Course: 2021 IPV/DV Update
Instructors: Lori A. Love, Ph.D., William G. Austin, M.S., Ph.D.., Ph.D.; Summer Stephan, Esq., San Diego Co. District Attorney
Approved for 4.0 Hours of CE Credit
Fulfills License Requirements
High Resolution Online Streaming Video
Intimate Partner Violence and Child Custody: Forensic Model, Social Science & Practical Application
A comprehensive overview and guide of how to approach the Intimate Partner Violence – Child Custody Case (IPV-CC) is presented. IPV is one of the complex and special issues that often confront custody evaluators. Professional guidelines (AFCC) call on evaluators to take a systematic approach to the complex problems in their implementation of forensic procedures for data collection, analysis, and offering expert opinions and recommendations. Forensic models and frameworks are described to assist in the systematic approach to IPV cases. Larger issues involved in child custody evaluations are discussed that pose challenges. Evaluators are encouraged to follow a mindful and outside thinking gestalt as they face dilemmas that require creativity in the implementation of their Forensic Trade Craft. Development of forensic IPV typologies are discussed. Advances in the development of IPV conceptualization have occurred in the context of family law-child custody. The Austin IPV models on IPV patterns and assessment of credibility are presented in the context of enhancing forensic investigation. The Austin & Drozd comprehensive forensic model is present as a social science-based framework to guide evaluators. The “Bench Book” version of the model for judges is discussed, including a rating checklist for considering the evaluator’s custody report. Principles of violence risk assessment are part of the integrated framework. The problem of IPV victims’ failure to disclose abuse is addressed. The quandary of conducting a parental gatekeeping analysis in IPV-CC cases is discussed with a description of the Austin et al forensic gatekeeping model. The need to modify the gatekeeping analysis for the IPV context is discussed. Inadequate and superficial IPV assessment is identified as a widespread problem that gave rise to creating the AFCC Guidelines. The severe form of IPV, Coercive Control, Intrusive-Authoritarian IPV (CCIA) is described along with coercive coparenting that often follows separation. Guidelines strongly suggest screening for IPV in every child custody evaluation. The Worst Case Scenario (WCS) issue is discussed with the “red flag” analysis that comes from the targeted violence literature. Implications of the IPV assessment for creating parenting plans and managing coercive coparenting is discussed. Case vignettes will be intermixed. Considering the implications of considering past IPV in Relocation cases will be discussed in the context of Austin’s relocation risk assessment model.
Course Goal and Objectives
At the conclusion of this program:
CE Approval Information
Your access to the course material extends for 3-years from the date of purchase. This includes after passing the post-test, so you may continue to review its contents.