Steegh & Clare Dalton (2008). Report from the Wingspread Conference on Domestic Violence and Family Courts, Family Court Review, 46:454-475; Joan B. Kelly & Michael P. Johnson (2008). Differentiation Among Types of Intimate Partner Violence: Research Update and Implications for Interventions, Family Court Review, 46:476-499, pp. 486-87; Loretta Frederick (2008). Questions About Family Court Domestic Violence Screening and Assessment, Family Court Review, 46: 523-530, pp. 534-55.
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
2 boys, 12 & 10 in state custody since September 2009, taken for inadequate housing and lack of supervision. Mom had substance abuse issues
Children live with Paternal Grandmother, Dad has been in prison since 2007
Mom has made some progress toward reunification, including rehab, parenting classes, however there has been very inconsistent visitation with her kids.
Unsupervised visits were supposed to start in December, but PG made an allegation of drug use. Mom tested negative.
Case worker reports that the boys want to stay with PG. PG says the boys want to stay with her, she wants to adopt. Mom alternates between working hard to reunite and saying the boys would be better off where they are.
January 14, 2011
Three children, one 15 year old girl, 10, 7 year old boys
Girl in state custody since April 2010 due to physical altercation and abuse by dad, dad initially claimed it was mutual. Boys allowed to stay in the home
Mom and Dad living together in the home
Both parents have attended parenting classes, therapy, general compliance with case plan
Unsupervised visits since December 2010 have gone well
Daughter told caseworker she is anxious to return home and be with her brothers
January 14, 2011 CLI 2011 DV Dynamics in Child Protection Cases
5 children, combined family, 3 older paternal step-children out of home (15, 13, 11), younger joint children in home.
Children removed on abuse allegations, denied by parents.
15 year old wants to return home, 13 & 11 don’t.
Attorney for state and parents and case workers agree children should return home. Attorney for children is unsure.
In mediation mom expresses concern about the kids coming home, but is otherwise quiet and unexpressive. Dad says if the kids follow his rules, everything will be fine.
In caucus mom reveals that she is thinking of leaving dad and would do so if the state would return her kids.
January 14, 2011 CLI 2011 DV Dynamics in Child Protection Cases
Increase the victim’s safety
Respect the authority and autonomy of the adult victim to direct their own life
Hold the perpetrator, not the victim, responsible for his/her abusive behavior and for stopping the abuse
January 14, 2011 CLI 2011 DV Dynamics in Child Protection Cases
What are the family/system resources available?
• What are the cultural issues relevant to this family?
• What are the strengths of this family?
• What are the administrative capacities of the system
Where is this family in the legal/child welfare system process?
What will happen in this case if there isn’t a problem solving process?
• Best case scenario
• Worst case scenario January 14, 2011 CLI 2011 DV Dynamics in Child Protection Cases
Policy and Practice Issues
Alternative to “Failure to Protect” approach:
• Protection of child and adult victim of violence, and
• Responsibility of the perpetrator both for the abuse and for stopping it
Confidentiality
• DVPO statutes include provisions for confidentiality
Screening and Assessment of Domestic Violence
• Collaboration with CPS, dv agencies and courts necessary to improve services
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Shifts in Traditional Child Protection Practice
Identifying domestic violence is critical to the safety of children;
Helping battered women and providing services to them is necessary to keep children safe;
Holding perpetrators of dv accountable for stopping the violence is essential to protecting children.
January 14, 2011 CLI 2011 DV Dynamics in Child Protection Cases
Case Scenario
5 children, combined family, 3 older paternal step-children out of home, (15, 13, 11), joint children in home.
Children removed on abuse allegations, denied by parents. 15 year old wants to return home, 13 & 11 year old don’t.
Attorney for state and case workers agree children should return home. Attorney for children is unsure.
When mom and dad meet with attorney she expresses concern about the kids coming home, but is otherwise quiet and unexpressive. Dad says if the kids follow his rules, everything will be fine.
When dad leaves the room for a phone call, Mom tells attorney that case worker told her to pretend everything is fine and then leave dad after the kids return home.
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Decision-making process
What will happen in this case if there isn’t a problem solving process?
Best case scenario Worst case scenario
What are the family/system resources available?
What are the cultural issues relevant to this family?
What are the strengths of this family?
What are the administrative capacities of the system?
Where is this family in the legal/child welfare system process?
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
BEST PRACTICES
In Small Groups: Discuss your best practices in cases of suspected abuse.
Have you seen situations where the DV has been missed or ignored? i.e., Women told to leave partner, but no services or assistance offered.
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Online screening resources
Michigan online resources:
• http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/SCAO/Resources/Documents/Publications/Manuals/Domestic%20Violence%20Screening%20Training%20for%20Mediators.pdf
• http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/SCAO/Resources/Documents/standards/odr/Domestic%20Violence%20Screening%20Protocol.pdf
• http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/SCAO/Resources/Documents/Publications/Manuals/focb/ModelCtProtocolDomesticMediation.pdf.
Relationship Behavior Rating Scale–Revised (RBRS-r) can be viewed at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10502556.2012.743830
The Mediator's Assessment of Safety Issues and Concerns (MASIC) can be viewed at http://courtadr.org/library/view.php?ID=5798 CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
Guiding Principles for Intervention
•Increase the victim’s safety
•Respect the authority and autonomy of the adult victim to direct their own life
•Hold the perpetrator, not the victim, responsible for his/her abusive behavior and for stopping the abuse
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening
The End
Contact Info:
Kelly Browe Olson
Director of Clinical Programs and Associate Professor
U.A.L.R. Bowen School of Law
kbolson@ualr.edu
These slides are a compilation of slides from other presentations done by Nancy Ver Steegh, Loretta Frederick and Praxis – Rural Technical Assistance on Violence Against Women and me.
All mistakes are my own.
CLI 2015 DV/IPV Screening