Does Level of Intimate Partner Violence and Abuse Predict the Content of Family Mediation Agreements?

This study investigated whether reported levels of intimate partner violence (IPV) and/or abuse (IPV/A) victimization are related to reaching agreement and to the content of mediation agreements of parties seeking to resolve family‐ and child‐related issues. Whether or not parties reached agreement was analyzed for 105 cases at a law school mediation clinic. Agreement content was coded for the 71 cases that reached agreement. Levels of IPV and IPV/A were determined separately for males and females, using a standardized measure. Regression models were utilized to examine reports of IPV or IPV/A as predictors. Results indicated that mediation may help families with a reported history of IPV and IPV/A address a variety of concerns; levels of partner violence/abuse predicted numerous issues in mediation agreements, including arrangements regarding legal custody, parenting time, holidays, child exchanges, interparental communication, safety restrictions, counseling referrals, child support, financial arrangements, and other miscellaneous topics (e.g., relocation). However, some findings were consistent with concerns raised about the use of mediation with parties reporting IPV and IPV/A; for example, increasing levels of male‐perpetrated IPV/A predicted increased likelihood of making an agreement to share legal custody. Further research is needed to resolve the longstanding debate of whether divorce mediation is an effective and safe process for parties demonstrating IPV/A.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• This study adds to the debate of whether divorce mediation is an effective and safe process for parties demonstrating IPV/A.
• It examines whether reported levels of IPV and IPV/A victimization are related to reaching agreement and to the content of mediation agreements of parties seeking to resolve family‐ and child‐related issues.
• Results provide some evidence that mediation may help families with a reported history of IPV and IPV/A address a variety of concerns.
• However, some findings are consistent with concerns raised about the use of mediation with parties reporting IPV and IPV/A.
• Findings have implications for the practice of family mediation with parties reporting a history of IPV or IPV/A.

     

Safety,Satisfaction, and Settlement in Domestic Relations Mediations: New Findings

Researchers and mediators have long been concerned about coercion, intimidation, and safety threats that could occur in mediation for cases where previous violence between the parties has occurred. Most of the research focuses on screening tools to identify parties at risk. When parties screen positive for intimate partner violence (IPV), some proceed to mediation and some do not, depending on the policies of individual mediation programs. But this misses a step: Some cases may benefit from mediation while others won't, but how can we predict whether mediation will be useful and safe in specific instances? This study uses survey data obtained from parties in domestic relations mediations to examine issues of safety, satisfaction, and settlement in the presence of various IPV behaviors.     

THE MEDIATOR'S ASSESSMENT OF SAFETY ISSUES AND CONCERNS (MASIC): A SCREENING INTERVIEW FOR INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE AND ABUSE AVAILABLE IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN

Screening for intimate partner violence and/or abuse (IPV/A) in family mediation is important, perhaps particularly among cases without attorney representation. While most mediators agree that it is ideal to consider IPV/A in case planning, there is less agreement regarding the need to universally and systematically screen for IPV/A among all cases. Such attitudes are of concern, given research in other fields (e.g., medicine, couples therapy) and our own research in a family mediation clinic, which documents that the lack of consistent and formal IPV/A assessment results in underdetection of IPV/A. While a variety of IPV/A screening measures exist, each has shortcomings. Thus, our research and clinical experience led us to develop a new IPV/A screening measure, the Mediator's Assessment of Safety Issues and Concerns (MASIC). We discuss features of the MASIC and provide the full measure in the Appendix. The MASIC is a behaviorally specific IPV/A screen that assesses various types of abuse (e.g., coercive control, stalking, physical violence) over the course of the relationship and in the past year. It is administered as an interview to build rapport and assesses lethality indicators and offers optional recommendations for procedural changes in mediation based on IPV/A. Although we have begun relevant research, it is important to note that the MASIC has not yet been validated. Nonetheless, we recommend the use of systematic IPV/A screens in family mediation and suggest that such measures may prove especially important in providing unrepresented parties a safe and appropriate environment for mediation.     

The Brooklyn mediation field test

This paper describes an experiment in which 465 felony arrest cases in Kings County, NY, USA, were, randomly, either filed in court and prosecuted or sent to a dispute resolution center for adjudication. The cases all involved persons who were acquainted, and nearly half were either intimate partners or in other immediate family relationships. The results indicated that the mediation process was perceived more positively by complainants than was prosecution and that going through mediation enhances complainants’ perceptions of their relationships with defendants to a greater degree than going through the court process. However, there was no evidence that mediation was no more effective than prosecution in preventing recidivism. Not surprisingly, in cases involving intimate partners or immediate family members, the offenders were most likely to experience continuing problems whether they were sent to mediation or were prosecuted. One of the values of this study is that, in the late 1970s, when this research was conducted, mediation was considered by many to be a legitimate alternative to prosecution in family violence cases, including cases arising from intimate partner violence. The data that we collected would be difficult to replicate in today’s political climate. While our study did not find that mediation reduced the odds of recidivism in these cases, neither did we find that mediation made victims less safe. Thus, it partially supports the sentiments of researchers such as Braithwaite and Strang (Restorative justice and family violence. In Strang H, Braithwaite J (eds) Restorative justices and family violence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 1−22; 2002), who argue that—given the evidence for success of restorative justice in reducing re-offending in cases other than family violence—it is worth testing whether similar beneficial effects could be found in applying restorative justice approaches to family violence cases.

Parenting Coordination In Cases Involving Intimate Partner Violence

Parenting Coordination is a “hybrid legal‐mental health role that combines assessment, education, case management, conflict management, dispute resolution and, often times, decision‐making functions (AFCC, 2019, https://www.afccnet.org/Portals/0/PublicDocuments/Guidelines%20for%20PC%20with%20Appendex.pdf?ver=2020-01-30-190220-990 ). This article addresses issues that arise when the case has allegations or findings of intimate partner violence (IPV). Considerations of the type of IPV, the severity, timing, perpetrator and effects on coparenting are discussed in the context of the parenting coordinator's role. Through screening and assessment, we differentiate the kinds of cases with the presence of IPV where a PC may be effective as opposed to other IPV cases that may not predict success for retaining a PC.     

Innovative Family Mediation Research Initiative Embedded in the Community In Ireland

The Family Mediation Project is a not‐for‐profit means‐tested research initiative at Waterford Institute of Technology, based on an innovative family mediation model developed by Dr Roisin O’ Shea, following her Irish Research Council funded doctoral research. The project, led by W.I.T.’s Dr Sinéad Conneely (coordinator) and Dr Roisin O’ Shea (principal investigator), is test‐running the next iteration in family mediation, embedded in the community, comprising of the most effective elements sourced globally, with a particular focus on innovations in Canada, and is gathering empirical data to evidence outcomes. The final “real world” phase of the project commenced in May 2018, an exciting collaboration between voluntary, statutory agencies and a research institution to further test the effectiveness of this innovative approach on a larger scale at community level in the south Dublin area. This paper will discuss the project innovations and efficacy of the projects objectives, to provide effective mediation as quickly as possible for families and their children, within their community, by experienced family mediators, with hook‐ups and sign‐posting to trusted existing resources, such as the support services offered by the Family Resource Centres, and on‐line and face‐to‐face resources, with the court‐room as an end of pipe‐line solution or emergency forum only.     

医疗纠纷案例鉴定及解决方式转变的研究

目的以某综合性三甲医院2009—2011年全部已结案医疗纠纷病例为研究对象,探讨医疗纠纷解决机制及相关医疗纠纷鉴定的转变。结果2009—2011年3年中,共结案医疗纠纷106例,其中医院自行和解结案26件,占24．5％;第三方调解结案21件,占19．8％;法院判决和调解结案59件,占55．7％。建议医疗机构应充分发挥第三方解决医疗纠纷的能力,重视医疗纠纷鉴定。     

Reframing the mediation debate in Irish all-issues divorce disputes: from mediation vs. litigation to mediation and litigation

Mediation currently plays a minor role in the Irish family justice system, yet a policy consensus exists that more couples should be encouraged to mediate and that increased rates of mediation will reduce the numbers seeking redress through the courts. The Mediation Act 2017 adopts this position, assuming that the provision of information on mediation will increase uptake and that mediation offers an alternative to litigation for most civil disputes. This article reviews attempts in Ireland, England and Wales to encourage family disputants to mediate, identifying weaknesses in the information strategy. It also examines the legal framework governing all-issues divorce and dissolution in Ireland, pointing to the limited potential for mediation to act as an alternative to litigation. It concludes by arguing that policy focus must shift away from encouraging mediation as an alternative to litigation towards more nuanced understanding of mediation as a support to court based dispute resolution.     

民事诉讼调解模式研究

在民事诉讼调解社会化和构建多元化纠纷解决机制的当前语境中,从权力配置的视角对民事诉讼调解进行模式化的分析并提炼出权力独享型民事诉讼调解、权力共享型民事诉讼调解和权力分享型民事诉讼调解三个概念是对民事诉讼调解进行一般性研究的创新尝试,不仅可以为社会公众认知各式各样的民事诉讼调解提供智识上的帮助,而且可以通过对不同模式的民事诉讼调解之运作机理的概括、解释来为民事调解的现代转型提供支持。     

人民调解与传统民间调解的关系探析

虽然传统民间调解与人民调解都是运用调解的手段来解决民间纠纷,但是对这两种纠纷解决机制之间的关系问题理论界却有着不同的观点。通过对这两种纠纷解决机制进行分析之后,本文认为,一方面,中华帝国统治制度的运作、小农经济所带来的社会结构与中国传统法律文化的合力决定了人民调解对民间调解的历史继承性;另一方面,人民调解是中国共产党在建立现代民族国家过程中的特定历史条件下所形成的独特法律制度,有其特有的逻辑性,它既不同于西方调解制度也没有完全继承中国帝制社会遗留下来的民间调解的传统。     

Young Children in Divorce and Separation: Pilot Study of a Mediation‐Based Co‐Parenting Intervention

This article reports on a cluster randomized pilot study of a mediation‐based intervention for separated parents of very young children, Young Children in Divorce and Separation (YCIDS). The control group intervention was “Mediation plus Reading.” Participants were separated parents attending mediation over a co‐parenting dispute concerning a child under the age of 5 years (n=33 cases). Nine of the 16 key child and parent outcomes were significantly better for the intervention group, with the remainder nonsignificant between groups. Mediators reported 35 per cent lower referral on to legal action for YCIDS cases following mediation. Implementation complexities of the YCIDS program led to the development of an online intervention format, now the subject of a further study. Further implications of this pilot study are discussed.     

Book Review: How Mediation Works: Theory,Research, and Practice by Stephen B. Goldberg,Jeanne M. Brett,Beatrice Blohorn‐Brenneur,With Nancy H. Rogers

This is a book review of How Mediation Works: Theory, Research, and Practice by Stephen B. Goldberg, Jeanne M. Brett, Beatrice Blohorn‐Brenneur, with Nancy H. Rogers. How Mediation Works is intended for a wide range of audiences: practicing mediators; aspiring mediators; those who may refer cases to mediation; participants in mediation, including parties and attorneys; managers who facilitate disputes; and those interested in mediation without a specific plan to engage in the practice (who the authors call “mediation learners”). The book is a well‐written, thoughtful, easy‐to‐read, organized, and concise overview of mediation practice. The book is divided into six chapters: (1) conflicts, disputes, and their resolution; (2) dispute resolution processes; (3) the roles of the mediator and the disputing parties at each step of the mediation process; (4) dealing with difficulties; (5) mediation and the law; and (6) suggestions for aspiring mediators. Though not an authority for family law mediation, the book provides many insightful observations and suggestions that would be instructive and helpful to any mediator or individual with an interest in mediation.     

Understanding Pathways to Family Dispute Resolution and Justice Reforms: Ontario Court File Analysis & Survey of Professionals

This article reports on two related studies about varying pathways to the resolution of family disputes and the effects of family justice reforms in Ontario: a survey of family court professionals (n = 118) and an analysis of 1,000 closed court files of family cases involving children. Both studies reveal that the vast majority of cases are resolved without a trial, often by negotiation. While professionals generally support family justice reform initiatives, there remain significant gaps in the implementation of these strategies. For example, many litigants do not attend information programs despite the requirement for mandatory attendance; there is limited use of mediation; the views of children are being sought in only a small number of cases; and there is a large proportion of self‐represented family litigants. Despite the increase in shared care and joint decision‐making arrangements, a majority of cases in the court file study were sole custody arrangements to the mother, whether the case was settled or resolved by trial. Mediation was associated with greater time of contact with the non–primary residential parent (usually the father).     

Public investment in private problems: legal aid and the family justice system

This paper examines findings from the Legal Aid Board Research Unit's Case Profiling Study in the light of the current reform programmes for both legal aid and family law. The findings relate to over 650 legally aided family cases including divorce, separation, ancillary relief and Children Act 1989 applications. The main aim of the study was to gain a better understanding of what is currently funded by the legal aid fund. Costs have been related to stages of cases and to the strategies employed by solicitors. Finally, I comment on the future role of legal aid in family law, suggesting that, to a large extent, public investment will be maintained. Remuneration of service providers will evolve as systems of contracting are introduced in January 2000. There will be continued emphasis on family mediation as an alternative method of dispute resolution. However, cases involving issues relating to children and their welfare will remain within the scope of public support. Domestic violence and other emergency issues will also merit high priority. Although there will be extensive changes in other areas of legal aid, family law appears to remain relatively unscathed.     

Experiences of Intimate Partner Violence during Lockdown and the COVID-19 Pandemic

Previous studies have demonstrated that there is an increase in Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) during times of crisis (e.g., financial, environmental, or socio-political situations). The COVID-19 pandemic has triggered an unprecedented global health and financial tragedy, but research is yet to establish exactly how the situation may impact on IPV. The present study investigates victims’ experience of IPV during lockdown and the COVID-19 pandemic. We report a qualitative thematic analysis of 50 discussion forum posts written by victims of IPV. Of these, 48 forum posts were written by female victims of male perpetrated violence. All forum posts were obtained from the popular online platform, Reddit. We identified four themes associated with IPV victims’ experiences during lockdown and the global pandemic: (i) Use of COVID-19 by the Abuser, (ii) Service Disruption, (iii) Preparation to Leave, and (iv) Factors Increasing Abuse or Distress. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a substantial impact on those living with IPV, often increasing the severity of IPV experienced. The experiences of those affected by IPV during this period inform interventions and the guidance and support provided to IPV victims during times of crisis.

     

Measuring intimate partner violence (IPV): you may only get what you ask for

With the goal of understanding the true extent of intimate partner violence (IPV), researchers have put tremendous effort over the past 20 years developing, revising, and assessing IPV screening instruments. The enhancements made in IPV instrumentation reflect our improved understanding of the nature of IPV. Unfortunately, as is often the case with progress, we are presently at the stage where IPV researchers have an arsenal of multiple IPV screens that are, in some cases, slightly different, whereas in others, the differences are sizeable. This article explores the evolution and variation of a sample of IPV screens. To further progress in IPV research, we must make conscious decisions concerning the best tool for our individual research. Simultaneously, we must enhance our understanding of how these IPV screening instruments overlap so that comparisons of IPV prevalence or incidence across time and population are possible.     

试论我国行政调解制度的完善

随着非诉讼纠纷解决机制（ADR）在西方行政法上的广泛适用，行政调解作为“东方经验”的本土资源也日益受到世界学术界的关注。然而，目前由于我国对行政调解制度的忽视和行政调解自身缺陷等原因，导致了法治观念的极端化及其与和谐理念相背离，难以发挥行政调解在和谐社会中应有的作用。通过比较法的考察，我们从西方ADR的相关制度中得以启发，以完善适合我国国情的行政调解制度。     

Informing Police Response to Intimate Partner Violence: Predictors of Perceived Usefulness of Risk Assessment Screening

Substantial research has demonstrated the value of using risk assessment tools for the prediction and management of violence risk, including for intimate partner violence (IPV) (Mills, Kroner, and Morgan 2011). Such tools have been advocated for use by police officers (Hilton, Grant, and Rice 2010), but little is known about police officers’ perceptions of using these tools to inform their decision-making. Using a sample of 159 Canadian police officers (73% male, M age =?41.8 years, SD?=?8.9), the current study examined police officer’s experiences with IPV risk tools, their attitudes about using such tools, and identified predictors of these attitudes using an online survey. Most of this sample had previously used an IPV risk tool, which was most commonly the Brief Spousal Assault Form for the Evaluation of Risk (64.1%). Most police officers rated use of risk tools as at least somewhat to extremely helpful (73.5%), and 67.4% indicated that they would use a risk tool with sufficient training on it. Regression analyses indicated that police officers’ perceived IPV risk tool usefulness was significantly predicted by older respondent age and greater perceived need for guidance in responding to IPV calls. In conclusion, most police officers view IPV risk screening as valuable for informing their responses to such calls for service and are likely to embrace such decision-aids with sufficient training on their potential impact for enhancing safety.