000			03375nab a22002897a 4500
999			_c6384 _d6384
005			20250625151515.0
008			190918s2019 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_aAFVC
100			_98516 _aSilberg, Joyanna L.
245			_aAbusers gaining custody in family courts : _ba case series of over turned decisions _cJoyanna Silberg and Stephanie Dallam
260			_bTaylor & Francis, _c2019
500			_aJournal of Child Custody, 2019, 16(2): 140-169
520			_aThis article presents findings and recommendations based on an in-depth examination of records from 27 custody cases from across the United States. The goal of this case series was to determine why family courts may place children with a parent that the child alleges abused them rather than with the nonoffending parent. We focused on “turned around cases” involving allegations of child abuse that were at first viewed as false and later judged to be valid. The average time a child spent in the court ordered custody of an abusive parent was 3.2 years. In all cases we uncovered the father was the abusive parent and the mother sought to protect their child. Results revealed that initially courts were highly suspicious of mothers' motives for being concerned with abuse. These mothers were often treated poorly and two-thirds of the mothers were pathologized by the court for advocating for the safety of their children. Judges who initially ordered children into custody or visitation with abusive parents relied mainly on reports by custody evaluators and guardians ad litem who mistakenly accused mothers of attempting to alienate their children from the father or having coached the child to falsely report abuse. As a result, 59% of perpetrators were given sole custody and the rest were given joint custody or unsupervised visitation. After failing to be protected in the first custody determination, 88% of children reported new incidents of abuse. The abuse often became increasingly severe and the children's mental and physical health frequently deteriorated. The main reason that cases turned around was because protective parents were able to present compelling evidence of the abuse and back the evidence up with reports by mental health professionals who had specific expertise in child abuse rather than merely custody assessment. (Authors' abstract). See related articles published in Volume 16(1): Special Issue Part I: Misperceptions and Misapplications of Research in Family Law Cases: Myths of “Parental Alienation Syndrome” and Implanted False Memories, and Volume 16(2): Special Issue Part II: Misperceptions and Misapplications of Research in Family Law Cases. (Guest Editor for both issues: Morgan Shaw). Record #6384
650			_aCHILD SEXUAL ABUSE _9121
650			_aFAMILY COURT _9241
650			_aFAMILY LAW _9244
650			_aSEPARATION _9522
650		4	_aCONTACT (ACCESS) _929
651		4	_aUNITED STATES _92646
700			_98515 _aDallam, Stephanie
773	0		_tJournal of Child Custody, 2019, 16(2): 140-169
830			_aJournal of Child Custody _94729
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1080/15379418.2019.1613204 _zRead abstract
856			_uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/toc/wjcc20/16/1?nav=tocList _zSpecial issue: Par I
856			_uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/toc/wjcc20/16/2?nav=tocList _zSpecial issue: Part II
942			_2ddc _cARTICLE