U.S. child custody outcomes in cases involving parental alienation and abuse allegations: what do the data show?

ABSTRACT

Family court and abuse professionals have long been polarized over the use of parental alienation claims to discredit a mother alleging that the father has been abusive or is unsafe for the children. This paper reports the findings from an empirical study of ten years of U.S. cases involving abuse and alienation claims. The findings confirm that mothers’ claims of abuse, especially child physical or sexual abuse, increase their risk of losing custody, and that fathers’ cross-claims of alienation virtually double that risk. Alienation’s impact is gender-specific; fathers alleging mothers are abusive are not similarly undermined when mothers cross-claim alienation. In non-abuse cases, however, the data suggest that alienation has a more gender-neutral impact. These nuanced findings may help abuse and alienation professionals find some common ground.     

‘Our normal is different’: autistic adults’ experiences of the family courts

ABSTRACT

This article reports the findings of a small-scale qualitative study exploring the experiences of autistic adults who have had experience of the family justice system. While participants related some positive elements to their experiences, in particular with regard to the willingness of professionals to try to learn more about their clients’ needs, the overall picture showed significant concerns. The reports given showed significant misunderstandings about autism, and a system which struggled to make appropriate adjustments which would allow autistic court users to have access to justice on an equivalent basis to non-autistic litigants. This situation stands in contrast to the position regarding other disabilities in the Family Justice System, but also to the relatively greater level of provision for autistic people within the Criminal Justice System. Based on participants’ experiences and existing good practice in other areas, we make recommendations that could be adopted by the Family Court and practitioners.     

NOT (QUITE) A HORSE AND CARRIAGE

This note critically interrogates the Civil Partnership Act 2004. Through an examination of the legislative background and some of the provisions of the Act, it is argued that civil partnership mirrors a marriage model with some exceptions. In creating this new legal status, the legislation also exacerbates the exclusion of some relationship forms from dominant legal norms. It should be understood as part of an agenda for social inclusion, rather than as radical social change.     

家庭暴力的构成及对策

家庭暴力是发生在家庭成员间的侵害对方身体、性和精神的伤害行为。针对已成为社会问题的家庭暴力 ,我们应采取如下对策 :强化婚姻家庭领域道德与法律的共同调控功能 ;尽快制定有关制止家庭暴力的专门性法律 ;扩大社会支持 ,预防和制止家庭暴力     

Family Representative Payeeship and Violence Risk in Severe Mental Illness

Although representative payeeship is prevalent among people with mental illness and shows promise to positively influence clinically relevant outcomes, research also suggests this legal mechanism could be implemented in ways that are problematic. The current study examined whether family representative payeeship was associated with elevated risk of family violence perpetrated by persons with severe mental illness (SMI). Data were collected every 4 months for 1 year in structured interviews with N = 245 persons with SMI who received disability benefits. Multivariate analyses showed that substance abuse, history of violence, frequency of family contact, and family representative payeeship were associated with elevated odds of family violence. Analyses also showed family contact and family representative payeeship had a cumulative effect on increasing the predicted probability of family violence (controlling for covariates such as violence history and substance abuse). The data shed light on the potential for family representative payeeship to be associated with increased risk of interpersonal conflict and violence in SMI.