Transcript Batterer as Parent: PowerPoint Presentation by Darlene Thomas

Exploring the Impact of
Children’s Exposure to
Batterers
Prepared by:
Darlene Thomas, M.S.S.W.
Executive Director
GreenHouse17
Factors
• Naming the Problem
• Newest language is “exposure”, “living with”
“experiencing” and “affected by” because it does not
make assumptions about the specific nature of the
children’s experiences.
• The research is increasingly clear that children are not
passive onlookers. They actively seek to make
meaning of their experiences and navigate the
situations which confront them.
(Laing, 2000)
•Prevalence of exposure
• Prevalence estimates vary widely, however, commonly
cited figures suggest that 3.3 million children and 10
million teenagers are exposed to batterers behaviors
each year.
• 20 to 40% of adults reported being exposed to
domestic violence as a child.
• 40 to 60% of mothers of abused children were abused
by their partner compared to 13% of mothers of
unabused children. (Davis and Briggs, 2000)
Children’s Experiences
• Violence during pregnancy
Exposure
to
Physical
Violence
• Injury from intervening attempting to protect Non•
•
•
•
•
•
offending parent.
Injury because non-offending parent was attempting
to protect.
Hearing acts of violence
Seeing injuries to non-offending parent
Belief that they are responsible for the violence.
Fear of leaving, fear of staying.
Moves from periphery to the center of conflict if
parents stay separated.
Non-Violent Exposures
•
•
•
•
•
Isolation/Family Secrecy (staying and leaving)
Emotional Abuse
Verbal Abuse
Economic Deprivation
Intervention effects (police involvement, rushed
upheavals, disruption in schooling, new living
environments, and loss of friends, pets, toys, etc.)
Impact
• Difficult to study, research has been limited until recently to
shelter residents.
• Other limitations include adult victim reporting of effects and
research tools that address behavior of children but not in terms
of exposure to domestic violence.
• Experts agree that there is an impact, but do not agree to what
degree.
• Overall, studies do agree that children exposed to batterers
exhibit a host of behavioral and emotional problems when
compared to other children.
• Less consensus is found regarding cognitive and social
impairments and long term effects. (Laing 2000)
• The literature agrees that we must keep in mind that
the majority of children exposed to domestic violence
do not become either perpetrators or victims of
domestic violence in their adult lives.
• Methodological difficulties exist especially when
exploring the impact on children and the cooccurrence of child sexual abuse, physical abuse,
poverty, and substance abuse.
• Until recently, research focused on the stress of the
non-offending parent, the contribution of the
perpetrator was largely ignored.
Mediating factors
• Co-occurrence of exposure to domestic violence and being a
victim of child abuse is associated with more severe impact. (Coexistence is estimated between 30 to 60%) Growing evidence
suggests that co-occurrence represent the greatest risk to
children’s safety.
• Family Relationships
Disputes assumptions that being victimized has a significant and
detrimental effects on victim’s parenting capacity.
Children report that they do not see their non-offending parent limited
in their capacity and identify that parent as a source of support.
Victims are aware of effects on their children and their parenting and
attempt to address and/or compensate for any negative effects. (Laing,
2000)
• Gender, Ethnicity, Nature and Extent of Violence, and
Dating Violence continues to have limited
comprehensive research.
• Resilience
Despite the association between exposure and diagnosable
problems, it is consistently found that the majority of children
do not exhibit negative effects. Many children exhibit average
social competence and adjustment.
Protective Factors such as attributes of the child, support of
family members, good relationship with one parent, and
outside support figures.
Little is known why some children are intensely affected by
exposure and others showed little negative impact.
Children Coping with Violence
• Report hiding, trying to intervene, trying to sleep,
caring for younger siblings.
• They report fear, helplessness, despair, self-blame
and depression.
• They report the non-offending parent were able to
assist and support them.
• They seek help from neighbors, trusted adults.
• Younger children understand situations
surrounding the violence while older children
demonstrate the context of intentionality,
entitlement and control.
• Children are not passive victims, children of all ages
were active in their response to and how they coped
with the exposure to violence.
• Very few children accept the duality of their abusive
parents behavior. Rather they viewed the parent as
either “bad” or found ways to contain, excuse and
reframe the parents abusive behaviors.
• Children’s view of the world, the meaning or purpose
of life, expectations of happiness, and moral
development may disrupt the progression through
age-appropriate developmental tasks.
Understanding “Batterer as the
Parent” in Custody and Visitation
Disputes
• Understanding the mindset of a batterer, parenting
style and tactics used in divorce or custody cases is
imperative to protecting children and the nonoffending parent.
• Contrary to popular belief, children can be just as
much as risk after separation as during the
relationship.
• Batterers as parents have a negative impact on
children by being a role model that perpetuates
violence, undermining the victim’s authority,
retaliating against the victim for efforts to protect
the children and themselves, and creating divisions
in the family/siblings.
Profile of Batterer
• They have a full range of personality types
• They are difficult to profile
• They often test well psychologically, frequently
better than victims do.
• Outside acquaintances do not perceive the abuser
as abusive and often defend or deny behaviors
even when presented with facts.
• Children and non-offending partner are exposed
to behaviors that he hides from others; controlling
and manipulative behavior such as not twisting
arguments and incidents of abuse, blames others,
and the public vs. private image.
Batterer Perception of Self
• Believes they are the victim
• View resistance by victim or the children as an act
of aggression, being wronged that they must make
right.
• Skilled at convincing others they are the victim.
• Manipulates “incidences” or “grievances” that
may lead professionals to conclude that they are
the victim or that the relationship is mutually
abusive.
• Most have no psychological problems.
• Battering is primarily driven by culture rather
than individual psychology.
Greatest predictors are…
1.Belief that battering is justified.
2.Presence of peers who support abusiveness.
These are more important than being exposed to
battering as a child. It is a learned behavior linked
to how the abuser formulates the concepts of
relationship and family. (Lundy Bancroft, 1998)
Batterers behaviors in and out of
the Courtroom during
Separation/Divorce
• Need to control becomes greater
• Focus’s on the betrayal and the perceived debt owed to
them by the victim.
• Threats to harm, on-going intimidation, manipulation
of victim and the children.
• File for sole custody to punish victim even though often
has had little involvement in the parenting of children.
Especially if victim begins a new relationship.
• Finds a new partner quickly, treats them well and has
them be a character witness, convinces new partner
that the “ex” is the problem
• Often the batterer has more money, takes advantage of
gender bias/victim blaming of systems, manipulates the
children to be loyal to them, and manipulates systems to
view them as the victim within custody disputes.
• Creates a great public image with systemic professionals.
Verbalizes concern and care for children, acknowledges
some mistakes but insists victim is exaggerating and
vindictive.
• Often the batterers continue to harass and intimidate
victims when they can’t be caught or held accountable.
Stalking, child visitations, repeated taking case back to
court, paying only enough child support to make it look
like a hardship to the court but that they are sincerely
trying.
Manipulation of Custody
Evaluations/Mediation
• Attempts to convince evaluators that the only want
what is best for children.
• Batterers language will reflect empathy for
children, understanding that the relationship has
ended, and insight into their feelings.
• Will blame others (family, friends, system) for
turning the victim against them.
• Insists that the victim is only “keeping children
from visiting” out of revenge.
• Often brings up victim’s HX of mental health,
insisting victim is crazy.
• Describes victim as being hysterical, often insists
that victim is promiscuous, left for another person.
• Batterer presents as the charming, betrayed,
humbled, defeated victim.
• Strikes pre-emptively accusing victim of doing all
the things they have done. Bancroft notes that in
the cross-fire batterers gain power because judges
and mediators throw up there hands and conclude
both parents are at fault.
• Trauma effects often make the victim appear
confused, hostile, disjointed and agitated while the
abuser appears calm and friendly.
Joint Custody?????
• In cases where domestic violence has been
determined joint custody principles
provide batterers continued opportunity
to manipulate, intimidate, harass and put
victims in perpetual, potential danger.
• When victims don’t want contact with the
abuser it is often viewed as obstructing
the parent/child relationship.
“There is a wide consensus that children's
recovery from exposer to batterers depends
largely on the quality of their relationship with
non battering parent and with their siblings.
Courts should consider whether the batterer is
likely to continue to undermine the mother’s
authority, interfere with mother-child
relationships or cause tension between siblings.
Courts may not want to leave children in the
unsupervised care of a man whose violent
tendencies they have witnessed, even if they have
a strong bond of affection for him” (Lundy Bancroft, 2002)
• Protecting
children while empowering victims by avoiding the
Best
Practices
creation of a dichotomy between the needs of women and
children.
Community Education and Professional Training.
Create new leverages for CPS other than “removal of children”
Specialized teams CPS/DV by integrating domestic violence and child
abuse practice.
Add Probation and parole conditions as part of case plans.
Protective Order power to hold batterer accountable.
• Understanding that victims safety and children’s safety are
closely linked.
Active collaboration between Domestic Violence Programs and Child
Protection Services to combine knowledge and expertise. (Voluntary
vs. involuntary)
Best
Practices
• Systems
to collaborate as a means to provide a
continuum of care, with responses tailored to each
child’s resilience and degree of impairment.
• Monitoring implementation and practice of
collaboratives.
• Adopting and implementing guidelines of “The
Greenbook” initiative.
• Avoid stigmatizing children who have been exposed.
As we create awareness and more comprehensive
services we can inadvertently create a socially deviant
identity for children exposed. (Peled and Davis, 1995)
Best
Practices
• Family
Law recognizes
Following separation poses greatest risk for victims and
children, yet at this time of heightened danger, the victim is
expected to negotiate arrangements of contact.
Offending parents use of visitation and contact with the
children as a route to further abuse victim or harming the
children directly or indirectly by a proliferation of court cases.
Reconsideration of Joint Custody when domestic violence is
present as opposed to low conflict couples. (Saunders, 1998)
• Expansion and Utilization of Visitation Centers
Best Practices
• Maintaining a focus on the responsibility of the perpetrator of
violence. Interventions must be developed in a framework in
which the responsibility of the perpetrator of violence is central
and visible.
Understanding the risks to children from contact with perpetrators
Continued undermining of the NOP parenting and parent child
relationship
Continued exposure to authoritarian or neglectful parenting
Risk of exposure to new threats or violence
Risk of learning violence-supportive beliefs and attitudes.
Risk of being abducted or used as a tool of the perpetrator
Risk of further exposure through perpetrators future relationships.
(Bancroft and Silverman, 2002)
Best Practices
• Creating and maintaining a balance between recognizing the
impact and trauma experienced by children while not
stigmatizing or pathologizing.
• Not labeling victims as pathological, co-participants in the
violence and un-protective.
• Not equating DVO’s or leaving the abuser with being safe.
• Focus on the strengths of the families, child/non-offending
parent relationship.
• Comprehensive assessments, appropriate and available
counseling interventions.
• Parenting classes for batterers.
• Ongoing research that addresses the current gaps in knowledge
regarding impact on children exposed to batterers.
References
• Daniel G. Saunders. 1998, “Child Custody and
Visitation Decisions in Domestic Violence Cases:
Legal Trends, Research Findings, and
Recommendations.”
• Washington State Criminal Justice Training
Commission, Burien, WA., 2004. “Helping Children
Affected by Domestic Violence.”
• Bancroft and Silverman. 2002, “The Batterer as
Parent”
• Dr. Laing, Leslie. 2000, “Children, young people
and domestic violence” Australian Domestic and
Family Violence Clearinghouse.
Contact Information
Darlene Thomas, M.S.S.W
Executive Director
Bluegrass Domestic Violence Program
800-544-2022
[email protected]
Beyondtheviolence.org