Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/16746 Record ID: d4624bf8-a53c-4486-bd3d-40d723b00e43
Full metadata record
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | Grey, Dimian | en |
| dc.contributor.author | Easteal, Patricia | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-06-30T23:28:04Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2022-06-30T23:28:04Z | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2013 | en |
| dc.identifier.citation | 27 (1), May 2013 | en |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0817-623X | en |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/16746 | - |
| dc.language | en | en |
| dc.publisher | Butterworths | en |
| dc.subject | Legal issues | en |
| dc.subject | Child protection | en |
| dc.subject | Impact on children and young people | en |
| dc.subject | Parenting | en |
| dc.subject | Family law | en |
| dc.subject | Legislation analysis | en |
| dc.title | Risk of harm to children from exposure to family violence: looking at how it is understood and considered by the judiciary | en |
| dc.title.alternative | Australian journal of family law | en |
| dc.type | Journal Article | en |
| dc.identifier.catalogid | 198 | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | National | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | new_record | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | Journal article/research paper | en |
| dc.description.notes | This Australian article examines judicial officers' decisions in family law cases involving allegations of family violence, where the children were alleged to have been exposed to the violence and/or to have been subject to abuse themselves. It is based on a study comparing 60 judgments that have been made since the 2006 amendments to the Family Law Act 1975 came into force. In four cases, the judicial officer applied the Family Law Act as further amended in 2012. The cases were drawn from the Australasian Legal Information Institute (AUSTLII) online database.<br/ ><br/ >Specifically, the article assesses the decisions made regarding contact with the alleged violent parent, including whether or not contact was to be supervised and, in cases of unsupervised access, whether any other restrictions were imposed, such as limits on alcohol consumption or restrictions on travel. The authors consider a range of factors involved in the judicial officers' decision, including their perceptions of the risk of harm based on the type of violence and the quality of corroborative evidence.<br/ ><br/ >The study found that orders of unsupervised time were the norm, both in cases involving allegations of child abuse and cases involving allegations of exposure to domestic violence; overall, 70% of judgments granted unsupervised time. However, exposure to family violence was typically perceived as posing a lower-level of potential harm to children than direct child abuse, despite evidence that exposure to violence is as harmful as direct abuse. | en |
| dc.identifier.source | Australian journal of family law | en |
| dc.date.entered | 2013-12-18 | en |
| dc.publisher.place | Chatswood, NSW | en |
| Appears in Collections: | Journal Articles | |
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in ANROWS library are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.