A Framework for Defining and Discussing Domestic Violence in Child Welfare Systems

Creating frameworks that address the issue of domestic violence for our audiences is central to our work at Safe & Together Institute. While the connection between domestic violence and child safety is intuitive on one level, child welfare systems face both bureaucratic and conceptual barriers to linking the two in practice. The Safe & Together Model provides a framework for defining and discussing domestic violence within the child welfare system that aids the system in breaking down some of the barriers they face to improve their practice.

Defining domestic violence

The Department of Justice’s Office of Violence Against Women defines domestic violence in the following way: “We define domestic violence as a pattern of abusive behavior in any relationship that is used by one partner to gain or maintain power and control over another intimate partner. Domestic violence can be physical, sexual, emotional, economic, or psychological actions or threats of actions that influence another person. This includes any behaviors that intimidate, manipulate, humiliate, isolate, frighten, terrorize, coerce, threaten, blame, hurt, injure, or wound someone.”

Key aspects of the definition

This definition highlights some key aspects of domestic violence including:

• A pattern of abusive behavior that goes beyond physical violence and criminal acts
• A focus on power and control as a central goal of the behavior pattern
• It occurs within the context of an intimate relationship
• It reflects the impact of these behaviors on the adult domestic violence survivor.
• It has the virtue of being gender-neutral, which allows it to cover domestic violence occurring within same-sex relationships. It also addresses those rare scenarios where a female partner is engaging in a pattern of coercive control against a male partner.

This definition is similar to one used by agencies and individuals across the world. It highlights the pervasive and serious nature of domestic violence. This understanding of the abusive behavior pattern is exactly what we refer to in the Safe & Together Model. Identifying “patterns of coercive control” is one of the five Critical Components of the Model. These Critical Components are foundational to informed domestic violence practice.

Two Major Aspects of Domestic Violence

Starting from this foundational understanding of domestic violence, my colleagues and I have worked to support child welfare agencies and communities in using the Safe & Together Model. In our discussions, we’ve found it very important to highlight the two following major points:

1)  Domestic violence is a choice or series of choices made by one person to act in ways that are abusive, violent and/or controlling towards their family members.

This language and focus highlight that there is a person who is responsible for the violence and its consequences. This is especially important when discussing domestic violence and children. The language ends up obscuring the specific responsibility of the perpetrator. For example, someone might say, “the couple has a history of domestic violence,”. Or, they might say, “the mother and father engaged in domestic violence. The children have been exposed to domestic violence” is also a common phrase used to describe domestic violence.

An active construction

So, we use active construction instead of using passive construction.

Active construction highlights the actor and their responsibility, not just the actions. For example, “The father has engaged in a pattern of coercive control and actions taken to harm the children. This pattern has involved the following behaviors: attempted strangulation of the mother while she was pregnant; threatening to kidnap their child if the mother left him; and physically assaulting mother in the presence of their child.”

By widening the focus of the discussion to include both the acts of domestic violence and the actor, we accomplish a number of different things simultaneously. First, the language itself helps create accountability for behavior.  It “names” the person responsible for the harm to the child and the family. Domestic violence isn’t like the weather-it doesn’t just happen. It’s the result of choices made by a person who is often in a caregiver role with children.  When we write and talk about domestic violence and children, our language should reflect this relationship and reality. When we do that, we:

• Increase the accuracy and clarity of our assessments
• Change the way we talk to family members and collaterals
• Paint a clearer picture of our concerns in our documentation and court papers
• Draw the clearest possible line between the perpetrator’s behavior and the adverse impact on children.

Addressing Gender Bias

Additionally, the language change is even more significant in a child welfare system that holds mothers and fathers to such differing standards around parenting. Language that doesn’t highlight the personal responsibility and choices of a father who abuses is likely to boomerang back against the domestic violence survivor. Because we are in the habit of holding mothers more responsible for the basic needs, day-to-day care and well-being of children., we hold her more responsible. When we use language that highlights the choices the perpetrator makes in the context of his role as a caregiver, we move closer to perpetrator accountability.

2)  The next shift in focus involves highlighting the perpetrator’s pattern as being the source of the problem versus the relationship as the source of the problem.

A lot of work has been done in the domestic violence field to dispel the myth that domestic violence is the product of relationship dysfunction. Instead, advocates and others have argued that domestic violence is about power and control exerted by one person over another. In saying this, we are articulating that domestic violence is the responsibility of the perpetrator of the violence and abuse. Still, we often think of the relationship between the adults as the defining characteristic of the domestic violence.

Acknowledging the Relationship Aspect

In the OVW definition above, this is suggested in the phrase: “is used by one partner to gain or maintain power and control over another intimate partner.”   With this language we end up implying that the partnership defines the boundaries of the domestic violence. Acknowledging the relationship aspect of domestic violence is critical to understanding how and why this behavior is so different from stranger assault or anger management issues. Acknowledging the relationship aspect also helps explain key dynamics of domestic violence such as the entrapment, isolation from the community and the role children play in the ongoing nature of the abuse.

At the same time, if we unconsciously default to the relationship as the exclusive lens for viewing domestic violence, it can build in certain filters and biases that can hamper our assessment capacities and may direct us towards blaming domestic violence survivors for the behavior of their abuser.

Emphasizing the Perpetrator’s Pattern of Behavior

By consciously emphasizing the perpetrator’s pattern of behavior as the focus of any attempt to understand the risk and safety concerns for the family, we once again accomplish a number of things simultaneously:

We widen our lens to include the perpetrator’s behavior in other relationships and other situations.

We shouldn’t just care about his behavior towards his current partner when we are interested in assessing dangerousness and safety. Among other things, we should also want to know about any abusive behavior in other relationships and any violence with non-family members. Maybe he has participated in gang-related activities.  Maybe he’s been arrested for violating court orders granted to protect another woman. This kind of information is likely to help our assessment of risk and safety for his current partner and children.

It becomes easier to avoid incorrectly using relationship status or living arrangements as proxies for risk and safety assessment.

In many cases, child safety discussions can boil down to two questions: “Is she going to stay with him or not?” and “Is he still living in the home?”    These types of questions assume that the end of the relationship or a change of address automatically equals enhanced child safety and well-being.

Anyone familiar with domestic violence perpetrator behavior patterns knows this is a false, unrealistic and potentially dangerous assumption. By consciously focusing on the perpetrator’s patterns, it becomes habitual to explore how his pattern is changing. For example, with the involvement of child protection, is he becoming more or less dangerous? What’s his parenting like when he sees the children during visits? How is the father influencing the children’s behaviors with the mother even though he is no longer in the home? This focus on his behavior pattern versus relationship status or living arrangement will lead to better assessments and case planning.

It’s easier to support integrating his behavior toward the adult survivor with his behavior toward the children.

The fact that domestic violence has primarily been defined as an adult-to-adult issue is part of the conceptual challenge for child welfare systems. This definition has made it harder to identify and describe the full range of behaviors that domestic violence perpetrators engage in, particularly those that involve, impact or target the children in the family.

Instead of a focus on the adult-to-adult relationship, a focus on the perpetrator’s pattern allows to us to weave together a much more holistic and accurate picture of the perpetrator’s behaviors and their impact on the entire family.  For example, we want to highlight how his jealousy towards his partner led to his children having less time with friends. We want to connect the mother’s increased sense of entrapment with his expectation that the children be home-schooled since he doesn’t trust anyone else to teach his children. His obsessive jealousy and his distrust of outsiders are part of his pattern of thinking and acting.)

It helps restrain tendencies toward victim blaming that comes with a relationship–based lens.

At its extreme manifestation, I’ve heard child welfare workers say, “They are no longer together, so domestic violence is no longer a factor for the children.”  This thinking is often associated with victim blaming. This manifests in statements such as: “if the victim would have the (substitute any of the following: guts, courage, insight, commitment to her children), then she would leave the relationship or get away from him.”  The implication is that by ending the relationship, she ends the danger, particularly as it relates to the children. As domestic violence survivors and their advocates know too well, the ending of the relationship far from guarantees an end to the perpetrator’s pattern of abuse and harassment, especially since an end of the relationship almost always gives him regular unsupervised access to the children, and through the children, ongoing, court-sanctioned access to the adult survivor.

A Framework for Defining and Discussing Domestic Violence

So for your consideration is the following working framework for defining and discussing domestic violence with the child welfare community and others:

Domestic violence perpetrators, in the context of the child welfare system, are parents and/or caregivers who engage in a pattern of coercive control against one or more intimate partners. This pattern of behavior may continue after the end of a relationship, or when the couple no longer lives together. The perpetrator’s actions often directly involve, target and impact any children in the family.

This definition reflects how we begin our Safe & Together model trainings.  In the past, like many domestic violence trainings, our trainings began by outlining the impact of domestic violence on adult and child survivors.  Now, we start our trainings by highlighting the perpetrator’s choices and behavior patterns. By clearly identifying the person who is choosing to be violent, widening the lens beyond the relationship and weaving together behaviors directed towards the adult and child survivors, we provide a greater context for understanding survivor decision-making and the impact the perpetrator’s behavior is having on the children and family functioning.

Our experience is that this approach increases domestic violence perpetrator accountability, reduces victim blaming, and improves assessments and case plans regarding the safety and well-being of children.  This framework produces identifiable and measurable changes in the ways workers talk to clients, document domestic violence in their case notes and how they approach their case plans.

Find out more about our Safe & Together Model CORE Training.

by David Mandel