58,000 children per year are placed in the custody of their abusers

588,600 children (at any time) are in the custody of their abusers

70% of abusers who petition the court for sole or shared custody of their children are granted their request according to Chesler (2011).

All of the above

You let her know the judge will most likely require her to go to mediation with her husband to see if they can settle on a custody/parenting time plan.

If mediation fails, then the judge can appoint a GAL, and or a CFI/PRE

If they have difficulty making joint decisions, a judge can appoint a parenting coordinator/decision-maker.

All of the above

Mediation is most of required by Family Courts

Exceptions: Domestic Violence (must have proof)

Mediators tend to use limited/poor/no assessments for domestic violence and lack understanding of Coercive Control Tactics

Victims/Mothers comply due to past or current threats; Mediators subject to coercive manipulations

All of the above

“fathers who fight tend to win custody, not because mothers are unfit or because fathers have been the primary caretakers of their children , but because mothers are women and are held to a much higher standard of parenting.”

“mothers also risk losing custody if they accuse fathers of physically or sexually abusing them or their children

“female professionals are often completely taken in by charming, sociopathic men, dangerous and violent men, and men who sexually abused their children.”

“…lawyers and judges are quick to say that joint custody should not apply where there is domestic violence and incest, they are often the ones who do not believe that domestic violence and incest exist all that much.”

All of the above

seek custody as a way to maintain control over their victim or seek joint custody to maintain control or trade for financial considerations.

Abusers use visitation exchanges to continue their abuse. Abusers hide income and assets to maintain control and punish women for leaving.

Abusers seek mutual orders of protection to nullify an order obtained by a woman.

All of the above

They create myths that women often make up false allegations of abuse and particularly sexual abuse to discourage courts from taking their abuse seriously.

They use their superior resources to hire better, more aggressive attorneys to help win court cases.

Abusers often use false allegations to distract attention from their own abuse.

All of the above

Protracted divorce litigation; Repeated continuances, delays

Unsupportable custody demands; Burdensome discovery, esp. depositions

Trading children for money

All of the above

Repeated motions for custody/evaluations

Repeated motions to increase visitation

Repeated motions to reduce support

Repeated motions for visitation contempt

All of the above

Karen’s attorney did not bring out in court evidence she provided to prove domestic violence/abuse or child abuse occurred in her family.

Karen’s attorney told her not to bring up the domestic violence that happened during her relationship because she did not report it to police and no arrest or court records exist.

Karen’s attorney told her not to bring up how her ex abused the children or continues to abuse them because Child Protective Services refused to investigate.

Karen’s ex responded to her one page motion with huge amounts of court-related paperwork, and her career was ruined due to missed appointments and deadlines to attend court hearings.

All of the above

After Karen’s ex was court-ordered to pay her a substantial sum of money, he refused to pay anything. He told the judge he would rather go to jail.

Karen’s ex used her request to increase child support as an opportunity to investigate her life, build a good enough case, refused to return the children after their summer visits, and used his substantial and respectable professional practice to gain permanent custody.

Karen’s ex got a restraining order prohibiting her from leaving the state with the children.

Karen’s ex married his girlfriend just before the court hearing, then talked in court about how the stepmother would be a stable influence on the child/ren. Plus, he arranged for his mother/new wife to care for your child/ren even when you were available to do so. He used this arrangement in court to gain primary parenting time or sole custody (physical and legal).

All of the above are possibilities to shift custody in her case.

Her court appointed custody evaluator, mediator, or guardian-ad-Litem (GAL) could misinterpret information collected in their interviews.

The mediator assigned to her case could refuse to allow her to meet in a separate room from her ex after she reported domestic violence or abuse of her or her children during the relationship

The court-appointed professionals denied reports of coercive control tactics, abuse, or violence during custody evaluations, mediation, or GAL meetings even when Karen provided documentation to the professional.

Her ex alleged parental alienation against her when he was the one brainwashing the children against her.

All of the above

There was more than one Child Family Investigator, or custody evaluator appointed to her case.

Multiple parenting supervisors were appointed to supervise her parenting time while the other parent received no supervised parenting time.

When she insisted on divorce, her ex had her examined by multiple psychiatrists.

Psychiatrists said her self-esteem was too low for her to be a good parent, and the Psychiatrist/psychologist said her career was bad for her children.

During mediation, custody evaluations, or meetings with the GAL, her experiences of coercive control tactics, abuse, or violence were not considered a safety factor for her children even though her ex showed signs of physical abuse toward the children before the meetings.

All of the above

During mediation, custody evaluations, or meetings with the GAL, Karen’s experiences of coercive control tactics, abuse, or violence were not considered a safety factor for her children if her ex showed signs of emotional abuse toward the children before the meetings.

Karen was asked directly by the mediator, custody evaluator, or GAL if there was a history of coercive control tactics, abuse, or violence during the relationship directed at her or the children.

When Karen was not asked, she directly told the mediator, custody evaluator, or GAL there was a history of coercive control tactics, abuse, or violence during the relationship directed at her or the children.

When she told the mediator, custody evaluator, or GAL there was a history of coercive control tactics, abuse, or violence during the relationship directed at her or the children they asked the father to respond to the allegations and ask for admissible evidence.

All of the above

When Karen told the mediator, custody evaluator, or GAL there was a history of coercive control tactics, abuse, or violence during the relationship directed at her or the children, they would dismiss abuse reports without evidence or would say it no longer mattered since she was not in the relationship anymore. This was especially true for non-physical abuse toward her.

The mediator, custody evaluator, or GAL criticized or punished Karen for attempting to protect her children in ways the mediator, custody evaluator, or GAL did not understand.

The GAL was “charmed” by her abusive ex and he was given custody/unsupervised access to their children.

All of the above can occur

In Karen’s case, mediators, custody evaluators, or GALs recommended or encouraged joint custody (50/50 split) even when presented with evidence of coercive control tactics, abuse, or violence.

Karen feared if sole or primary custody was awarded, the mediator, custody evaluator, or GAL would favor the parent who meets one or more of the following criteria: a) does not use substances, b) employed, c) promotes child/ren’s education, d) ensures basic needs are taken care of (hygiene, housing, food), or e) acts professionally during the meeting (e.g. he does not act aggressively).

In Karen’s case, the mediator, custody evaluator, or GAL preferences occurred regardless of who wants custody or whether abuse against the mother happened. However, if sole or primary custody is to be awarded to either parent, the mediator, custody evaluator, or GAL preferred to give as much time with the father as possible (i.e., liberal visitation in the case of sole custody)—especially if the father requests such time.

All of the above can occur

How many hours of training do you have in Coercive Control Tactics in relationships?

How many hours of training do you have in Dynamics of Domestic Violence in Relationships?

How many hours of training do you have on the Effects of Domestic Violence on Children? Did that include long-term emotional and physical impacts?

What is your understanding of the use of children as leverage by an abusive parent in high conflict/contested custody cases?

All of the above

What is your approach to working with children’s emotional, social, and cognitive development in shared parenting situations where prior Domestic Violence or Coercive Control Tactics are witnessed by a child?

How willing is the therapist to explore, work with, and understand why a child does not want contact with one parent?

How do you help children view their world on a reality basis when one parent uses manipulations to gain power and control over the child?

All of the above

How do you handle children’s communication with you when parents ask you to tell them everything the child shared in therapy?

Do you work strictly with the child in therapy or do you bring the parent in for part of the session?

When parents are no longer living together, how do you work with both parents around issues concerning their children?

How do you approach financial abuse of one parent by the other parent in therapy when the child is the client/patient? For example, one parent pays, but the other parent brings in the child and refuses to allow the other parent access to what is talked about in therapy or access to the therapist.

All of the above

The judge ordered maternal visitation only at father's discretion.

The judge threatened dire consequences if Karen did not obey.

The judge treated Karen with a paternalistic demeanor, denial of protection, and treated her claims as lies.

The judge kept Karen from moving away from the abuser and kept her from family and resources by threatening loss of custody if she relocated.

The judge refused to issue or enforce adequate support orders, and can reinforce this control.

All of the above

When Karen wanted to move away, she was prevented from doing so with her children even if this would allow her to survive economically and psychologically.

The judge ordered Karen into “alienation therapy” to learn how to stop “alienating” the children from their father.

The judge was predisposed to favor the calm, cooperative, controlled (and controlling), father over the distressed, anxious, and difficult mother, Karen.

The judge viewed Karen’s unwillingness to consider joint custody with her ex-husband who had never been formally charged with abuse or domestic violence as unreasonable.

All of the above

The judge didn’t know enough about domestic violence victims, and misread how Karen looked or acted in court. For example, the judge viewed her passive behavior and well-groomed appearance as evidence that the domestic violence did not really harm her;

The judge allowed him or herself to be fooled by Karen’s abusive husband’s charm.

The judge refused to grant or enforce restraining orders against the Karen’s abusive husband.

The judge refused to consider psychological damage to children as “abuse,” and would not include the children in protective orders.

All of the above

The judge issued restraining orders to both Karen’s abusive husband and to Karen, indicating that the abuse was partially her fault.

The judge viewed counseling received by the abuser husband as a “cure,” and with no recent domestic violence incidents, treated the husband as a responsible and caring parent.

The judge down-played the domestic violence in the relationship, or refused to consider the pattern of abuse over time.

The judge treated domestic violence charges against Karen’s abusive husband and against her as equally real, even though her ex filed charges against her as an intimidation strategy after she separated.

All of the above

The best interest of all parties to encourage frequent and continuing contact between each parent and the minor children of the marriage after the parents have separated or dissolved their marriage.

In order to effectuate this goal, the general assembly urges parents to share the rights and responsibilities of child-rearing and to encourage the love, affection, and contact between the children and the parents.

The court shall determine the allocation of parental responsibilities, including parenting time and decision-making responsibilities, in accordance with the best interests of the child giving paramount consideration to the physical, mental, and emotional conditions and needs of the child.

All of the above

Whether one of the parties has been a perpetrator of child abuse or neglect which factor shall be supported by credible evidence;

Whether one of the parties has been a perpetrator of domestic violence,

The ability of each party to place the needs of the child ahead of his or her own needs.

All of the above

Despite domestic violence/custody laws in every state, mothers who are victims of domestic abuse are no more likely than other mothers to receive custody.

Judges tend to award custody to battering fathers at the same rate that they award custody to non-violent fathers

Nonabusive dads are more likely to get supervised visitation

All of the above

A threat of contested custody litigation is the most common reason she may: 1) Give up property 2) Give up support

Agree to joint custody- even when it's not safe to do so 1) A threat to abduct the children is the second most common reason she may stay/go back

Both 1 and 2

Neither 1 or 2

Treat Abuse Seriously – Protective Bond

Protection Orders – Support Orders

Deny Continuances – Order Full Restitution

All of the above

Deny Visitation – Visitation by Photograph

Supervised Visitation – Relocation Permission

Monitored Batterer Intervention

Strict Enforcement – Jail for Violations

All of the above

They think violence will end with divorce/separation

They think every man has an “absolute right to see his children”

They think many women are lying to them

They believe judicial neutrality rules require judicial blindness to violence against women

All of the above

Speak of “our child(ren)” (not mine)

Speak of child(ren)’s needs, not hers

Speak more in sorrow than in anger

All of the above