“Intimate Terrorism” and Gender Differences in Injury of Dating Partners by Male and Female University Students

A version of the partner violence typology developed by Johnson (Journal of Marriage and the Family 57: 283-294, 1995) that more fully reflects the inherently dyadic nature of partner violence is presented, as well as a method of using the Conflict Tactics Scales to identify cases in the typology, including “Intimate Terrorists.” Analysis of 13,877 university student dating relationships found a similar percent of male and female “Intimate Terrorists.” This is consistent with other studies of general populations and reflects inadequacies in Johnson’s methodology. Bidirectional violence, including Intimate Terrorism, was associated with the highest probability of injury, especially for women. The results suggest that programs to reduce partner violence, including reducing violence against women, should address violence and coercive control by both partners.     

Do Standards of Proof Affect Decision Making in Child Protection Investigations?

Every state investigates child maltreatment reports. Some states use a lower standard of proof of some credible evidence (or similar terms) to substantiate cases after investigation. Other state legislatures prescribe a higher standard of preponderance of the evidence. Legislatures use these terms of art as a matter of policy to control the risk of false-positive errors. A lower rate of substantiation should follow from a higher standard of proof. There was no statistically significant difference in the percent of substantiated and the percent of unsubstantiated cases in the two groups of states. If state policy to reduce the false-positive error rate is to be effective, something more is required than simply manipulating the verbal formula in legislation.     

Managing children's and adolescents' medical complaints amid parent conflict: Strategies and tools for professionals

Children and adolescents who are having difficulty coping with stress often present with complaints of physical discomfort. Effective treatment approaches exist for many of these issues. Among high-conflict parents, however, children's medical issues can become another canvas for conflict, with parents focused more on blaming one another for the child's distress than on options for assisting the child. Professionals can be drawn into the conflict to such a degree that they overlook essential steps for addressing and managing these issues. The authors present a research-informed model for managing medical and psychophysiological issues amid parental conflict.     

The future of parenting plan evaluations: A view from the trenches

As expectations rise for parenting plan evaluators to be well-trained, skilled, and knowledgeable in numerous subject areas, and scrutiny of evaluators' work intensifies, the pool of qualified evaluators is shrinking nationwide. The future of parenting plan evaluation as a forensic subspecialty relies upon the availability of competent and committed professionals to do this challenging work, yet few are entering the field. Five experienced parenting plan evaluators from various regions of the United States, including the authors, met for a roundtable discussion to ponder the future of parenting plan evaluations. The panel discussed what drew them to the work, their experiences “in the trenches,” and what has kept them committed to doing evaluations despite daunting challenges. Their views of the rewards and risks of doing the work, barriers and disincentives to newcomers entering the field, recommendations to new evaluators, and outlook for the future are presented.