Lily J. Jiang, Amy G. Applegate JD, Claire S. Tomlinson, Fernanda S. Rossi PhD, Connie J. Beck PhD, Jeannie M. Adams MA, Amy Holtzworth-Munroe PhD
{"title":"父母报告伴侣暴力:在调解中达成或未达成协议或未经调解提起诉讼","authors":"Lily J. Jiang, Amy G. Applegate JD, Claire S. Tomlinson, Fernanda S. Rossi PhD, Connie J. Beck PhD, Jeannie M. Adams MA, Amy Holtzworth-Munroe PhD","doi":"10.1002/crq.21387","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Using data from a study examining forms of mediation designed to be safer for separating parents reporting high levels of intimate partner violence (IPV; Holtzworth-Munroe, Applegate, et al., 2021; Holtzworth-Munroe, Beck, et al., 2021), the current study compares three groups, cases that reached mediation agreement (“mediation agreement group”), did not reach mediation agreement and returned to court (“no mediation agreement group”), or went to court without attempting mediation (“court group”). Ninety-eight cases started mediation and 68% did not reach agreement. Sixty-six cases went to court without mediation. The mediation agreement group reported better outcomes, immediately (e.g., felt safer, less upset, higher satisfaction, faster case resolution, more likely to address issues and interparental communication limits) and one-year later (e.g., higher satisfaction, fewer court orders), than the other groups. The court group only differed from both mediation groups on a few measures (e.g., lower satisfaction, less likely to exchange children at parents' homes). The no mediation agreement group reported more negative outcomes than one or both other groups (e.g., less satisfaction, more harassment from other parent, less social support at follow-up). In mediation designed to be safer for cases reporting high levels of IPV and with parties willing to try mediation, reaching agreement was associated with positive outcomes, and not reaching agreement was associated with potentially concerning outcomes. Research is needed to identify risk factors for not reaching agreement. Additional services may need to be provided to such cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":39736,"journal":{"name":"Conflict Resolution Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/crq.21387","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Parents reporting partner violence: Reaching or not reaching agreement in mediation or litigating without mediation\",\"authors\":\"Lily J. Jiang, Amy G. Applegate JD, Claire S. Tomlinson, Fernanda S. Rossi PhD, Connie J. Beck PhD, Jeannie M. Adams MA, Amy Holtzworth-Munroe PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/crq.21387\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Using data from a study examining forms of mediation designed to be safer for separating parents reporting high levels of intimate partner violence (IPV; Holtzworth-Munroe, Applegate, et al., 2021; Holtzworth-Munroe, Beck, et al., 2021), the current study compares three groups, cases that reached mediation agreement (“mediation agreement group”), did not reach mediation agreement and returned to court (“no mediation agreement group”), or went to court without attempting mediation (“court group”). Ninety-eight cases started mediation and 68% did not reach agreement. Sixty-six cases went to court without mediation. The mediation agreement group reported better outcomes, immediately (e.g., felt safer, less upset, higher satisfaction, faster case resolution, more likely to address issues and interparental communication limits) and one-year later (e.g., higher satisfaction, fewer court orders), than the other groups. The court group only differed from both mediation groups on a few measures (e.g., lower satisfaction, less likely to exchange children at parents' homes). The no mediation agreement group reported more negative outcomes than one or both other groups (e.g., less satisfaction, more harassment from other parent, less social support at follow-up). In mediation designed to be safer for cases reporting high levels of IPV and with parties willing to try mediation, reaching agreement was associated with positive outcomes, and not reaching agreement was associated with potentially concerning outcomes. Research is needed to identify risk factors for not reaching agreement. Additional services may need to be provided to such cases.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39736,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Conflict Resolution Quarterly\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/crq.21387\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Conflict Resolution Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/crq.21387\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conflict Resolution Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/crq.21387","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
使用来自一项研究的数据,该研究旨在对报告高水平亲密伴侣暴力的分居父母更安全的调解形式;Holtzworth-Munroe, Applegate等,2021;Holtzworth-Munroe, Beck, et al., 2021),本研究比较了三组案件,即达成调解协议的案件(“调解协议组”),未达成调解协议并返回法院的案件(“无调解协议组”),或未尝试调解的案件(“法院组”)。98起案件开始调解,68%的案件没有达成协议。66起案件未经调解就上了法庭。与其他小组相比,有调解协议的小组报告了更好的结果,立即(例如,感觉更安全,更少心烦意乱,更高的满意度,更快的案件解决,更有可能解决问题和父母之间的沟通限制)和一年后(例如,更高的满意度,更少的法院命令)。法院组与两个调解组只在一些措施上有所不同(例如,满意度较低,不太可能在父母家中交换孩子)。无调解协议组报告的负面结果比其他一组或两组都多(例如,满意度较低,来自其他家长的骚扰较多,随访时社会支持较少)。在旨在为报告高水平IPV的病例和当事人愿意尝试调解的情况下更安全的调解中,达成协议与积极结果相关,未达成协议与潜在的不利结果相关。需要进行研究以确定无法达成协议的风险因素。对于这种情况,可能需要提供额外的服务。
Parents reporting partner violence: Reaching or not reaching agreement in mediation or litigating without mediation
Using data from a study examining forms of mediation designed to be safer for separating parents reporting high levels of intimate partner violence (IPV; Holtzworth-Munroe, Applegate, et al., 2021; Holtzworth-Munroe, Beck, et al., 2021), the current study compares three groups, cases that reached mediation agreement (“mediation agreement group”), did not reach mediation agreement and returned to court (“no mediation agreement group”), or went to court without attempting mediation (“court group”). Ninety-eight cases started mediation and 68% did not reach agreement. Sixty-six cases went to court without mediation. The mediation agreement group reported better outcomes, immediately (e.g., felt safer, less upset, higher satisfaction, faster case resolution, more likely to address issues and interparental communication limits) and one-year later (e.g., higher satisfaction, fewer court orders), than the other groups. The court group only differed from both mediation groups on a few measures (e.g., lower satisfaction, less likely to exchange children at parents' homes). The no mediation agreement group reported more negative outcomes than one or both other groups (e.g., less satisfaction, more harassment from other parent, less social support at follow-up). In mediation designed to be safer for cases reporting high levels of IPV and with parties willing to try mediation, reaching agreement was associated with positive outcomes, and not reaching agreement was associated with potentially concerning outcomes. Research is needed to identify risk factors for not reaching agreement. Additional services may need to be provided to such cases.
期刊介绍:
Conflict Resolution Quarterly publishes quality scholarship on relationships between theory, research, and practice in the conflict management and dispute resolution field to promote more effective professional applications. A defining focus of the journal is the relationships among theory, research, and practice. Articles address the implications of theory for practice and research directions, how research can better inform practice, and how research can contribute to theory development with important implications for practice. Articles also focus on all aspects of the conflict resolution process and context with primary focus on the behavior, role, and impact of third parties in effectively handling conflict.