I ran some further tests on the text I'm working with, and found some odd
results.
I found that if used no dom4j code, and used generic JAXP code to parse the
HTML code I was cleaning up using JTidy, and used a subclass of
DefaultHandler (called XMLPrettyPrinter in the code below), none of my
text "disappeared", though I still have some formatting problems with my
pretty printer.
Example that works:
SAXParser parser = factory.newSAXParser();
ByteArrayOutputStream baos = new ByteArrayOutputStream();
parser.parse(new InputSource(holder.getReader()), new
XMLPrettyPrinter(baos));
baos.flush();
baos.close();
System.out.println(baos.toString());
However, I need to manipulate the XML a bit before printing it out, so I was
using code like this:
SAXReader reader = new SAXReader();
Document document = reader.read(in);
// manipulate xml here....
XMLWriter writer = new XMLWriter( out, format);
writer.write(document);
writer.flush();
writer.close();
Now the xml is all messed up. I even tried just parsing and writing the
xml (commented out all the manipulation), and again, the xml I'm working
with is messed up. I'm trying to figure out why the dom4j code isn't
working here... whole segments of the xml text is just gone after dom4j gets
ahold of it.
I'm using jdk 1.4 and its endogenous parsers, etc. for my work. I've
attached a sample input XML document that doesn't work with dom4j... using
the second example, I'd expect the xml to be the same coming out, assuming I
don't perform any manipulations.
Rob
<html>
<head>
<title>Child Custody and Visitation Decisions in Domestic
Violence</title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" link="#3300CC" vlink="#0066FF">
<img src="/Images/header.gif" usemap="#header" border="0" />
<map id="header" name="header">
<area shape="RECT" coords="15,22,103,98"
href="http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/";
alt="Office of Justice Programs"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"
onmouseover="window.status='Office of Justice Programs'; return true;" />
<area shape="RECT" coords="94,12,535,47" href="/index.asp"
alt="VAWOR Homepage"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"
onmouseover="window.status='VAWOR Homepage'; return true;" />
<area shape="RECT" coords="121,47,208,64" href="/index.asp"
alt="VAWOR Homepage"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"
onmouseover="window.status='VAWOR Homepage'; return true;" />
<area shape="RECT" coords="230,47,316,64" href="/search.asp"
alt="Search"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"
onmouseover="window.status='Search'; return true;" />
<area shape="RECT" coords="338,47,424,64"
href="/infoassist.asp" alt="Email to VAWOR"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"
onmouseover="window.status='Email us for information'; return true;" />
<area shape="RECT" coords="443,47,532,64"
href="/Surveys/feedback.asp" alt="Feedback survey"
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"
onmouseover="window.status='Survey'; return true;" />
</map>
<br clear="all" />
<hr />
<p><a href="http://www.vawnet.org";><img src="vawlogo.gif"
align="top" alt="VAWnet logo/home" border="0" /></a></p>
<div style="text-align: center">
<h3>Child Custody and Visitation Decisions in Domestic
Violence Cases:
<br />
Legal Trends, Research Findings, and Recommendations</h3>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center">
<strong>Daniel G. Saunders, Ph.D.</strong>
<br />
Revised October 1998
</div>
<p>It may be hard to believe an abusive partner can ever make
good on his threat to take the children away from his victim.
After all, he has a history of violent behavior and she almost
never does. Unfortunately, a surprising number of battered
women lose custody of their children. The actual number is not
known and offenders appear to be no more successful in gaining
custody than non-offenders (Liss & Stahly, 1993). However,
violence against one parent by another is often considered in
custody-determination proceedings (Family Violence Project,
1995). This document describes some of the legal and cultural
trends surrounding custody and visitation decisions and the
social science evidence supporting a need to consider domestic
violence in these decisions.</p>
<p><strong>Legal Trends</strong></p>
<p>Over the past 200 years, the bases for child custody
decisions have changed considerably. The patriarchal doctrine
of fathers' ownership of children gave way in the
1920's and 30's to little preference for one parent or
the other obtaining custody. When given such broad discretion,
judges tended to award custody to mothers, especially of young
children. The mother-child bond during the early, "tender
years" was considered essential for children's
development. In the 1970's, "the best interests of the
children" became the predominant guideline (Fine &
Fine, 1994) and presumably was neutral regarding parental
rights. Exposure to domestic violence was not originally
included in the list of factors used to determine the
child's best interest.</p>
<p>States recently came to recognize that domestic violence
needs to be considered in custody decisions (Cahn, 1991; Hart,
1992; for a review of state laws see Family Violence Project,
NCJFCJ, 1995, and legislative updates for 1995, 1996, and
1997). While a growing number of states specifically mention
domestic violence as a factor to be considered, most of them
allow wide discretion and do not give it special weight. It is
simply one additional factor when considering the best
interests of the child. By the end of the 1997 legislative
session, 13 states had adopted the Model Code of the Family
Violence Project of the National Council of Juvenile and Family
Court Judges (NCFCJ, 1998). These statutes specify that there
is a "rebuttable presumption that it is detrimental to the
child and not in the best interest of the child to be placed in
sole custody, joint legal custody, or joint physical custody
with the perpetrator of family violence" (p. 33).</p>
<p>Statutes now address other concerns related to custody and
the recent proliferation of legislation seems likely to
continue. Statutes in some states now cover: the prevention of
child abduction by the perpetrator through supervised
visitation and similar safeguards (Girdner & Hoff, 1996;
Hart, 1990), providing a defense against child abduction
charges if battered women flee with their children, exempting
battered women from mandated mediation (Girdner, 1996),
protecting battered women from charges of "child
abandonment" if they flee for safety without their
children (Cahn, 1991), and allowing parents to check on the
criminal charges against a divorce partner (Pennsylvania's
Jen & Dave's law). Recent case law makes it easier for
battered women to relocate far away from their abusers
(Dunford-Jackson, in press). Unfortunately, courts may apply
psychological pressures that keep women tied to their abusers.
"Friendly parent" statutes ask courts to assess each
parent's willingness to co-parent when making custody
decisions (Zorza, 1992). Despite their reasonable reluctance to
co-parent, battered women may end up being labeled
"uncooperative," with an increased risk of losing
their children. Along with legal changes, training and resource
manuals for judges and court managers have recently been
published, including guidelines for selecting custody
evaluators and guardian ad litems (Goelman, Lehrman, Valente,
1996; Lemon, Jaffe, & Ganley, 1995; NCJFCJ, 1995; National
Center for State Courts, 1997). For further discussion of these
topics, see the references at the end of this document.</p>
<p><strong>General Views About Joint Custody</strong></p>
<p>Enthusiasm for joint custody in the early 1980's was
fueled by studies of couples who were highly motivated to
"make it work" (Johnston, 1995). This enthusiasm has
waned in recent years, in part because of social science
findings. For example, Johnston (1995) concluded from her most
recent review that "highly conflictual parents" (not
necessarily violent) had a poor prognosis for becoming
cooperative parents and there is increasing evidence that
children of divorce have more problems because of the conflict
between the parents before the divorce and not because of the
divorce itself (Kelly, 1993). "High conflict" parents
should be allowed to develop separate parenting relationships
with their children. Frequent visits and joint custody
schedules led to more verbal and physical abuse. More frequent
transitions between high-conflict parents were related to more
emotional and behavioral problems of the children. If this is
true of "high conflict" parents, it is likely to be
even more true if mothers are being physically victimized.</p>
<br />
<br />
<p>Not all social scientists conclude that joint custody can be
problematic. For example, Bender (1994) believes that
"even the small percentage of parents who are very angry
may be able to work out procedures to alleviate anger so that
the child is not caught in the middle" (p. 126). However,
his conclusion relies on data gathered at one point in time and
thus statements about cause and effect are not possible. For
example, better child adjustment is likely to result when joint
custody is requested by (or ordered to) non-violent,
low-conflict couples rather than from joint custody per se.
Joint custody can be quite beneficial to the children of these
non-violent, low-conflict couples, but not in cases of
battering.</p>
<p><strong>Parents Most at Risk for Physical and Emotional
Abuse of a Child</strong></p>
<p>Social science evidence can help to establish which parent
is most likely to harm children. The most convincing evidence
for the potential of men who batter their partners also to
batter their children comes from a nationally representative
survey (Straus, 1983). Half the men who battered their wives
also abused their children. Abuse was defined as violence more
severe than a slap or a spanking. Battered women were half as
likely as men to abuse their children. Several
non-representative surveys show similar results (reviewed in
Saunders, 1994). When battered women are not in a violent
relationship, there is some evidence that they are much less
likely to direct anger toward their children (Walker,
1984).</p>
<p>Emotional abuse of children by men who batter is even more
likely because nearly all of these men's children are
exposed to domestic violence (Pagelow, 1990). This exposure
often constitutes a severe form of child abuse since the
problems associated with witnessing abuse are now clearly
documented (e.g., Edleson, 1997). There are short and long-term
emotional and behavioral consequences for both boys and girls.
Parents may not realize that their children can be affected
even if they do not see the violence. For example, the children
may be hiding in their bedrooms listening to repeated threats,
blows, and breaking objects. Obviously, they may be afraid
their mother will be injured or killed, but they may also have
divided loyalties between their parents, guilt about not being
able to intervene, and anger at their mothers for not leaving
(Saunders, 1994). If mothers cannot find safety, their fears
and depression may keep them from being as nurturing and
supportive to their children as they normally would be.</p>
<p>Although state laws include emotional abuse in their
statutory definitions of child abuse, such abuse is difficult
to substantiate and child protection workers often give it low
priority.</p>
<p>Mothers may also be blamed for harming their children in
cases where evaluators and practitioners do not understand the
dynamics of abuse (Edleson, 1997). Their cases are sometimes
labelled as "failure to protect" since they are
supposedly able to protect their children from the physical and
emotional abuse of their partners (Enos, 1996). Battered women
may even face criminal charges (Sierra, 1997). However,
battered women's actions often come from their desire to
care for their children. They may not attempt to leave because
of financial needs, because they believe that the children need
a father, or because they fear losing the children to their
abuser. They often leave the relationship when they see the
impact of violence on their children, only to return when
threatened with even greater violence or out of economic
necessity. Innovative programs, like Project Protect in
Massachusetts, were developed to address these concerns. They
use specially trained staff and multidisciplinary teams to
integrate interventions for child abuse and domestic violence
(Davidson, 1995). On a policy level, states generally allow
evidence to show that the non-abusive spouse feared retaliation
from her partner and thus could not try to stop or prevent
abuse to the child. However, only a few states explicitly
authorize this type of evidence.</p>
<p><strong>Factors Related to Risk to the Children</strong></p>
<p>In a given custody case, a number of factors related to or
incorrectly attributed to child abuse and exposure to domestic
violence may be present. Several factors--parental separation,
childhood victimization of the parents, the parents'
psychological characteristics, and abuser interventions-- are
discussed next.</p>
<p><strong><em>Parental Separation.</em></strong> Parental
separation or divorce does not prevent abuse to children or
their mothers. On the contrary, physical abuse, harassment, and
stalking of women continue at fairly high rates after
separation and divorce. In one study, a fourth of the women
reported threats against their lives during visitation
(Leighton, 1989). Separation is a time of increased risk of
homicide for battered women (Wilson & Daly, 1994) and these
homicides sometimes occur during custody hearings or visitation
exchanges of children. In rare cases, men kill children in
retaliation for their female partners leaving them.</p>
<p>Children are also likely to be exposed to renewed violence
if their fathers become involved with other women. Over half of
men who batter go on to abuse a second woman (Wofford, Elliot,
& Menard, 1994). Judges who consider the remarriage of a
man to be a sign of stability and maturity should instead
consider it as a possible sign that the children will once
again be emotionally harmed.</p>
<p><strong><em>Parents' Childhood
Victimization.</em></strong> Evaluators may look to childhood
risk factors of each parent to assess their child abuse
potential. The link between being abused in childhood and
becoming a child abuser is not as strong as was once thought,
with about 30% of child abuse victims becoming abusers (Kaufman
& Zigler, 1987). Some evidence suggests that the link is
stronger in men than in women (Miller & Challas, 1981).</p>
<p><strong><em>Parents' Psychological
Characteristics.</em></strong> The parents' personality
traits and psychological disorders are generally poor
predictors of child abuse (Wolfe, 1985). Neither parent is
likely to have chronic mental disorders of genetic origin
(e.g., schizophrenia, or bipolar disorder). Personality
disorders are much more likely to appear on the psychological
tests of both parents. Great care must be taken, however, when
interpreting parents' behaviors and psychological tests.
Men who batter often have the types of personality disorders
that keep childhood traumas, anxiety, and other problems hidden
(Holtzworth-Munroe & Stuart, 1994).</p>
<p>To the extent that psychological disorders continue to be
used to describe battered women, they can be placed at a
serious disadvantage. Compared with the chronic problems of
their partners, battered women's psychological problems are
much more likely to decrease as she becomes safer. Many
battered women may seem very unstable, nervous, and angry
(Crites & Coker, 1988). Other battered women may speak with
a flat affect and appear indifferent to the violence they
describe (Meier, 1993). These women probably suffer from the
numbing symptoms of traumatic stress. The psychological test
scores of some battered women may indicate severe personality
disorders and mental illness. However, their behaviors and test
scores must be interpreted in the context of the traumas they
have faced or continue to face (Rosewater, 1987). The tactics
used by their abusers parallel those used against prisoners of
war and include threats of violence, forced isolation,
degradation, and attempts to distort reality and increase
psychological dependence. Severe depression and traumatic
stress symptoms are the likely results. When women fear losing
custody of children to an abusive partner, the stress can be
overwhelming.</p>
<p><strong><em>Interventions for the Abuser.</em></strong>
Successful completion of treatment does not at all mean that
the risks of child and woman abuse are eliminated. Although the
evaluation of programs for men who batter is still in its
infancy (Saunders, 1996), it is clear that a substantial
proportion of women (35%, averaged across a number of studies)
report that physical abuse by their partners occurs within 6-12
months after treatment. Psychological abuse is even more
prevalent. Only two studies of programs for men who batter
investigated the reduction of actual or potential violence
toward the children (Myers, 1984; Stacey & Shupe, 1984).
Both of these studies showed promising results, yet did not
specifically focus on parenting issues. Only one description
could be found of a special parent training program for men who
batter (Mathews, 1995)</p>
<p><strong>Recommendations for Custody and
Visitation</strong></p>
<p>Despite the dearth of sound research in this area, some
tentative recommendations can be made from practice wisdom and
the research that does exist. There is general agreement that
joint custody has many advantages when a woman has good
financial resources and an ex-partner who is nonabusive and
supportive as a co-parent. However, the past and potential
behavior of men who batter means that joint custody (or sole
custody to him) is rarely the preferred option for these
families. In addition to their propensity for violence, these
men are likely to abuse alcohol (Tolman & Bennett, 1990)
and communicate in a hostile, manipulative manner
(Holtzworth-Munroe & Stuart, 1994).</p>
<p>As stated earlier, the model state statute of the National
Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges clearly states that
there should be a presumption that it is detrimental to the
child to be placed in sole or joint custody with a perpetrator
of family violence (NCJFCJ, 1994). The model statute emphasizes
that the safety and well-being of the child and the parent who
is the victim must be primary. The perpetrator's history of
causing fear as well as physical harm should be considered. A
parent's absence or relocation in an attempt to escape
violence by the other parent should not be used as a factor to
determine custody. Courts sometimes label battered women as
"impulsive" or "uncooperative" if they
leave suddenly to find safety in another city or state. The
model statute specifies that it is in the best interest of the
child to reside with the non-violent parent and that this
parent should be able to choose the location of the residence,
even if it is in another state. The noncustodial parent may
also be denied access to the child's medical and
educational records if such information could be used to locate
the custodial parent.</p>
<p>Visitation guidelines should be based on the following
general principles: a) contact between child and parent should
be structured in a way that limits the child's exposure to
parental conflict; b) transitions should be infrequent in cases
of ongoing conflict and the reasonable fear of violence; and c)
substantial amounts of time with both parents may not be
advisable (Johnston, 1992). Ideally, a court order should
detail the conditions of supervised visitation, including the
role of the supervisor (NCJFCJ, 1995). Unsupervised visitation
should be allowed only after the abuser completes a specialized
program for men who batter and does not threaten or become
violent for a substantial period of time. Practitioners need to
be aware of the strong likelihood that men who batter will
become violent in a new relationship and that they often use
nonviolent tactics that can harm the children. Rather than rely
on official records of recidivism, the best way to establish
that the perpetrator is nonviolent is to interview current and
past partners.</p>
<p>Visitation should be suspended if there are repeated
violations of the terms of visitation, the child is severely
distressed in response to visitation, or there are clear
indications that the violent parent has threatened to harm or
flee with the child. Even with unsupervised visitation, it is
best to have telephone contact between parents only at
scheduled times, to maintain restraining orders to keep the
offender away from the victim, and to transfer the child in a
neutral, safe place with the help of a third party (Johnston,
1992). Hart (1990) describes a number of safety planning
strategies that can be taught to children in these
situations.</p>
<p>The model statute (NCJFCJ, 1994) states that visitation
should only be awarded to the perpetrator if adequate safety
provisions for the child and adult victim can be made. Orders
of visitation can specify, among other things: the exchange of
the child in a protected setting, supervised visitation by a
person or agency, completion by the perpetrator of "a
program of intervention for perpetrators", and no
overnight visitation. If the court allows a family or household
member to supervise the visitation, the court can set the
conditions to be followed during visitation. For example, an
order might specify that the batterer not use alcohol prior to
or during a visit and that the child be allowed to call the
mother at any time.</p>
<p>Visitation centers are expanding across North America in
response to the need for safe access and visitation (Straus,
1995). The approaches of these centers vary. For example, most
of them provide some form of observational records of the
visit, but the role of these programs in evaluating parents and
reporting to courts differs. The experience of the visitation
center in Duluth, Minnesota, shows the difficulty of keeping a
neutral stance given the traditional biases in our social
systems (McMahon & Pence, 1995). The Duluth center found
that the traditional over-emphasis on parental rights and child
welfare may block from view the harm of domestic violence to
both battered women and their children.</p>
<p>In conclusion, although there is a need for further practice
experience and research, our current knowledge of risk factors
for continued abuse of women and children means that
decision-makers must exercise great caution in awarding custody
or visitation to perpetrators of domestic violence. If custody
or visitation is granted, careful safety planning and
conditions attached to the court order are important to help
lower the risk of harm to the children and their mothers.</p>
<p><em>Author of this document:</em>
<br />
<strong>Daniel G. Saunders, Ph.D.</strong>
<br />
University of Michigan
<br />
School of Social Work
<br />
August 1998</p>
<br />
<br />
<hr />
<br />
<p><strong>References</strong>
<br />
Bender, W.N. (1994). Joint custody: The option of choice.
<em>Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 21,</em> 115-131.
<br />
<br />
Cahn, N.R. (1991). Civil images of battered women: The impact
of domestic violence on child custody decisions. <em>Vanderbilt
Law Review, 44,</em> 1041.
<br />
<br />
Crites, L., & Coker, D. (1988). What therapists see that
judges might miss: A unique guide to custody decisions when
spouse abuse is charged. <em>The Judges' Journal, 27</em>
(2), 9-13, 40-43.
<br />
<br />
Davidson, H.A. (1995). Child abuse and domestic violence:
Legal connections and controversies. <em>Family Law Quarterly,
29,</em> 357-373.
<br />
<br />
Dunford-Jackson, B.L. (in press). National Council of Juvenile
and Family Court Judges, manual on pro se custody practices for
battered women.
<br />
<br />
Edleson, J. L. (1997). <a
href="/Vawnet/witness.htm"><em>Children's witnessing of
adult domestic violence.</em></a> Manuscript submitted for
publication, University of Minnesota.
<br />
<br />
Edleson, J. L. (1997, June). Charging battered mothers with
"failure to protect" is often wrong. <em>APSAC
Advisor, 10</em> (2), 2-3. [American Professional Society on
the Abuse of Children, 407 S. Dearborn St., Suite 1300,
Chicago, IL 60605].
<br />
<br />
Enos, P. (1996). Prosecuting battered mothers: State laws
failure to protect battered women and abused children.
<em>Harvard Women's Law Journal, 19,</em> 229.
<br />
<br />
Family Violence Project, National Council of Juvenile and
Family Court Judges. (1995). Family violence in child custody
statutes: An analysis of state codes and legal practice.
<em>Family Law Quarterly, 29,</em> 197-228.
<br />
<br />
Family Violence Project, National Council of Juvenile and
Family Court Judges. (1996). <em>Family violence: Legislative
update (Vol. 1).</em> Reno, NV: NCJFCJ. [National Council of
Juvenile and Family Court Judges, University of Nevada, P.O.
Box 8970, Reno, NV 89507].
<br />
<br />
Family Violence Project, National Council of Juvenile and
Family Court Judges. (1997). <em>Family violence: Legislative
update (Vol. 2).</em> Reno, NV: NCJFCJ. [National Council of
Juvenile and Family Court Judges, University of Nevada, P.O.
Box 8970, Reno, NV 89507].
<br />
<br />
Family Violence Project, National Council of Juvenile and
Family Court Judges. (1998). <em>Family violence: Legislative
update (Vol. 3).</em> Reno, NV: NCJFCJ. [National Council of
Juvenile and Family Court Judges, University of Nevada, P.O.
Box 8970, Reno, NV 89507].
<br />
<br />
Fine, M. A. & Fine, D. R. (1994). An examination and
evaluation of recent changes in divorce laws in five western
countries: A critical role of values. <em>Journal of Marriage
and the Family, 56,</em> 249-263.
<br />
<br />
Girdner, L. (1996). Mediation. In D. M. Goelman, F. L.
Lehrman, & R.L. Valente (Eds.), <em>The impact of domestic
violence on your legal practice: A lawyer's handbook</em>
(17-21). Washington, D.C.: ABA Commission on Domestic Violence.
<br />
<br />
Girdner, L., & Hoff, P.M. (1996). Parental abduction. In
D. M. Goelman, F. L. Lehrman, & R.L. Valente (Eds.),
<em>The impact of domestic violence on your legal practice: A
lawyer's handbook</em> (11-16). Washington, D.C.: ABA
Commission on Domestic Violence.
<br />
<br />
Goelman, D. M., Lehrman, F. L., & Valente, R.L. (Eds.).
(1996). The impact of domestic violence on your legal practice:
A lawyer's handbook. Washington, D.C.: American Bar
Association.
<br />
<br />
Hart, B. J. (1990). <em>Safety planning for children:
Strategizing for unsupervised visits with batterers</em>
[On-line]. Unpublished manuscript, Pennsylvania Coalition
Against Domestic Violence. Available: <a
href="http://www.mincava.umn.edu/hart/safetyp.htm";>http://www.mincava.umn.edu/hart/safetyp.htm</a>
<br />
<br />
Hart, B. J. (1992). State codes on domestic violence:
Analysis, commentary and recommendations. <em>Juvenile and
Family Court Journal, 43</em> (4), 1992.
<br />
<br />
Holtzworth-Munroe, A., & Stuart, G. L. (1994). Typologies
of male batterers: Three subtypes and the differences among
them. <em>Psychological Bulletin, 116</em> (3), 476-497.
<br />
<br />
Johnston, J. R. (1992). High-conflict and violent parents in
family court: Findings on children's adjustment, and
proposed guidelines for the resolution of custody and
visitation disputes. Section III: Proposed guidelines for
custody and visitation for cases with domestic violence. Corta
Madera, CA: Center for the Family in Transition.
<br />
<br />
Johnston, J. R. (1995). Research update: Children's
adjustment in sole custody compared to joint custody families
and principles for custody decision making. <em>Family and
Conciliation Courts Review, 33,</em> 415-425.
<br />
<br />
Kaufman, J., & Zigler, E. (1987). Do abused children
become abusive parents? <em>American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry, 57,</em> 186-198.
<br />
<br />
Kelly, J. B. (1993). Current research on children's
postdivorce adjustment: No simple answers. <em>Family and
Conciliation Courts Review, 31,</em> 29-49.
<br />
<br />
Leighton, B. (1989). <em>Spousal abuse in metropolitan
Toronto: Research report on the response of the criminal
justice system</em> (Report No 1989-02). Ottawa: Solicitor
General of Canada.
<br />
<br />
Lemon, N., Jaffe, P., & Ganley, A. (1995). <em>Domestic
violence and children: Resolving custody and visitation
disputes.</em> San Francisco: Family Violence Prevention Fund.
<br />
<br />
Liss, M. B., & Stahly, G .B. (1993). Domestic violence and
child custody. In M. Hansen, & M. Harway (Eds.),
<em>Battering and family therapy: A feminist perspective</em>
(175-187). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
<br />
<br />
Mathews, D. J. (1995). Parenting groups for men who batter. In
E. Peled, P.G. Jaffe, & J.L. Edleson (Eds.), <em>Ending the
cycle of violence</em> (106-120). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
<br />
<br />
McMahon, M. & Pence, E. (1995). Doing more harm than good?
Some cautions on visitation centers. In E. Peled, P.G. Jaffe,
& J.L. Edleson (Eds.), <em>Ending the cycle of
violence</em> (186-206). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
<br />
<br />
Meier, J. (1993). Notes from the underground: Integrating
psychological and legal perspectives on domestic violence in
theory and practice. <em>Hofstra Law Review, 21,</em> 1295.
<br />
<br />
Miller, D., & Challas, G. (1981). Abused children as adult
parents: A twenty-five year longitudinal study. Paper resented
at the National Conference for Family Violence Researchers,
University of New Hampshire.
<br />
<br />
Myers, C. (1984). The family violence project: Some
preliminary data on a treatment program for spouse abuse. Paper
presented at the Second National Conference for Family Violence
Researchers, University of New Hampshire.
<br />
<br />
National Center for State Courts. (1997). <em>Domestic
violence and child custody disputes: A resource handbook for
judges and court managers.</em> Williamsburg, VA: author.
[National Center for State Courts, 300 Newport Avenue,
Williamsburg, VA 23185].
<br />
<br />
National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. (1993).
<em>Model code on domestic an family violence.</em> Reno, NV:
NCJFCJ. [National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges,
University of Nevada, P.O. Box 8970, Reno, NV 89507].
<br />
<br />
National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. (1995).
<em>Custody and visitation decision-making when there are
allegations of domestic violence.</em> Reno, NV: NCJFCJ.
[National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges,
University of Nevada, P.O. Box 8970, Reno, NV 89507].
<br />
<br />
Pagelow, M. D. (1990). Effects of domestic violence on
children and their consequences for custody and visitation
agreements. <em>Mediation Quarterly, 7,</em> 347-363.
<br />
<br />
Rosewater, L. B. (1987). The clinical and courtroom
application of battered women's personality assessments. In
D. Sonkin (Ed.), <em>Domestic violence on trial</em> (86-96).
New York: Springer.
<br />
<br />
Saunders, D. G. (1996). Interventions for men who batter: Do
we know what works? <em>Insession Psychotherapy, 2/3,</em>
81-94.
<br />
<br />
Sierra, L. (1997, December). Representing battered women
charged with crimes for failing to protect their children from
abusive partners. <em>Double-time, 5</em> (1-2). [Newsletter of
the National Clearinghouse for the Defense of Battered Women,
125 S. 9th Street, Suite 302, Philadelphia, PA 19107].
<br />
<br />
Stacey, W. A. & Shupe, A. (1984). <em>The family secret:
Family violence in America.</em> Boston: Beacon Press.
<br />
<br />
Straus, M. A. (1983). Ordinary violence, child abuse, and wife
beating: What do they have in common? In D. Finkelhor, R. J.
Gelles, G. T. Hotaling, & M. A. Straus (Eds.), <em>The dark
side of families: Current family violence research</em> (pp.
213-234). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
<br />
<br />
Straus, R.B. (1995). Supervised visitation and family
violence. <em>Family Law Quarterly, 29,</em> 229-252.
<br />
<br />
Tolman, R. M., & Bennett, L. W. (1990). A review of
research on men who batter. <em>Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 5,</em> 87-118.
<br />
<br />
Walker, L. E. (1984). <em>The battered woman syndrome.</em>
New York: Springer.
<br />
<br />
Wofford, S., Elliot, D., & Menard, S. (1994). Continuities
in marital violence. <em>Journal of Family Violence, 9,</em>
195-226.
<br />
<br />
Wolfe, D.A. (1985). Child-abusive parents: An empirical review
and analysis. <em>Psychological Bulletin, 97</em> (3), 462-482.
<br />
<br />
Zorza, J. (1992). "Friendly parent" provisions in
custody determinations. <em>Clearinghouse Review, 26,</em>
921-925.
<br />
<br />
</p>
<p style="font-size: 80%">(Rev. 10/30/98)
<br />
VAWnet is a project of the National Resource Center on
Domestic Violence
<br />
800-537-2238 TTY 800-553-2508 Fax 717-545-9456</p>
<br />
<br />
<hr />
<p><a href="http://www.vawnet.org";><img src="vawlogo.gif"
align="top" alt="VAWnet logo/home" border="0" /></a></p>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center">
<h3><em>In Brief:</em> Child Custody and Visitation Decisions
in Domestic Violence Cases:
<br />
Legal Trends, Research Findings, and Recommendations</h3>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center">
<strong>Daniel G. Saunders</strong>
</div>
<br />
<br />
<p>The current enthusiasm for joint child custody and liberal
visitation need to be tempered drastically in cases involving
domestic violence for the following reasons:
<br />
</p>
<ul>
<li>Men who batter their intimate partners have a high
potential for physically and emotionally abusing their
children.</li>
<li>Child custody evaluations often place battered women at a
disadvantage because living in an abusive relationship may
produce traumatic effects that give the false impression that
they are unfit parents.</li>
<li>Battered women's attempts to protect themselves and
their children can also give the false appearance that they
are unfit parents.</li>
<li>Men who batter are likely to have chronic behavioral and
emotional problems that may not be easily detected.</li>
<li>Many states are responding to these concerns by enacting
laws that require domestic violence to be considered in child
custody determinations and sometimes presume that the abuser
should not have joint or sole custody. Other statutes address
concerns over visitation, mediation, child abduction, and
child abandonment.</li>
</ul>
<p>Although more research is needed in the field, our current
practice wisdom and social science research indicate that:
<br />
</p>
<ul>
<li>Men who batter should rarely have sole or joint custody
of their children.</li>
<li>Divorce, separation and/or treatment of the abuser do not
guarantee that the abuse of the women and children will
stop.</li>
<li>Visitation needs to be supervised in many cases or
restricted in other ways.</li>
<li>Battered women need to be allowed exemptions from
mandated mediation.</li>
<li>Battered women should be allowed to relocate with their
children at a safe distance from their ex-partners and not be
labelled "uncooperative" if they do not wish to
coparent.</li>
</ul>
<br />
<br />
<p style="font-size: 80%">This <em>In Brief</em> highlights
issues discussed in a longer document created by Daniel G.
Saunders and is available through your state domestic violence
coalition.</p>
<br />
<br />
<p style="font-size: 80%">(Rev. 10/30/98)
<br />
VAWnet is a project of the National Resource Center on
Domestic Violence
<br />
800-537-2238 TTY 800-553-2508 Fax 717-545-9456</p>
<hr width="100%" />
<span style="font-size: 80%">This project was supported by
grant number 98-WT-VX-K001 awarded by the <a
href="http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/vawo/";>Violence Against Women
Office,</a> Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of
Justice. Points of view in this document are those of the
authors and do not necessarily represent the official position
or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.</span>
<p style="font-size: 80%">This site is a cooperative project of
<strong><em><a href="http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/vawo/";>Violence
Against Women Office</a></em></strong> and <em><strong><a
href="http://www.mincava.umn.edu/";>Minnesota Center Against
Violence & Abuse</a></strong></em> at the University of
Minnesota.</p>
<p style="font-size: 80%"><em>Additional information about this
site can be obtained by contacting: <a
href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]";>[EMAIL PROTECTED]</a></em></p>
<p style="font-size: 80%"><em><img
src="/Images/copyrigh.gif" /> Copyright 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001
MINCAVA
<br />
Minnesota Center Against Violence & Abuse
<br />
File Last Modified on:</em> 2/25/02 3:48:11 PM</p>
</body>
</html>
