Impact of childhood exposure to family violence

Definitions of domestic and family violence can be quite variable. However, based on empirical research, violence within the family is increasingly understood as a complex concept that refers to a wide range of behaviours and various patterns of violence (Jaffe et al., Reference Jaffe, Johnston, Crooks and Bala2008). For the purpose of this article, family violence refers to the definition specified under the Family Law Legislative Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Act 2011, that was recently introduced to Australia. The definition of family violence was broadened to include violent, threatening or other behaviour that is coercive, controlling, or fear provoking to a family member (S4AB). This Section of the Act also recognised that a child is exposed to family violence by seeing or hearing the violence or experiencing the effects of family violence. Also, the legislative amendments, under Section 4(1) of the Act, broadened the definition of child abuse to include serious psychological harm to the child from exposure to family violence. This is very important legislative progress, as research shows misuse of power and control by one partner over the other is experienced by the child as an abusive relationship (Bagshaw & Chung, Reference Bagshaw and Chung2000).

Children exposed to family violence need to manage and make sense of a range of complex issues including the behaviour of the violent parent, their own and other family members’ safety, their own responses to the perpetrator's behaviours, and their ongoing fear (Mullender et al., Reference Mullender, Hague, Imam, Kelly, Malos and Regan2002). Children from violent families are powerless, may have devastated lives, and often fail to seek help and admit their needs as they feel scared, or shamed by their experiences (Batmanghelidjh, Reference Batmanghelidjh2006). Childhood exposure to family violence disrupts the normal tasks of childhood (Castelino, Reference Castelino2009). Children's special needs and safety issues may have been overlooked, and they may continue to experience elevated stress and fear (Mullender, Hague, Imman et al., Reference Mullender, Hague, Imam, Kelly, Malos and Regan2002). In addition, consistent research findings show the high rates of co-occurrence of family violence and direct forms of child abuse (Edleson, Reference Edleson, Graham-Bermann and Edleson2002).

Research on the effects on children from exposure to family violence is expanding, as is the research about the complexity and variability of this violence. Findings reveal that the short and long-term problems that may develop are similar to problems for children who have been directly abused (Wolfe et al., Reference Wolfe, Crooks, Lee, McIntyre-Smith and Jaffe2003). A range of short and long-term adverse effects on children include serious physical, psychological, cognitive, behavioural, developmental, emotional and relational problems (Eisikovits & Winstok, Reference Eisikovits, Winstok, Graham-Bermann and Edleson2002; Wolfe et al., Reference Wolfe, Crooks, Lee, McIntyre-Smith and Jaffe2003). This affects their life satisfaction, self esteem and future relationships.

Research shows a range of variables that influence the severity of impact on children from exposure to violence. More negative and extensive adverse effects are created when trauma is experienced earlier in life, is more severe, and more prolonged (Cozolino, Reference Cozolino2010). Serious damage occurs when the trauma emanates from the caregivers, and the child is deprived of healing interactions and has no safety zone (Cozolino, Reference Cozolino2010).

Multiple areas of the brain that respond to threat are affected by traumatic events and the neurochemical systems become altered post trauma. Where children are not protected from exposure to abnormal, severe or repetitive patterns of stress during critical phases of brain development, there can be serious long-term impairment to their neurobehavioural functioning (Anda et al., Reference Anda, Felitti, Bremmer, Walker, Whitfield, Perry, Dube and Giles2006). This includes impairments in attention, reactivity, sleep, fine motor control and other emotional, cognitive and motor functions (Perry, Reference Perry2000; Cozolino, Reference Cozolino2010). Children's physical health is also adversely affected as heightened stress creates physiological changes that increase cardiovascular activity, and reduced digestion, growth and immune responses.

Children exposed to prolonged or severe trauma can develop Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Exposure to family violence is one of the two variables most closely associated with the children's development of PTSD (Adams, Reference Adams2006). These children tend to have decreased positive adaptation, less coping capacity, and have increased vulnerability to future trauma, such as inadequate self protection, and impaired judgement (Cozolino, Reference Cozolino2010). While the measurable criteria for PTSD are not applicable for infants and young children, neuroscience research has provided clear symptoms for identification of young children who have been traumatised. The infant or young child may become dissociative as a biological and psychological way of detaching from the trauma (Perry et al., Reference Perry, Pollard, Blakley, Baker and Vigilante1995). This dissociative response can contribute to deficits in affect regulation and executive functioning of the brain, and attachment problems. This can manifest in a range of psychological disorders related to the complex adaptations to early childhood trauma (van de Kolk, Pelcovitz, Roth et al., Reference van der Kolk, Pelcovitz, Roth, Mandel, MacFarland and Herman1996).

Each child has individual needs for timely care, protection and assistance in coping with the trauma (Jouriles et al., Reference Jouriles, McDonald, Norwood, Ezell, Graham-Bermann and Edleson2002). However, mother victims of family violence are less able to attune and respond to their children's needs because of their own heightened stress responses. Infants and young children are especially vulnerable when they experience suboptimal bonding and when they are exposed to trauma. For children raised in these households, they experience unrelieved distress, loss of hope, and live the experience of being totally powerless to alleviate their frightening situation (Batmanghelidjh, Reference Batmanghelidjh2006). Stressors that are perceived as inescapable have greater sustained negative impact on the brain and can create long-term problems in the child's overall functioning (Cozolino, Reference Cozolino2010).

Centralising children's needs in family dispute resolution

Separated families in dispute face myriad of complex issues. In a number of countries, including Australia, ongoing concern about children's post-separation adjustment has supported an increasing emphasis on the importance of family mediation as a voluntary or mandated alternative to litigation over parenting disputes (Martin & Douglas, Reference Martin and Douglas2007). Also, across many Western countries including Australia, there has been growth in multidisciplinary Collaborative Practice as a holistic alternative dispute resolution model (Tesler & Thompson, Reference Tesler and Thompson2007). Both family mediation and Collaborative Practice utilise child inclusive practice. This has been influenced by empirical and clinical evidence that shows how child inclusive practice centralises the needs of the child by enhancing parents’ understanding of their children's experiences, needs and views, and how this leads to more informed and durable agreements that can also influence improved family relationships (McIntosh et al., Reference McIntosh, Wells, Smyth and Long2008).

Child inclusive practice can occur at any stage of the dispute resolution process. It involves both parents giving informed consent for the process to include an individual child assessment, and for both parents to listen to constructive feedback and to fully participate in the dispute resolution. This aim is to develop understanding of: the child's experience and understanding of the family separation including any exposure to conflict or violence; the child's coping capacity and adjustment; family relationship dynamics; and the child's development, support network, and perspectives and wishes. The child is made aware that any views or needs that are identified during this session will be constructively conveyed to both parents to help the parents develop better awareness of the child's needs, but that the child does not have the burden of decision-making as that is the role of their parents (Shea Hart, Reference Shea Hart2009). It is common practice in Australia for a Child Consultant to be engaged to conduct the child assessment, and to provide feedback to the parents in the presence of the mediator or the Collaborative Practice team. The Child Consultant may also be engaged in further dispute resolution sessions.

While child inclusive practice has been successfully applied in mediation and Collaborative Practice to centralise the child's needs in cases that include serious and entrenched conflict (McIntosh, Wells, Smyth et al., Reference McIntosh, Wells, Smyth and Long2008), it has not been widely utilised in cases involving family violence. It is important that family dispute resolution further evolves to implement child inclusive practice in cases of family violence. Children exposed to family violence have already been subjugated by their life experiences (Smith & Taylor, Reference Smith and Taylor2003). To facilitate appropriate decisions in regard to post-separation parenting arrangements, and to identify required interventions for the child, the parents must be fully and accurately informed about the child's needs (Batmanghelidjh, Reference Batmanghelidjh2006).

Practice development

Family dispute resolution and child inclusive practice are evolving and there is no single model that should be exclusively relied upon. While child inclusive practice has been researched, there is a significant gap in research of this practice in cases of family violence. Family dispute resolution provides an important opportunity for effective early intervention to centralise the needs of the child in cases of family violence. All family dispute resolution practitioners are the gatekeepers who screen for violence, make decisions about the appropriateness of proceeding with alternative dispute resolution, and either facilitate or prevent relevant exploration of issues to centralise children's needs. Child inclusive practice is relevant for all organisations providing family dispute resolution in cases of violence and/or abuse, including Family Courts, Family Relationship Centres and other non-government organisations, and for private practice family mediators and Collaborative Practitioners.

To develop practice that centralises the needs of the child, rather than relying on practice that achieves parenting arrangements that are gambling with vulnerable children's futures, it is important for family dispute resolution practitioners to consider the reasoning that supports the development and utilisation of child inclusive practice. This includes preventing matters from proceeding to the Family Courts by reaching appropriate parenting agreements. Despite the recent significant legislative change to the Australian Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), to prioritise children's safety (Family Law Legislative Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Act 2011), prior research has raised concerns about how the Family Law system demonstrates gaps in knowledge, practices and procedures in regard to parenting disputes involving family violence (Bagshaw et al., Reference Bagshaw, Brown, Wendt, Campbell, McInnes, Tinning, Batagol, Sifris, Tyson, Baker and Fernandez Arias2011; Shea Hart, Reference Shea Hart2011). This suggests that legislative change alone is insufficient, and that other developments within the system are needed to facilitate parenting decisions that are in the best interests of the children who have been exposed to family violence.

Other rationale for utilising child inclusive practice includes research findings that show: children's coping capacity is enhanced when their views are respected (Grotberg, Reference Grotberg and John1997); child victims of domestic violence want to be included in discussing their future family relationships (Mullender et al., Reference Mullender, Hague, Imam, Kelly, Malos and Regan2002); when these children are not heard they feel powerless and more distressed (McGee, Reference McGee2000); children's fear of disclosure about violence in the family can be overcome by appropriately discussing their experiences (Hester, Reference Hester, Humphreys and Stanley2006); and children who are required to spend time with their violent parent can become the direct victims of the violence (Harne, Reference Harne2004), and such exposure can exacerbate children's problems (Brown, Reference Brown2002). Also, where the impact of violence on the individual child is constructively conveyed to both parents, the adult victim can become less submissive and motivated to support the needs of the child, and in some cases the perpetrator of violence may seek individual intervention, including addressing the violent behaviours (Flynn, Reference Flynn2005). Child inclusive practice is supported by the social justice principle of the child having the right to be heard (United Nations, 1989), and by the National Framework for Protecting Australia's Children 2009–2020 (Commonwealth of Australia, 2009).

Inherent complexities and challenges

To effectively facilitate child inclusive practice in cases where family violence is an issue there are many inherent challenges that need to be addressed. These include policy, practice, philosophies, knowledge, cultural issues and individual client needs.

The families often have multiple and complex needs and changing relational dynamics. The parents may present with cumulative impacts from the compounding stress and lack of supports that affect their functioning as individuals and as parents (Bromfield, Sutherland, & Parker, Reference Bromfield, Sutherland and Parker2012). Challenges include assessing the suitability for using child inclusive practice based on the parents’ cognitive capacity and emotional readiness to commit to this process. Complex dynamics must be understood and managed including: power imbalance; the potency and pattern of violence and behaviour of the primary perpetrator (Jaffe et al., Reference Jaffe, Johnston, Crooks and Bala2008); the context in which violence occurs; the short and long term consequences for the adult and the child; and the partner dynamics (Kelly & Johnson, Reference Kelly and Johnson2008). Also, risk is a core feature that is not static (Frederick, Reference Frederick2008). Risk assessments need to be ongoing and address the changing factors and to identify that the threat of violence to the child is not current, including that there is minimal risk of perpetrator retaliation against the child.

Children exposed to family violence are often the silent victims who are reluctant to disclose their lived experiences (Shea Hart, Reference Shea Hart2003). For children who have been traumatised, there are additional challenges in how to encourage them to attend and to fully participate in their individual session. Appropriate engagement, exploration of and empathic responses to any sensitive or distressing issues for the child, and working at the pace of the child with integration of appropriate therapeutic steps are crucial in successful completion and outcomes of the session. Specialised knowledge and skills are required to identify and manage signs of trauma, and to accurately elicit open, truthful and non-scripted information, and to accurately interpret and evaluate information from the child, particularly if the child's functioning has been adversely affected by trauma.

These cases are resource intensive. Organisational support and resources are needed to provide a safety system for the child and adult participants and professionals involved, and to provide timely, responsive interventions. Resources are also needed to provide a child friendly environment to conduct the child assessment. As engaging and accurately assessing the individual child can be challenging, a suitably qualified and experienced Child Consultant who specialises in working with children of various ages and stages of development from domestic violence families is often required.

Because of the inherent complexities in these cases, to prevent inappropriate decision-making, that could create heightened risks and potentially enduring problematic life circumstances for the child, the dispute resolution practitioner needs specialised knowledge and skills. This is required to competently assess for suitability and to manage these challenging cases. The dispute resolution practitioners need well developed skills in: managing power imbalances and sensitive issues; to motivate the parents to follow up with adult or child referrals to address identified needs; and to discuss information from the child assessment that does not provoke the violent parent to hold the child accountable for expressing his or her own views. Case management of the complex and multiple needs requires high level organisational support for service implementation, cross sector collaboration, and for sustainability.