Search results

Showing 1 – 6 of 6 results.

Curated

Divorce Mediation and Domestic Violence in the United States, 1993 (ICPSR 2561)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: United States

This study gathered data on policies and procedures for identifying domestic violence issues among divorcing couples and examined divorce mediation practices and policies in cases with allegations of spousal violence. Mediators and court administrators provided information on: (1) whether and how they attempted to gauge the level of domestic abuse and the capacity of divorcing parties to mediate, and (2) common adjustments to the mediation process made to enhance safety in divorce cases where domestic abuse is present. Data collection involved a collaboration with the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) in the administration and analysis of this survey. Court programs providing divorce mediation and/or custody evaluations in 1993 were targeted. The questionnaire was mailed in late 1993 to 200 institutional members of the AFCC and active providers of family and divorce services in the National Center for State Courts database. A total of 149 public-sector divorce mediation and custody/visitation counseling providers responded. Variables include information on the rules, statutes, or guidelines under which the program operates, case handling procedures prior to mediation or custody/visitation evaluations, and procedures used when clients come to mediation. Information is also provided on the number of paid professional staff, number of custody/visitation mediations and evaluations completed, population of the jurisdiction, the program's relationship to the court, types of orientation programs for parents provided by the court, if the community had any supervised visitation services, and the city and state in which the program is located.

Curated

Evaluation of Violence Prevention Programs in Four New York City Middle Schools, 1993-1994 (ICPSR 2704)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: United States, New York (state)

Time period: 1993-02-01--1994-06-01

This research project sought to evaluate the impact of broad-based multifaceted violence prevention programs versus programs that have a more limited focus. Two specific programs were evaluated in four New York City middle schools. The more limited program used Project S.T.O.P.(Students Teaching Options for Peace), a conflict resolution and peer mediation training program. The full multi-faceted program combined Project S.T.O.P. with Safe Harbor, a program that provided victimization counseling and taught violence prevention. The effects of this combined program, offered in three of the middle schools, were compared to those of just the Project S.T.O.P. program alone in one middle school. To study the program models, researchers used a quasi-experimental pre-post design, with nonequivalent comparison groups. Questionnaires were given to students to assess the impact of the two programs. Students were asked about their knowledge and use of prevention programs in their schools. Data were also collected on students' history of victimization, such as whether they were ever attacked at school, stolen from, mugged, or threatened with a weapon. Students were also asked about their attitudes toward verbal abuse, victims of violence, and conditions when revenge is acceptable, and their exposure to violence, including whether they knew anyone who was sexually abused, beaten, or attacked because of race, gender, or sexual orientation. Additional questions covered students' use of aggressive behaviors, such as whether they had threatened someone with a weapon or had beaten, slapped, hit, or kicked someone. Data were also gathered on the accessibility of alcohol, various drugs, weapons, and stolen property. Demographic variables include students' school grade, class, sex, number of brothers and sisters, and household composition.

Curated

Intimate Partner Violence and Custody Decisions: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Outcomes from Family Court, Shuttle Mediation, or Videoconferencing Mediation, Washington D.C., 2017-2018 (ICPSR 37162)

Released/updated on: 2021-01-28

Geographic coverage: District of Columbia

Time period: 2017-01-01--2018-01-01

Among divorcing and separating parents referred by family courts to mediation to resolve issues, over half report intimate partner violence (IPV). Whether family mediation can be safely offered to cases with a history of IPV is a major controversy that has not been examined previously with empirically sound research. This study was a randomized controlled trial, the "gold standard" for assessing interventions, of family mediation cases with levels of IPV that would, historically, be considered inappropriate for mediation at our study site, a court-attached mediation center in Washington, D.C. Study cases were randomly assigned to one of three study conditions: traditional court-based litigation (n=67), shuttle mediation (n=49), or videoconferencing mediation (n=50).

Researchers conducted a randomized control trial to compare immediate and one year outcomes for three dispute resolution processes (i.e., traditional court-based litigation, shuttle mediation, and videoconferencing mediation) among family law cases seeking to resolve parenting related issues and self-reporting a level of IPV history that would typically prohibit joint mediation as an option at the court-annexed mediation program where the study was conducted.

The mediation intake interview included an IPV screening measure, the Mediator's Assessment of Safety Issues and Concerns (MASIC; Holtzworth-Munroe, Beck, and Applegate, 2010). There is initial evidence of the reliability and validity of the MASIC (Pokman et al., 2014) and research demonstrating that the MASIC leads to higher levels of detection of IPV among parents seeking mediation than other methods of IPV screening (Rossi, et al., 2015). The MASIC is a behaviorally specific measure, listing a series of abusive behaviors on subscales (e.g., psychological abuse, coercive control, physical violence, sexual violence, stalking) and consequences of abuse (e.g., fear of the partner, injury). Each item is assessed for occurrence twice-- ever in the relationship and in the past year. The questions ask the party about their victimization from the other party.

Based on party responses to the Multi-Door intake interview, including the MASIC, the DRSs identified cases as being potentially eligible for the study if the level of IPV reported by either or both parties was at a level that the case was considered inappropriate for joint mediation. No specific level of IPV for study eligibility was set, for two reasons. First, no previous empirical data are available to guide decisions regarding what level of IPV would make joint mediation inappropriate. Second, the DRSs were well trained and experienced and wanted to retain the right to use their clinical judgment. However, the Multi-Door staff and research team agreed that DRSs would pay particular attention to level and types of IPV, presence of risk factors empirically related to lethality (e.g., weapons), whether IPV was escalating in frequency or severity, IPV-related injuries, and whether a party was fearful of the other party or expressed IPV-related concerns about participating in mediation.

Curated

Mandatory Custody Mediation in San Diego, California, 1996 (ICPSR 20365)

Released/updated on: 2010-05-27

Geographic coverage: San Diego, United States, California

The purpose of the study was to provide empirical data to inform the debate and lead to meaningful answers to questions in custody mediation and domestic violence including equity of outcomes for families with partner violence versus those without any evidence of violence, and the issue of health and safety outcomes for the children. Researchers examined every seventh action filed in the Family Court in San Diego during the calendar year 1996. Each of the 512 nonagreement mediation reports and its associated Court Screening Form were scanned in its entirety and subsequently printed. Each report also contained an appended page, containing a detailed parenting plan in which the mediator summarized the percentage of physical custody recommended for each parent. Each report was studied and content analyzed by three trained raters who had no access to the Court Screening Form and so were blind to any a prior domestic violence allegations. The majority of coding items called for yes/no responses. Other coding items allowed the raters to choose from among more than two options. A variable was coded in a particular direction if all three raters agreed or if two of the three raters agreed. The domestic violence sample (n = 200) included all of the selected cases with domestic violence indicators on the current screening form, prior allegation of domestic violence on a court screening form and/or a permanent domestic violence restraining order in the case file that was available to the mediator, and clear cases of domestic violence as documented by the mediator in which there was absolutely no indication of domestic violence on any screening form or in the case file. The nondomestic violence sample (n = 200) included 200 of the remaining 312 cases that had no indicators of domestic violence in the file and no mention of domestic violence in the mediation report. The data includes five categories of variables: general case information, parental factors, child factors, family interaction factors, and current parental relationship.

Curated

Metro Court Project: A Study of Mediation and Adjudication in Bernalillo County (Albuquerque), New Mexico, Small Claims Court, 1990-1992 (ICPSR 6487)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12

Geographic coverage: United States, New Mexico

Time period: 1990-06-01--1991-10-01

This study used court records and interviews with disputants, litigants, and mediators in Bernalillo County, New Mexico, to compare the effects of ethnicity and gender in mediated versus adjudicated small claims disputes. Initial structured telephone interviews with both adjudicated and mediated claimants and respondents (Parts 1-4) were conducted. Follow-up questionnaires (Parts 6-8) were then administered to the initial interviewed groups. Data from mediators (Part 9) were collected from self-administered structured questionnaires. Pertinent questions from all eight survey instruments were combined into a master file (Part 5). This data collection also includes two qualitative summary files of adjudicated and mediated cases (Parts 10-11). The unit of analysis is the small claims case.

Curated

Restricted

State Laws and Child Custody Recommendations in Cases of Intimate Partner Violence, 2009-2010 [United States] (ICPSR 36594)

Released/updated on: 2018-03-19

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2009-01-01--2010-01-01

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

This study was a secondary analysis of Custody Evaluators' Beliefs about Domestic Abuse Allegations, 2009-2010 [United States] (ICPSR 30962 - https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR30962.v1). The purpose of this study was to conduct further analysis of a recent, National Institute of Justice (NIJ) sponsored national survey of professionals to better understand the relationship between family law statutes and professionals' recommendations for child custody and visitation in cases of intimate partner violence. The samples involve 512 child custody evaluators and 200 judges from 46 states. Evaluators and judges responded to a case vignette of serious intimate partner violence (IPV). They indicated recommendations they would make for custody and visitation and the perceived risk of future harm. Evaluators also reported on their history of actual recommendations in IPV cases. The original study investigated beliefs about custody, value-laden beliefs, knowledge professionals had acquired on IPV, the number of survivors they had known, and their work setting, education, and other demographics. In the current study, statutory provisions with sufficient sample sizes of professionals with and without the provisions were used in the analysis.