Factors associated with child custody evaluators’ recommendations in cases of intimate partner violence.

2013 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 473-483 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel G. Saunders ◽  
Richard M. Tolman ◽  
Kathleen C. Faller
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Child Custody ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Factors Associated

scholarly journals Factors Associated with Intimate Partner Violence among Wives of Military and Civilian Men in Abuja Nigeria

2015 ◽  
Vol 05 (02) ◽  
pp. 61-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prosper Obunikem Uchechukwu Adogu ◽  
Uzoamaka Carol Chimah ◽  
Amobi Linus Ilika ◽  
Chika Florence Ubajaka
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Factors Associated

scholarly journals The Denial of Emergency Protection: Factors Associated With Court Decision Making

2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 603-616 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol E. Jordan ◽  
Adam J. Pritchard ◽  
Pamela Wilcox ◽  
Danielle Duckett-Pritchard
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Fiscal Year ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Emergency Protection ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Judicial Education ◽  
Protective Orders ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence Research

Despite the importance of civil orders of protection as a legal resource for victims of intimate partner violence, research is limited in this area, and most studies focus on the process following a court’s initial issuance of an emergency order. The purpose of this study is to address a major gap in the literature by examining cases where victims of intimate partner violence are denied access to temporary orders of protection. The study sample included a review of 2,205 petitions that had been denied by a Kentucky court during the 2003 fiscal year. The study offers important insights into the characteristics of petitioners and respondents to denied orders and outlines individual, contextual, structural, qualitative/perceptual, and procedural factors associated with the denial of temporary or emergency protective orders. Recommendations for statutory changes, judicial education, and future research to remedy barriers to protection are offered.

Judges in the Protection Orders and Family Law Systems

2021 ◽  
pp. 184-214
Author(s):  
Heather Douglas
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Child Custody ◽  
Family Law ◽  
Physical Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Family Courts ◽  
Protection Orders ◽  
The Family

This chapter explores women’s interactions with judges when they appeared before them in relation to protection orders and child custody orders after experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV). Commonly women identified that judges prioritized physical violence and minimized other forms of abuse and that they seemed to align with abusers, discounting the women’s experiences of abuse. Women identified that judges often lacked preparation for hearings, rubber-stamped witness subpoenas, and failed to stop irrelevant witness examination. They explained how these approaches facilitated their partner’s misuse of the legal system as a tactic of abuse. Women also discussed how judges, especially in the family courts, prioritized fathers’ rights to contact with children over safety. However, women’s stories also demonstrated resistance to their abuser’s control over them through the courts, and their efforts to ensure the safety of their children regardless of court orders.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document