DIVORCE AND THE FAMILY COURT: WHAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE?

Approximately 50% of couples who have separated report being victims of violence and/or emotional abuse by their former intimate partners. Family courts can make an important contribution toward reducing the number of intimate partners who report being victims of domestic violence and abuse during and following their participation in divorce proceedings in three ways. First, increase opportunities for participation in nonadversarial procedures. Second, implement mandatory assessment/screening for domestic violence using field‐tested instruments that link subscores on sets of items (e.g., control motivated violence, conflict instigated violence/abuse, substance abuse associated violence/abuse) with appropriate community‐based treatments and/or resources. Third, educate family court judges, lawyers, mediators, and other court personnel in the dynamics of domestic violence generally, as well as the dynamics associated with separation/divorce.     

TWENTY‐FIRST CENTURY PINK OR BLUE: HOW SEX SELECTION TECHNOLOGY FACILITATES GENDERCIDE AND WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT IT

In the midst of a genetic revolution in medicine, Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) has become a well‐established technique to help infertile women achieve pregnancy. But many women are now turning to ART not just to circumvent infertility, but consciously to shape their families by determining the sex of their children. Many patriarchal cultures have a gender preference for males and to date have used technological advances in reproductive medicine to predetermine the sex of the child being born. Women have sought sex‐selective abortions, where the pregnancy was being terminated solely on the basis of the sex of the unborn fetus. The combination of ART advances and gender preference has led to the disappearance of at least 100 million girls from the world's population leading to a mass gendercide. This article examines the societal impact of unbalanced gender ratios and the need to regulate sex selection to avoid nations of bachelors.     

DIVORCE IN THE NURSERY: ON INFANTS AND OVERNIGHT CARE

Infants, parental separation, custody, and overnight care: a vexed combination of issues and needs that has long perplexed the family law field. Carol George and Judith Solomon have conducted the only published observational study of infant attachment in light of postseparation overnight care arrangements. Here they revisit that study and bring more than three decades of experience to bear on questions concerning very young children implicated in family law disputes. Currently a professor of psychology at Mills College, California, George is an author and coauthor of several notable attachment measures and has over 50 research publications in the area of attachment. Judith Solomon is both a clinical psychologist and a researcher in the attachment field, specializing in the study of early attachment relationships and representations, most recently in the Department of Pediatrics, Bridgeport Hospital. George and Solomon are associate editors of the journal, Attachment and Human Development, reviewers on multiple developmental journals, and both consult and teach internationally.     

FAMILY COURT IMPROVEMENT AND THE ART OF GRANTSMANSHIP: A JUDGE'S PERSPECTIVE

Many American courts face funding obstacles as they try to create and implement unified family court processes that have not been part of the traditional family court adversarial process. To create new staff positions, build and equip adequate facilities, and create and implement innovative programs, grant funding may be available to supplement what local and state governments provide. While social science research confirms that children are adversely affected by exposure to high‐conflict family litigation and domestic violence, many communities have few affordable and available resources to address these issues. This article presents lessons and principles that one court learned as it applied for a grant to design programs for high‐conflict families and families with domestic violence history.     

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: WHY WE DO WHAT WE DO—A FAMILY COURT REFLECTION

This article, adapted from the keynote address delivered at the Hofstra University School of Law Family Law Review Annual Banquet on March 24, 2011, focuses on the impact of the Family Law Review, the need to improve the stature of the family court, and shares excepts of letters written by members of the New York State Permanent Judicial Commission on Justice for Children regarding their passion for working in the fields of child welfare and in the family court.     

MOTHERING,FATHERING, AND DIVORCE: THE INFLUENCE OF DIVORCE ON REPORTS OF AND DESIRES FOR MATERNAL AND PATERNAL INVOLVEMENT*

The present study investigated the extent to which young adults' reports of—and desires for—maternal and paternal involvement differed between intact and divorced families. An ethnically diverse sample of 1,376 young adults completed measures of reported and desired mothering and fathering across 20 parenting domains. Results indicated that both reports of and desires for father involvement differed sharply by family form (intact versus divorced), whereas few family form differences emerged for reported or desired mother involvement. These findings are discussed in terms of implications for custody and access decisions within the family court system.     

WEAPON EFFECTS AND INDIVIDUAL INTENT TO DO HARM: INFLUENCES ON THE ESCALATION OF VIOLENCE*

In order to assess the roles of weapons and offender intentions in the outcomes of potentially violent events, we analyze more than 2,000 incidents described by offenders. We advance the study of weapons effects through a within‐person analysis that lets us control for all time‐stable characteristics of the offenders. Thus, we address the concern that relationships between type of weapon and incident outcome may be spurious because individuals with a greater propensity to do harm are more likely to use guns. Findings indicate that weapons have independent effects that differ across the stages of an event.     

THE LANGUAGE OF STIGMATIZATION AND THE MARK OF VIOLENCE: EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE ON THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION AND USE OF CRIMINAL RECORD STIGMA

After years of stagnation, labeling theory has recently gained new empirical support. Simultaneously, new policy initiatives have attempted to restructure criminal record stigma to reduce reintegration barriers, and subsequent recidivism, driven by labeling. For example, in a recent Department of Justice (DOJ) language policy, person‐first terms (e.g., “person with a conviction”) were substituted for crime‐first terms (e.g., “offender”). The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has also issued guidelines to structure how decision‐makers use criminal records. Unfortunately, little is currently known about the social construction and use of criminal record stigma or the potential effects of such policy changes. In the current study, we provide two unique empirical tests. In study 1, we examine the social construction of stigma by testing DOJ's language policy with experimental data from a nationally representative sample of American adults (N = 996). In study 2, we use a separate nationwide experiment (N = 1,540) to examine how the contextualization of criminal records influences social exclusion decisions. Across both studies, we find consistent evidence of a “mark of violence.” The public perceives that individuals with violent convictions are the most likely to commit future crimes, and it is more supportive of excluding these individuals from employment. Crime‐first terms exacerbate perceived recidivism risk for individuals with violent convictions.