Academic Journal
Intimate Partner Violence and Family Dispute Resolution – Coercion, Capacity, and Control
| العنوان: | Intimate Partner Violence and Family Dispute Resolution – Coercion, Capacity, and Control |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Olson, Kelly Browe |
| المصدر: | Faculty Scholarship |
| بيانات النشر: | Scholarship & Archives |
| سنة النشر: | 2024 |
| المجموعة: | University of Arkansas at Little Rock: UALR Bowen Law Repository |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: | Intimate Partner Violence, IPV, Family Dispute Resolution, FDR, parenting plans, screening, protocols, mediation, assessment, Risk Identification Assessment, RIA, SAFeR, Self-Represented Litigants, SRL, Dispute Resolution and Arbitration, Family Law |
| الوصف: | Intimate partner violence (IPV) is one of the most complex issues that family dispute resolution (FDR) professionals encounter. Over one-third of women and one-quarter of men in the United States have experienced physical violence, rape, and/or stalking by an intimate partner in their lifetime (Black et al., 2011), and a majority of separation- and divorce-related cases involve IPV allegations (Ballard et al., 2011; Beck et al., 2010; Belzer, 2003). IPV often escalates, and is most dangerous, during and after separation and creates unique challenges for mediation and other collaborative processes (Beck & Raghaven, 2010; Kelly & Johnson, 2008). Therefore, all FDR professionals (including mediators, lawyers, judges, evaluators, parenting coordinators, and others) should educate themselves about IPV and its implications. They need to know how to discuss IPV with their client and how, if it has been an issue in their relationship, it might hinder their client’s ability to participate in certain FDR processes or to reach an effective resolution. IPV advocates have long contended that resolving disputes in a relationship based on violence and coercion requires the oversight and accountability of court proceedings (Grillo, 1991) and that mediation and other FDR processes based on collaboration and consensus may be unsafe, unfair, and ineffective for a survivor (Campbell, 2017; Putz et al., 2012; Tischler et al., 2004). Others suggest courts are ineffective in addressing IPV issues and that litigation, too, may result in revictimization (Goodmark, 2004; Nonomura et al., 2021). While there is no ideal process for cases involving IPV, FDR can be successful when the service providers (1) are well-trained, experienced and knowledgeable about IPV; (2) account for their clients’ present and future safely and power dynamics; (3) understand how to empower survivors; (4) focus parties toward an interest-based resolution; and (5) ensure the parties make an informed choice to participate in the process (Cross et al., ... |
| نوع الوثيقة: | text |
| وصف الملف: | application/pdf |
| اللغة: | unknown |
| Relation: | https://lawrepository.ualr.edu/faculty_scholarship/300; https://lawrepository.ualr.edu/context/faculty_scholarship/article/1301/viewcontent/IPV_and_Family_Dispute_Resolution.pdf |
| الاتاحة: | https://lawrepository.ualr.edu/faculty_scholarship/300 https://lawrepository.ualr.edu/context/faculty_scholarship/article/1301/viewcontent/IPV_and_Family_Dispute_Resolution.pdf |
| رقم الانضمام: | edsbas.A75D6696 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | BASE |
| الوصف غير متاح. |