AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF

8/6/2019 AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/amicus-curiae-brief 1/48

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

DIVISION THREE

In re th e GuardianshipSydney & J u s t in S.

Case No. G021264

(Super. Ct.Case No. A 174254)

APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ORANGE COUNTY

NANCY WIEBEN STOCK, JUDGE PRESIDING

AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF OFSTEPHEN E. DOYNE, Ph.D., J. REID MELOY, Ph.D. ,

DON DUTTON, Ph.D., PETER JAFFE, Ph.D., PROFESSORJANET BOWERMASTER, THE PUBLIC LAW CENTER, THE CALIFORNIAWOMEN'S LAW CENTER, AND THE CALIFORNIA ALLIANCE AGAINST

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

STEPHEN TEMKO, CFLS, CALS

ATTORNEY AT LAW

Sta te Bar No. 677851666 Garnet Avenue, No. 502

San Diego, Cal i fo rn ia 92109(619) 274-3538

PAUL MONES, LLB

ATTORNEY AT LAW

Sta te Bar No. 128329P.O. Bo x 5701Santa Monica, CA 90405(310) 396-3743

Attorneys fo r Amici



I .

I I .

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE . . .

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IS AN EPIDEMIC.

A. Bat te rers

B. Sta lkers . .

CHILDREN ARE AT GREAT RISK LIVING WITH APERPETRATOR OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.

A. Emotional Abuse to Children .

B. Impact of Exposure to Violence.

C. Neurobiological Changes and the Cycleof Domestic Violence........ .

. 1

. 9

. 10

. 12

. 16

. 17

. 18

. • 2 0

I I I . FEAR OF LOSING CUSTODY OFTEN TRAPS BATTERED

SPOUSES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

IV. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SHOULD BE A PRIMARY

v.

VI.

CONSIDERATION IN CHILD CUSTODY DECISIONS .27

A. Protec t ing Children from Harm. . . . .27

B. Best In t e re s t s and Domestic Violence. . . 31

c. Spousal Murder and Detriment to Children . . 32

THE BEST INTERESTS OF CHILDREN ARE MORE

IMPORTANT THAN THOSE OF BIOLOGICAL PARENTS.

CONCLUSION...... .

. 36

40



TABLE OF AUTHORITIESCASES

Barka lof f v . Woodward (1996)47 Cal . App. 4 th 303

In re David C. (1984) 154 Cal . App. 3d. 1189 . .. . . . 7

29

Guardianship o f Phi l l i p B. (1983) 139 Cal . App. 3d 407 . . 2

Guardianship o f Stephen G. (1995) 40 Cal . App. 4 th 1418 . 28

In re Heather A. (1996) 52 Cal . App. 4 th 183.

In re Jon N. (1986) 179 Cal. App. 3d 156

People v . Humphrey (1996) 13 Cal. 4 th 1073.

. 29, 30, 38

CIVIL CODE

Family Code 3011.

Family Code 6203.

Family Code 6211.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

1 , 30

. 7

28, 38

• 9

. . 9

Cal i fo rn ia Assembly B i l l 200 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

BOOKS AND LAW REVIEW

deBecker, The Gif t o f Fear : Surviva l Signals t ha tPro tec t Us from Violence (1997) L i t t l e , Brown andCompany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14, 33, 34

Dutton, The Domestic A·ssaul t ofWomen

(1995)UBC

Press/Vancouver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Gelles and St rauss , In t imate Violence (1988)Simon & Schus te r . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16, 21, 33

Peled, Ja f fe , Edleson Ending the Cycle of Violence , (1995)SAGE Publ i ca t ions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5



OTHER AUTHORITIES

ABA, Center on Children and the Law, The Impact ofDomestic Violence on Children: A Report to thePres ident of the American Bar Associa t ion .

Washington, D.C. . . . .

....Ackerman and Ackerman, Child Custody Evalua t ion Prac t ices :

39

A Survey of Psychologis ts 30 (3) Fam L.Q. 565 (1996) 30

APA, I ssues and Dilemmas in Family Violence (1996)American Psycholog ica l Associa t ion Pres ident ia lTask Force on Violence and the Family. . 25

Crawford and Gartner , Woman k i l l i ng , in t imate femicidein Ontar io : 1974-1990, (1992) Toronto: The Women We

Honor Action Committee . . . .17

Dalton, Domestic Violence in Cal i fo rn ia , A Sta tus Reportto the Cal i fo rn ia Department of Heal th Services ,

(1996) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Dobosh, Dobash, Wilson, and Daly, The Myth of SexualSymmetry in Mari ta l Violence (1992) Socia l Problems,39 (1) . . . . . . . . . .11

Dutton, Prof i l i ng Wife Assau l te r s : Some Evidence fo r aTrimodal Analysis (1988), Violence and Vict ims, 3( 1 ) 1 pp 5 - 3 0 • • • • •11

Dutton, Starzomski , & Ryan, "Antecedents of Border l inePersona l i ty Disorder Organizat ion in Wife Assaul ters"

(1996) Fam. Violence 11 (2) . .11

Dutton, Starzomski & Van Ginkel , "The ro le of shame andg u i l t in i n t e rgenera t iona l t ransmiss ion ofabusiveness" (1995) Violence and Victims 10 (2) . . .11

Hil ton , Battered women's concerns about t h e i r ch i ld ren

witness ing wife a s s a u l t (1992) J . of In te rper sona l

Violence , 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Hotal ing and Sugarman, An Analysis of Husband and Wife

Violence: The Curren t State of Knowledge (1986)Violence and Vict ims, 11 . . . . . .21

Jacobson, Gottman, Waltz, Rushe, Babcock, and HoltzworthMunroe, "Affec t , Verbal Content, and Psychophysiologyin the Arguments of Couples With a Violent Husband"(1994) 62 No . 5, Journa l of Consul t ing andCl in ica l Psychology, . . . . . . . . .

Ja f fe , Lemon, Sandler and Wolfe, Working Together to End

.14

Domestic Violence, (1996) . . . . . . . . . . . . 5



Ja f fe , Peled, and Edelson, Ending th e Cycle o f Violence :Community Responses to chi ldren of ba t te red women,

(19 91) SAGE . . . . . . . . 5

Ja f fe , Children of Domestic Violence: Spec ia l Challengesin Custody and Vi s i t a t i on Dispute Resolut ion in

Lemon, Domestic Violence and Children: ResolvingCustody and Vi s i t a t i on Disputes , A Nat iona l

J ud ic i a l Curriculum (1995) The Family ViolencePrevent ion Fund, Chap 2, . . . . . .10

Ja f f e , Wolfe, & Wilson, Children of Bat tered Women,(1990) . . . . . . . 5

Ja f fe , Wolfe, Wilson & Zak, Emotional and phys ica l hea l thoroblems of ba t t e r e d women (1986) CanadianJourna l of Psychia t ry , 31 . . . . . . . . . 17

Johnston and Campbell , Paren t -ch i ld re la t ionship in

domestic v io lence f ami l ies d i spu t ing custody (1993)Fam. Conci l . Courts Rev. 31 . . . . . 24

Meloy, "Sta lk ing (obsess iona l fol lowing) : A Review of

Some Pre l iminary s tudies" (1996) Aggression andViolen t Behavior , Vol 1, No. 2 . . . . . . . . 2,13,14

Meloy and Gother t , A Demographic and Cl in ica l Comparisonof Obsessional Followers and Mental ly DisorderedOffenders (1995) American Journa l of Psych ia t ry ,

Vol 152:2 . . . . . . 14

Model Code on Family Violence (1994) 37

Novello, The Domestic Violence I ssue:

(1992) Am. Med. News Mar. 23/30,Hear Our Voices

Peled, The exper ience of l i v ing with violence fo r

preadolescent chi ld witnesses of women abuse(1993) Unpublished doc to ra l d i s se r t a t i on , Univ.

.10

of Minn. Minneapolis . . . . . . . . . . 17

Perry , "Incubated in Ter ro r : Neurodevelopmental Factors

inth e

'Cycleof

Vio lence ' " ,in

Osofsky, Childrenin a Violent Socie ty (1997) Gui l ford , Chap. 2. . 20,30

Rodgers , Wife Assaul t : The f indings of a Nat ional Survey(1994) J u r i s t a t , 14. . . . . . 16

Walker , Psychology and Violence Against Women (1989) Am.

Psychol . 44 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Westra and Mart in , Children of Bat te red Women (1981) Vol10 Maternal Child Nursing J . . . . . . . . . . . 10



Zorza, Woman ba t t e r i ng : a major cause of homelessness(1991) Clear inghouse Review, 25 . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Zorza, "Fr iendly parent" provis ion s in cus todydeterminat ions (1992) Clearinghouse Review 26

....4



INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE

The au thors , who come from the d i sc i p l i nes o f chi ld ,

adolescent , adul t and fo rens ic psychology, and family law, contend

t ha t the r i sk fac tors presented to ch i ld ren in divorced fami l ies by

a bat t e r ing parent are not as eas i ly observable as a bruise or a

s p l i t l ip t h a t needs s t i t c h e s . Rather , a parent who abuses another

parent i s abusing the ch i ld ren by exposing them to a c l imate o f

fea r and a poor model o f conf l i c t r e s o lu t ion in in t imate

re la t ionships .

Domestic v io lence which harms spouses and ch i ld ren inc ludes ,

but i s n ot l imi ted to , psychological verbal abuse, sexua l abuse ,

s ta lk ing , physica l abuse, o r , a t i t s worst , murder. In determining

bes t i n t e r e s t s , Family Courts h i s to r i c a l l y cons ider a broad

spectrum of pa re n t s ' behavior as it a l l a f f ec t s ch i ld ren . In t h i s

regard , the en t i r e h i s t o ry o f domest ic v io l e n t behavior of a paren t

who i s a b a t t e r e r - from verba l i n t imida t ion to homicide - should

be considered by th e cour t to proper ly assess what d i r ec t ly or

ind i rec t ly 1 causes harm to ch i ld ren . In the extreme case of spousa l

murder, th e detr iment 2 to the ch i ld ren by th e loss of a paren t

1 In re Jon N. (1986) 179 Cal. App. 3d 156, 161, 224 Cal .

Rpt r . 319 the court found t he re had been "secondary abuse" in theform of angry domest ic violence between the parents which must haveinevi tab ly a f fec ted the chi ld even though he had not been in jured .

2 • "Whether pa re n ta l custody would be de t r imen ta l i,s n otjudged ob je c t ive ly (nor i s it equated wi th the so r t o f ' p a ren t a lunf i tness ' t ha t would requ i re in te rvent ion by the s t a t e through a

juveni le court depending proceeding) . Rather , ins tead o f

presc r ib ing r ig id s t a tu to ry guidel ines , the l eg i s l a t ive i n t en t i sto leave cour t with broad f l ex i b i l i t y to make the ul t imate decis ion

based on th e spec i f i c fac t s in l i g h t of the t o t a l i t y of theevidence. (Guardianship of Phi l l ip B. (1983) 139 Cal. App. 3d 407,



should be considered if a l l ega t ions a re made t ha t t h i s loss i s

re la ted to the ac t ions of the surviving parent . Moreover, when

chi ldren have l o s t a parent , they wil l c l ing to the surviving

parent even if t ha t person has been a ba t te re r . However, the

grea te s t future det r iment these chi ldren face i s t ha t they wil l

l ive to experience the surviving parent bea t another par tner ,

recycl ing the cl imate of fear tha t i s so det r imental to ch i ldren .

Therefore, because the psychological r i sks to chi ldren l iv ing

with a ba t te re r are high, amici bel ieve there should be a

rebut t ab le presumption3 aga ins t sole or jo in t custody fo r

perpe t ra tors of domestic violence, even i f tha t parent has never

d i rec t ly abused the chi ldren .

Amici 's respect ive careers have been pa r t i a l l y defined by the

quest ions of why domestic violence occurs and how it a f f ec t s

chi ldren .

Stephen E. Doyne. Ph.D. i s a c l in ica l and forens ic

psychologis t in pr iva te prac t ice in San Diego. Dr. Doyne received

421.) II

3 In 1994, the Nat iona l Council of Juveni le and Family CourtJudges adopted a Model Code on Domestic and Family Violence

(Hereafter re fer red to as "Model Code") which s ta ted : "In everyproceeding where there i s , a t l ea s t , a t i ssue a dispute as tocustody of a chi ld , a determina t ion by the cour t tha t domestic orfamily violence has occurred, ra i ses a rebut tab le presumption t ha ti s det r imental to the chi ld and not in the bes t in te re s t 9f thechi ld to be placed in the sole custody, j o in t l ega l custody, o rjo in t physical custody with a perpe t ra tor of family violence.Model Code on Domestic and Family Violence, (1994) National Counci lof Juvenile and Family Court Judges, Chapter 4: Family andChildren, Sec. 401, Presumption Concerning Custody, p.33)"

2



h is Ph.D. in C l in i c a l Psychology a t Peabody College of Vanderbi l t

Univers i ty . He i s a Diplomate of the American Board of Forensic

Examiners, and i s a Diplomate of the American Board of

Psychological Spec i a l i s t s in th e area of chi ld cus tody evaluat ions .

For a major i ty of h is ca ree r , he has been conduct ing chi ld custody

eva lua t ions fo r the Super io r Courts in Southern Ca l i fo rn i a . Dr.

Doyne i s Pas t -Pres iden t of th e Ca l i fo rn ia Associa t ion of Psychology

Providers and Fellow of the San Diego Psychologica l Associa t ion .

In 1991, he received an American Psychological Assoc ia t ion Prac t i ce

Di rec to ra te Leadership Award fo r Outs tanding Contr ibut ion to

American Psychology fo r h is work associa ted with t he Ca l i fo rn ia

Associa t ion of Psychology Providers .

J . Reid Meloy, Ph.D. i s a Diplomate in forensic psychology of

th e American Board of Profess iona l Psychology. Dr. Meloy i s Chief

of the Court Serv ices , Forens ic Mental Heal th Divis ion fo r San

Diego County, and a l so devotes h is t ime to a pr i va t e c i v i l and

cr iminal forens ic prac t i ce , r esearch , wri t ing , and t each ing . He i s

an assoc ia t e c l i n i c a l professor of psych ia t ry a t th e Univer s i ty of

Cal i fo rn ia , San Diego, School o f Medicine and an ad junc t professo r

a t the Univers i ty of San Diego School of Law. He i s a l so a Fellow

o f the Socie ty fo r Persona l i ty Assessment, and i s cur ren t ly

Pres iden t of the American Academy of Forens ic Psychology. In 1992,

he received the Dis t inguished Contr ibut ion to Psychology. as a

Profess ion Award from the Cal i fo rn ia Psychological Associa t ion . He

3



has authored o r co-authored over one hundred papers publ ished in

peer-reviewed psychia t r i c and psychologica l journa l s , and has

wri t ten or edi ted four books. Dr. Meloy i s working on h is f i f t h

book, The Psychology of Sta lk ing , to be publ ished in 1998. He i s

a sought -a f te r speaker and psychological consul tan t on var ious

c i v i l and cr iminal cases throughout the United Sta tes .

Don Dutton, Ph.D. received h is doctora te in Socia l Psychology

from th e Univers i ty o f Toronto . While on facul ty a t the Univers i ty .

of Br i t i sh Columbia, he began to inves t iga te the cr imina l j u s t i ce

response to spousal assau l t , prepar ing a government repor t t ha t

out l ined the need fo r a more aggress ive response , and subsequently

t r a ined pol ice in "domest ic dis turbance" in te rvent ion techniques .

From 1979 to th e present , Dr. Dutton has served as a

psychotherapis t in the Assaul t ing Husbands Pro jec t , a cour t

mandated t rea tment program fo r men convicted of wife assau l t . In

the course of provid ing t rea tment fo r these men, he drew on h is

background in both soc i a l and c l i n i c a l psychology to develop a

psychological model fo r in t imate abus iveness . He has publ ished

over e ighty papers and th ree books, inc luding the Domestic Assaul t

of Women and The Ba t t e r e r : A Psychologica l Prof i l e . Dr. Dutton i s

c ur r e n t ly professo r o f psychology a t the Univer s i ty of Br i t i sh

Columbia.

Pe t e r G. Ja f fe , Ph.D. i s Direc to r of the London Family Court

Cl in ic and a t ru s t ee fo r th e London Board of Educat ion (London,

4



Ontar io , Canada) . He i s an adjunc t associa te pro fes so r in the

Departments of Psychology and Psychia t ry a t the Univers i ty of

Western Ontario. Dr. Ja f fe has publ i shed widely on the top ic of

domestic violence and i s co-author , with David A. Wolfe and Susan

K. Wilson, of Children of Bat tered Women (1990), Ending the Cycle

of Violence: Community responses to chi ldren of ba t t e r ed women,

(1991, Sage) (with Eina t Peled and Jef f rey L. Edleson), and Working

Together to End Domestic Violence, (1996, Mancorp, with Nancy

Lemon, Jack Sandler , and David Wolfe). He received h is

undergraduate t ra in ing from McGill Univers i ty and h is Ph.D. in

c l i n i c a l psychology from the Univers i ty of Western Ontar io . Dr.

Jaf fe recent ly served as a member o f the Canadian Panel on Violence

Against Women, a federa l ly appointed committee t h a t examined

so lu t ions to violence agains t women across Canada.

Janet M. Bowermaster, J .D. i s a professor of law a t Cal i forn ia

Western School o f Law in San Diego. She received her law degree

from the Univers i ty o f I l l i no i s College of Law. For th e l a s t

severa l years she has t aught courses in family law and chi ldren and

the law. More recent ly , she has t aught an advanced seminar on

domest ic vio lence . Professor Bowermaster i s the author o f severa l

law review a r t i c l e s on chi ld custody. Her most recent a r t i c l e ,

"Relocat ion Custody Disputes Involving Domestic Violence" wil l

appear in the Univers i ty of Kansas Law Review in March of .1998.

Professor Bowermaster i s a member of the American Bar Associa t ion

Family Law Committee, the Socie ty o f American Law Teachers, the

5



Nat ional Associa t ion o f Counsel for . Children, the Associa t ion of

Family and Conc i l i a t ion Courts , the Law and Socie ty Associa t ion and

the San Diego Domestic Violence Council Legal Action Committee.

She regular ly as s i s t s l oca l domestic violence agencies by

conduct ing t r a i n i ngs fo r ho t - l i ne vo lun tee r s on custody i s sues in

domest ic vio lence .

Publ ic Law Center i s the only pr iva t e bar , publ ic i n t e r e s t law

firm in Orange County, Cal i forn ia . Created from a 1989 merger of

Amicus Publ ico and th e Orange County Public In t e re s t Law Advocates ,

The Publ ic Law Center br ings eighteen years of experience to th e

t ask of adminis ter ing pr i va t e a t to rney involvement programs.

Public Law Center provides f ree lega l se rv ices to low income Orange

County re s idents through i t s s t a f f and volunteer , pr iva te

a t to rneys . The Publ ic Law Center a l so chal lenges systemic

i n jus t i ce s through l i t i ga t i on and o ther forms of advocacy.

Cal i forn ia Women's Law Center i s a pr iva te , non-prof i t , publ ic

i n t e r e s t law cen te r in Santa Ana, Cal i fo rn ia spec ia l i z ing in the

c i v i l r i gh t s of women and g i r l s . Cal i fo rn ia Women's Law Center was

es tab l i shed in 1989 to address the comprehensive c i v i l r i gh t s of

women and g i r l s in th e fol lowing pr io r i ty areas : Family Law,

Violence Against Women, Reproduct ive r i gh t s , Sex Discr iminat ion and

Child Care.

Since i t s incept ion , Cal i forn ia Women's Law Center has

mainta ined a mul t i -d i sc ip l inary approach to domestic violence and

6



family law i s sues by focusi t ig on the i n t e r - r e l a t ionsh ip of these

areas in the l i ves of women and chi ldren and the po l i c i e s a f fec t i ng

them.

Cal i forn ia All iance Against Domestic Violence, headquar tered

in Sacramento, i s a s ta tewide coa l i t i on responding to the needs and

i n t e r e s t s o f ba t t e red women and t he i r chi ldren . As t he so le

s ta tewide voice fo r vic t ims of domest ic v io lence , the Al l iance has

worked s ince 1976 with pol icy makers, advocacy organ iza t ions , c i v i l

and cr imina l j u s t i ce profess iona ls , ch i ld pro tec t ive se rv ice

workers, law enforcement of f i ce r s , and others to develop spec i f i c

proposals to a id the v ic t ims o f domestic vio lence . These

co l l abora t ions mark the f i r s t a t tempt in Ca l i forn ia a t a

comprehensive approach to th i s devas ta t ing problem. The All iance

was incorpora ted in 1993 as a non-pro f i t corporat ion .

Cal i forn ia All iance Agains t Domestic Violence has par t i c i pa t ed

in amicus b r i e f s in severa l impor tan t Cal i fo rn ia cases , inc luding

Barkalof f v . Woodward, (1996) 47 Cal . App. 4th 303, and People v.

Humphrey (1996) 13 Cal . 4 th 1073.

7



With regard to the case a t bench, In re Guardianship o f Sydney

and Jus t inS . ,

CaseNo

Al74254 amicuscur iae

express noc l i n i ca l

opinion. Rather , amici reques t s t ha t th i s cour t examine the

persuas ive data on the i s sue o f family violence and i t s e f fec t s on

chi ldren, pa r t i cu la r ly as they re la te to divorce and custody

decis ions .

8



I . DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IS AN EPIDEMIC

Domestic vio lence4

i s a pa t t e rn of behavior t ha t inc ludes , but

i s not l imi ted to , the fol lowing forms of abuse:

PSYCHOLOGICAL: shout ing, swearing, t aunt ing , t h r ea t

ening, degrading, demeaning, inducingfear , gender harassment , s ta lk ing

SEXUAL:

PHYSICAL:

FINANCIAL:

rape, i nces t , unwanted sexual touching,date rape , harassment

s lapping, shoving, h i t t ing , mut i la t ion ,s tabbing, assau l t , murder

withholding, dive r t ing , embezzling or

cont ro l l ing funds (Dutton, The DomesticAssaul t of Women: Psychologica l andCriminal Jus t i ce Perspect ives (1995) UBC

Press , pp. 3-10)

According to a 1996 repor t by the Cal i forn ia Department of

Health Services , domestic violence - both reported and unreported

- occurs an es t imated four mil l ion t imes a year , with tw o mil l ion

of these inc idents being severe as sau l t s . (Dalton, Domestic

Violence in Ca l i forn ia , A Status Report to the Cal i forn ia

Department of Health Services , (1996) p. 3.) The repor t a lso

es t imates t ha t as many as one- thi rd of emergency room v i s i t s re la te

4According to Family Code Sect ion 6203, nabuse meansin ten t iona l ly or reck less ly to cause o r at tempt to cause bodily

in jury , o r sexual assau l t , or to place a person in reasonableapprehension o f imminent ser ious bodi ly in jury to t ha t person or to

anothern.According to Family Code sec t ion 6211: nDomestic violence i s

abuse perpe t ra ted aga ins t any of the fol lowing persons : a) aspouse or former spouse, b) a cohabi tant or former cohabi tan t , asdefined in sec t ion 6209, c) a person with whom the r e s p o n d ~ n t i shaving or has had a da t ing or engagement re la t ionship , d) a personwith whom the respondent has had a chi ld , 3) a chi ld of a par ty of

a chi ld who i s subjec t to an act ion under the Uniform ParentageAct, f) any o the r person r e l a t ed by consanguini ty or a f f i n i t ywithin the second degree.n

9



to domestic violence and apparent ly , one- f i f th to one-four th of

pregnant women seeking prena ta l care are in a bat t e r ing

re la t ionship . Fur ther , medical care to v ic t ims o f domestic

violence cos t s an es t imated $1.8 b i l l i o n do l l a r s p er year . (Dalton,

supra, (1996) a t p . 3 .) Current ly , domestic violence i s the

leading cause of in jury to women ages 14 to 44, more common than

automobile accidents , muggings, and rapes combined (Novello, The

Domestic Violence Issue: Hear Our Voices (1992) Am. Med. News Mar.

23/30, p . 25.)

Children do not have to be vic t ims of abuse to su f fe r

emotional detr iment from l iv ing with a ba t t e r e r . In fac t , chi ldren

ra ised in a home in which spousal abuse occurs experience the same

fea r as ba t te red ch i ld ren (Westra & Martin, Children of Bat tered

Women (1981) Vol 10. Maternal Child Nursing J . , pp. 41, 49, and

SO.) This i s why exper ts in the f ie ld , such as Pete r Ja f fe , Ph.D.,

poin t out t ha t domestic vio lence should be more proper ly termed

violence aga ins t women and chi ldren s ince the majo r i ty o f vict ims

are women and ch i ld ren . (Jaffe , Children of Domestic Violence:

Spec ia l Challenges in Custody and Vis i t a t ion Dispute Resolut ion in

Lemon, Domestic Violence and Children: Resolving Custody and

Vis i ta t ion Disputes , A National Judic ia l Curriculum (1995) The

Family Violence Prevent ion Fund, Chap 2, pp. 19-21.)

A. BATTERERS

The persona l i ty cha rac t e r i s t i c s of ba t t e r e r s espec ia l ly

t h e i r vio len t tendencies - are important in evaluat ing whether it

w i l l be de t r imen ta l for ch i ldren to be placed in t ha t parent ' s

10



custody.

Donald Dutton, Ph.D., descr ibes s e ve ra l types of ba t t e r e r s ,

al though there i s no s ing le pro f i l e . (Dutton, supra , a t p . 121.)

Sta t i s t i ca l ly , ba t te re r s tend to be male, r a t he r than female.

(Dobash, Dobash, Wilson & Daly, The Myth o f Sexual Symmetry in

Mari ta l Violence (1992) Socia l Problems, 39 (1) , pp. 71-76.)

Dutton concludes tha t the wife-assaul t e rs have pronounced needs fo r

i n t e rpe rsona l cont ro l but do not possess hea l thy mechanisms to

generate t h i s c on t ro l . From h is numerous research s tudies , Dr.

Dutton concludes t ha t the b a t t e r e r r eac t s with exaggerated arousal

in anger to scenes of male/female c o n f l i c t . (Dutton, supra , a t p .

94 . )

Dr. Dutton 's data found tha t wife as sau l t e r s subdivide in to

th ree subtypes : those who a c t out anger impuls ively in the context

of int imate r e l a t i onsh i ps , those who use vio lence ins t rumen ta l ly

and genera l ly , and those who repress o r over cont ro l a deep

resentment . (Dutton, Prof i l i ng Wife Assaul te r s : Some Evidence fo r

a Trimodal Analysis (1988), Violence and Vict ims, 3 (1), pp. 5-30.)

A typ ica l background inc ludes deep shaming exper iences usual ly by

the f a t he r of the even tua l perpe t ra tor , insecure at tachment and

exposure to vio len t ro le models. (Dutton, Starzomski , & Ryan.

"Antecedents of Border l ine Personal i ty Disorder Organizat ion in

Wife Assaul ters" (1996) Fam. Violence. 11 (2), pp. 131-132.)

However, a l l wife as sau l t e r s do not have s imi l a r et iologies : · they

d i f f e r both in what t r i gge r s the violence and how they r a t i ona l i ze

t he i r behavior . (Dutton, Starzomski, and van Ginkel . "The ro le of

11



shame and g u i l t in i n t e rge ne ra t i ona l t ransmiss ion o f abusiveness"

(1995) Violence and Vict ims 10(2) , pp. 121-131.) Fur the r , many

offenders are s e r i a l b a t t e r e r s , i.e., j u s t because one re la t ionship

i s over does not mean t h a t the pe rpe t r a to r wi l l no t expose the

chi ldren to violence in the nex t re la t ionship as two- th i rds of

ba t t e re r s re -o f fend . (Dutton, supra , a t p. 25.)

B. STALKERS

Within the subse t o f b a t t e r e r s , J . Reid Meloy, Ph.D., has

i den t i f i ed a subgroup who s t a lk women, some of whom presen t the

gre a t e s t r i sk of domest ic v io lence o r spousal murder. In h is

research , he concludes t h a t th e va s t major i ty - in excess of 80% of

s t a lk ing vic t ims are p r i o r acquain tances o r former sexual

in t imates of the s t a lke r . (Meloy, "Sta lk ing (obsess iona l fol lowing) :

A Review of Some Prel iminary S tudies" (1996) Aggression and Violent

Behavior , Vol 1 , No.2, pp. 147-162. ) Although Meloy notes there i s

no publ i shed s tudy on the r e l a t i ons h ip between domest ic violence

and s ta lk ing p e r se , he be l i eves t ha t it i s l i k e ly domestic

violence increases the r i sk of s ta lk ing . One source of data

suppor t ing t h i s theory i s the fac t tha t r e s t r a i n i ng order

v io l a t i ons inc rease as v io lence p r i o r to separa t ion in a marr iage

i nc reases .

Meloy, whose spec i a l t y i s "obsess iona l fol lowing" o r s ta lk ing ,

found in a review of a l l publ ished s tud ies t ha t the r i sk o f

vio lence among i nd iv idua l s who s t a lk ranges from 3 to 36% ,· with

approximately one in four i nd iv idua l s (25-30%) being phys ica l ly

assaul t ive towards t h e i r ob jec t of pur s u i t . (Meloy, supra , a t pp.

12



147-162.) About ha l f of those who s ta lk th rea ten persons or

proper ty and 25% of those i nd iv idua l s who make such t h r ea t s are , in

fac t , v io l e n t toward persons or proper ty . Although the homicide

ra te fo r those who s t a lk i s l ess than 2 !1,-0 I t h i s i s more than 200

t imes the current homicide ra te in the general popula t ion of the

United St a t e s . (Meloy, supra , a t pp. 158-159.)

Meloy also no tes t h a t o ther research ind ica tes t ha t over

th ree - four ths of spousal homicides occurr ing a f t e r separa t ion a re

preceded by behaviors cons i s ten t with the accepted def i n i t i on of

s t a lk ing : a long- term pa t t e rn of t h rea t and harassment t ha t causes

the v ic t im to fea r for her sa fe ty . (Meloy, supra , a t pp. 147-162. )

This i s a pa r t i cu la r ly usefu l f inding because it may be a

predic t ive va r iab le in separated spousal homicide s ince most

spousa l ba t t e r e r s do not murder t h e i r mates. (Meloy, supra , a t pp .

147-162. )

Dr. Meloy's motivat ional theory of s ta lk ing i s psychodynamic.

The s t a l k e r i n i t i a l l y develops a na rc i s s i s t i c l i nk ing fantasy to

th e objec t , perhaps h is wife , in which he i s spec ia l , idea l ized by,

or dest ined to be with h er forever . Her r e j ec t i on of him in a

divorce or separa t ion s t imula tes deep humil ia t ion which i s defended

aga ins t with abandonment rage . This i n t ense anger fuels the

pur s u i t of h is ex-wife to decimate and devalue her , paradoxica l ly

to res tore h is ide a l i z e d f an tasy o f her . In othe r words, h er

physica l death i s seen by the s t a l ke r as the death o f the r e j ec t i ng

spouse, which makes room fo r the re s tora t ion in the s t a l ke r ' s mind

of the per fec t (na rc i s s i s t i c ) fantasy of an uncondi t ional ly

13



accept ing spouse. (Meloy, supra , a t pp. 147-162. ) Meloy 's theory

i s supported by the empir ica l f indings of pa tho log ica l narc iss i sm

among those who s ta lk . (Meloy and Gother t , A Demographic and

Clin ica l Comparison of Obsessional Followers and Mental ly

Disordered Offenders (1995) American Journal of Psychia t ry , Vol

152:2, pp. 258-263.)

In cont ras t to the common s tereotype , ba t t e r e r s are not always

out of cont ro l when abusing. In fac t , some b a t t e r e r s ' hear t r a t e s

ac tua l ly drop and they become phys io logica l ly calmer as they become

more v i o l en t . (Jacobson, Gottman, Waltz, Rushe, Babcock, and

Holtzworth-Munroe, "Affect , Verbal Content, and Psychophysiology in

the Arguments of Couples With a Violent Husband" (1994) 62 No.5,

Journa l of Consul t ing and Cl in i c a l Psychology, pp. 982-988.) This

f inding i s c ons i s t e n t with deBecker ' s explanat ion of domestic

assaul t and murder:

"Though l eaving i s the be s t response to v io lence ,it

i s

in t ry ing to leave t ha t most women get k i l l e d . This

dispe l s the dangerous myth about spousal k i l l ings : they

happen in the heat of argument. In fac t , the m ajor i ty of

husbands who k i l l t h e i r wives s t a lk them f i r s t , and fa r

from the ' c r ime of pass ion ' tha t it i s so of ten ca l led ,

k i l l i n g a wife i s usua l ly a decis ion , no t a loss o f

cont ro l . Those men who are most v io l e n t are not a t a l l

car r i ed away by fury ." (deBecker, The Gif t of ·Fear :

surv iva l Signals t ha t Protec t Us From Violence (1997)

L i t t l e , Brown, p. 183.)

14



Thus, a b a t t e r e r - who may be capable of spousa l murder - can

presen t as a person not l i k e ly to lose emotional c on t ro l , o r be

harmful to ch i ld ren .

5

But l iv ing with a b a t t e r e r i s an enormous

r isk to ch i ld ren , as wi l l be seen in the next s e c t ion .

5In the case a t bench, Judge Nancy Weiben Stock descr ibed the

f a the r as "a man who has n ot in the pas t , o r i s not l i k e ly in the

fu ture to lose cont ro l of himsel f in such a manner as toemot iona l ly or phys ica l ly harm h is tw o young chi ldren" (In re Sydneyand Jus t i n S ., Order and Findings , (1996), p . 6 .)

15



I I . CHILDREN ARE AT GREAT RISK LIVING WITH A PERPETRATOR OF

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

The bes t ava i lab le research has found t ha t domest ic v io lence

has dramatic and long- las t ing det r imenta l e f fec t s on chi ldren .

Stud ies on th e incidence of v io lence in homes suggest a wide

range of es t imates depending on the research methodology and

def i n i t i on of v io lence . Two of th e more recent comprehensive

surveys es t imate t ha t a t l e a s t 30% of a l l women wil l su f f e r from

some form of v io lence in an adu l t r e l a t i ons h ip during t h e i r l i f e

span. ( Ja f fe , supra, a t pp. 19-21.) For 10% of the women, t h i s

violence i s so severe t ha t they worry fo r t h e i r personal sa fe t y .

(Rodgers, Wife Assaul t : The Findings o f a National Survey (1994)

J u r i s t a t , 14. pp. 1-22 . ) Thei r fea rs are well-founded when one

considers t h a t the majori ty of female homicide vic t ims are k i l l ed

by t h e i r pa r tne r , ex-par tne r , o r boyfr iend . (Jaffe , supra, a t p .

19)

Although the terms " fami ly vio lence" and "domestic violence"

are commonly u t i l i zed , the most accura te term i s "mal t reatment of

women and ch i ld ren" , s ince they rep resen t the vast major i ty of th e

vic t ims. ( Ja f fe , supra, a t p. 20.) Pol ice forces across North

America have reported t ha t 90% of the vic t ims of family v io lence

are women and ch i ld ren . ( Ja f fe , supra , a t p. 20.)Men

are also

abused, but in most i n s t ances , it i s men' s violence aga ins t women

which c rea tes grea t e r pain and suf fe r ing . A l a rge propor t ion of

women's violence toward men i s in se l f -de fense . (Gel les & St rauss ,

Int imate Violence (1988) Simon & Schuster , pp. 18-20.)

16



A. EMOTIONAL ABUSE TO CHILDREN

Although th e term "violence" i s usual ly associa ted with

phys ical o r sexua l v io lence , most v ic t ims repor t t ha t emotional o r

psychologica l abuse can have the most pers i s t en t long- term e f f ec t s .

( Jaf fe , supra , a t p. 21-22.) This abuse i s charac ter ized by

th rea t s , demeaning o r be l i t t l i ng comments, and an a t tempt to c rea te

a family cl imate of fear , t e r ro r , and insecur i ty .

Although many parents with in v i o l en t fami l ies th ink t ha t they

have protec ted t he i r chi ldren from the v io lence , between 80% and

90% of chi ldren indica te the opposi te . (Jaffe , Wolfe, Wilson & Zak.

Emotional and phys ica l hea l th problems of ba t te red women (1986)

Canadian Journa l of Psychia t ry 31, pp . 625-629.) Most ch i ld ren not

only are aware of what happened, bu t they can give de t a i l ed

desc r ip t ions about the esca la t ion of the violence . Chi ldren may be

a t t he i r bedroom door , a t th e top of the s t a i r s , o r they may en t e r

the room shor t l y a f t e ra

v io l e n t episode , bu t they know too wel l

the r ea l i t y of the v io lence and the emotional and phys ica l

consequences to t h e i r mother. (Peled, The experience of l iv ing with

violence fo r preadolescent chi ld witnesses of women abuse (1993)

Unpublished doc to ra l d i s se r t a t i on , Univ. of Minn. Minneapol is . ) At

the extreme, when women are murdered by t h e i r husbands, ch i ld ren

are present in approximately 25% o f th e cases . (Crawford & Gar tner ,

Woman k i l l i ng , int imate femicide in Ontario: 1974-1990 (1992)

Toronto: The Women We Honor Action Committee.)

The term "witness", o r exposure to violence i s not j u s t th e

observat ion of discre te events , bu t ra the r , a ch i ld ' s t o t a l

17



experience of fea r and i n secu r i t y o f what happens, what they

a n t i c ipa t e happening and the af termath of phys ica l , s exua l , and

emotional abuse in th e family . ( Ja f fe , supra , a t p . 21-22.) Murder

of one spouse by ano the r - witnessed o r not - i s the ul t imate

exposure chi ldren can have to family v io lence .

B. IMPACT OF EXPOSURE TO VIOLENCE

The impact of th e exposure to violence has both short - term and

long-term consequences t ha t depend on th e c h i ld r e n ' s age, gender ,

s tage o f development, and ro le with the family. ( Ja f fe , supra , a t

p . 21 . )

Preschool ch i ld ren who are exposed to th i s violence may su f fe r

from nightmares o r o the r s leep d i s tu rbances . The t rauma in t h e i r

l i ve s causes g re a t confus ion and i n s e c ur i t y t h a t may l ead to

reg ress ive behavior , such as excess ive c l ing ing to adu l t s and /o r

fea r o f being l e f t a lone . ( Ja f fe , supra , a t p. 21.) Some ch i ld ren

are po la r i zed by cons tan t fea r and anx ie ty because th e p laces and

people who should a f fo rd them th e gre a t e s t pro tec t ion (horne and

parents ) t u rn out to be the most dangerous. ( Jaf fe , Wolfe & Wilson,

supra , a t pp. 625-629.)

Chi ldren exposed to t h e i r f a t h e r ' s abuse of t h e i r mother may

e xh ib i t a range of i n t e rna l i z i ng and ex te rna l i z ing emotional and

behav io ra l problems. These symptoms cont inue in to adolescence .

Aside from th e more dramat ic o r v i s i b l e symptoms o f .being

exposed to vio lence , ch i ld ren may a l so exh ib i t more subt le s igns o f

t h i s t rauma t ha t are not apparen t from t r ad i t i ona l assessment and

in terv iew da ta . For example ch i ld ren who are exposed to p a re n t a l

18



violence tend to hold be l ie f s t ha t violence i s an appropria te

method in t ry ing to reso lve conf l i c t s , espec ia l ly in the contex t of

an in t imate r e l a t i onsh i p . ( Ja f fe , supra , a t p. 22.) Many ch i ld ren

see phys ica l aggression as appropria te in gain ing respect or

con t ro l in a re la t ionship , and excusable if a perpe t ra t o r i s

drinking , or if a vic t im has supposedly done something to "provoke"

him ( i . e . , they th ink the fa the r ' s view of the vio lence was

j u s t i f i ed because the house was messy o r dinner not ready on time) .

Addi t ional ly , chi ldren tend to blame themselves over t ime fo r

the vio lence . (Jaffe , supra , a t p. 22.) They of ten fee l t ha t it i s

t he i r duty to pro tec t t he i r mother or defuse t h e i r f a th e r ' s anger.

They may f ee l t ha t i f they were per fec t in t he i r own horne t he i r

paren t s wouldn ' t f i gh t over them and cause more vio lence . This

pronounced sense of persona l respons ib i l i ty begins a t an ear ly age

and can l a s t in to adul thood. Obviously these symptoms, as well as

the prev ious ly mentioned ones, impede chi ldren ' s development, t h e i r

academic and community involvement , and t h e i r sense of persona l

competence.

Many chi ldren may fee l so responsib le fo r t h e i r mother ' s

safe ty t ha t they adjus t t he i r own l i ves in order to pro t ec t t he i r

mother. (Jaf fe , supra , a t p. 22.) Some chi ldren refuse to go to

school and l a t e r receive the diagnos is of "school phobic" fo r t h i s

reason . Other chi ldren may go to school and presen t somat ic

concerns such as headaches and stomach pains so tha t they can

re turn home to t h e i r mothers . In some circumstances , mothers do

not discourage th i s behavior because of t he i r own i so la t ion ,

19



depress ion and i n a b i l i t y to se t any l imi t s fo r t h e i r chi ldren .

Adolescents who have been exposed to violence , develop t he i r

own coping s t r a t e g i e s to deal wi th t rauma. At an adapt ive l eve l ,

with extended family o r community suppor ts , these young persons may

t ry to separa te and ind iv iduate from the family problems and seek

more independent l iv ing and school-vocat ional pursu i t s .

Unfor tunate ly , ~ a n y adolescents do no t have adequate s k i l l s and

s oc i a l suppor ts in p lace . These adolescents may at tempt to cope

through drug and a lcoho l abuse, o r by running away to po ten t i a l ly

more dangerous environments (e .g . , th e s t r ee t s ) .

p . 22.) Often, they become involved in

(Ja f fe , supra, a t

abusive dat ing

re la t ionships . Adolescent boys who have been exposed to v io lence

are more l i k e ly to be abusive , and g i r l s who have been exposed to

violence are l e s s l ike ly to ques t ion dat ing violence . Many of

these adolescents do not even cons ider t ha t th i s v io l e n t behavior

i s cr imina l in nature and could l ead to sanct ions by th e cour t

system. (Jaf fe , supra , a t p. 22.)

C. NEUROBIOLOGICAL CHANGES AND THE CYCLE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

Chi ldren neurobio logica l ly adapt to violence exhib i t ing

measurable changes in the ac t iv i ty of t h e i r brainstems as a r e s u l t

of chronic t r aumat ic s t r e s s i n v io l e n t homes. However, the very

neurobio logical adapters which allow the chi ld to surv ive violence

may, as the chi ld grows older , r e s u l t in an increased t e n d e ~ c y to

be vio len t . (Perry, "Incubated in Ter ro r : Neurodeveloptnental

Factors in th e 'Cycle of Violence ' " , in Osofsky, Children in a

Violen t Socie ty (1997) Guilford, Chap 2 . , pp. 124-149.)

20



Thus, l iv ing with a perpe t ra t o r o f domestic vio lence makes it more

l ike ly t ha t those chi ldren wil l grow up to be vio len t themselves .

In fac t , in 14 ou t o f 16 s tudies , witness ing vio lence between one ' s

parents or ca re take rs i s a more cons i s ten t pred i c t o r of fu ture

violence than being th e vic t ims o f abuse. (Hotal ing and Sugarman,

An Analysis of Husband and Wife Violence: The Current Sta te o f

Knowledge (1986) Violence and Vict ims, 11, pp. 101-124.)

The long- term impact of being exposed to domest ic violence i s

most apparent from re t rospec t ive s tudies o f male perpe t ra tor s o f

violence and female surv ivors o f violence in adu l t re la t ionships .

The majori ty of abusive husbands have grown up in fami l ies where

they were exposed to t he i r fa the r ' s abuse of t h e i r mothers. The

landmark s tudies in th i s f i e ld sugges t t ha t sons of severe

ba t t e re r s have wife abuse r a t e s a t 10 t imes the l e ve l of sons of

non-vio lent f a t he r s . (Jaf fe , supra , a t pp. 21-22. ) Women are l e s s

l ike ly to seek ass i s tance when they are abused i f they have been

exposed to v io lence in t h e i r family of or i g i n . (Gel les & St rauss .

supra, a t p . 18-20i Walker. Psychology and Violence Against Women

(1989) Am. Psychol . 44 (4), pp. 695-702.)

Several important i s sues and caut ions need to be ra i sed about

the research on chi ldren who have been exposed to violence .

Although being exposed to violence i s an important fac tor , it

ra re ly happens in i so l a t ion from o ther s t r e s so r s in a ch i ld ' s l i f e

(e .g . , repeated separa t ions and dis rupt ions , f inanc ia l hardships ,

lack of adequate housing or she l t e r ) . In many circumstances a

chi ld may persona l ly experience severa l forms of violence

21



themselves as ide from being exposed to t he i r mother ' s

vic t imiza t ion . The most conservat ive es t imates suggest a t l e a s t a

minimum 30% over lap between wife assau l t and phys ica l chi ld abuse,

and some s tud i e s and recen t reviews have es t imated an over lap up to

70%. (Jaffe , supra , a t pp. 22-23.)

As out l ined in the nex t sec t ion , violence does not end with

separa t ion . Although th e physica l vio lence may te rminate , the

ongoing i s sues of abuse of power and cont ro l may g e t played out

througha

custody dispute and compromise the ch i ld ren ' s emot ional

and behav io ra l adjustment .

22



I I I . FEAR OF LOSING CUSTODY OFTEN TRAPS BATTERED SPOUSES

Children are a cen t ra l focus in decis ions ba t t e red spouses

make about l eaving the b a t t e r e r o r s tay ing t rapped in an abusive

r e l a t i onsh i p .

Bat tered women of ten c i t e the ch i ld ren as a reason to remain

with t h e i r spouse, in addi t ion to othe r fac tors , such as fear ,

economic dependency, se l f -b lame, and lack of community suppor t .

(Hil ton. Battered women's concerns about t h e i r ch i ld ren witness ing

wife a s s a u l t (1992) J . of In te rpe rsona l Violence 7, pp. 77-86. )

They may be f i nanc i a l l y dependent on the b a t t e r e r and may a l so want

the presence of a fa the r , a lb e i t a poor ro le model. They may a l so

fea r los ing the ch i ldren , as many ba t t e r e r s t h rea ten t he i r par tne rs

with t ak ing away the ch i ld ren , and with proving her to be an

"unf i t " mother.

These fea r s are well- founded s ince some research sugges ts t ha t

pe rpe t r a to r s of domestic v io lence ac tua l ly have a good chance of

convincing judges t ha t they should have custody. (Zorza, Woman

ba t t e r i ng : a major cause of homelessness (1991) Clearinghouse

Review, 25 pp. 421-429.) Sometimes ba t te red spouses are depr ived

economical ly to the poin t of being l e f t homeless. On the othe r

hand, some ba t te red women may decide to l eave if they s t a r t to

recognize the impact the v io lence has on t h e i r chi ldren . Most

of ten , th i s decis ion happens a f t e r an i nc iden t of d i r ec t physica l

or sexua l abuse of the ch i ld ren , o r when the ba t te red spouse s t a r t s

to recognize the impact t ha t exposure to the v io lence has on t h e i r

chi ldren . (Hi l ton, supra , a t pp. 77-86.)

23



The research on chi ldren of divorce and t ha t of chi ldren

exposed to domestic vio lence has developed as tw o separa te

branches , which of ten l eads to conf l i c t ing advice fo r bat t e red

spouses.

The general l i t e r a t u r e on the impact of divorce s t resses the

negative in f luence of conf l i c t on chi ldren and the pos i t ive

in f luence of a co-parent ing re la t ionship where the chi ldren

maintain an ongoing, suppor t ive re la t ionship with both parents .

This i s of ten t rue fo r nonviolent fami l i e s . In r e a l i t y , though,

contes ted custody cases of ten represent a higher l e ve l of violence

compared to the genera l popula t ion of divorcing adul t s . (Johnston

& Campbell . Parent -ch i ld re la t ionship in domestic violence fami l ies

d isput ing custody (1993) Fam. Concil . Courts Rev. 31 pp. 282-298.)

When domest ic vio lence has been present , a co-parent ing

re la t ionship and the impact o f the conf l i c t on the chi ldren of ten

represents a negat ive inf luence on the ch i ldren . Many bat t e red

spouses are p laced in a s i tua t ion where they are advised to promote

a re la t ionship and se t as ide t he i r pa s t conf l i c t s with an ex-spouse

who may be a danger to themselves and t h e i r chi ldren . I f they do

not comply, they may be deemed "unfr iendly or unf i t parents" and

they can lose custody to an abusive parent . (Zorza. ' F r iendly

parent ' provis ions in custody determinat ions . (1992) Clearinghouse

Review 26 pp. 921-925.)

One of the most important i ssues t ha t of ten goes unrecognized

by many l ega l and mental hea l th profess iona l s i s t ha t the v io lence

does not end with separa t ion . Many chi ldren of bat t e red spouses

24



f ind t h e i r exper iences to be the opposi te .

A l a rge sca le s tudy of ch i ld ren of ba t te red women in she l t e r s

in Ca l i forn ia showed t ha t separa t ion t ends to l ead to an esca la t ion

of violence and a grea t e r danger fo r th e safe ty of t h e i r mother.

(Jaffe , supra , a t p . 24.) I t i s est rangement , not argument, t h a t

begets the wors t violence as a majori ty of spousa l murders happen

a f t e r the woman l eaves (deBecker, supra , a t p . 184. ) In f ac t , many

cour ts promote unsupervised v i s i t a t i o n orders , and t h i s may give

abusive spouses an ongoing oppor tuni ty to expose chi ldren to

violence o r t h r ea t s of vio lence . Recent c l i n i c a l ana lys i s in

Canada poin t s to th e ongoing psychologica l abuse whereby chi ldren

become pawns in custody ba t t l e s in order both to punish and devalue

t h e i r mother and to t r y to rewr i t e the his tory of abuse and

parent ing . ( Ja f fe , supra , a t p . 24.)

Paradoxical ly ,

repor ted because

women may not be be l ieved when violence

they are seen as exaggera t ing i nc iden t s

i s

o f

violence as a way of manipulat ing the cour t s . Many of these women

who su f fe r pos t t raumat ic s t r e s s d i so rder have been l abe l led as

his t r ion ic o r worse. For example, a r ecen t a r t i c l e discussed a

supposed "Malicious Mother Syndrome" in divorce as an "explana t ion"

as to why some women hold animosi ty toward t h e i r former husbands,

at tempt to blame t he i r ex-husbands fo r a l l the problems by accus ing

them of various behaviors , and at tempt to not allow the fa thers to

see the chi ldren . ( Ja f fe , supra , a t p. 24.)

The American Psychologica l Assoc ia t ion Pres ident ia l Task Force

on Violence and th e Family (1996) recent ly summarized th e

25



l i t e r a tu r e in t h i s area , and .expressed concerns about th e l abe l l i ng

and pa tho log iz ing o f ba t t e r e d women in divorce and cus tody cases .

When such l abe l l i ng occurs , men's v io lence may be minimized as only

an emot iona l r e a c t i o n to the separa t ion . (American Psychologica l

Assoc ia t ion , I s sues and Dilemmas in Family Violence (1996) American

Psycho log ica l Associa t ion Pre s ide n t i a l Task Force on Violence and

the Family , pp. 13-15 . )

26



IV. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SHOULD BE A PRIMARY CONSIDERATION IN CHILD

CUSTODY DECISIONS

Domestic violence also p lay sa

s igni f icant p a r t in many

cus tody d i spu tes and should be a pr imary cons idera t ion in ques t ions

of both b e s t i n t e r e s t s and de t r imen t to ch i ld ren .

J a f f e contends t h a t the abusive paren t di scove rs t h a t , p o s t

marr iage , th e most e f fec t i ve way to hur t o r des t roy t he o the r

paren t i s through emot iona l o r psychological abuse u t i l i z i n g the

domest ic c o u r t s . He note s t h a t ch i ld ren in cr i s i s who openly

d i sc lose th e violence and trauma l ea rn to be s i l e n t - d i sc losu re

j u s t angers the person wi th the most power and may have d i r e c t and

i nd i rec t repercuss ions fo r them and t h e i r mother upon v i s i t a t i o n .

For many ch i ld ren , t h e i r mother has modeled s i l e nc e in th e

r e l a t i ons h ip , and t h i s pa t t e rn i s d i f f i c u l t to change, e s pe c i a l l y

if t h e i r s a f e ty i s fu r the r jeopardized by any d i sc losu re . ( Ja f fe ,

supra , a t p. 27.)

Dr. Ja f fe concludes t h a t the genera l i zed not ions o f j o i n t

cus tody and tw o equal .parents coopera t ive ly planning fo r t h e i r

ch i l d ren ' s fu tu re i s impossible fo r many couples when the re i s

family violence. In f ac t , he be l i eves t ha t fo r ba t t e r e d spouses ,

t h i s not ion of shared cus tody may perpe tua te the violence and

abus ive power and con t ro l in family r e l a t i ons h ips .

A. PROTECTING CHILDREN FROM HARM

In cases involving documented domest ic violence , it i s 'in th e

bes t i n t e r e s t s of ch i ld ren to re s i d e with a non-v io len t care taker ,

r a the r than a b a t t e r e r .

27



In determining the b e s t in te re s t s of th e chi ld , Cal i fo rn ia

Family Code (3011) 6requi res t ha t the Court cons ider any his tory

of abuse by one parent aga ins t the chi ld o r aga ins t the othe r

pa rent .

Ca l i forn ia i s not a lone in inc luding domestic violence as a

fac tor to be considered in determining the bes t i n t e r e s t s of a

chi ld . In fac t , even when a dispute i s between a paren t and a non-

paren t , 35 s t a t e s have s t a t u t e s t ha t requ i re courts to cons ider

evidence o f domestic violence or abuse of a spouse when making

chi ld cus tody or v i s i t a t i o n determinat ion .

Before the cour t reaches th e be s t i n t e r e s t s t e s t , the non-

paren t seeking custody must prove det r iment if the chi ld i s placed

with th e paren t , "by c l e a r and convincing evidence". (Guardianship

of Stephen G. (1995) 40 Cal. App.4th. 1418.) Clear and convincing

i s descr ibed as nothing l ess than evidence t ha t " is so c l e a r as to

leave no subs t an t i a l doubt. I t must be su f f i c i en t ly s t rong to

6Family Code sec t ion 3011 s t a t e s in par t :"In making a dete rmina t ion of the bes t i n t e r e s t of the chi ld in aproceeding descr ibed in sec t ion 3021, the cour t sha l l , among anyo ther fac tors it f inds re levant , cons ider a l l of the fol lowing:a) The hea l th , sa fe ty , and welfare of the chi ld , b)Any his tory of

abuse by a paren t , o r any o the r person seeking custody aga ins t anyof th e fol lowing: 1) Any ch i l d to whom he o r she i s r e l a t ed byblood o r a f f i n i t y or with whom he o r she has had a care taking

re la t ionship , no mat te r how temporary. 2) The o ther paren t . 3) Aparent , current spouse , or cohabi tan t , of the paren t or personseeking custody, or a person with whom the paren t o r person seekingcustody has a dat ing or engagement re la t ionship . (Emphasis a9ded.)

As a pre - requ i s i t e to the considera t ion of a l l e ga t ions of

abuse, the cour t may requ i re subs t an t i a l independent cor robora t ion

including , but not l imi ted to , wri t ten repor t s by law enforcementagencies ... As used in th i s subd iv i s ion , ' abuse aga ins t a ch i l d 'means ' c h i ld abuse ' as def ined in Sect ion 11165.6 of the Penal Codeand abuse agains t any of the o ther persons descr ibed in Sect ion

6203 of the Family Code."

28



command an unhe s i t a t i ng as sen t in every reasonable mind". (In re

David C. (1984) 154 Cal. App. 3d. 1189, 1208.)

The def in i t i on of det r iment i s f a i r l y broad and inc ludes more

than d i rec t phys ica l abuse between paren t and chi ld . In re Heather

(1996) 52 Cal . App. 4 th 183, i l l u s t r a t e s the poin t . There, th e

t r i a l cour t denied cus tody to an ordained mini s t e r who bea t h is

wife . The f a th e r ' s h i s t o ry o f abuse inc luded choking, h i t t ing and

t h rea t s to k i l l h is wife . The ch i ld ren , twin 5-year o ld daughters ,

had not been beaten , but t h e i r stepmother , Ramona, the beat ing

vic t im, sa id they were in the room dur ing severa l of the inc idents

and once accompanied her to th e hosp i t a l .

In the case , the fa the r , i den t i f i ed as Harold A., pleaded no

contes t to spousa l abuse in September, 1994, an inc ident which l e f t

Ramona a head f r ac t u re which requi red hospi t a l i za t ion . This

beat ing did not occur in f ron t of the chi ldren as they were as leep

in another p a r t of the house. Afte r the inc ident , Los Angeles

County soc ia l workers t r i ed to remove th e chi ldren from h is care .

However, during a 1995 custody hear ing, t he m in i s te r denied h i t t i n g

h is wife and sa id he en te red the p le a only to "preserve the

family". (In re Heather A., supra, a t p . 317.)

Never theless , the Super ior Court judge denied custody to both

the fa the r and stepmother , and ordered the chi ldren placed in

fos t e r care . The ru l ing was upheld by the Second Dis t r i c t Court o f

Appeal. In addi t ion to poss ib le phys ica l i n ju ry the g i r l s f a ~ e d in

a v io len t household, they could s u f f e r " las t ing psychologica l

damage" i f exposed to the abuse of t h e i r stepmother, the Appel la te

29



Court sa id , underscor ing t_he spec ia l r i sk presented by family

v io lence :

11 I t i s c lea r to th i s Court t ha t domestic v io lence in the

household where chi ldren are l i v i ng i s neg lec t ; it i s f a i l u re

to p ro t e c t ( the twins) from subs t an t i a l r i sk of encounter ing

the vio lence and s u f f e r ing se r ious phys ica l harm o r i l l n e s s

from it. Such neg lec t causes the r i s k . 11 (In re Heather A.,

supra , a t pp. 315-322.)

As to cur ren t and fu ture detr iment , the Court found t ha t

domest ic violence in the same household where ch i ld ren were l iv ing

i s "secondary abuse" 7of the ch i ld ren . (In re Heather A. , supra ,

a t p . 3OS.)

Despi te the f indings of Ja f fe and o thers , and t h i s r ecen t

decis ion which underscores spec ia l r i sks to chi ldren from l iv ing

with a ba t t e r e r , resea rch ind ica tes t ha t custody eva lua to rs seldom

cons ider domestic v io lence in making chi ld custody recommendations.

A survey of psychologis t s from 39 s t a t e s who conducted custody

eva lua t ions amazingly ind ica tes tha t domest ic violence was not

considered a major f ac t o r in making custody determinat ions except

as a poss ib le r a t iona l i za t ion fo r not recommending j o i n t custody.

(Ackerman & Ackerman, "Child Custody Evaluat ion Prac t ices : A 1996

Survey of Psychologis ts" (1996) Fam. L.Q. 30(3) , p . 565.) Even

7 The concept of 11 secondary abuse 1 was recognized in In ·re Jon~ w h e r e a f a t he r ques t ioned the s u i t ab i l i t y of the minor ' s motherto be a cus tod ia l parent . The Court found t ha t there had beenongoing domestic v io lence between the minor ' s parents which mustinevi tab ly have a f fec ted the chi ld even though he had not beenphys ica l ly in jured . (In re Jon N., supra a t pp. 156, 161. )

30



then, it was seldom l i s t e d as a determining fac tor . When the

psychologis t s were asked fo r three to f ive reasons tha t would most

suppor t not recommending j o in t custody, family/domest ic violence

was the second l e a s t l i k e ly reason. Of more concern was the

f inding tha t over th ree quar te rs of the custody evaluators

recommend denying sole or j o in t custody to a parent who "a l i ena tes

the chi ld from the othe r pa rent by negat ive ly i n t e rp re t ing the

o the r paren t ' s behavior" . (Ackerman & Ackerman, supra , a t p . 565.)

This l a t t e r f inding ind ica tes tha t custody eva lua tors may be

more l ike ly to blame the parent seen as more hos t i l e and

uncooperat ive and, thus, deny the parent sole or j o in t custody even

in cases involving domestic vio lence .

B. BEST INTEREST AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

In custody cases , Family Courts have a long his tory of

examining a wide range of paren t s ' behavior as it r e l a t e s to the

chi ldren ' s bes t i n t e r e s t . In cases of domestic violence, the cour t

should examine a wide spectrum of parents ' behavior , not j u s t

whether they have been convic ted of bea t ing a spouse as violence i s

r a r e ly ever i so la ted .

However, judges are of ten faced with another paradox inherent

in ba t t e r i ng re l a t i onsh i ps . On one hand, cour ts a re often

presented with evidence showing spec ia l r i sks chi ldren face when

they are placed in the cus tody of an abuser - r i sks , not only to

t he i r physica l safe ty , bu t also to t h e i r emotional and

developmental needs. On the o the r hand, j u r i s t s are to ld by court -

appointed exper ts - who may, as the Ackerman s tudy poin t s out ,

31



downplay domest ic violence -· t ha t the chi ldren in a given case have

a ' ' c lose bond" with a paren t who has committed domestic v io lence .

In f ac t , the chi ldren may even say they " jus t want to go home".

The apparent closeness between a pe rpe t r a to r of domestic

violence and t h e i r ch i ld ren , whether ba t te red or no t , i s expla ined

by the concept of " t raumat ic bonding" . 8 These i n t e rm i t t e n t

mal t rea tment pa t t e rns have been found to produce s t rong emot ional

at tachments and i s the very reason many ba t t e red spouses s tay in

abus ive r e l a t i ons h ips (Dutton, supra , a t p. 191.) Simi lar ly ,

ch i ld ren may also appear emot iona l ly close to the very paren t who

i s th e most dangerous because they are a f ra id of them. But, as

Perry po in t s out , l iv ing with domest ic violence only makes it more

l i ke ly the c h i ld w i l l r epea t the cyc le of violence themselves .

(Perry, supra , a t p. 124-149.) In fac t , ch i ld ren who grow up in

abus ive homes are more a t r i sk fo r committ ing violence themselves,

bothwithin

andouts ide

t h e i rown f ami l ies

(Dutton, supra ,a t

p.

ix . )

C. SPOUSAL MURDER AND DETRIMENT TO CHILDREN

Psychological det r iment to chi ldren by the murder of a paren t

i s ind isputable and i r r epa rable in terms of t h e i r l o s s . When

address ing t h i s ques t ion of det r iment , the cour t should examine the

" to t a l i t y of the evidence" r e l a t ed to cur ren t and fu ture harm to

the ch i ld ren . (Guardianship of Phi l l ip B, supra , a t pp. 407,421.)

8 "Traumatic bonding" i s the development of s t rong emot ionalt i e s between tw o persons, wi th one person in te rmi t ten t ly harass ing ,

beat ing , th rea tening , abus ing o r in t imida t ing the o ther . (Dutton,supra , a t p . 190)"

32



A major i ty o f female homicide vic t ims are k i l l ed by t he i r

par tne rs , ex-pa r tne rs , o r boyfr iends . (Jaf fe , supra , a t p. 20;

Gelles and St rauss , supra, a t p. 18.) However, in domestic

disputes , the re are numerous pre- inc ident ind ica tors a s soc ia ted

with spousa l vio lence and murder. deBecker, who grew up in a

family with domestic violence , descr ibed these "pre- inc ident"

behaviors as s i gna l s . Noting t h a t they wil l not be presen t in

every case , he caut ions tha t i f a s i tua t ion has severa l of these

ind ica tors , t he re i s reason fo r concern. (deBecker, supra , a t p .

174.)

1) The woman has i n tu i t i ve fee l ings t ha t she i s a t r i sk .2) At the incept ion of the r e l a t i onsh i p , the man accelera ted

th e pace, prematurely plac ing on the agenda such th ings

as commitment, l iv ing toge the r , and marr iage.3) He reso lves conf l i c t with in t imidat ion , bul ly ing , and

vio lence .

4) He i s verba l ly abusive.5) He uses th rea t s and in t imida t ion as ins truments of

cont ro l o r abuse. This inc ludes t h rea t s to harm

phys ica l ly , to defame, to embarrass , to r e s t r i c t freedom,to disc lose sec re t s , to cu t o ff suppor t , to abandon, andto commit suic ide .

6) He breaks or s t r ikes th ings in anger . He uses symbolicviolence ( tear ing a wedding photo, marring a face in aphoto, e t c . ) .

7) He has bat t e red in pr io r re la t ionships .8) He uses alcohol or drugs with adverse a f f ec t s (memory

loss , hos t i l i t y , c rue l t y ) .9) He c i t e s alcohol or drugs as an excuse or explanat ion fo r

hos t i l e or v io l e n t conduct ("That was the booze t a lk ing ,not me: I go t so drunk I was crazy") .

10) His h i s t o ry inc ludes pol ice encounters fo r behaviora l

offenses ( threa t s , s ta lk ing , assau l t , ba t t e ry ) .11) There has been more than one inc ident of v io l e n t behavior

( including vandalism, breaking th ings , throwing th ings) .12) He uses money to cont ro l the a c t i v i t i e s , p u r c h a s e ~ , and

behavior o f his wi fe /pa r tne r . ·13) He becomes jealous of anyone o r anything t ha t takes he r

time away from the re la t ionship ; he keeps her on a " t igh tl eash" , requires her to account fo r her t ime.

14) He re fuses to accept re jec t ion .15) He expects the re la t ionship to go on forever , perhaps

33



us ing phrases l i ke " together fo r l i f e " , "always", "nomat te r what."

16) He pro j ec t s extreme emotions onto others (hate , love ,

j ea lousy , commitment) even when there i s no evidence t ha t

would l ead a reasonable person to perceive them.17) He minimizes inc idents of abuse.18) He spends a d i sp ropor t iona te amount of t ime t a lk ing about

h is wife /pa r tne r and derives much of h is i d e n t i t y frombeing her husband, lover , e tc .

19) He t r i e s to e n l i s t h is wife ' s f r i ends o r r e l a t ives in acampaign to keep o r recover th e re la t ionship .

20) He has inappropr ia te ly surve i led or followed h is

wi fe /pa r tne r .21) He be l i eves o the rs a re out to g e t him. He be l i eves t h a t

those around his wi fe /pa r tne r d i s l i ke him and encourageher to leave.

22) He r e s i s t s change and i s descr ibed as i n f l ex ib l e ,

unwi l l ing to compromise.23) He i den t i f i e s with o r compares himself to v io l e n t people

in f i lms, news s to r i e s , f i c t i on , o r his tory . Hecharac te r izes the v io lence of others as j u s t i f i e d .

24) He su f fe r s mood swings o r i s s u l l e n , angry, o r depressed.25) He c ons i s t e n t ly blames o thers fo r problems of h is own

making; he re fuses to take r e spons i b i l i t y fo r the re su l t sof h is ac t ions .

26) He r e f e r s to weapons as ins t ruments of power, cont ro l , o r

revenge.27) Weapons are a subs t an t i a l p a r t of h is persona: he has a

gun o r he t a l k s about , jokes about, reads about , or

co l l ec t s weapons.

28) He uses "male pr iv i lege" as a j u s t i f i c a t i o n fo r h i sconduct ( t rea t s h er l ike a servant , makes a l l the b ig

dec i s ions , acts l i ke the "master of the house".29) He exper ienced o r witnesses violence as a chi ld .30) His wife /pa r tne r fea r s he wi l l in jure or k i l l her . She

has discussed t h i s with othe r or has made plans to beca r r i ed out in th e event of her death (e .g . , designat ing

someone to care fo r chi ldren) . (deBecker, supra , a t p.175. ) 9

9 The above list of behaviors has been used by deBecker to

develop a computer program, MOSAIC-20, t ha t assesses the deta. i ls of

abused spouse ' s s i tua t ion as they repor t it to pol ice (deB·ecker,supra, a t p. 191) . MOSAIC-20 i s now used in the Los Angeles CountyS h e r i f f ' s Department, the Los Angeles County Dis t r i c t At to rney ' s

of f i ce , and othe r po l i ce departments across the country, to f l agcases in which the danger of homicide i s highest . (deBecker, supra ,

atp. 313-314. )

34



In the case a t bench, Judge Nancy Weiben Stock heard evidence

of a pat te rn of domest ic vio lence perpe t ra ted by the f a t he r towards

the mother which i s cons i s t en t with the above list of ind ica tors

assoc ia t ed with spousa l vio lence and murder. These behaviors

inc luded, but were no t l imi ted to , verba l and phys ica l abuse,

a r r e s t of the fa ther for domestic vio lence , s lapping inc ident s on

a t l ea s t th ree separa te occas ions , as wel l as s ta tements by the

mother to dispatch pol ice in an inc ident of al leged v io lence . (In

re Sydney and Jus t i n S . , supra , a t pp. 6-7.) Nevertheless , the

t r i a l cour t decl ined to hear the t o t a l i t y of the evidence on

whether the f a t he r was responsib le fo r the death of the mother ,

s t a t ing t h i s "would not be in the bes t i n t e r e s t s of the ch i ldren"

because of cons iderable r i s k o f fur ther damaging pub l i c i ty and

delays in the custody dec is ion . (In re Sydney and Jus t in S . , supra ,

a t pp . 9 -1 o . )

Amici bel ieve the j udge ' s decis ion inappropr ia te ly discounted

concerns regarding the ch i ld ren ' s safe ty in favor of l ess impor tant

considera t ions such as adverse publ ic i ty and delays in the custody

decis ion .

35



V. THE BEST INTERESTS OF CHILDREN ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN THOSE

OF BIOLOGICAL PARENTS

Children s sa fe t y and well -being should be the court 1 s primary

concern above th e prev ious ly assumed bes t i n t e r e s t s of the

bio logica l pa rents .

In determinat ion of cus tody 1 the b e s t i n t e r e s t s tandard i s

genera l ly used with the under ly ing not ion t ha t the re are two fit

b io log ic a l ( legal ) parents . In parent /non-parent d i spu tes / the

det r iment s tandard i s used to counterbalance the b io log ic a l parents

grea t e r l ega l r i gh t to the chi ld .

But 1 i f a paren t was an admit ted b a t t e r e r and had been found

to have caused the dea th o f the other spouse/ should th e Court

automat ica l ly grant custody to t ha t surviv ing paren t 1 given t ha t

det r iment had a l ready occur red to the chi ldren due to the loss of

a parent? Should the Court look a t a wide range o f domestic

v io l e n t behaviors of t h a t su rv iv ing paren t 1 across t ime 1 before

making a determinat ion of what i s in the chi ldren 1 s bes t i n t e re s t s?

Or 1 in the a l t e rna t i ve / should th e Court only be concerned i f the

surv iv ing spouse had been convic ted of spousal abuse/ ignor ing the

fac t t ha t violence i s r a r e ly ever i so la ted? Should the Court

unders tand t ha t gr iev ing chi ldren may a l so be t r aumat ica l ly bonded

and express a prefe rence to l i ve with the surviv ing parent / even if

he i s a ba t t e re r?

Whose bes t i n t e r e s t s are primary: the ch i ld ren o r the

surviv ing bio logica l paren t who may be a pe rpe t r a to r o f domestic

vio lence?

36



The chi ldren1

S bes t i n t e r e s t s are primary and keeping them

from harm1s way supersedes the bes t i n t e r e s t s of bio logica l paren t s

who have a h i s to ry of domest ic v io lence . Therefore 1 amici makes

the same presumpt ion c l i n i c a l l y as has the Nat iona l Council &

Family Court Judges in t h e i r 1994 Model Code on Family Violence:

There should be a rebu t t ab le presumpt ion agains t so le custody o r

j o i n t custody fo r abusive par tne rs even if they have never d i r ec t ly

abused t h e i r ch i ld ren . 10

As demonst ra ted in t h i s b r i e f / domestic violence i s harmful to

ch i ld ren , whether they are abused or no t . Therefore , domestic

violence i s presumed to be de t r imen ta l to chi ldren as wel l as not

be in t h e i r bes t i n t e r e s t s . To t h i s end1

the sa fe ty and wel l -be ing

of ch i ld ren should be e leva ted above a l l bes t i n t e r e s t fac to rs in

those disputed custody cases where there has been a f inding of

10 Regarding custody the Model Code s t a t e s : (Sect ion 401) "In

every proceeding where t he re i s / a t l ea s t 1 a t i s sue a dispute as tocustody of a chi ld 1 a dete rmina t ion by the cour t t ha t domestic or

family vio lence has occurred, ra i ses a rebu t t ab le presumption t ha ti s detr imenta l to th e chi ld and not in the bes t i n t e r e s t s of thechi ld to be placed in so le custody, j o i n t l ega l custody, or j o i n t

phys ical custody with a pe rpe t r a to r of family v io lence ." (M::delCode, supra , a t p . 33.)

Given t h i s rebu t t ab le presumption/ the Model Code (Sect ion402) l i s t s fac to rs t ha t should be u t i l i zed in dete rmining cus todyand v i s i t a t ion when domestic violence has occurred.

"In add i t ion to the o ther fac to rs t ha t a cour t must cons ider

in the proceeding in which the custody of a ch i ld o r v i s i t a t ion bya parent i s a t i s sue in which the Court has made a f inding of

domestic or family violence:a) The Court sha l l cons ider as primary the sa fe ty and wel l

being of the chi ld and of the paren t who i sthe vic t im of domestic or family vio lence /

b) The Court sha l l cons ider the perpe t ra to r / s his tory of

caus ing phys ica l harm, bodi ly in jury / a s s a u l t or causingreasonable fea r of phys ical harm/ bodi ly i n ju ry o r

assaul t to another person. (Model Code/ supra a t p . 33)"

37



abuse by one paren t of the othe r .

A f inding of domest ic vio lence by a parent presumes detr iment

to the chi ldren i f they res ide with a ba t te re r as a primary

cus todian. (In re Heather A., supra, a t p. 317.) This f inding

compels the Court to consider , by his tory , both the ac t s and the

pat t e rns of physica l abuse i n f l i c t ed by the abuser on othe r

persons, not l imi ted to chi ldren and the abused parent , as wel l as

the f ea r of physica l harm reasonably engendered by th i s behavior .

Research f indings d iscussed in t h i s b r i e f ind ica te t ha t

domest ic violence i s r a r e ly ever i so la ted . Thus, amici contend

tha t d i sc re t e ac t s of abuse do not accura te ly convey the r i sk of

cont inuing vio lence , the l i k e ly seve r i t y of fu ture abuse, or the

magnitude of fear prec ip i t a t ed by the composite pic ture of vio len t

conduct .

By sh ie ld ing ch i ldren from fu ture det r iment through a

rebut tab le presumption, the court p laces t h e i r be s t i n t e r e s t s as

primary. This prevents the perpe t ra t o r of domest ic vio lence from

benef i t ing from h is v i o l en t , abusive conduct in cases such as

spousal murder, where custody of the ch i ldren may be awarded to the

surv iv ing parent .

In addi t ion to the Nat ional Council o f Juveni le and Family

Court Judges, the Cal i forn ia l eg is la ture gave the i s sue o f

ch i l d ren ' s s a fe t y top pr i o r i t y in chi ld custody decis ion making. 11

11 Effec t ive January 1, 1998, Assembly Bi l l 200, (Kuehl) amendsSect ions 3004, 3011, 3020, 3161, and 3162 of the Family Code. Th eLegis la t ive Counsel 's Digest s ta te s : " I t i s also the pol icy of t h i ss t a t e t ha t the hea l th , sa fe ty , and welfare of chi ldren sha l l be th ec o u r t ' s primary concern in determining bes t i n t e r e s t of chi ldren

38



Further, in 1994, the American Bar Associat ion recommended tha t

chi ldren ' s bes t i n t e res t s be elevated above those o f bio logica l

parents who are ba t t e r e r s . u

when making orders regarding custody o r vi s i t a t ion , t ha tperpe t ra t ion of chi ld abuse or domestic violence in a householdwhere a chi ld res ides i s det r imenta l to a chi ld , and where th i spol icy and the exis t ing pol icy a re in conf l i c t , an order fo rcustody and v i s i t a t i on should be made tha t ensures the heal th ,safe ty , and welfare of the chi ld and the safe ty of a l l familymembers." (Cal i fornia Legis la ture , Assembly B i l l 200 (1997)

paragraph 2)

l2The ABA recommended:" ... tha t custody not be awarded, in whole

or in pa r t , to a parent with a his tory of i n f l i c t ing domesticvio lence , t ha t vi s i t a t ion be awarded to such parent only i f thesafe ty and well-being of the abused parent and chi ldren can beprotec ted, and t ha t a l l awards of vi s i t a t ion incorpora te expl ic i tpro tec t ions for the chi ld and the abused parent (ABA Center onChildren and the Law. The Impact of Domestic Violence on Children:A Report to the Pres ident of the American Bar Associat ion.Washington, D.C., p. 15.)

39



VI. CONCLUSION

Chi ldren a re a t gre a t r i sk l i v ing with a perpe t ra t o r of

domest ic vio lence . Whether they have been abused or no t , they

experience th e same psychological fea r s and may be t r aumat ica l ly

bonded to the b a t t e r e r , even express ing a preference to l i ve with

them. In th e case o f spousa l murder , t hese ch i ld ren may s u f f e r

11 secondary abuse 1, adopt ing a pa t t e rn of emot ional compliance

because they may f e a r th e pena l ty fo r misbehaving could be phys ica l

harm. However, the grea t e s t fu ture harm ch i ld ren face l i v i ng with

a ba t t e r e r i s t h a t they w i l l l ive to exper ience the su rv iv ing

paren t bea t ano ther pa r tne r , r ecyc l ing the cl imate of fea r t ha t i s

so de t r imen ta l to ch i ld ren . Moreover, if they remain with a

ba t t e r e r , th e same neurob io log ica l adapta t ions t ha t helps them

psycho log ica l ly su rv ive the t raumas assoc ia t ed with domest ic

violence make it more l i ke ly they w i l l grow up to be v io l e n t

themselves.

To preven t fu tu re detr iment , ch i l d ren ' s sa fe ty and wel l being

should be elevated above the p rev ious ly assumed bes t i n t e r e s t s of

bio logica l pa rents . And, what i s most needed to in su re ch i l d ren ' s

protec t ion in custody cases where there has been domestic violence

i s a new commitment to p r io r i t i z e ch i l d ren ' s sa fe ty as an e s s e n t i a l

corners tone o f the j u s t i c e system. I f the j u s t i ce system cannot

o f f e r these ch i ld ren a vis ion of not being with a ba t t e r e r , t he re

40



can be no dream of a safe fu ture fo r them, because the cycle of

violence wi l l cont inue.

Dated: December 1 1997

41

Respec t fu l ly Submitted,

Stephen Temko, Esq.SBN 67785

Paul Mones, Esq.SBN 128329

Attorneys fo r Amici



DECLARATION OF SERVICE BY MAIL

I , Stephen Temko, dec la re :

I am over 18 years o f age, and n o t a par ty to th e wi th in

cause ; my bus iness address i s 1666 Garne t NO. 502, San Diego,

92109. I served one copy o f th e a t tached :AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF OF

STEPHEN E. DOYNE, Ph.D. , J REID MELOY, Ph.D. , DON DUTTON, Ph.D. ,PETER JAFFE, Ph.D. , PROFESSOR JANET BOWERMASTER, THE PUBLIC LAW

CENTER, THE CALIFORNIA WOMEN'S LAW CENTER AND THE CALIFORNIAALLIANCE AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

on each of the fo l lowing, by p lac ing same in an envelope (o r

envelopes addressed ( r espec t ive ly ) as fo l lows:

Bernie Leck ie , Esq.Meserve , Mumper & Hughes2301 Dupont DriveSui t e 410

I rv i n e , CA 92612Attorney fo r Respondent

Kimberly Kni l l , Esq.1461 GlenneyreSui te DLaguna Beach, CA 92651fax 714 497 9637

t e l : 714 497 8313

Attorney fo r Appel lan t

Court o f AppealFourth Appel la te D i s t r i c t

Divis ion Three925 Spurgion St r e e tSanta Ana, CA 92701714 558 67790+ 4

Each envelope was then , on December 1997 sea led anddepos i t ed in th e United St a t e s Mail a t San Diego, Cal i fo rn ia ,

The county in which I am employed, with th e postage thereon

fu l l y prepa id . I dec la re under pena l ty of per ju ry t h a t th e

foregoing i s t rue and c o r re c t .

Executed on December ___ , 1997 a t San Diego, C al i f o r n i a .

STEPHEN TEMKO

Documents

AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF