Domestic violence and high conflict are not the same: a gendered analysis

Abstract

In child custody decision-making experiences of domestic violence and high conflict are not the same. Legislative reform has not yet been guided by the parent voice to inform differentiated responses that keep women and children safe. Available literature in child custody decision-making focuses on outcome research regarding children’s adjustment and well-being. Debates about types of post-separation arrangements have yet to find agreement in three under-researched areas: (a) high conflict, (b) domestic violence; and (c) children under four. Yet, Canadian legislation supports shared parenting arrangements that privilege the dominant, powerful parent in situations of domestic violence. Based on a Canadian study that explores the parent perspectives and experiences of child custody decision-making, this paper privileges a sub-group of participants; five women, all survivors of domestic violence; defined here as both physical violence and coercive control. Data collection includes one-on-one tape-recorded interviews. Thematic analysis reveals that shared parenting is neither the goal, nor does it meet the needs of these women. The findings illuminate the importance of differentiating parent experience as distinct groups, and reinforces the notion of the state’s role in the reproduction of gendered power. Legislative reform and collaborative community practices are critical to facilitate healthy differentiated responses.

Keywords:

• Differentiated experience
• gender analysis
• qualitative
• policy reform