Rates At Which Batterers Receive Custody

by Joan Meier, Esq.

One statement in Breaking the Silence: Children’s Voices that has provoked controversy was my statement that “the studies are showing” that up to 2/3 of accused or adjudicated batterers receive joint or sole custody in court.  While no empirical study can definitively determine a universal statistical rate, the key point is that the research consistently shows that accused and adjudicated batterers receive joint or sole custody disturbingly often.  This confirms the anecdotal experience of domestic violence attorneys and victims around the country.  The following research supports this perspective.

 

I. A History of Domestic Violence is Common among Contested Custody Cases.

The remarkably consistent research on this issue is compiled in my previously-issued statement , Research Indicating that the majority of cases that go to court as ‘high conflict’ contested custody cases have a history of domestic violence (Nov.  9, 2005).

One good example is a study cited by Janet Johnston, a leading researcher of parental alienation, which found that, among custody litigants referred to mediation, “[p]hysical aggression had occurred between 75% and 70% of the parents . . . even though the couples had been separated. . . [for an average of 30-42 months]”.  Furthermore, [i]n 35% of the first sample and 48% of the second, [the violence] was denoted as severe and involved battering and threatening to use or using a weapon.” 
- Janet R. Johnston, “High-Conflict Divorce,” The Future of Children, Vol. 4, No. 1, Spring 1994,  165-182) citing Depner et al., “Building a uniform statistical reporting system:  A snapshot of  California Family Court Services,“ Family and ConciliationCourts Review (1992) 30: 185-206

 

II. Domestic Violence Perpetrators are More Likely to Contest Custody than Non- Abusers.

The American Psychological Association’s Presidential Task Force on Violence in the Family, the leading review of the research as of 1996, found that men who abuse their partners contest custody at least twice as often as non-abusing fathers.  They are even more likely to contest custody if the children are boys.
- American Psychological Association Presidential Task Force on Violence in the Family (1996) at p. 40.

 

III. Accused and Adjudicated Batterers Receive Joint or Sole Custody Surprisingly  Often.

The research on this has only emerged in the past few years and most studies have been small and local.  Nonetheless, they document disturbing trends, which surprised even me when I first discovered them.

 

A. Multiple studies have documented gender bias against women in custody litigation.

Contrary to the conventional wisdom that women are favored in custody litigation, both the experiences of battered women and the empirical research are showing that women who allege abuse are deeply disfavored in custody courts.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Gender Bias Task Force was one of the first states to document the gender bias against women in family courts.  This court-initiated study expressly found that “our research contradicted [the] perception” that ”there is a bias in favor of women in these decisions.”  Moreover, it found that “in determining custody and visitation, many judges and family service officers do not consider violence toward women relevant.”  The Court’s study further found that “the courts are demanding more of mothers than fathers in custody disputes” and that “many courts put the needs of noncustodial fathers above those of custodial mothers and children.” 
- Gender Bias Study of the Court System in Massachusetts, 24 New Eng.L.Rev. 745, 747, 825, 846 (1990)

More recently, and since the evolution and widespread adoption of “parental alienation syndrome,” a multi-year, four-phase study using qualitative and quantitative social science research methodologies by the Wellesley Centers for Women found “a consistent pattern of human rights abuses” by family courts, including failure to protect battered women and children from abuse, discriminating against and inflicting degrading treatment on battered women, and denying battered women due process.  Histories of abuse of mother and children were routinely ignored or discounted.
-  Wellesley Centers for Women Battered Mothers’ Testimony Project, Battered Mothers Speak  Out:  A Human Rights Report on Domestic Violence and Child Custody in the Massachusetts  Family Courts (Nov. 2002)(hereafter “BMTP”), Executive Summary at 2.

A comparable study by the Arizona Coalition Against Domestic Violence found that most of the women surveyed felt the history of abuse was not taken seriously and that they were ignored, disrespected and discriminated against by court personnel. 
- Arizona Coalition Against Domestic Violence, Battered Mothers’ Testimony Project:  A Human  Rights Approach to Child Custody and Domestic Violence (June 2003), pp. 47, 49, 6.

A study of the Domestic Relations Division of Philadelphia Family Court conducted by the Philadephia Women’s Law Project in cooperation with the court, found that litigants are often denied due process, and that applicable legal standards are “not always observed, particularly in the consideration of abuse in custody proceedings, leaving families at risk.”
- Tracy, Fromson & Miller, Justice in the Domestic Relations Division of Philadelphia Family Court:   A Report to the Community, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE REPORT, Vol. 8, No. 6 (Aug/Sept. 2003), p. 94.

 

B. Studies show Accused and Adjudicated Batterers Receiving Sole or Joint Custody  Surprisingly Often.

My own survey of the case law in 2001 identified 38 appellate state court decisions concerning custody and domestic violence.  To my astonishment, 36 of the 38 trial courts had awarded joint or sole custody to alleged and adjudicated batterers.  Two-thirds of these decisions were reversed on appeal.
- Meier, Domestic Violence, Child Custody, and Child Protection:  Understanding Judicial  Resistance and Imagining the Solutions, A.U. J. Gender, Soc. Pol. & the Law, 11:2 (2003), 657-731, p. 662, n. 19, and Appendix.

These cases included a case in which the perpetrator had been repeatedly convicted of domestic assault;  in which a father was given sole custody of a16-month old despite his undisputed choking of the mother resulting in her hospitalization and his arrest;  in which the father had broken the mother’s collarbone;  had committed “occasional incidents of violence”;  and had committed two admitted assaults.   More such instances can be found in Meier, supra.

The American Judges Association has found that approximately 70% of batterers succeed in convincing authorities that the victim is unfit for or undeserving of sole custody.  Another way of saying this is that 70% of batterers obtain sole or joint custody.
- American Judges Association, “Domestic Violence and the Courtroom:  Understanding the Problem . . . Knowing the Victim”    http://aja.ncsc.dni.us/domviol/page5.html  (at “Forms of Emotional Battering. . . Threats to Harm or Take Away Children”)

 

A survey of battered women by the Arizona Coalition Against Domestic Violence found that courts awarded joint or sole custody to the alleged batterers 56-74% of the time (depending on the county).  Many of these cases involved documented child abuse or adult abuse.
- Arizona Coalition Against Domestic Violence, Battered Mothers’ Testimony Project:  A Human  Rights Approach to Child Custody and Domestic Violence (June 2003), pp. 33-34, 47-49

A study of 300 cases over a 10-year period in which the mother sought to protect the child from sexual abuse, found that 70% resulted in unsupervised visitation or shared custody; in 20% of the cases the mothers completely lost custody, and many of these lost all visitation rights.
- Neustein & Goetting (1999), “Judicial Responses to the Protective Parent’s Complaint of Child  Sexual Abuse,” Journal of Child Sexual Abuse 8 (4): 103-122.

The Wellesley Battered Mothers’ Testimony Project found that 15 out of 40 cases resulted in sole or joint physical custody to the fathers, all of whom had abused both the mother and the children.
- BMTP, supra at Appendix A.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Gender Bias Task Force found that 94% of fathers who actively sought custody received sole or joint custody, regardless of whether there was a history of abuse.  While fathers received primary physical custody 29% of the time, mothers received primary physical custody in only 7% of the contested cases.  The Study also cited other research which similarly found that fathers who sought custody received primary physical custody 2/3 of the time, with mothers receiving it less than ¼ of the time; and another study which found that fathers seeking custody received joint or sole custody 79% of the time, with mothers receiving sole custody in only 15% of those cases (compared to fathers’ sole custody in 41% of the cases). 
- Gender Bias Study at 831-832 and citing Middlesex Divorce Research Group relitigation study and Phear et al., 1983.

While the Massachusetts study and those it cited were not able to identify what proportion of the contesting fathers were batterers, the studies cited in my other Statement indicate consistently that 75% of cases have a history of domestic violence, with a substantial proportion of severe violence.  Hence, it is likely that a substantial proportion of the fathers receiving joint or primary physical custody in this study had committed domestic violence.
- Meier Statement, Research Indicating that the Majority of Cases that go to Court as ‘High Conflict’ Contested Custody Cases have a History of Domestic Violence (Nov. 9, 2005).

Battered Mothers Gain Fair Attorney Client Terms at Conference (Albany, New York)

 

Battered Mothers Gain Fair Attorney Client Terms at Conference

Attorney, legislator and author Karen Winter opened the 8th Battered Mothers Custody Conference in Albany, New York reviewing attorney billing practices.

Attorney, legislator and author Karen Winner opened the 8th Battered Mothers Custody Conference in Albany, New York with her presentation, “How to Think Like a Lawyer on Legal Billing Issues”, on Friday afternoon January 7, 2011. Winner is well known for her report on family law abuses in Marin County, California which was published during 2000. She developed a Statement of Rights & Responsibilities for use between attorneys and their clients in 1993. The Statement of Rights & Responsibilities was subsequently incorporated into New York State law and was utilized as a model by many other states as well.

Good Attorneys Respect Client Rights

The hallmark of a good attorney is one that establishes expectations at the outset of the business relationship and understands that mutual respect is essential. Winner’s Statement of Rights & Responsibilities for clients include: appropriate, respectful treatment; avoidance of a conflict of interest; competency; fair billing practices; an expectation to be kept informed of the status of your case; a right to privacy; ethical conduct, and; an equal opportunity for representation. If the state you live in has not incorporated a similar Statement of Rights & Responsibilities, be aware the statement can be incorporated by copy into a retainer agreement negotiated with an attorney.

Good Attorneys Zealously Represent Client Interests

The attorney client relationship is a precarious balance of sharing the most intimate details of life with someone who is in business to make a living from dispatching heartache as effectively as possible. Conflicts of interest occur as a result of personal relationships, spousal or business relationships that are frequently not revealed by attorneys. Cronyism can play a part as well. Some small towns’ “business as usual” legal practices frequently include improper ex parte communication or enmeshment of business opportunities.

Some attorneys project that social graces and professionalism require a personal need to “play nice” with other attorneys. They may also choose to placate the judge by avoiding unpopular points of view, thereby putting their need for social acceptance ahead of their obligation to zealously represent their clients’ best interests. It isn't unusual to hear, “That's the way it's done here...” Just like any medical diagnosis, in a crisis, your legal diagnosis merits a second opinion. If you live in a small town where there are only a few attorneys, you can make a request for an “objective memorandum” on the issues you are trying to resolve.

Good Attorneys Have Fair Billing Practices

In many states, attorneys are required to bill within sixty days or forfeit their fees. If you have never been billed by your attorney, you are not legally obligated to pay the bill. However, in the interest of fairness, it isn’t unreasonable to balance how many tasks your attorney has performed for you without charging you. A client should consider several issues before they ‘nickel and dime’ each line item on the attorney’s invoice. Did the attorney forget to bill for an appearance or a letter to your benefit in the past? Is the business relationship generally fair? If so, it may be better to let an oversight slide. It's appropriate to ask your attorney to define appropriate benchmarks for your case to help you fairly gauge their performance and to allow for a reasonable anticipation of the length of time and expense related to your legal issues.

If you entered into an attorney client relationship while you were overwhelmed by the circumstances that led to your asking for representation, once you catch your breath, you can go back and request that your attorney renegotiate the terms of their retainer. If your case transitions, for instance, from a custody case to a child support modification, these separate legal actions are appropriate opportunities to address the incorporation of the Statement of Rights & Responsibilities. A retainer should reflect the scope of work that is actually being performed.

Good Attorneys Arbitrate Billing Disputes

If a client finds addressing financial issues emotionally traumatic or too difficult to understand, it's perfectly reasonable to request that a trusted family member or friend temporarily assist while addressing billing issues. Attorneys are required to maintain contemporaneous records to justify their billing practices. If you're addressing an error in billing, your attorney should be willing to rectify it. If you are being billed for administrative and clerical tasks at the attorney's hourly rate, it's time to address billing practices.

If you come to an impasse with your attorney about their billing practices, request arbitration. In New York State, an attorney who does not provide arbitration papers to a client objecting to a bill, may be subject to forfeiting their fees. In many cases attorneys are required to present their bills to the court for approval of fees. They must be reasonable, itemized, as well as substantiated. If they are not, then a judge has the right to reject the billing or reduce it to more reasonable fees.

Good Attorneys Protect Battered Mothers

Understanding and preserving client rights and responsibilities is particularly important to battered mothers. The controversial nature of obtaining fair, equitable and protective provisions from the courts is a more difficult task for victims of domestic violence. The laws of evidence are not consistently applied within the family courts as they are in other areas of the law. A family law judge is allowed to dictate many aspects of a divorce or custody action without challenge, and are given immunity if they are mistaken.

The discretion of judges, custody evaluators and other legal participants is much more subjective and it is not subject to the same scrutiny by appellate courts. An attorney that is not diligently representing the interests of a battered mother, while draining her financial resources, can deliver negative consequences that last for generations to her children.

To include a copy of Section 1210.1 of the Joint Rules of the Apellate Division (22NYCRR§1210.1):

You are entitled to be treated with courtesy and consideration at all times by your lawyer and the other lawyers and personnel in your lawyer's office.

You are entitled to an attorney capable of handling your legal matter competently and diligently, in accordance with the highest standards of the profession. If you are not satisfied with how your matter is being handled, you have the right to withdraw from the attorney-client relationship at any time (court approval may be required in some matters and your attorney may have a claim against you for the value of services rendered to you up to the point of discharge).

You are entitled to your lawyer's independent professional judgment and undivided loyalty uncompromised by conflicts of interest.

You are entitled to be charged a reasonable fee and to have your lawyer explain at the outset how the fee will be computed and the manner and frequency of billing. You are entitled to request and receive a written itemized bill from your attorney at reasonable intervals. You may refuse to enter into any fee arrangement that you find unsatisfactory. In the event of a fee dispute, you may have the right to seek arbitration; your attorney will provide you with the necessary information regarding arbitration in the event of a fee dispute, or upon your request.

• You are entitled to have your questions and concerns addressed in a prompt manner and to have your telephone calls returned promptly.
• You are entitled to be kept informed as to the status of your matter and to request and receive copies of papers. You are entitled to sufficient information to allow you to participate meaningfully in the development of your matter.
• You are entitled to have your legitimate objectives respected by your attorney including whether or not to settle your matter (court approval of a settlement is required in some matters).
• You have the right to privacy in your dealings with your lawyer and to have your secrets and confidences preserved to the extent permitted by law.
• You are entitled to have your attorney conduct himself or herself ethically in accordance with the Code of Professional Responsibility.
• You may not be refused representation on the basis of race, creed, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, age, national origin or disability.

Read more at Suite101: Battered Mothers Gain Fair Attorney Client Terms at Conference

Battered Mothers: No Longer Silenced!! Eighth Annual Battered Mother's Custody Conference

Battered Mothers: No longer silenced.

The Battered Mother's Custody Conference focuses on legal and human rights issues surrounding divorce and custody cases for victims of domestic violence.

The Eighth Battered Mother’s Custody Conference: held in Albany, New York January 7 through January 9, 2011. The conference was founded by Mo Therese Hannah, Ph.D. of Albany, New York and Liliane Heller Miller of Charlotte, North Carolina in 2003. Dr. Hannah’s most recent publication was as co-editor of “Domestic Violence, Abuse, and Child Custody: Legal Strategies and Policy Issues” with Barry Goldstein, which was published in 2010.

The conference brings a laser focus to the little known phenomenon of battered mothers losing custody of their children to their abusers in divorce and custody cases. The conference focuses on both domestic and international aspects of the issue; scholarly research; and legal and human rights cases related to domestic violence and child custody cases. Members bring international advocates together once a year. Twenty-eight advocates are scheduled to make presentations at this year's conference.

In a society that sees itself as progressive, and a champion of the needs of the disenfranchised; domestic violence continues to cover the United States in a cloak of disgrace. Many individuals are led to believe that if a victim of domestic violence seeks the aid of police, social service agencies, or sincerely pursues leaving a dangerous marriage through divorce, that the end of her nightmare is close at hand. However, once inside the judicial system, asking for help becomes a myth, as victims of domestic violence do not fare well.

According to attorney Joan Meir in a 2005 article published on “Stop Family Violence Now” (Meier), within U. S. divorce and custody cases, contested cases by abusers result in fully seventy percent (70%) of abusers receiving custody of the couple’s children. Trends like these as well as an increase in petitions protesting the violation of human rights to the Inter America Human Rights Commission, tell a different story.

Ironically, the U.S. was once seen as a safe harbor and respite from injustice in other parts of the world. The U.S. was petitioned as the grantor of political asylum to world citizens suffering from unfair political and legal persecution. Yet, the tide began to turn when the first U. S. citizen was granted asylum from the United States by The Netherlands in 1994.

Holly Ann Collins appealed for protection from an abusive ex-spouse and the right to raise her three children in The Netherlands. Scheduled to appear this weekend, Ms. Collins and her son Zachary Collins will discuss their experience. Now grown, Ms. Collins’ children serve as advocates for the plight of children caught in the middle by the court systems. Her daughter Jennifer Collins founded CA3, “Children Against Court Appointed Child Abuse” in 2008.

Even in cases where the murder of a couple’s children was the ultimate tragic result, injustice has proven extremely difficult to remedy within U.S. Courts for mothers plagued by domestic violence. In 2005 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Town of Castle Rock, Colorado v. Jessica Gonzales, that the state of Colorado was not obligated to enforce the restraining order that was issued to protect Jessica Gonzales' family from her ex-husband, Simon Gonzales. The murder of her three daughters at the hands of their father was battled out in U. S. courts for five years.

Gonzales made ten requests over a ten hour period of time asking police to enforce her restraining order against Simon Gonzales, but they repeatedly put her off. Ultimately her ex-husband opened fire into the police station with an assault weapon, was killed, and her daughters were found dead in his bullet riddled car in front of the police station.

With both protection and justice denied by her own country, Ms. Lanahan (formerly Gonzales) filed a complaint with the Inter America Human Rights Commission protesting the violation of her human rights. The case, Jessica Ruth Gonzales v. USA, was accepted for argument by the IAHRC in 2007.

Subsequently at least ten more victims of domestic violence have filed petitions protesting the violation of their human rights against the United States with the IAHRC.

Their cases known as (Dombrowski et el v US 2007) are currently pending acceptance.

While the United States never ratified the signed agreement making it accountable to the IAHRC for human rights offenses, hope remains that if justice will not motivate the U. S. government to take protective action on behalf of battered mothers and their children, shame will.

Meier, Joan. “Rates at Which Batters Receive Custody”. Stop Family Violence, a Project of the Tides Center. NewYork, NY. November 30, 2005. stopfamilyviolence.org

Read more at Suite101: Eighth Annual Battered Mother's Custody Conference Convenes http://www.suite101.com/content/eighth-annual-battered-mothers-custody-conference-convenes-a329059#ixzz1B1NsTJiJ

Author Lundy Bancroft Teaches Battered Mothers to Fight Back – BMCC, Albany NY

Leading author and therapist Lundy Bancroft teaches battered mothers to fight back at the 8th Battered Mothers Custody Conference in Albany, New York 1/7/11

The 8th Battered Mother’s Custody Conference featured author and activist Lundy Bancroft, who has for more than a decade addressed the issues of battered mothers who lost custody to their abusers in family courts. Well known as the founder of the Battered Mothers Testimony Project in Massachusetts, Bancroft is also the author of three books on the dynamics and subsequent effects of domestic violence. He was the winner of the 2004 Pro Humanitate Award from the North American Resource Center for Child Welfare, for his book, “The Batterer as Parent”.

Battered Mothers Fight Myths

The past seven Battered Mother’s Custody Conferences validated and quantified an emergent judicial and human rights crisis in our family courts. Judges are delivering abused children to the very abusers that their protective mothers painstakingly escaped. For the first time in the conference’s history, Bancroft introduced fighting back against this injustice as the theme for this year’s conference meetings and speakers.

The prevailing myth is that once out of an abusive marriage, the mother is now safe from her abuser. But the truth is that 75% of women who are injured or murdered by their abusers suffer the attack within the first thirty days of escaping the relationship[1]. Despite the divorce, many women endure ongoing torment by their former spouse and abuser because they are permanently connected through their common children.

An abuser stalking, threatening, and torturing the mother, and abusing their children in order to hurt her, are very common realities. The courts perceive repeated requests for protection as strategic chicanery and often fail to validate an ongoing threat to the mother.

Paradoxically, many battered mothers are in the unenviable position of being challenged by Child Protective Services to ‘leave their abusive marriage to protect their children’, despite the statistical odds of their own demise, and the unlikelihood that law enforcement will provide or enforce protective orders. Once embroiled in the family court systems, the battered mothers are marginalized and accused of lying to gain unfair advantage over abusive fathers.

No amount of presenting the actual facts and figures seems to gain these protective mothers and their children safe harbor. Judges and other legal participants routinely place children with their abusers. There are both domestic and international human rights implications to this issue with more than 1,000 families a week now facing this crisis; Bancroft’s expertise is needed more than ever[2].

Battered Mothers Fight Courts

The first shock a protective mother must overcome is the reality that the justice system does not exist within the family court system. On television, in our classrooms, and in the news, the myth that our legal system is fair and just is promulgated. Many protective mothers discover that the truth is that the rules which apply in a criminal court or in business related civil cases are not applied in family courts. Rules of evidence and consequences for challenging the status quo are harsh and unpredictable. Judges have unilateral discretion to define what happens, how it happens and whether she is even allowed to tell anyone else about the court’s orders.

Images

A protective mother stripped of her children, is also stripped of her right to parent; her right of free speech; her right of protection; and her right to protest these injustices. Our Bill of Rights is frequently ignored, and the judicial system affords immunity for the legal participants including Judges, Child Custody Evaluators, Child Protective Services, and Law Enforcement Agencies. If they misjudge, and the battered mother or her children die, then no one is accountable. Do you risk contempt of a court order in an attempt to protect your children?

Battered Mothers Fight Child Abuse

Often the abuser begins to deliberately alienate the protective mother from her children, telling the children that she abandoned them, did not want to mother them, lies about his abuse, or fails to parent them effectively. The child begins to doubt their own ability to perceive reality. They may feel a forced sense of loyalty to their abuser. If the children do not follow his lead and mistreat their mother, what are the physical and emotional consequences they suffer at the hands of the abusers?

Bancroft advises protective mothers and their support systems to remember that the purpose of the fight is to keep as close to your children as possible. Keep things calm, remind them that you love them. Rather than debate which parent is “right” in a never ending battle for the right to exist without the abuser’s influence – ask your child, “What do YOU think?” Maintain the child’s ability to read the situation, assess it and come to an independent conclusion. When the abuser misrepresents a mother’s feelings or actions, correct the lie, and encourage the child to rely on their own personal experience with their mother.

Battered Mothers Fight Isolation

Many Americans erroneously believe family court dynamics are identical to other courts’ standard of evidence in the United States. Therefore they come to the conclusion that a mother who loses custody in civil proceedings must have done something to deserve the loss. The stigma of losing one’s child is an isolating experience. The battered mother finds the experience so painful that she abandons any attempt to explain what happened to her.

To overcome the stigma, the battered mother may attend conferences like the annual Battered Mother’s Custody Conference; join Facebook Causes; and support websites related to healing from and fighting domestic violence; connect with other people with like experiences; and research what is happening in other parts of the country. Books like those published by authors Lundy Bancroft, Mo Therese Hannah, Barry Goldstein, Amy Neuman, Michael Lesher, Wendy Murphy, Karin Huffer and others can provide specific legal, emotional and political strategies to effect change.

Battered Mothers Fight Human Rights Injustices

Political initiatives are reflected in the progress of landmark legal cases in human rights; follow the outcome of cases such as Jessica Ruth Gonzales v. USA, as well as other international cases concerning domestic violence under consideration by the Inter America Human Rights Commission. The U. S. Supreme Court upheld the Castle Rock, Colorado Police Department’s refusal to enforce a protective order against Simon Gonzales that resulted in the murder of their three children. Gonzales (now Lanahan) is protesting the violation of her human rights.

As the first U. S. Citizen to receive political asylum from The Netherlands, Holly Collins and her three children fled the United States in 1994 to be free of domestic violence when they could not obtain protection from family courts. Ms. Collins plans to return to live in the U. S., just as her youngest child reaches adulthood. How our country responds to the knowledge that a mother was forced to flee her own country for protection will be an important barometer of progress.

 

[1] Indiana Law School Protective Order Project, “What is Domestic Violence?” Website. Referenced January 12, 2011. http://www.law.indiana.edu/pop/domestic_violence/

[2] Silberg, Joyanna, “How Many Children Are Court -Ordered Into Unsupervised Contact With an Abusive Parent After Divorce?”, The Leadership Council on Child Abuse & Interpersonal Violence, Press Release. September, 22, 2008, http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/med/PR3.html, referenced January 12, 2011

Read more at Suite101: http://www.suite101.com/content/author-lundy-bancroft-teaches-battered-mothers-to-fight-back-a331711#ixzz1B1NATWa2

How Narcissists/Batterers Abuse Children During Divorce

Narcissistic Parents Emotionally Abuse Children. -

Narcissists often use children as pawns during and after divorce. Learn to identify this emotional abuse of children caught in the middle.

The emotional abuse by a narcissist is pervasive and insidious. It impacts not only the narcissist’s spouse but his or her children as well. Once divorce proceedings begin, the narcissist’s abuse will likely escalate. Narcissists will use any means possible to gain control of the situation or to make themselves look better. Children become perfect pawns for narcissistic parents to use against their spouses. Identifying how narcissistic parents abuse their children is the first step to devising strategies to minimize abuse and help children cope.

Using Children as Pawns in Divorce

Narcissistic parents will often seek custody of children during a divorce even if previously they were not involved parents. It’s important to them to appear to be the better parent. Also, if they have custody of the children, it gives them another way to continue to control and abuse their spouse.

If narcissists don’t get custody of the children, after divorce, they may use visitation as a means of control and harassment. They may ask for many changes to visitation schedules to accommodate optional work, social and vacation events. Most often these requests will be to not to have the children when they are scheduled to. Narcissists may refuse to accommodate the spouse’s requests even when the requests are made for the benefit of the children.

Narcissists may also be late in picking up the children for visitation or not picking them up at all. They may make last minute changes and expect to be accommodated. When they are not, they will cite this as an example of how unreasonable their spouse is. Narcissists may also take advantage of third parties such as school, daycare or friends and family who don’t know the agreements made with the other parent. It’s important to note that all of these tactics by the narcissist have nothing to do with the best interest of the children. It’s simply a way for the narcissist to play games and have control.

Emotional Abuse by a Narcissistic Parent

Narcissists will use people in whatever way in necessary to get what they want. This world view also applies to their children. They will abuse their children regardless whether they stay married to the other parent or not. During and after divorce, a narcissist’s emotional abuse of his or her children may seem more direct or blatant. Quite often, this is simply another tactic employed by narcissists to further control their former spouse. Unfortunately, the children pay the price for the narcissist’s games.

Narcissists are masters of lying. They will lie to their children and distort reality the same as they do to everyone else. Often, narcissists will sacrifice their children’s well-being in an attempt to save face. This leaves the children feeling confused and unsure of their own reality and judgment. Narcissists will ask their children to lie for them, keep secrets and to spy on the other parent.

Narcissistic parents do not respect their children’s desires. They may make promises to the children in order to gain compliance from the child, then refuse to honor the promises. Children may miss out on birthday parties, sporting events or other activities important to them in order to accommodate the narcissistic parent’s wishes. The children soon learn that what they want is not important when with the narcissistic parent.

Coping with a Narcissistic Parent

It’s important to understand that it’s impossible to control a narcissist’s behavior. Neither the narcissist’s spouse nor children are responsible for his or her behavior. Narcissists are who they are. The best the other parent can do for their children and themselves is to separate themselves as much as possible from the narcissist.

First and foremost, former spouses of narcissists need to seek professional support for themselves and their children. It’s important that both children and spouses of narcissists have someone outside the situation to support and validate their feelings and reality while trying to cope with a crazy-making narcissist.

Spouses also need to hire a lawyer who understands narcissism and how to best deal with it in court. It’s often best for abused spouses to seek full custody of the children. They should, however, be prepared to offer reasonable visitation. In addition, spouses of narcissists will do well to put as many negotiation points about the children as they can think of in the divorce decree. These include visitation, pick-up times, phone calls, school activities and vacations. It may seem excessive or restraining but in the long run these written agreements will often be easier than constantly renegotiating with an unreliable and emotionally abusive former spouse.

Divorce is never easy on children. Coping with a narcissistic parent makes a stressful situation even more difficult. Learning to identify the games narcissists play can help parents to minimize the emotional abuse children suffer at the hands of a narcissistic parent.

Sources:

Bancroft, Lundy. When Dad Hurts Mom: Helping Your Children Heal the Wounds of Witnessing Abuse. New York: Berkley Books, 2004.

Hotchkiss, Sandy. Why is is Always About You? The Seven Deadly Sins of Narcissism. New York: Free Press, 2002.

Skerritt, Richard. Surviving the Storm: Strategies and Realities for Divorcing a Narcissist. Kennett Square, PA: Dalkeith Press, 2009.

Read more at Suite101: How Narcissists Abuse Children During Divorce http://www.suite101.com/content/how-narcissists-abuse-children-during-divorce-a289326#ixzz1B1OZTz1U

LIVE STREAM FOR THE The 8th Annual Battered Mothers Custody Conference

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/battered-mothers-custody-conference

 

The 8th Annual Battered Mothers Custody Conference

Total views: 7CONFERENCE AGENDA

Friday, January 7th, 2011

4:00 – 5:30 p.m. Special pre-conference workshop: Karen Winner, Esq. How to Think Like a Lawyer on Legal Billing Issues

• Registration begins at 4:00 p.m.

• Exhibitors, book sales, and Silent (Chinese) Auction beginning at 5 p.m.

6:00 Opening greetings by the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence and other BMCC co-sponsors; song by Tynia Canada

6:30 – 8:00 Lundy Bancroft

8:00 – 9:00 p.m. Meet and Greet with Coffee, Tea, and Cookies

9:00 - Special Friday Night Workshop: Meditation with Rev. Anne Curtin

Saturday, January 8th, Morning Session

8:30 Plenary I: Attorney and Author Wendy Murphy, J.D. : Landmark Massachusetts ruling: Ensuring the Rights of Disabled Victims in Judicial Proceedings.

9:15 – 10:15 Introductions by Barry Nolan Plenary II: Protective Mother Holly Collins and her son Zachary Collins with Attorney Alan Rosenfeld, J.D.

10:15 – 10:30 Break

10:30 – 11:30 Barry Goldstein, J.D., Joan Zorza, J.D. and Nancy Erickson, J.D. Panel on the book: Domestic Violence, Child Custody, and Abuse: Legal Practices and Policy Issues

11:30 – 12:15 Psychologist and Expert Joy Silberg, Ph.D.: Perspective of a Psychologist on the Front Lines

12:15 – 12:30 Break

Saturday, January 8th, Afternoon Session

12: 30 – 1:30 Saturday Working Luncheon: Professor and Producer Garland Waller: Screening and Discussion of No Way Out But One (working title): An Independent Documentary on Holly Collins - The First Woman to Be Granted Political Asylum on Grounds of Domestic Violence

1:45 – 3:30 Panel: Karin Huffer, Ph.D., Renee Beeker, Wendy Murphy, J.D., & Robin Yeamans, J.D.: Groundbreakers Present A New Trajectory: Managing Family Court Cases

3:45 – 4:45 Concurrent Workshop Session I

1. Renee Beeker & Paul Holdorf: The National Family Court Watch Project

The National Family Court Watch Project believes that large-scale data will reveal national trends and ignite a call for change in the family court system. The project is a conversation springboard and uses the technique of "quiet observer" to get a sense of what's happening inside family courts. We report those findings publicly through a new conduit and work with judges and the public to find solutions. We will be sharing latest data update as well as information about the increasing involvement from professionals and educators as we expand this effort around the country.

2. Joy Silberg: Using Expert Witness Testimony in Family Court Child Abuse Cases

This presentation will review some of the effective ways to use expert witness testimony in family court child abuse cases. The roles for an expert in these cases can include criticizing existing custody evaluations, reviewing symptoms and disclosures of the child, or being court appointed to do a child protection evaluation. The presenter will emphasize how to avoid pitfalls and what points to emphasize when helping a judge look at the information from a new perspective.

Saturday, January 8th, Afternoon Session

Concurrent Workshop Session I (cont.)

3. Massachusetts Protective Mothers for Custodial Justice, Inc. RESPECT FOR ADVOCACY-- PART II of “The Basics” RESPECT FOR ADVOCACY (PART II of “The Basics”)

I. Advocacy Basics

Working with Battered Mothers: Active Listening, Getting to the Matter, Getting to the HELP!

Supporting Battered Mothers: Resources, Abilities

Using Systems that Support Battered Women, Using Supports for Battered Mothers: What They Offer, What They Can’t & Why We All Need Each Other

II. Advocacy as Activism

• When to Resist, When To Comply & Whose Call That Is

• Unity: Defining our “Same Page”

Eliminating the Extraneous

Defending What We Fought For In the New War for our Children

4. Karin Huffer, Crystal Morgan-Huffer, & Jason Huffer: Silenced No More - Self Protection in the High Tech Age: You are Not Paranoid--Just Hypervigilant and Smart

Thirty self-protective actions you must take to ensure your safety and self protection in this high tech age. Domestic Violence victims suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and if they are stalked, intruded upon, and left unprotected they suffer legal abuse syndrome. Learn to safeguard yourself in and out of court proceedings. Privacy protection, the Americans with Disabilities Amendments Act, and Violence Against Women Act provide more protection than you may think.

5. Barry Goldstein, J.D.: How to Use the Book "Domestic Violence, Child Abuse, and

Custody." Earlier in the day, Joan Zorza, Nancy Erickson and Barry Goldstein will discuss how to use the research in the book to help your case. The workshop will be a more interactive session in which protective mothers can ask questions about how to use the book in their individual cases.

5:00 – 6:00 p.m. Concurrent Workshop Session 2

1. Erica Olsen: Violence Against Women in the Digital Age

Do you know how easy it is for some abusers to track their victim's every move, to monitor everything they do on a computer, in their cars, or on certain phones? Like many criminals, perpetrators of stalking and domestic violence are often ahead of the curve on the use of technology. Through the Internet, high-tech global positioning systems (GPS), cell-phones and handheld computers, abusers use technology to further harm and control their victims. Understanding technology misuse is crucial to both supporting victims and holding offenders accountable. Drawing from survivor experiences and through videos and demonstrations, this training will illustrate the safety risks of phone, GPS, camera, Internet, and computer technologies.

2. Karen Borders: High Risk vs. High Conflict Family Law Matters, Identifying the Differences

This workshop will discuss Family Violence Risk Assessments which address high-conflict risk cases, which get labeled as high conflict cases and rarely get the proper assessment, leaving the risk to children and to abuse victims. While the goal remains to serve the best interest of the children, it is critical to prove or disprove any allegations before determining best interest of the children. This new risk based approach is well rooted in evidence-based practices and truly addresses the best interest of the children while keeping safety as the priority. Courts throughout the United States are recognizing this multi-disciplinary team approach and methods of assessment in handling these volatile matters.

3. Nancy S. Erickson, J.D., LL.M., M.A. (Forensic Psychology): On Custody Evaluations

We will address as many of the following questions as time permits: Why are Custody Evaluations (CEs) ordered by courts? Have custody courts always used evaluators? Are they helpful to courts? Which mental health professionals (MHPs) are authorized to conduct them? How can I tell which MHPs are good evaluators? What rules, if any, are they bound to follow? What are the financial and other costs of CEs? How can I avoid an order for a CE? How can I prepare for one if necessary? How can I fight a bad one -- including one that uses against protective parents junk science like Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS)? What other psychological theories should I watch out for? What psychological “tests” are often used? Are they valid and reliable? How can I fight a bad CE in court? How can I report an incompetent or biased evaluator?

4. Dara Carlin & Dr. Joyce Braak: Advocacy with an Open Case

Professional advocacy is one thing but when you're a mom with an open family court case, you're dealing with an entirely different ball of wax; a mistake for you doesn't mean a disciplinary reprimand - it could cost you your kids. This workshop will identify factors to bear in mind as you fight for your children (and your life!) with consideration for strategies that have worked (and failed). More than simply giving a presentation, I hope to encourage an exchange of experiences that will generate a list of ideas that we can disseminate to all conference participants. Mom Bloggers, especially - please come!

5.

Saturday, January 8th, Evening Session

6:00 – 7:30 p.m. Screening of the documentary Power and Control: Domestic Violence in America in the main conference ballroom (take-out dinner available on site at hotel restaurant)

7:30 pm Ben Atherton Zeman: Voices of Men Redux [Warning note: Includes graphic images of violence.]

9:00 Special Saturday Night After-Hours Session: Strength in Numbers: Sharing stories, sharing strategies, and organizing at the local level. Organized by Nancy Erickson, J.D., Janice Levenson (Protective Mothers Alliance), Renee Beeker (National Family Court Watch), and Paul Holdorf, J.D.

We are calling all protective mothers to meet and organize at their local levels. We will discuss general objectives and report on progress made in 2010 for protective moms (PMs). We will then break up into small groups based on residence (or location of the court involved, whichever is more important): county, part of the state, state, or other geographic area. In the small groups, facilitated by PMs, we will find out what are the worst problems for protective moms in that geographic area, what are the resources for PMs, and what we think can be done to help PMs. Each group will report back to the larger group, and we will plan our strategies for 2011.

Sunday, January 9th Morning Session

8:30 Plenary 2: Attorney Toby Kleinman: Our children are at risk, and their health is endangered: How can we hold the court accountable to protect them?

9:30 Plenary 3: Attorney Michael Lesher: Facing family court dangers: CPS, law guardians, experts -- Oh, my!

10:30 – 10:45 Break

10:45 – 12:30 Panel: Join Up! Leaders of the protective mothers’ movement share what they’ve been doing—and ask you to join them

• Janice Levinson/Lundy Bancroft, Protective Mothers Alliance

• Kathleen Russell, Center for Judicial Excellence

• Holly Collins

• Dara Carlin

• Ayanna Najuma, Inspirational Spirit of the Phoenix

• American Mothers Political Party

-Nancy Carroll: www.RightsForMothers.com

-Claudine Dombrowski: www.angelfury.com

-Lorraine Tipton: www.mamaliberty.wordpress.com

-Melanie Smith: Australian Shared Parenting Law Debate

-Randi James- www.RandiJames.com

• Kathy Lee Scholp & Jay Sutter: H.eroes O.n L.ine DE.fense N.etwork

12:45 – 2:00 Sunday luncheon-- Q & A and Community Dialogue

2:00 Close ( show less )

Videos

Highlights

• The 8th Annual Battered Mothers Custody Conference 01/07/11 02:33PM0 views

• The 8th Annual Battered Mothers Custody Conference 01/07/11 02:16PM2 views

Protecting Kids: Rethinking the Hague Convention

Especially since in the USA and other Countries where ABUSERS get CUSTODY of the Children. A Battered mother can never escape the abuser—Dead or alive. Run mommy run!
136 Killer Dads: Fathers who ended their children's lives in ...Nov 10, 2010 ... 136 Killer Dads: Fathers who ended their children's lives in situations involving child custody, visitation, and/or child support (USA) .

An ethnic Chin refugee with her sons in New Delhi

Tengku Bahar / AFP / Getty Images

In 1980, an international treaty was designed to return children who had been abducted by a parent who moved to another country. Back then, the people drafting the treaty thought the typical abductor would be a noncustodial father skipping town with the kids, leaving mom with little recourse to try to get her children back. So what happens, three decades later, when research indicates that 68% of the abducting parents in cases under this treaty are mothers — and that many of them are fleeing abusive spouses?

The Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, dubbed the Hague Convention after the place where it was finalized, has been adopted by 82 countries, which are expected to help return abducted children to their habitual residence within six weeks of a parent filing a petition. But Jeffrey Edleson and Taryn Lindhorst, lead researchers on a new study of Hague Convention cases, argue that the treaty is often used against women seeking safety for themselves — and for their children — from violent husbands. "We always thought that child abduction is a bad thing," says Edleson, a professor of social work at the University of Minnesota. "But in some cases, mothers are taking children to protect them from greater harm."(Read about countless Chinese children who have been kidnapped and sold to strangers.)

Building on a previous study by Nigel Lowe, a law professor at Britain's Cardiff University, that found more than two-thirds of alleged abductors in Hague cases filed worldwide were women, Edleson and Lindhorst looked at the more than 300 Hague Convention decisions that were published in U.S. courts between 1993 and 2008. Their new study, which was funded by the National Institute of Justice and will be published next year by Northeastern University Press, analyzed the 47 published U.S. Hague Convention court decisions involving allegations of domestic violence and included interviews with 22 battered mothers who responded to Hague petitions in U.S. courts. The majority of those women had their children ordered to return to another country.

The result in several cases was that the children — and their mothers, who generally accompanied them — faced renewed physical abuse upon their return, researchers found in interviews with the mothers. "Judges want to trust our treaty partners will provide protection for our children and mothers," says Merle Weiner, a law professor at the University of Oregon and one of the nation's leading scholars on the Hague Convention. "But sometimes that protection is not real. Sometimes the batterer is so dangerous that only geographical distance can make a difference."(Read about the abduction of Elizabeth Smart in her own words.)

To raise awareness of the issue, Edleson has organized a Dec. 10 event, timed to coincide with Human Rights Day, in Minneapolis, where actresses will read battered mothers' testimonies from Hague Convention cases. The readings will be interspersed with conversations between lawyers, legal scholars and social scientists on domestic violence and the Convention, which contains provisions that allow judges to refrain from returning a child if doing so puts him or her at "grave risk" of "physical or psychological harm." But too often, scholars and lawyers say, judges are not sufficiently steeped in the law to know that they have discretion to accept this as an applicable defense. Additionally, since the treaty's goal is to have children returned to their habitual residence within six weeks of a parent filing a Hague Convention petition, lawyers may not have enough time to assemble evidence that domestic violence occurred in the other country.

"I don't think the treaty is wrong," Edleson says. "It was put in place for the right reasons." But he and other experts say it's time to update how the Hague Convention is being implemented, to make it easier for battered mothers to argue that their kids should not be returned to a country where their violent husbands live. The U.S. could also act independently and add a similar provision to the International Child Abduction Remedies Act that Congress passed in 1988. "We've only recently realized that the great majority of taking parents are mothers," Edleson says. "It's important we make these adjustments so that the Convention fits this new reality."

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2036246,00.html#ixzz1AACSZweM