Child Protection in Families 


Experiencing Domestic Violence
 

H. Lien Bragg 

2003 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
 

Administration for Children and Families
 

Administration on Children, Youth and Families
 

Children’s Bureau
 

Office on Child Abuse and Neglect
 
Table of Contents
 

PREFACE..................................................................................................................................1 


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS..........................................................................................................3
 

1.	 PURPOSE AND OVERVIEW ............................................................................................5 


2.	 THE OVERLAP BETWEEN CHILD MALTREATMENT 


AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE..........................................................................................7
 

The Co-occurrence of Child Maltreatment and Domestic Violence ....................................9
 

Children’s Exposure to Domestic Violence ........................................................................9
 

Professionals Responding to Child Maltreatment and 


Domestic Violence: In Search of Common Ground ..........................................................12 


The Different Responses to Families Experiencing Domestic Violence ..............................13
 

3.	 THE BASICS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ....................................................................15
 

What Is Domestic Violence? ..............................................................................................15
 

Victims of Domestic Violence ............................................................................................23
 

Perpetrators of Domestic Violence......................................................................................29
 

4.	 CHILD PROTECTION PRACTICES WITH FAMILIES EXPERIENCING 


DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ................................................................................................35
 

Guiding Principles and Desired Outcomes ........................................................................35
 

Practice Guidelines for Initial Screening ............................................................................36
 

Practice Guidelines for Family Assessment..........................................................................37
 

Safety Planning with Adult and Child Victims ..................................................................46
 

Case Decision ....................................................................................................................47 


Case Planning for Cases Involving Domestic Violence ......................................................49
 

Case Closure ......................................................................................................................54
 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence i 
5.	 ENHANCING CASEWORKER SAFETY AND SUPPORT IN CHILD PROTECTION 


CASES INVOLVING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ..............................................................57
 

Safety Considerations for Caseworkers ..............................................................................57
 

Steps to Enhance Caseworker Safety ..................................................................................58
 

The Role of the CPS Supervisor in Supporting Caseworkers..............................................59
 

6.	 BUILDING COLLABORATIVE RESPONSES FOR FAMILIES EXPERIENCING
 

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ................................................................................................61
 

Partnering with Service Providers ......................................................................................61
 

Community Partnerships and Principles ............................................................................63
 

Promising Initiatives, Models, and Programs ......................................................................64
 

Conclusion ........................................................................................................................66
 

ENDNOTES............................................................................................................................67
 

APPENDICES: 

APPENDIX A—GLOSSARY OF TERMS ........................................................................75
 

APPENDIX B—RESOURCE LISTINGS OF SELECTED NATIONAL 


ORGANIZATIONS CONCERNED WITH DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 


AND CHILD MALTREATMENT ....................................................................................81
 

APPENDIX C—STATE TOLL-FREE TELEPHONE 


NUMBERS FOR REPORTING CHILD ABUSE ............................................................89
 

APPENDIX D—STAGES OF CHANGE..........................................................................91
 

APPENDIX E—DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ASSESSMENT: VICTIM ..............................93
 

APPENDIX F—DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ASSESSMENT: CHILD ................................95
 

APPENDIX G—DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ASSESSMENT: 


ALLEGED PERPETRATOR..................................................................97
 

APPENDIX H—SAFETY PLANS ....................................................................................99
 

APPENDIX I—DEVELOPING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ..........101
 

ii Table of Contents 
Preface
 

Each day, the safety and well-being of children 

across the Nation are threatened by child abuse 

and neglect. Many of these children live in homes 

that are experiencing domestic violence. The child 

welfare field is working to find effective ways to 

serve families where this overlap occurs.

Intervening effectively in the lives of these children 

and their families is not the sole responsibility of a 

single agency or professional group, but rather it is 

a shared community concern. 

The Child Abuse and Neglect User Manual Series has 

provided guidance on child protection to hundreds 

of thousands of multidisciplinary professionals and 

concerned community members since the late 

1970s. The User Manual Series provides a 

foundation for understanding child maltreatment 

and the roles and responsibilities of various 

practitioners in its prevention, identification, 

investigation, assessment, and treatment. Through 

the years, the manuals have served as valuable 

resources for building knowledge, promoting 

effective practices, and enhancing community 

collaboration. 

Since the last update of the User Manual Series in 

the early 1990s, a number of changes have occurred 

that dramatically affect each community’s response 

to child maltreatment. The changing landscape 

reflects increased recognition of the complexity 

of issues facing parents and their children, new 

legislation, practice innovations, and system reform 

efforts. Significant advances in research have 

helped shape new directions for interventions, 

while ongoing evaluations help us to know 

“what works.” 

The Office on Child Abuse and Neglect (OCAN) 

within the Children’s Bureau of the Administration 

for Children and Families (ACF), U.S. Department 

of Health and Human Services (DHHS), has 

developed this third edition of the User Manual 

Series to reflect the increased knowledge base and 

the evolving state of practice. The updated and new 

manuals are comprehensive in scope while also 

succinct in presentation and easy to follow, and they 

address trends and concerns relevant to today’s 

professional. 

The keystone manual for the series, A Coordinated 

Response to Child Abuse and Neglect: The Foundation 

for Practice, addresses the definition, scope, causes, 

and consequences of child abuse and neglect, and 

presents an overview of prevention efforts and the 

child protection process. Because child protection 

is a multidisciplinary effort, the Foundation for 

Practice manual also describes the roles and 

responsibilities of different professional groups and 

offers guidance on how the groups can work 

together effectively to protect the safety,

permanency, and well-being of children. 

The Foundation for Practice manual is intended to 

accompany other manuals in the User Manual 

Series, including this manual, Child Protection in 

Families Experiencing Domestic Violence, as well 

as the other profession-specific or special

issue manuals. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 1 
User Manual Series 

This manual—along with the entire Child Abuse and Neglect User Manual Series—is available from the 

National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information. Contact the Clearinghouse for a full list 

of available manuals and ordering information: 

National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information
 

330 C Street, SW
 

Washington, DC 20447
 

Phone: (800) FYI-3366 or (703) 385-7565
 

Fax: (703) 385-3206
 

E-mail: nccanch@caliber.com

The manuals also are available online at http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/profess/tools/usermanual.cfm. 

2 Preface
Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 

Acknowledgments
 

PRIMARY AUTHOR 

H. Lien Bragg, M.S.W., a senior associate with 

Caliber Associates, has more than 9 years of social 

service work experience. Her areas of expertise 

include crime victim services; domestic violence 

policy and practice, program development,

intervention, and services; family violence

prevention and treatment; child protection policy 

and practice implementation; curriculum and 

product development; social work policy and 

practice; and conducting needs assessments. Ms. 

Bragg has served in a variety of victim and 

community service capacities, including as a 

domestic violence project coordinator for a Federal 

demonstration project designed to increase

collaborative efforts among child protective

services, service providers, and dependency courts. 

She also has provided technical assistance to State 

and local public child welfare and human service 

agencies regarding the intersection of domestic 

violence and child abuse and neglect. 

REVIEWERS 

Sarah Webster 

Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory 

Services (retired) 

Beverly Heydon 

Howard County, Maryland, Office of Law 

Kathy Pinto 

Howard County, Maryland, Department of Social 

Services 

Jeff Edleson 

Minnesota Center Against Violence and Abuse 

Susan Schechter 

University of Iowa School of Social Work 

Lonna Davis 

Family Violence Prevention Fund 

Jerry Silverman 

Chair of the Federal Interagency Greenbook Team 

3 
TECHNICAL ADVISORY PANEL 

The following were members of the January 2001

Technical Advisory Panel for the User Manual Series 

contract. The organizations identified reflect each

member’s affiliation at that time. 

Carolyn Abdullah 

FRIENDS National Resource Center 

Washington, DC 

Lien Bragg 

American Public Human Services Association 

Washington, DC 

Sgt. Richard Cage 

Montgomery County Police Department 

Wheaton, MD 

Diane DePanfilis, Ph.D. 

University of Maryland at Baltimore School of Social 

Work 

Baltimore, MD 

Pauline Grant 

Florida Department of Children and Families 

Jacksonville, FL 

Jodi Hill 

Connecticut Department of Children and Families 

Hartford, CT 

Robert Ortega, Ph.D. 

University of Michigan School of Social Work 

Ann Arbor, MI 

Nancy Rawlings 

Kentucky Cabinet for Families and Children 

Frankfort, KY 

Barry Salovitz 

Child Welfare Institute/National Resource Center on 

Child Maltreatment 

Glenmont, NY 

Sarah Webster 

Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory 

Services 

Austin, TX 

Ron Zuskin 

University of Maryland at Baltimore School of Social 

Work 

Baltimore, MD 

The following members were subsequently added to 

the Technical Advisory Panel: 

William R. (Reyn) Archer III, M.D. 

Hill and Knowlton, Inc. 

Washington, DC 

David Popenoe, Ph.D. 

National Marriage Project 

Princeton, NJ 

Bob Scholle 

Independent Consultant 

Pittsburgh, PA 

Brad Wilcox, Ph.D. 

University of Virginia, Department of Sociology 

Charlottesville, VA 

ADDITIONAL ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

The third edition of the User Manual Series was 

developed under the guidance and direction of Irene 

Bocella, Federal Task Order Officer, and Catherine 

Nolan, Director, Office on Child Abuse and Neglect. 

Also providing input and review was Susan Orr,

Associate Commissioner, Children’s Bureau. 

This manual was developed and produced by Caliber Associates, Fairfax, VA, under Contract Number 

HHS-282-98-0025. 

4 Acknowledgments 
CHAPTER 1 

Purpose and Overview 

Child abuse and neglect is a community 

concern. Each community has a legal and 

moral obligation to promote the safety, 

permanency, and well-being of children, which 

includes responding effectively to child 

maltreatment. At the State and local levels, 

professionals assume various roles and 

responsibilities ranging from prevention, 

identification, and reporting of child maltreatment 

to intervention, assessment, and treatment. Child 

protective services (CPS) agencies, along with law 

enforcement, play a central role in receiving and 

investigating reports of child maltreatment. With 

the increasingly recognized overlap between 

domestic violence and child maltreatment, CPS is 

working more closely with those providing services 

related to domestic violence to ensure more 

comprehensive assistance to both the child and 

victim. This manual offers considerations and 

alternate protocols for CPS caseworkers culled 

from the practices of various agencies involved in 

addressing both forms of violence. 

To protect children from harm, CPS relies on 

community members to identify and report 

suspected cases of child maltreatment, including 

physical abuse, sexual abuse, neglect, and 

psychological maltreatment. Many community 

professionals (including health care providers, 

mental health professionals, educators, and legal 

and court system personnel) are involved in 

responding to cases of child maltreatment and 

domestic violence and providing needed services. 

It is important to note that various professionals 

are mandated to report suspected child 

maltreatment to CPS or law enforcement, such as 

health care workers and school personnel. In some 

States, those who provide services related to 

domestic violence also are mandated reporters. In 

addition, community-based agency staff, clergy, 

extended family members, and concerned citizens 

play important roles in supporting and keeping 

families safe. 

Domestic violence is a devastating social problem 

that affects every segment of the population. 

While system responses are primarily targeted 

towards adult victims of abuse, increasing attention 

is now focused on the children who witness 

domestic violence.1 Studies estimate that 10 to 20 

percent of children are at risk for exposure to 

domestic violence. Research also indicates children 

exposed to domestic violence are at an increased 

risk of being abused or neglected, and that a 

majority of studies reveal there are adult and child 

victims in 30 to 60 percent of families who 

experience domestic violence.2 

This manual provides background on this complex 

topic and addresses the following practice issues: 

• 	 The overlap between child maltreatment and 

domestic violence; 

•	 The basics of domestic violence; 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 5 
•	 Modifying child protection practice with 

families experiencing domestic violence; 

•	 Enhancing caseworker safety and support 

in child protection cases involving 

domestic violence; 

•	 Building collaborative responses for families 

experiencing domestic violence. 

Various terms are used within the field and 

throughout communities to describe domestic 

violence and the individuals involved. Some 

commonly used terms suggest all perpetrators of 

domestic violence are male and all victims are female. 

While this type of terminology reflects the majority of 

cases, it certainly is not always true. Terms commonly 

The use of a particular term over another may be 

based on what is commonly used in an organization 

or community, the perceived socio-political 

implications of certain terms, or personal preference. 

In many settings, however, no or little distinction is 

placed on these terms. This manual reflects that 

perspective. For purposes of clarity and ease of 

understanding, this manual uses a select number of 

these terms. For example, perpetrators of domestic 

violence usually are referred to as “abusers” or 

“perpetrators” throughout the manual for brevity and 

readability. Whenever possible, this manual also uses 

gender-neutral language. 

used in the field include: 

Domestic violence: 

• Adult domestic violence 

• Intimate partner violence 

• Partner violence 

• Violence against women 

Victim: 

• Abuse victim 

• Abused woman 

• Battered woman 

• Battered mother 

Perpetrator: 

• Spouse abuser 

• Batterer 

• Offender 

• Abuser 

Service provider: 

• Advocate 

• Treatment provider 

• Family violence 

• Domestic abuse 

• Partner abuse 

• Battering 

• Female 

• Woman 

• Her 

• She 

• Male 

• Man 

• Him 

• He 

• Victim advocate 

• Victim service 

coordinator 

6 Purpose and Overview 
CHAPTER 2 

The Overlap Between
 

Child Maltreatment and
 

Domestic Violence
 

Over the past few decades, there has been a 

growing awareness of the co-occurrence of 

domestic violence and child maltreatment.3 

Studies report that there are approximately 

between 750,000 and 2.3 million victims of 

domestic violence each year.4 Many of these 

victims are abused several times, so the number of 

domestic violence incidents is even greater. 

According to a national study by the U.S. 

Department of Health and Human Services, 

approximately 903,000 children were identified by 

child protective services (CPS) as victims of abuse 

or neglect in 2001.5 Increasingly, service providers 

and researchers have recognized that some of these 

adult and child victims are from the same families. 

Research suggests that in an estimated 30 to 60 

percent of the families where either domestic 

violence or child maltreatment is identified, it is 

likely that both forms of abuse exist.6 Studies 

show that for victims who experience severe forms 

of domestic violence, their children also are in 

danger of suffering serious physical harm.7 In a 

national survey of over 6,000 American families, 

researchers found that 50 percent of men who 

frequently assaulted their wives also abused their 

children.8 Other studies demonstrate that 

perpetrators of domestic violence who were abused 

as children are more likely to physically harm their 

children.9 

Rates of Domestic Violence 

Domestic violence measured by the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) includes rape or 

sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated and simple assault committed by a current or former spouse, 

boyfriend, or girlfriend. In 2000, about 1 in every 200 households acknowledged that someone in the 

household experienced some form of domestic violence. There is no statistically significant difference 

in this rate over the prior 6 years. 

As with other crimes measured using the NCVS, a household counted as experiencing domestic 

violence was counted only once, regardless of the number of times that a victim experienced violence 

and regardless of the number of victims in the household during the year. The following statistics 

represent reported cases.10 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 7 
Rates of Domestic Violence (continued) 

Percent of households that 

Characteristic of the household experienced domestic violence 

Caucasian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0.4% 

African-American . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0.5% 

Hispanic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0.5% 

Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0.5% 

Urban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0.5% 

Suburban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0.4% 

Rural . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0.4% 

Northeast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0.3% 

Midwest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0.7% 

South . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0.4% 

West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0.5% 

Household Size 

1 person . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0.4% 

2 to 3 persons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0.4% 

4 to 5 persons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0.5% 

6 or more persons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.0% 

Domestic Violence by Type of Crime and Gender in 2001 

Female Male Total 

Rape or sexual assault 41,740 41,740 

Robbery 44,060 16,570 60,630 

Aggravated assault 81,140 36,350 117,480 

Simple assault 421,550 50,310 471,860 

Overall violent crime 588,490 103,230 691,710 

For more information on the scope and impact of domestic violence, see Chapter 3, “The Basics of Domestic 

Violence.” 

8 
THE CO-OCCURRENCE OF CHILD 

MALTREATMENT AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 

An estimated 3.3 to 10 million children a year are at 

risk for witnessing or being exposed to domestic 

violence, which can produce a range of emotional, 

psychological, and behavioral problems for children.11 

This estimate is derived from an earlier landmark 

study that found approximately 3 million American 

households experienced at least one incident of serious 

violence each year.12 The broad range of this estimate 

highlights the fact that the exact number of domestic 

violence incidents is unknown, and there sometimes is 

incongruence or a lack of agreement about exactly 

what constitutes “domestic violence.” 

One study estimates that as many as 10 million 

teenagers are exposed to parental violence each year.13 

This estimate comes from a survey in which adults 

were asked “whether, during their teenage years, their 

father had hit their mother and how often” and vice 

versa for the mother. The survey found that about 

one in eight, 12.6 percent of the sample, recalled such 

an incident. In these cases, 50 percent remembered 

their father hitting the mother, 19 percent recalled 

their mother hitting the father, and 31 percent 

recalled the parents hitting each other.14 

These estimates are based on research that identified 

maltreated children who accompanied victims of 

domestic violence to shelters and identified adult 

victims via CPS caseloads. Additionally, research 

examining the relationship between victims and their 

own use of violence indicate that they are more likely 

to perpetrate physical violence against their children 

than caretakers who are not abused by a partner or 

spouse.15 Children who witness domestic violence 

and are victimized by abuse exhibit more emotional 

and psychological problems than children who only 

witness domestic violence.16 

Current data regarding the co-occurrence between 

domestic violence and child maltreatment compel 

child welfare and programs that address domestic 

violence to re-evaluate their existing philosophies, 

policies, and practice approaches towards families 

experiencing both forms of violence. The overlap of 

these issues may be particularly critical in identifying 

cases with a high risk of violence, such as the 

relationship between domestic violence and child 

fatalities in CPS cases. A review of CPS cases in two 

States identified domestic violence in approximately 

41 to 43 percent of cases resulting in the critical injury 

or death of a child.17 A number of protocols and 

practice guidelines have surfaced over the past decade 

to provide child welfare and service providers with 

specific assessment and intervention procedures aimed 

at enhancing the safety of children and victims of 

domestic violence. 

CHILDREN’S EXPOSURE TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 

Children who live in homes where a parent or 

caretaker is experiencing abuse are commonly referred 

to as “child witnesses” or “children who are 

witnessing” domestic violence. The term “children’s 

exposure” to domestic violence, however, provides a 

more inclusive definition because it encompasses the 

multiple ways children experience domestic abuse. 

Although caretakers frequently believe they are 

protecting their children from witnessing their abuse, 

children living in these homes report differently. 

Researchers have found that 80 to 90 percent of 

children in homes where domestic violence occurs can 

provide detailed accounts of the violence in their 

homes.18 Research studies have proliferated regarding 

children’s exposure to domestic violence, the problems 

associated with witnessing, and the protective factors 

that influence their responses to the violence.19 

Children’s exposure to domestic violence typically falls 

into three primary categories: 

• 	 Hearing a violent event; 

•	 Being directly involved as an eyewitness, 

intervening, or being used as a part of a violent 

event (e.g., being used as a shield against abusive 

actions); 

•	 Experiencing the aftermath of a violent event.20 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 9 
Children’s exposure to domestic violence also may 

include being used as a spy to interrogate the adult 

victim, being forced to watch or participate in the 

abuse of the victim, and being used as a pawn by the 

abuser to coerce the victim into returning to the 

violent relationship.21 Some children are physically 

injured as a direct result of the domestic violence. 

Some perpetrators intentionally physically,

emotionally, or sexually abuse their children in an 

effort to intimidate and control their partner. While 

this is clearly child maltreatment, other cases may not 

be so clear. Children often are harmed accidentally 

during violent attacks on the adult victim. An object 

thrown or weapon used against the battered partner 

can hit the child. Assaults on younger children can 

occur while the adult victim is holding the child, and 

injury or harm to older children can happen when 

they intervene in violent episodes. In addition to 

being exposed to the abusive behavior, many children 

are further victimized by coercion to remain silent 

about the abuse, maintaining the “family secret.” 

The Effects of Domestic Violence on Children 

Children who live with domestic violence face 

numerous risks, such as the risk of exposure to 

traumatic events, the risk of neglect, the risk of being 

directly abused, and the risk of losing one or both of 

their parents. All of these can lead to negative 

outcomes for children and clearly have an impact on 

them. Research studies consistently have found the 

presence of three categories of childhood problems 

associated with exposure to domestic violence: 

•	 Behavioral, social, and emotional problems— 

higher levels of aggression, anger, hostility, 

oppositional behavior, and disobedience; fear, 

anxiety, withdrawal, and depression; poor peer, 

sibling, and social relationships; low self-esteem. 

•	 Cognitive and attitudinal problems—lower 

cognitive functioning, poor school performance, 

lack of conflict resolution skills, limited problemsolving skills, acceptance of violent behaviors and 

attitudes, belief in rigid gender stereotypes and 

male privilege. 

•	 Long-term problems—higher levels of adult 

depression and trauma symptoms, increased 

tolerance for and use of violence in adult 

relationships.22 

Children also display specific problems unique to 

their physical, psychological, and social development. 

For example, infants exposed to violence may have 

difficulty developing attachments with their 

caregivers and in extreme cases suffer from “failure to 

thrive.”23 It should be noted that there also are 

limitations and uncertainties to the research since 

some of the children in such studies do not show 

elevated problem levels even under similar 

circumstances.24 Preschool children may regress 

developmentally or suffer from eating and sleep 

disturbances. School-aged children may struggle with 

peer relationships, academic performance, and 

emotional stability. Adolescents are at a higher risk 

for either perpetrating or becoming victims of teen 

dating violence.25 Reports from adults who repeatedly 

witnessed domestic violence as children show that 

many suffer from trauma-related symptoms, 

depression, and low self-esteem.26 

10 The Overlap Between Child Maltreatment and Domestic Violence 
Possible Symptoms in Children Exposed to Domestic Violence 

•	 Sleeplessness, fears of going to sleep, nightmares, dreams of danger; 

•	 Physical symptoms such as headaches or stomachaches; 

•	 Hypervigilance to danger or being hurt; 

•	 Fighting with others, hurting other children or animals; 

•	 Temper tantrums or defiant behavior; 

•	 Withdrawal from people or typical activities; 

•	 Listlessness, depression, low energy; 

•	 Feelings of loneliness and isolation; 

•	 Current or subsequent substance abuse; 

•	 Suicide attempts or engaging in dangerous behavior; 

•	 Poor school performance; 

•	 Difficulties concentrating and paying attention; 

•	 Fears of being separated from the nonabusing parent; 

•	 Feeling that his or her best is not good enough; 

•	 Taking on adult or parental responsibilities; 

•	 Excessive worrying; 

•	 Bed-wetting or regression to earlier developmental stages; 

•	 Dissociation; 

•	 Identifying with or mirroring behaviors of the abuser.27 

Children’s Protective Factors 


in Response to Domestic Violence
 

Studies documenting the types of problems associated 

with children who are exposed to domestic violence 

reveal a wide variation in their responses to the violence. 

Children’s risk levels and reactions to domestic violence 

exist on a continuum where some children demonstrate 

enormous resiliency while others show signs of 

significant maladaptive adjustment. Protective factors 

such as social competence, intelligence, high selfesteem, outgoing temperament, strong sibling and peer 

relationships, and a supportive relationship with an 

adult, are thought to be important variables that help 

protect children from the adverse effects of exposure to 

domestic violence.28 In addition, research shows that 

the impact of domestic violence on children can be 

moderated by certain factors, including: 

•	 The nature of the violence. Children, who witness 

frequent and severe forms of violence, perceive the 

violence as their fault. Because they fail to observe 

their caretakers resolving conflict, these children 

may undergo more distress than children who 

witness fewer incidences of physical violence. The 

frequency with which they witness positive 

interactions between their caregivers also affects 

them. 

•	 Coping strategies and skills. Children with poor 

coping skills are more likely to experience problems 

than children with strong coping skills and 

supportive social networks. Children who utilize 

problem-solving strategies targeted directly at the 

source of disagreement demonstrate fewer 

maladaptive symptoms. Emotion-focused 

strategies, however, are less desirable because they 

often target internal responses to a stressful 

situation, which can result in less effective coping 

methods (e.g., children fantasizing that their 

parent’s are “getting along”). 

•	 The age of the child. Younger children appear to 

exhibit higher levels of emotional and 

psychological distress than older children. Agerelated differences might result from older 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 11 
children’s more fully developed cognitive abilities 

to understand the violence and select various 

coping strategies to alleviate upsetting emotions. 

•	 The time since exposure. Children are observed 

to have heightened levels of anxiety and fear 

immediately after a recent violent event. Fewer 

observable effects are seen in children the longer 

time has past after they have witnessed the 

violence. 

•	 Gender. In general, boys exhibit more 

“externalized” behaviors (e.g., aggression or acting 

out) while girls exhibit more “internalized” 

behaviors (e.g., withdrawal or depression). In 

addition, boys identify more with the male abuser 

and girls identify more with the female victim; 

both may continue these roles throughout life if 

the issues are not addressed. 

•	 The presence of child abuse. Children who 

witness domestic abuse and are physically abused 

demonstrate increased levels of emotional and 

psychological maladjustment than children who 

only witness violence and are not abused.29 

PROFESSIONALS RESPONDING TO CHILD
 

MALTREATMENT AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: 


IN SEARCH OF COMMON GROUND
 

Although adult and child victims often are found in the 

same families, child protection and domestic violence 

programs have historically responded separately to 

victims. The divergent responses are largely due to the 

differences in each system’s historical development, 

philosophy, mandate, policies, and practices. As a 

result, these differences have led to variations in desired 

outcomes and practice methods for child welfare 

caseworkers and service providers who lack a mutual 

understanding of one another’s mission and approach 

when addressing the co-occurrence of child 

maltreatment and domestic violence.30 

Several key debates stemming from these differences 

have limited collaboration between the two fields.31 For 

CPS caseworkers, whose legal mandate is the 

protection of the abused child, responding to domestic 

violence has been widely regarded as a peripheral issue. 

Alternatively, service providers have primarily focused 

on pursuing safety and empowerment for adult victims. 

The differing opinion about whose safety is paramount 

has led to misconceptions and critical accusations by 

both systems. Child welfare advocates have charged 

service providers with discounting the safety needs of 

children by focusing primarily on the adult victim who 

also may be neglectful or abusive towards the children. 

Conversely, some service providers accuse child welfare 

caseworkers of “revictimizing” victims of domestic 

violence by placing responsibility and blame on adult 

victims for the violent behaviors of perpetrators or 

charging the adult victim with “failing to protect” the 

child. Furthermore, interactions with the perpetrator 

are markedly distinct for each system. CPS’s growing 

emphasis on a family-centered approach may 

sometimes compel caseworkers to engage perpetrators, 

who are either biological parents or caretakers of the 

children, in efforts aimed at creating healthy and stable 

families. In contrast, service providers often view 

separation from perpetrators as a desirable intervention 

until the safety of all family members is assured. 

Despite their differences, child welfare advocates and 

service providers share areas of common ground that 

can bridge the gap between them, including: 

•	 Both want to end domestic violence and child 

maltreatment; 

•	 Both want children to be safe; 

•	 Both want adult victims to be protected—for their 

own safety and so their children are not harmed by 

the violence; 

•	 Both believe in supporting a parent’s strengths; 

•	 Both prefer that children not be involved in CPS, 

if avoidable.32 

Additionally, men historically have not been actively 

involved with CPS or domestic violence agencies in 

working to make the necessary behavior modifications 

that will facilitate change on these issues. 

12 The Overlap Between Child Maltreatment and Domestic Violence 
THE DIFFERENT RESPONSES TO FAMILIES 

EXPERIENCING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 

As previously discussed, children respond in varying 

degrees to domestic violence, and researchers caution 

against holding a unilateral position that children 

witnessing domestic abuse constitutes child 

maltreatment or warrants CPS involvement.33 

However, the complexity of the research regarding the 

intersection between domestic violence and child 

maltreatment has led various social service providers 

and policy-makers to believe that every child exposed 

to domestic violence is at severe risk for harm and 

warrants formal or mandatory intervention. Some 

States are considering legislation that broadens the 

definition of child neglect to include children who 

witness domestic violence. Expanding the legal 

definitions of child maltreatment, however, may not 

always be the most effective method to address the 

needs of these children in an already overburdened 

CPS system. It is an unrealistic expectation that CPS 

investigate every report of children living in a home 

where domestic violence occurs. However, CPS 

should screen every report for domestic violence and 

refer to specific criteria or agency protocol when 

determining if the referral warrants further 

investigation. Furthermore, a CPS investigation is 

typically labor intensive and invasive in the lives 

of families. 

Communities can better serve families by allocating 

new as well as existing resources that build

partnerships between CPS, service providers, and the 

wide network of informal and formal systems that 

offer a continuum of services based upon the level of 

risk present.34 In fact, a number of national, State, 

and local initiatives throughout the country are 

demonstrating that a collective ownership and 

intolerance for abuse against adults and children can 

form the foundation of a solid, coordinated, and 

comprehensive approach to ending child

maltreatment and domestic violence in their 

communities. Chapter 6, “Building a Collaborative 

Response for Families Experiencing Domestic 

Violence,” provides specific examples of promising 

practices and programs that have implemented 

community-wide collaborations to address cooccurring child maltreatment and domestic violence. 

There are families experiencing domestic violence 

where CPS involvement is necessary. CPS agencies 

are required to intervene in cases where child exposure 

to domestic violence meets the State or local legal 

definition of child abuse and neglect and in instances 

where children, in addition to adult victims, are 

physically or sexually abused. Presenting risk factors 

associated with potentially dangerous and lethal forms 

of domestic violence also will require intervention by 

CPS. Parental substance abuse and mental illness are 

two examples of risk factors that can increase the 

threat of harm to children who witness domestic 

violence.35 In cases where there are several risks to 

children’s safety, CPS caseworkers should address the 

multiple needs of these families. Relevant services are 

discussed later in this manual. 

There are some situations, however, where child 

protection efforts to secure the safety of children can 

and should occur without a formal determination of 

abuse or neglect. After completing a comprehensive 

assessment of the nature and severity of the domestic 

violence and its impact on child safety, CPS may elect 

to refer a family to community-based services rather 

than substantiating a CPS case. CPS agencies who 

adopt this alternative response to domestic violence 

and child maltreatment may find it to be a more 

manageable and effective approach in assisting victims 

of domestic violence who have not maltreated their 

children, but who need help in securing safety 

and protection for them. Additionally, both the 

children and the victim are often better served by 

voluntary, and therefore less stigmatizing,

community-based services. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 13 
Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 

CHAPTER 3 

The Basics of 


Domestic Violence
 

To establish a foundation for understanding 

child protection in families experiencing 

domestic violence, this chapter provides an 

overview of the definition, scope, and causes of 

domestic violence, along with the evolving societal 

responses. The chapter also provides a description 

of victims and perpetrators of domestic violence, 

highlighting prevalent misconceptions, common 

behaviors, and parenting issues. 

WHAT IS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE? 

Historically, domestic violence has been framed 

and understood exclusively as a women’s issue. 

Domestic abuse affects women, but also has 

devastating consequences for other populations 

and societal institutions. Men also can be victims 

of abuse, children are affected by exposure to 

domestic violence, and formal institutions face 

enormous challenges responding to domestic 

violence in their communities. The effects of 

domestic violence on victims are more typically 

recognized, but perpetrators also are impacted by 

their abusive behavior as they stand to lose 

children, damage relationships, and face legal 

consequences. Domestic violence cuts across every 

segment of society and occurs in all age, racial, 

ethnic, socio-economic, sexual orientation, and 

religious groups. Domestic violence is a social, 

economic, and health concern that does not 

discriminate. As a result, communities across the 

country are developing strategies to stop the 

violence and provide safe solutions for victims of 

domestic violence. 

Defining Domestic Violence 

Domestic violence is a “pattern of coercive and 

assaultive behaviors that include physical, sexual, 

verbal, and psychological attacks and economic 

coercion that adults or adolescents use against their 

intimate partner.”36 Domestic violence is not 

typically a singular event and is not limited to only 

physical aggression. Rather, it is the pervasive and 

methodical use of threats, intimidation, 

manipulation, and physical violence by someone 

who seeks power and control over their intimate 

partner. Abusers use a specific tactic or a 

combination of tactics to instill fear in and 

dominance over their partners. The strategies used 

by abusers are intended to establish a pattern of 

desired behaviors from their victims. Certain 

behaviors often are cited by the perpetrator as the 

reason or cause of the abusive behavior, therefore, 

abusive verbal and physical actions are often 

intended to alter or control that behavior. 

Scope of the Problem 

Currently, national crime victimization surveys, 

crime reports, and research studies indicate: 

•	 An estimated 85 to 90 percent of domestic 

violence victims are female.37 

•	 Females are victims of intimate partner 

violence at a rate about five times that 

of males.38 

15 
•	 Females between the ages of 16 and 24 are most 

vulnerable to domestic violence.39 

•	 Females account for 39 percent of hospital 

emergency department visits for violence-related 

injuries, and 84 percent of persons treated 

for intentional injuries caused by an 

intimate partner.40 

•	 As many as 324,000 females each year experience 

intimate partner violence during their pregnancy, 

and pregnant and recently pregnant women are 

more likely to be victims of homicide than to die 

of any other cause.41 

•	 Females experience the greatest assault rate (21.3 

per 1000 females) between the ages of 20 and 24. 

This is eight times the peak rate for males (3 per 

1000 males ages 25 to 34).42 

•	 Domestic violence constitutes 22 percent of 

violent crime against females and 3 percent of 

violent crime against males.43 

•	 Eight percent of females and 0.3 percent of males 

report intimate partner rape.44 

•	 Approximately 33 percent of gays and lesbians are 

victims of domestic violence at some time in 

their lives. 

•	 Twenty-eight percent of high school and college 

students experience dating violence and 26 

percent of pregnant teenage girls report being 

physically abused. 

•	 Seventy percent of intimate homicide victims are 

female, and females are twice as likely to be killed 

by their husbands or boyfriends than murdered 

by strangers. 

•	 On average, more than three women are 

murdered by their husbands or boyfriends in the 

United States every day. In 2000, 1,247 women 

were killed by an intimate partner. The 

same year, 440 men were killed by an 

intimate partner.45 

•	 An estimated 5 percent of domestic violence cases 

are males who are physically assaulted, stalked, 

and killed by a current or former wife, girlfriend, 

or partner. 

•	 Domestic violence victims lose a total of nearly 

8.0 million days of paid work—the equivalent of 

more than 32,000 full-time jobs—and nearly 5.6 

million days of household productivity as a result 

of the violence.46 

•	 The costs of intimate partner rape, physical 

assault, and stalking exceed $5.8 billion each year, 

nearly $4.1 billion of which is for direct medical 

and mental health care services.47 

•	 Males are significantly more likely to be 

victimized by acquaintances (50 percent) or 

strangers (44 percent) than by intimates or 

other relatives. 

•	 Females experience over 5 to 10 times as many 

incidents of domestic violence than males. In 

comparison to men, women have a significantly 

greater risk for being a victim of domestic 

violence and suffering chronic and severe forms 

of physical assaults.48 

16 The Basics of Domestic Violence 
Domestic Violence Tactics 

The types of domestic violence actions perpetrated by 

abusers include physical, sexual, verbal, emotional, 

and psychological tactics; threats and intimidation; 

economic coercion; and entitlement behaviors. 

Examples of each are provided below. Some of the 

behaviors identified in the following lists do not 

constitute abuse in and of themselves, but frequently 

are tactics used in a larger pattern of abusive and 

controlling behavior. 

Physical Tactics 

•	 Pushing and shoving; 

•	 Restraining; 

•	 Pinching or pulling hair; 

•	 Slapping; 

•	 Punching; 

•	 Biting; 

•	 Kicking; 

•	 Suffocating; 

•	 Strangling; 

•	 Using a weapon; 

•	 Kidnapping; 

•	 Physically abusing or threatening to 

abuse children. 

Sexual Tactics 

•	 Raping or forcing the victim into unwanted 

sexual practices; 

•	 Objectifying or treating the victim like a 

sexual object; 

•	 Forcing the victim to have an abortion or 

sabotaging birth control methods; 

•	 Engaging in a pattern of extramarital or other 

sexual relationships; 

•	 Sexually assaulting the children. 

Verbal, Emotional, and Psychological Tactics 

•	 Using degrading language, insults, criticism, or 

name calling; 

•	 Screaming; 

•	 Harassing; 

•	 Refusing to talk; 

•	 Engaging in manipulative behaviors to make 

the victim believe he or she is “crazy” or 

imagining things; 

•	 Humiliating the victim privately or in the 

presence of other people; 

•	 Blaming the victim for the abusive behavior; 

•	 Controlling where the victim goes, who he or she 

talks to, and what he or she does; 

•	 Accusing the victim of infidelity to justify the 

perpetrator’s controlling and abusive behaviors; 

•	 Denying the abuse and physical attacks. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 17 
Threats and Intimidation	 Root Causes of Domestic Violence 

•	 Breaking and smashing objects or destroying the 

victim’s personal property; 

•	 Glaring or staring at the victim to 

force compliance; 

•	 Intimidating the victim with certain physical 

behaviors or gestures; 

•	 Instilling fear by threatening to kidnap or seek 

sole custody of the children; 

•	 Threatening acts of homicide, suicide, or injury; 

•	 Forcing the victim to engage in illegal activity; 

•	 Harming pets or animals; 

•	 Stalking the victim; 

•	 Displaying or making implied threats 

with weapons; 

•	 Making false allegations to law enforcement 

or CPS. 

Economic Coercion 

•	 Preventing the victim from obtaining 

employment or an education; 

•	 Withholding money, prohibiting access to family 

income, or lying about financial assets and debts; 

•	 Making the victim ask or beg for money; 

•	 Forcing the victim to hand over any income; 

•	 Stealing money; 

•	 Refusing to contribute to shared or household 

bills; 

•	 Neglecting to comply with child support orders; 

•	 Providing an allowance. 

Entitlement Behaviors 

•	 Treating the victim like a servant; 

•	 Making all decisions for the victim and 

the children; 

•	 Defining gender roles in the home 

and relationship. 

Some people believe domestic violence occurs because 

the victim provokes the abuser to violent action, while 

others believe the abuser simply has a problem 

managing anger. In fact, the roots of domestic 

violence can be attributed to a variety of cultural, 

social, economic, and psychological factors.49 As a 

learned behavior, domestic violence is modeled by 

individuals, institutions, and society, which may 

influence the perspectives of children and adults 

regarding its acceptability. Abusive and violent 

behaviors can be learned through: 

•	 Childhood observations of domestic violence; 

•	 One’s experience of victimization; 

•	 Exposure to community, school, or peer 

group violence; 

•	 Living in a culture of violence (e.g., violent 

movies or videogames, community norms, and 

cultural beliefs).50 

Domestic violence is reinforced by cultural values and 

beliefs that are repeatedly communicated through the 

media and other societal institutions that tolerate it. 

The perpetrator’s violence is further supported when 

peers, family members, or others in the community 

(e.g., coworkers, social service providers, police, or 

clergy) minimize or ignore the abuse and fail to 

provide consequences. As a result, the abuser 

learns that not only is the behavior justified, but also 

it is acceptable. 

Psychopathology, substance abuse, poverty, cultural 

factors, anger, stress, and depression often are thought 

to cause domestic violence. While there is little 

empirical evidence that these factors are direct causes 

of domestic violence, research suggests that they can 

affect its severity, frequency, and the nature of the 

perpetrator’s abusive behavior.

51 Although there is 

debate among researchers regarding a definitive 

theory to explain domestic violence, there is little 

disagreement that it is an insidious problem requiring 

a complex solution. 

18 The Basics of Domestic Violence
Evolving Societal Responses to Domestic Violence 

Many believe the historical inequality of women and 

gender socialization of females and males contribute 

to the root causes of domestic violence.52 Until the 

1970’s, women who were raped or suffered violence in 

their homes had no formal place to go for help or 

support. Shelters and services for victims of domestic 

violence did not exist and there was little, if any, 

response from criminal or civil courts, law 

enforcement, hospitals, and social service agencies. 

Society and its formal institutions viewed domestic 

violence as a “private matter.” As awareness and 

recognition of this problem grew, groups of women 

organized an advocacy movement that focused on 

addressing the safety needs of victims and the systemic 

barriers and social attitudes that contributed to 

domestic violence. Volunteers established safe havens 

and crisis services for victims of domestic violence in 

their homes and held meetings where they began to 

define violence against women as a political issue. 

This grass roots effort, commonly referred to as the 

“Battered Women’s Movement,” revolutionized the 

responses to injustices against women into a social 

movement that forms the foundation of existing 

domestic violence advocacy and community-based 

programs throughout the country.53 

The need for safe alternatives for victims of domestic 

violence called for a major social transformation and 

the Battered Women’s Movement was an essential part 

of that struggle. Feminists, community activists, and 

survivors of rape and domestic violence responded 

with three primary goals: (1) securing shelter and 

support for victims and their children, (2) improving 

legal and criminal justice responses, and (3) changing 

the public consciousness about domestic violence.54 

Through a collective vision, the Battered Women’s 

Movement was guided by a set of inherent principles 

that continue to direct the current network of 

community-based domestic violence programs and 

advocacy efforts. These principles include: 

•	 Safety for victims and their children; 

•	 Victims’ rights to self-determination, which 

includes their decision to either remain with or 

leave their abusive partner; 

•	 Accountability for perpetrators of domestic 

violence through societal and criminal sanctions; 

•	 Systemic change to combat social oppression of 

victims and to promote victims’ rights. 

Today, community-based domestic violence programs 

throughout the country provide an array of 

services, including: 

•	 Shelter and safe houses; 

•	 National, State, and local emergency hotlines; 

•	 Crisis counseling and intervention; 

•	 Support groups; 

•	 Medical and mental health referrals; 

•	 Legal advocacy; 

•	 Vocational counseling, job training, and 

economic support referrals; 

•	 Housing and relocation services; 

•	 Transportation; 

•	 Safety planning; 

•	 Children’s services. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 19 
Domestic violence programs also engage in 

continuous advocacy efforts that include developing 

public awareness campaigns, collaborating with 

community service providers, and being active in 

political lobbying efforts aimed at improving safety 

for victims and their children. One of the benefits of 

the increased awareness of the problem garnered by 

these activities is the greater recognition that many 

sectors of society—beyond shelters, law enforcement, 

and the judicial system—have important roles to play 

in identifying and addressing this problem. These 

sectors include child welfare, health care, mental 

heath, substance abuse treatment, business, and faith 

communities. Along with the recognition that legal 

sanctions are not always the best response, there is a 

growing awareness that communities themselves must 

take responsibility for preventing and aiding victims 

of domestic violence by establishing programs and 

services that meet the needs of their citizens. One 

example is a community-based approach that involves 

combining the efforts of law enforcement, domestic 

violence victim advocates, social service providers, 

faith-based communities, and community members. 

Society’s recognition that domestic violence is no 

longer a private matter, but a widespread social 

problem, is evidenced in the establishment of 

approximately 2,000 shelters and domestic violence 

programs, legislation in every State identifying 

domestic violence as a criminal act, legal rights to civil 

protection orders, and Federal legislation that 

provides funding and national recognition regarding 

its seriousness.55 Exhibits 3-1 and 3-2 outline Federal 

legislation that addresses domestic violence and child 

maltreatment and provides a legal framework and 

guidance for providing services and intervention. 

20 The Basics of Domestic Violence 
Exhibit 3-1 

Federal Domestic Violence Legislation 

Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 (P.L. 98-457) 

The Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 (FVPSA) was Congress’ first attempt to address 

domestic violence in the country. This legislation was intended to assist States with their efforts to increase 

public awareness about domestic violence and to provide Federal funding for domestic violence shelters and 

victim services. States and nonprofit organizations also were awarded grants to develop domestic violence 

and child maltreatment programs and to provide training and technical assistance for law enforcement 

officers and community service providers.56 

Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), Title IV of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement 

Act (P.L. 103-322) 

In 1994, Congress passed the Violence Against Women Act, which marked a turning point in Federal 

recognition of the extent and seriousness of domestic violence. This legislation demonstrated the Federal 

government’s commitment to address domestic violence. There are four titles within the Act—the Safe 

Street Act, Safe Homes for Women, Civil Rights for Women and Equal Justice for Women in the Courts, 

and Protections for Battered Immigrant Women and Children—and each act addresses domestic violence, 

sexual assault, stalking, and protection against gender-motivated violence. The provisions of VAWA call for 

improving law enforcement and criminal justice responses, creating new criminal offenses and tougher 

penalties, mandating victim restitution, and requiring system reform geared towards protecting victims of 

domestic violence during prosecution of the perpetrator. VAWA also authorized support for increased 

prevention and education programs, victim services, domestic violence training of community professionals, 

and protections from deportation for battered immigrant women.57 

Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) – 

Wellstone/Murray Amendment (P.L. 104-193) 

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) replaced the 

Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program with the Temporary Assistance to Needy 

Families program. The Wellstone/Murray Amendment of PRWORA includes a provision entitled the 

Family Violence Option, which addresses the safety and economic barriers faced by victims of domestic 

violence. Through this amendment, each State has the option to enact procedures that temporarily exempt 

identified victims of domestic violence from meeting certain time limit and other work requirements. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 21 
Exhibit 3-2 

Federal Child Abuse and Neglect Legislation 

•	 The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) of 1974 (P.L. 93-247) was established to 

ensure that victimized children are identified and reported to appropriate authorities. The Act was most 

recently amended in 1996 (P.L. 104-235) and continues to provide minimum standards for definitions 

and reports of child maltreatment. 

•	 Family Preservation and Support Services Program enacted as part of the Omnibus Budget 

Reconciliation Act of 1993 (P.L. 103-66) provides funding for prevention and support services for 

families at risk of maltreatment and family preservation services for families experiencing crises that 

might lead to out-of-home placement. 

•	 The Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) of 1997 (P.L. 105-89) was built on earlier laws and 

reforms in the field to promote the safety, permanency, and well-being of maltreated children. A 

component of ASFA is the Promoting Safe and Stable Families (PSSF) Program, which was developed 

from and expanded upon the Family Preservation and Support Services Program mentioned above. 

While the legislation reaffirms the importance of making reasonable efforts to preserve and reunify 

families, it also specifies instances where reunification efforts do not have to be made (e.g., when a child 

is not safe with his or her family), establishes tighter time frames for termination of parental rights, and 

promotes adoption initiatives. 

•	 Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program Reauthorization of 2002 (P.L.107-133) continued to 

build upon ASFA by extending the PSSF Program for an additional 5 years and increasing discretionary 

funding. It also created several new programs including a new State grant program that provides 

education and training vouchers for youth aging out of foster care and a mentoring program for children 

with incarcerated parents. 

For more information on other Federal legislation regarding child abuse and neglect, please see the 

foundation manual of this series, A Coordinated Response to Child Abuse and Neglect: The Foundation for 

Practice, at http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/profess/tools/usermanual.cfm. 

22 The Basics of Domestic Violence 
VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 

This section describes some common characteristics 

of victims of domestic violence, dynamics of the 

victimization (e.g., common barriers to leaving an 

abusive relationship, protective strategies), and the 

impact that domestic violence has on the individual 

and on parenting behaviors. 

Who Is the Victim? 

Victims of domestic violence do not possess a set of 

universal characteristics or personality traits, but they 

do share the common experience of being abused by 

someone close to them. Anyone can become a victim 

of domestic violence. Victims of domestic violence 

can be women, men, adolescents, disabled persons, 

gays, or lesbians. They can be of any age and work in 

any profession. Normally, victims of domestic 

violence are not easily recognized because they are not 

usually covered in marks or bruises. If there are 

injuries, victims have often learned to conceal them to 

avoid detection, suspicion, and shame. 

Unfortunately, an array of misconceptions about 

victims of domestic violence has led to harmful 

stereotypes and myths about who they are and the 

realities of their abuse. Consequently, victims of 

domestic violence often feel stigmatized and 

misunderstood by the people in their lives. These 

people may be well-intended family members and 

friends or persons trained to help them, such as social 

workers, police officers, or doctors. Exhibit 3-3 

presents common myths about victims of domestic 

violence. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 23 
Case Example 

Myth One: Only poor, uneducated women are victims of domestic violence. 

Victims of abuse can be found in all social and economic classes and can be of either sex. They can be 

wealthy, educated, and prominent as well as undereducated and financially destitute. Victims of domestic 

violence live in rural towns, urban cities, subsidized housing projects, and in gated communities. The 

overrepresentation of underprivileged women in domestic violence crime reports may be due to several 

factors, including the fact that those seeking public assistance or services are subject to data tracking trends 

that often capture this information. Victims of domestic violence who have higher incomes are more likely 

to seek help from private therapists or service providers who can protect their identity through confidentiality 

agreements. 

Myth Two: Victims provoke and deserve the violence they experience. 

An abusive tactic used by perpetrators is to accuse their partners of “making” them violent. This accusation 

is even more effective when the perpetrator and other people tell the victim that he or she deserved the abuse. 

As a result, many victims remain in the abusive relationship because they believe that the violence is their 

fault. Many victims make repeated attempts to change their behavior in order to avoid the next assault. 

Unfortunately, no one, including the victim, can change the behavior except for the perpetrator. The 

perpetrator is accountable for the behavior and responsible for ending the violence. 

Myth Three: Victims of domestic violence move from one abusive relationship to another. 

Although approximately one-third of victims of domestic violence experience more than one abusive 

relationship, most victims do not seek or have multiple abusive partners. Victims of domestic violence who 

have a childhood history of physical or sexual victimization may be at greater risk of being harmed by 

multiple partners.58 

Myth Four: Victims of domestic violence suffer from low self-esteem and psychological disorders. 

Some people believe that victims of domestic violence are mentally ill or suffer from low self-esteem. 

Otherwise, it is thought, they would not endure the abuse. In fact, a majority of victims does not have 

mental disorders, but may suffer from the psychological effects of domestic violence, such as posttraumatic stress disorder or depression.59 Furthermore, there is little evidence that low self-esteem is a factor 

for initially becoming involved in an abusive relationship.60 In reality, some victims of domestic violence 

experience a decrease in self-esteem because their abusers are constantly degrading, humiliating, and 

criticizing them, which also makes them more vulnerable to staying in the relationship. 

Myth Five: Victims of domestic violence are weak and always want help. 

Some victims of domestic violence are passive while others are assertive. Some victims actively seek help, 

while others may refuse assistance. Again, victims are a diverse group of individuals who possess unique 

qualities and different life situations. Victims of domestic violence may not always want help and their 

reasons vary. They may not be prepared to leave the relationship, they may be scared their partners will harm 

them, or they may not trust people if past efforts to seek help have failed. 

24 The Basics of Domestic Violence
Barriers to Leaving an Abusive Relationship 

The most commonly asked question about victims of 

domestic violence is “Why do they stay?” Family, 

friends, coworkers, and community professionals who 

try to understand the reasons why a victim of 

domestic violence has not left the abusive partner 

often feel perplexed and frustrated. Some victims of 

domestic violence do leave their violent partners while 

others may leave and return at different points 

throughout the abusive relationship.61 Leaving a 

violent relationship is a process, not an event, for 

many victims, who cannot simply “pick up and go” 

because they have many factors to consider. To 

understand the complex nature of terminating a 

violent relationship, it is essential to look at the 

barriers and risks faced by victims when they consider 

or attempt to leave. Individual, systemic, and societal 

barriers faced by victims of domestic violence include: 

•	 Fear. Perpetrators commonly make threats to 

find victims, inflict harm, or kill them if they end 

the relationship. This fear becomes a reality for 

many victims who are stalked by their partner 

after leaving. It also is common for abusers to 

seek or threaten to seek sole custody, make child 

abuse allegations, or kidnap the children. 

Historically, there has been a lack of protection 

and assistance from law enforcement, the judicial 

system, and social service agencies charged with 

responding to domestic violence. Inadequacies in 

the system and the failure of past efforts by 

victims of domestic violence seeking help have 

led many to believe that they will not be 

protected from the abuser and are safer at home. 

While much remains to be done, there is a 

growing trend of increased legal protection and 

community support for these victims. 

•	 Isolation. One effective tactic abusers use to 

establish control over victims is to isolate them 

from any support system other than the primary 

intimate relationship. As a result, some victims 

are unaware of services or people that can help. 

Many believe they are alone in dealing with the 

abuse. This isolation deepens when society labels 

them as “masochistic” or “weak” for enduring the 

abuse. Victims often separate themselves from 

friends and family because they are ashamed of 

the abuse or want to protect others from the 

abuser’s violence. 

•	 Financial dependence. Some victims do not 

have access to any income and have been 

prevented from obtaining an education or 

employment. Victims who lack viable job skills 

or education, transportation, affordable daycare, 

safe housing, and health benefits face very limited 

options. Poverty and marginal economic support 

services can present enormous challenges to 

victims who seek safety and stability. Often, 

victims find themselves choosing between 

homelessness, living in impoverished and unsafe 

communities, or returning to their abusive 

partner. 

•	 Guilt and shame. Many victims believe the 

abuse is their fault. The perpetrator, family, 

friends, and society sometimes deepen this belief 

by accusing the victim of provoking the violence 

and casting blame for not preventing it. Victims 

of violence rarely want their family and friends to 

know they are abused by their partner and are 

fearful that people will criticize them for not 

leaving the relationship. Victims often feel 

responsible for changing their partner’s abusive 

behavior or changing themselves in order for the 

abuse to stop. Guilt and shame may be felt 

especially by those who are not commonly 

recognized as victims of domestic violence. This 

may include men, gays, lesbians, and partners of 

individuals in visible or respected professions, 

such as the clergy and law enforcement. 

•	 Emotional and physical impairment. Abusers 

often use a series of psychological strategies to 

break down the victim’s self-esteem and 

emotional strength. In order to survive, some 

victims begin to perceive reality through the 

abuser’s paradigm, become emotionally 

dependent, and believe they are unable to 

function without their partner. The 

psychological and physical effects of domestic 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 25 
violence also can affect a victim’s daily 

functioning and mental stability. This can make 

the process of leaving and planning for safety 

challenging for victims who may be depressed, 

physically injured, or suicidal. Victims who have 

a physical or developmental disability are 

extremely vulnerable because the disability can 

compound their emotional, financial, and 

physical dependence on their abusive partner. 

•	 Individual belief system. The personal, familial, 

religious, and cultural values of victims of 

domestic violence are frequently interwoven in 

their decisions to leave or remain in abusive 

relationships. For example, victims who hold 

strong convictions regarding the sanctity of 

marriage may not view divorce or separation as an 

option. Their religious beliefs may tell them 

divorce is “wrong.” Some victims of domestic 

violence believe that their children still need to be 

with the offender and that divorce will be 

emotionally damaging to them. 

•	 Hope. Like most people, victims of domestic 

violence are invested in their intimate 

relationships and frequently strive to make them 

healthy and loving. Some victims hope the 

violence will end if they become the person their 

partner wants them to be. Others believe and 

have faith in their partner’s promises to change. 

Perpetrators are not “all bad” and have positive, as 

well as, negative qualities. The abuser’s “good 

side” can give victims reason to think their 

partner is capable of being nurturing, kind, and 

nonviolent. 

•	 Community services and societal values. For 

victims who are prepared to leave and want 

protection, there are a variety of institutional 

barriers that make escaping abuse difficult and 

frustrating. Communities that have inadequate 

resources and limited victim advocacy services 

and whose response to domestic abuse is 

fragmented, punitive, or ineffective can not 

provide realistic or safe solutions for victims and 

their children. 

•	 Cultural hurdles. The lack of culturally sensitive 

and appropriate services for victims of color and 

those who are non-English speaking pose 

additional barriers to leaving violent 

relationships. Minority populations include 

African-Americans, Hispanics, Asians, and other 

ethnic groups whose cultural values and customs 

can influence their beliefs about the role of men 

and women, interpersonal relationships, and 

intimate partner violence. For example, the 

Hispanic cultural value of “machismo” supports 

some Latino men’s belief that they are superior to 

women and the “head of their household” in 

determining familial decisions. “Machismo” may 

cause some Hispanic men to believe that they 

have the right to use violent or abusive behavior 

to control their partners or children. In turn, 

Latina women and other family or community 

members may excuse violent or controlling 

behavior because they believe that husbands have 

ultimate authority over them and their children. 

Examples of culturally competent services include 

offering written translation of domestic violence 

materials, providing translators in domestic 

violence programs, and implementing 

intervention strategies that incorporate cultural 

values, norms, and practices to effectively address 

the needs of victims and abusers. The lack of 

culturally competent services that fail to 

incorporate issues of culture and language can 

present obstacles for victims who want to escape 

abuse and for effective interventions with 

domestic violence perpetrators. Well-intended 

family, friends, and community members also can 

create additional pressures for the victim to 

“make things work.” 

The Impact of Domestic Violence on Victims 

As with anyone who has been traumatized, victims 

demonstrate a wide range of effects from domestic 

violence. The perpetrator’s abusive behavior can 

cause an array of health problems and physical 

injuries. Victims may require medical attention for 

immediate injuries, hospitalization for severe assaults, 

26 The Basics of Domestic Violence
or chronic care for debilitating health problems 

resulting from the perpetrator’s physical attacks.62 The 

direct physical effects of domestic violence can range 

from minor scratches or bruises to fractured bones or 

sexually transmitted diseases resulting from forced 

sexual activity and other practices. The indirect 

physical effects of domestic violence can range from 

recurring headaches or stomachaches to severe 

health problems due to withheld medical attention 

or medications. 

Many victims of abuse make frequent visits to their 

physicians for health problems and for domestic 

violence-related injuries. Unfortunately, research 

shows that many victims will not disclose the abuse 

unless they are directly asked or screened for domestic 

violence by the physician.63 It is imperative, therefore, 

that health care providers directly inquire about 

possible domestic violence so victims receive proper 

treatment for injuries or illnesses and are offered 

further assistance for addressing the abuse. 

The impact of domestic violence on victims can result 

in acute and chronic mental health problems. Some 

victims, however, have histories of psychiatric illnesses 

that may be exacerbated by the abuse; others may 

develop psychological problems as a direct result of 

the abuse. Examples of emotional and behavioral 

effects of domestic violence include many common 

coping responses to trauma, such as: 

• Emotional withdrawal 

• Denial or minimization of the abuse 

• Impulsivity or aggressiveness 

• Apprehension or fear 

• Helplessness 

• Anger 

• Anxiety or hypervigilance 

• Disturbance of eating or sleeping patterns 

• Substance abuse 

• Depression 

• Suicide 

• Post-traumatic stress disorder.64 

Some of these effects also serve as coping mechanisms 

for victims. For example, some victims turn to 

alcohol to lessen the physical and emotional pain of 

the abuse. Unfortunately, these coping mechanisms 

can serve as barriers for victims who want help or 

want to leave their abusive relationships. Psychiatrists, 

psychologists, therapists, and counselors who provide 

screening, comprehensive assessment, and treatment 

for victims can serve as the catalyst that helps them 

address or escape the abuse. 

Parenting and the Victim 

Emerging research indicates that the harmful effects of 

domestic violence can negatively influence parenting 

behaviors.65 Parents who are suffering from abuse may 

experience higher stress levels, which in turn, can 

influence the nature of their relationship with and 

responses to their children.66 Victims who are 

preoccupied with avoiding physical attacks and 

coping with the violence confront additional 

challenges in their efforts to provide safety, support, 

and nurturance to their children. Unfortunately, 

some victims of domestic violence are emotionally or 

physically unavailable to their children due to injuries, 

emotional exhaustion, or depression. 

Studies have found that victims of domestic violence 

are more likely to maltreat their children than those 

who are not abused by their partners.67 In some cases, 

victims who use physical force or inappropriate 

discipline techniques are trying to protect their 

children from potentially more severe forms of 

violence or discipline by the abuser. For example, a 

victim of domestic violence might slap the child 

when the abuser threatens harm if the child is not 

quiet. Seemingly, neglectful behaviors by the victim 

also may be a direct result of the domestic violence. 

This is illustrated when the abuser prevents the victim 

from taking the child to the doctor or to school 

because the adult victim’s injuries would reveal 

the abusiveness. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 27 
The majority of victims of domestic violence are not 

bad, ineffective, or abusive parents, but researchers 

note that domestic violence is one of a multitude of 

stressors that can negatively influence parenting. 

However, many victims, despite ongoing abuse, are 

supportive, nurturing parents who mediate the 

impact of their children’s exposure to domestic 

violence.68 Given the impact of violence on parenting 

behaviors, it is beneficial that victims receive services 

that alleviate their distress so they can support and 

benefit the children.69 

Strategies Victims Use to 


Protect Themselves and Their Children 


Protective strategies that frequently are recommended 

by family, friends, and social services providers 

include contacting the police, obtaining a restraining 

order, or seeking refuge at a friend or relative’s home 

or at a domestic violence shelter. It is ordinarily 

assumed that these suggestions are successful at 

keeping victims and their children safe from violence. 

It is crucial to remember, however, that while these 

strategies can be effective for some victims of 

domestic violence, they can be unrealistic and even 

dangerous options for other victims. For example, 

obtaining a restraining order can be useful in 

deterring some perpetrators, but it can cause other 

perpetrators to become increasingly abusive and 

threatening. Since these recommendations are 

concrete and observable, they tend to reassure people 

that the victim of domestic violence is actively taking 

steps to address the abuse and to be safe, even if they 

create additional risks. Furthermore, these options 

only address the physical violence in a victim’s life. 

They do not address the economic or housing 

challenges the victim must overcome to survive, nor 

do they provide the emotional and psychological 

safety the victims need. Therefore, victims often 

weigh “perpetrator-generated” risks versus “lifegenerated” risks as they try to make decisions and find 

safety. 

Typically, victims do not passively tolerate the 

violence in their lives. They often use very creative 

methods to avoid and deescalate their partner’s 

abusive behavior. Some of these are successful and 

others are not. Victims develop their own unique set 

of protective strategies based on their past experience 

of what is effective at keeping them emotionally and 

physically protected from their partner’s violence. In 

deciding which survival mechanism to use, victims 

engage in a methodical problem-solving process that 

involves analyzing: available and realistic safety 

options; the level of danger created by the abuser’s 

violence; and the prior effectiveness and consequences 

of previously used strategies. After careful 

consideration, victims of domestic violence decide 

whether to use, adapt, replace, or discard certain 

approaches given the risks they believe it will pose to 

them and their children. Examples of additional 

protective strategies victims use to survive and protect 

themselves include: 

•	 Complying, placating, or colluding with 

the perpetrator; 

•	 Minimizing, denying, or refusing to talk about 

the abuse for fear of making it worse; 

•	 Leaving or staying in the relationship so the 

violence does not escalate; 

•	 Fighting back or defying the abuser; 

•	 Sending the children to a neighbor or family 

member’s home; 

•	 Engaging in manipulative behaviors, such as 

lying, as a way to survive; 

•	 Refusing or not following through with services 

to avoid angering the abuser; 

•	 Using or abusing substances as an “escape” or to 

numb physical pain; 

•	 Lying about the abuser’s criminal activity or abuse 

of the children to avoid a possible attack; 

•	 Trying to improve the relationship or finding 

help for the perpetrator.

70 

28 The Basics of Domestic Violence 
 

Although these protective strategies act as coping and 

survival mechanisms for victims, they are frequently 

misinterpreted by laypersons and professionals who 

view the victim’s behavior as uncooperative, 

ineffective, or neglectful. Because victims are very 

familiar with their partner’s pattern of behavior, they 

can help the caseworker in developing a safety 

plan that is effective for both the victim and the 

children, especially when exploring options not 

previously considered. 

In situations where certain coping strategies have 

adverse affects, such as using drugs to numb the pain, 

it is crucial that service providers make available 

additional support and guidance that offer positive 

solutions to victims of domestic violence. A 

thoughtful understanding of the unique approaches 

used by victims of domestic violence to secure their 

safety will help community professionals and service 

providers respond more effectively to their needs. 

PERPETRATORS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 

This section presents common characteristics and 

behavioral tactics of perpetrators, indicators of 

dangerousness, and relevant parenting issues. 

Who Is a Perpetrator of Domestic Violence? 

As is the case with victims of domestic violence, 

abusers can be anyone and come from every age, sex, 

socioeconomic, racial, ethnic, occupational, 

educational, and religious group. They can be 

teenagers, college professors, farmers, counselors, 

electricians, police officers, doctors, clergy, judges, and 

popular celebrities. Perpetrators are not always angry 

and hostile, but can be charming, agreeable, and kind. 

Abusers differ in patterns of abuse and levels of 

dangerousness. While there is not an agreed upon 

universal psychological profile, perpetrators do share a 

behavioral profile that is described as “an ongoing 

pattern of coercive control involving various forms of 

intimidation, and psychological and physical abuse.”71 

While many people think violent and abusive people 

are mentally ill, research shows that perpetrators do 

not share a set of personality characteristics or a 

psychiatric diagnosis that distinguishes them from 

people who are not abusive. There are some 

perpetrators who suffer from psychiatric problems, 

such as depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, or 

psychopathology. Yet, most do not have psychiatric 

illnesses, and caution is advised in attributing mental 

illness as a root cause of domestic violence.72 The 

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American 

Psychological Association (DSM-IV) does not have a 

diagnostic category for perpetrators, but mental illness 

should be viewed as a factor that can influence the 

severity and nature of the abuse.73 

Examples of the most prevalent behavioral tactics by 

perpetrators include: 

•	 Abusing power and control. The perpetrator’s 

primary goal is to achieve power and control over 

their intimate partner. In order to do so, 

perpetrators often plan and utilize a pattern of 

coercive tactics aimed at instilling fear, shame, 

and helplessness in the victim. Another part of 

this strategy is to change randomly the list of 

“rules” or expectations the victim must meet to 

avoid abuse.74 The abuser’s incessant degradation, 

intimidation, and demands on their partner are 

effective in establishing fear and dependence. It is 

important to note that perpetrators may also 

engage in impulsive acts of domestic violence and 

that not all perpetrators act in such a planned or 

systematic way. 

•	 Having different public and private behavior. 

Usually, people outside the immediate family are 

not aware of and do not witness the perpetrator’s 

abusive behavior. Abusers who maintain an 

amiable public image accomplish the important 

task of deceiving others into thinking they are 

loving, “normal,” and incapable of domestic 

violence. This allows perpetrators to escape 

accountability for their violence and reinforces 

the victims’ fears that no one will believe them. 

•	 Projecting blame. Abusers often engage in an 

insidious type of manipulation that involves 

blaming the victim for the violent behavior. Such 

perpetrators may accuse the victim of “pushing 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 29 
buttons” or “provoking” the abuse. By diverting 

attention to the victim’s actions, the perpetrator 

avoids taking responsibility for the abusive 

behavior. In addition to projecting blame on the 

victim, abusers also may project blame on 

circumstances, such as making the excuse that 

alcohol or stress caused the violence. 

•	 Claiming loss of control or anger problems. 

There is a common belief that domestic violence 

is a result of poor impulse control or anger 

management problems. Abusers routinely claim 

that they “just lost it,” suggesting that the 

violence was an impulsive and rare event beyond 

control. Domestic violence is not typically a 

singular incident nor does it simply involve 

physical attacks. It is a deliberate set of tactics 

where physical violence is used to solidify the 

abuser’s power in the relationship. In reality, only 

an estimated 5 to 10 percent of perpetrators have 

difficulty with controlling their aggression.75 

Most abusers do not assault others outside the 

family, such as police officers, coworkers, or 

neighbors, but direct their abuse toward the 

victim or children. This distinction challenges 

claims that they cannot manage their anger. 

•	 Minimizing and denying the abuse. 

Perpetrators rarely view themselves or their 

actions as violent or abusive. As a result, they 

often deny, justify, and minimize their behavior. 

For example, an abuser might forcibly push the 

victim down a flight of stairs, then tell others that 

the victim tripped. Abusers also rationalize 

serious physical assaults, such as punching or 

choking, as “self-defense.” Abusers who refuse to 

admit they are harming their partner present 

enormous challenges to persons who are trying to 

intervene. Some perpetrators do acknowledge to 

the victim that the abusive behavior is wrong, but 

then plead for forgiveness or make promises of 

refraining from any future abuse. Even in 

situations such as this, the perpetrator commonly 

minimizes the severity or impact of the abuse. 

It is equally important to acknowledge that abusers 

also possess positive qualities. There are abusers who 

are remorseful, accept responsibility for their violence, 

and eventually stop their abusive behavior. 

Perpetrators are not necessarily “bad” people, but 

their abusive behavior is unacceptable. Some 

perpetrators have childhood histories where they were 

physically or sexually abused, neglected, or exposed to 

domestic abuse.76 Some suffer from substance abuse 

and mental health problems.77 All of these factors can 

influence their psychological functioning and 

contribute to the complexity and severity of the 

abusive behavior. Perpetrators need support and 

intervention to end their violent behavior and any 

additional problems that compound their abusive 

behavior. Through specialized interventions, 

community services, and sanctions, some abusers can 

change and become nonviolent.78 

Indicators of Dangerousness 

Different levels of violence and types of abuse are 

perpetrated by domestic violence offenders. Some 

abusers rarely use physical violence, while others 

assault their partners daily. There are perpetrators 

who are only abusive towards family members and 

others who are violent toward a variety of people. 

There are abusers who are more likely to inflict serious 

injury or become homicidal. Some frequently 

degrade the victim, while some rarely, if ever, 

implement that particular tactic. 

It is critical that professionals and community service 

providers who intervene in domestic violence cases 

engage in thorough and continuous assessment of the 

perpetrator’s level of dangerousness. Evaluating this 

dangerousness involves identifying risk indicators that 

reflect the capacity to continue perpetrating severe 

violence.79 Although domestic violence homicides or 

severe assaults cannot be predicted, there are several 

risk factors that help determine the likelihood that 

severe forms of violence may be imminent. The 

greater the number or the intensity of the following 

indicators, the more likely a severe or life-threatening 

attack will occur: 

30 The Basics of Domestic Violence
behaviors common among perpetrators that can have 

harmful effects on children: •	 Threats or thoughts of homicide and suicide; 

•	 Possession or access to weapons; 

•	 Use of weapons in a threatening or intimidating 

manner; 

•	 Extreme jealousy or obsession with the victim; 

•	 Physical attacks, verbal threats, and stalking 

during a separation or divorce; 

•	 Kidnapping or hostage taking; 

•	 Sexual assault or rape; 

•	 Prior abusive incidents that resulted in serious 

injury; 

•	 History of violence with previous partners and 

children; 

•	 Psychopathology or substance abuse.80 

The above factors pose a substantial risk to victims of 

domestic violence and possibly to their children. It also 

is important to ask for the victim’s assessment of the 

abuser’s dangerousness. Extremely dangerous 

perpetrators can be safety threats to people who are 

involved in the victim’s life, individuals trying to help, 

or the children. It is crucial that community 

professionals who work with violent families 

incorporate these risk indicators into their assessments 

and interventions because failure to do so can seriously 

compromise the lives of everyone involved. 

Parenting and the Perpetrator 

Can perpetrators be supportive parents when they are 

abusive towards the other parent? An emerging issue 

facing victims of domestic violence and child advocacy 

groups is the role and impact that perpetrators have in 

their children’s lives. There are perpetrators who have 

positive interactions with their children, provide for 

their physical and financial needs, and are not abusive 

towards them. There also are perpetrators who neglect 

or physically harm their children. Although abusers 

vary tremendously in parenting styles, there are some 

•	 Authoritarianism. Perpetrators can be rigid and 

demanding with their children. They often have 

high and unrealistic expectations and expect 

children to obey without question or resistance. 

This parenting style is intimidating for children 

and alters their sense of safety around the abuser. 

These perpetrators are more likely to use harsher 

forms of physical discipline, which can make the 

children increasingly vulnerable to becoming 

direct targets of violence. 

•	 Neglect, irresponsibility, and lack of 

involvement. Some abusers are infrequently 

involved in the daily parenting activities of their 

children. They may view their children as 

hindrances and become easily annoyed with 

them. Furthermore, the perpetrator’s 

preoccupation with controlling the partner and 

meeting his or her own emotional needs leaves 

little time to engage the children. Unfortunately, 

the perpetrator’s physical and emotional 

unavailability can produce unrequited feelings of 

anticipation and fondness in the children who 

eagerly await attention. 

•	 Undermining the victim. The perpetrator’s 

coercive and violent behavior towards the victim 

sometimes sends children a message that it is 

acceptable for them to treat that parent in the 

same manner. More overt tactics that weaken the 

victim’s influence over the children include the 

perpetrator disregarding the victim’s parenting 

decisions, telling the children that the victim is an 

inadequate parent, and belittling the victim in the 

presence of the children. Being victimized by 

abuse can lead children to perceive the parent in a 

weaker, passive role with no real authority over 

their lives. 

•	 Self-centeredness. Some perpetrators use their 

children to meet their own emotional needs. 

Perpetrators may expect their children to be 

immediately available only when they are 

interested and often overwhelm them with their 

problems. This can result in children feeling 

burdened and responsible for helping their parent 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 31 
while their own needs are neglected. 

•	 Manipulation. To gain power in the home, 

perpetrators may manipulate their children into 

aligning against the victim. Abusers may make 

statements or exhibit behaviors that confuse the 

children regarding who is responsible for the 

violence and coerce them into believing that they 

are the preferable parent. Abusers also may 

directly or indirectly use their children to control 

and intimidate the victim. Perpetrators 

sometimes may threaten to abduct, seek sole 

custody of, or physically harm the children if the 

victim is not compliant.81 Sometimes these are 

threats exclusively and the abuser does not intend 

or really want to carry out the action, but the 

threats are typically perceived as being very real. 

Children’s perception of the perpetrator’s violence can 

play a significant role in the nature of their 

relationship. Children often feel anxious, scared, and 

angry when they witness abuse. At the same time, 

many children also feel affection, loyalty, and love for 

the abuser. It is common for children to experience 

ambivalent feelings towards the abuser and this can be 

difficult for them to resolve.82 

Domestic violence can influence the children’s 

feelings toward the victim. Many children know the 

abuse is wrong and may even feel responsible for 

protecting the battered parent. Yet, they also 

experience confusion and resentment towards the 

victim for “putting up” with the abuse and are more 

likely to express their anger towards the victim rather 

than directly at the perpetrator.

83 

Children need additional support as they struggle 

with their conflicting feelings towards the perpetrator. 

The responsibility of perpetrators as parents primarily 

focuses on preventing the recurrence of the violence. 

Some victims want their children to have a safe and 

positive relationship with the perpetrator, and some 

children crave that connection. Consequently, 

community service providers are confronted with the 

challenge of developing resources and strategies to 

help perpetrators become supportive and safe 

parents.84 

Examples of specific approaches that programs and 

service providers can use that will assist perpetrators 

in taking responsibility for the harm they pose to their 

children include: 

•	 Educating abusers on the damaging effects of 

their behavior on their partners and children; 

•	 Providing intensive parenting skills programs that 

emphasize the needs of children affected by 

domestic abuse; 

•	 Offering safe exchange and supervised visitation 

programs; 

•	 Encouraging abusers to support their children 

attending groups for youths exposed to domestic 

violence; 

•	 Recruiting nonviolent fathers to mentor domestic 

violence perpetrators.85 

A provocative issue for CPS caseworkers, service 

providers, and other community groups is 

determining the role abusers should have as parents or 

caretakers.86 Many voice legitimate concerns 

regarding the safety of the child victims. 

There are special considerations and challenges in 

attempting to engage fathers who are abusive to their 

children or spouse, in activities that promote healthy 

involvement with the family. Some groups, such as 

some of those in the fatherhood movement, address 

this issue by helping fathers to increase their 

responsible involvement in their children’s lives.87 

Other groups, either through a prevention effort or an 

intervention treatment, seek to increase compassion, 

emotional awareness, and self-regulation skills in the 

belief that these skills remove the motivation for 

abusive behavior.

88 Although juvenile court and 

protective order laws are designed to assign 

responsibility for child support and parental 

involvement, CPS caseworkers often face challenges 

in engaging fathers in the safety and care of their 

32 The Basics of Domestic Violence
children. The difficulty with engaging some fathers in 

child protection efforts, however, stems from a 

cultural and gender bias of placing parenting 

responsibilities primarily on women.89 This is 

evidenced in child welfare systems where cases are 

tracked through the mother’s name and subsequent 

case planning efforts are focused on her to make 

significant changes.90 Unfortunately, involving fathers 

or male caretakers typically does not occur unless they 

are willing participants or easily accessible in the CPS 

process. Thus, fathers can become essentially 

“invisible” in CPS efforts and unaccountable for the 

well-being of their children.91 Please see “Practice 

Recommendations for Assessing the Domestic 

Violence Perpetrator” in Chapter 4 for specific steps 

on engaging abusive parents. Unquestionably, 

balancing the protection of adult and child victims 

with the rights and responsibilities of perpetrators will 

require continuous dialogue and a movement towards 

collaboration. If communities are dedicated to ending 

domestic violence, they must strive to hear the voices 

of adults and children who suffer from abuse so that a 

collective agenda of building healthy, safe, and stable 

families can be accomplished. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 33 
Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 

CHAPTER 4 

Child Protection Practices 

with Families Experiencing 

Domestic Violence 

The primary mission of child protective services 

(CPS) is to preserve the safety, permanency, 

and well-being of abused and neglected children. 

In CPS cases involving domestic violence, there is 

an increased concern that abuse suffered by victims 

can seriously compromise the safety of their 

children. Families who are affected by both child 

maltreatment and domestic abuse have multiple 

needs that compel child protection and domestic 

violence programs to examine and refine their 

policies and practices. CPS efforts with families 

experiencing both forms of violence face added 

challenges because there are child and adult victims 

in the same family. Adult victims confront the 

challenge of ensuring their children’s safety when 

they are often struggling to ensure their own 

protection from the abuser. Many CPS 

caseworkers feel frustrated or overwhelmed by the 

chronic nature of domestic violence, which may be 

further intensified by co-occurring issues such as 

substance abuse or mental illness. A solid 

philosophical framework that guides child 

protection practice can help caseworkers focus 

their assessment and intervention practices with 

families in which domestic violence occurs. 

This chapter begins with broad-based guiding 

principles and desired outcomes for CPS cases that 

involve domestic violence. It continues with more 

specific guidelines and considerations for CPS 

practices—from the initial screening and family 

assessment through safety planning, case planning, 

and, finally, case closure. 

GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND DESIRED OUTCOMES 

The following guiding principles can serve as a 

foundation for child protection practice with 

families when domestic violence has been 

confirmed. 

•	 The safety of abused children often is linked to 

the safety of the adult victims. By helping 

victims of domestic violence secure protection, 

the well-being of the children also is enhanced. 

•	 Perpetrators of domestic violence who abuse 

their partner also emotionally or 

psychologically harm their children, even if the 

children are not physically or sexually harmed. 

Identifying and assessing domestic violence at 

all stages of the child protection process is 

critical in reducing risks to children. It is 

important to understand potential effects of 

domestic violence to children beyond those 

that are physical in nature. 

•	 If the family’s circumstances are clear and it is 

appropriate, every effort should be made to 

keep the children in the care of the 

nonoffending parent. Supportive, 

noncoercive, and empowering interventions 

that promote the safety of victims and their 

children should be incorporated in child 

protection efforts. 

35 
•	 Once domestic violence has been substantiated, 

the perpetrators must be held solely responsible 

for the violence while receiving interventions that 

address their abusive behaviors. CPS must 

collaborate with domestic violence programs and 

other community service providers to establish a 

system that holds abusers accountable for their 

actions.92 

PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR INITIAL SCREENING 

Early identification of domestic violence is the first 

step in achieving positive and safe outcomes for adult 

and child victims.93 Identifying it at the initial 

screening can help CPS caseworkers conduct 

thorough assessments and create effective case plans. 

In cases where domestic violence exists but has not 

been identified, CPS caseworkers may find they are 

focusing their efforts on other presenting issues, such 

as substance abuse, that are often exacerbated by 

undisclosed domestic violence. Failure to address 

domestic violence in child protection cases can 

compromise the safety of victims and children. 

Additionally, caseworkers should keep in mind the 

“stages of change” to better assess the readiness for 

change in both the victim and perpetrator. (See 

Appendix D to further examine the stages of change.) 

The generally chronic nature of domestic violence can 

lead to lengthy agency involvement, foster care 

placements, and termination of parental rights. 

Screening Questions 

Assessment for domestic violence should occur on 

every child abuse and neglect report received by the 

agency. Initial screening questions typically include: 

•	 Is any adult in the home being assaulted or hurt 

by his or her partner? 

•	 Have the police ever been to the home to respond 

to assaults against adults or children? 

•	 Have the children said that one of their caretakers 

is a victim of violence or is acting violently in the 

home? 

•	 Have weapons been used to threaten or harm a 

family member? If so, what kind of weapon and 

is it still in the home?94 

If the reporter confirms the presence of domestic 

violence, the initial screener should continue with 

additional questions to determine the nature and 

severity of the abuse and the risks posed to the 

children. Examples of supplementary questions 

include: 

•	 Have the children intervened or been physically 

harmed during a violent assault? 

•	 Is the perpetrator physically or sexually abusing 

the children? 

•	 How is the violence affecting the children? 

•	 Has the abuser made threats of homicide or 

suicide? 

•	 Does the abuser have access to dangerous 

weapons or firearms? 

•	 Is the nonoffending parent able to protect the 

child? If so, how?95 

Initial screeners also should ask if the reporter is aware 

of efforts by the alleged victim to protect the children. 

Systematically collecting initial information regarding 

domestic violence will allow the screener to make a 

competent and informed decision as to whether the 

report should proceed for further assessment. 

Accepting a Report for Ongoing Assessment 

Not every child maltreatment report involving 

domestic violence needs to be accepted for formal 

investigation. Child abuse or neglect allegations that 

do not indicate a threat of harm or serious risk to the 

children or victim should be referred to external 

community agencies for specialized domestic violence 

36 Child Protection Practices with Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 
The Domestic Violence Enhanced Response Team of Colorado 

CPS frequently works with local law enforcement in dealing with severe cases of child maltreatment or where 

there may be instances of domestic violence. In some States, those reporting child abuse and neglect are 

directed to call the police hotline for the initial report. As law enforcement becomes more involved with 

these cases, many of the same issues regarding the safety of the children and victims apply. The Domestic 

Violence Enhanced Response Team (DVERT) of Colorado Springs, Colorado, demonstrates how one 

community is approaching these issues. Established in 1996, DVERT is a multidisciplinary program that 

addresses serious domestic violence cases. Its mission is to ensure appropriate containment of high-risk, 

violent offenders and facilitate local community policing efforts. DVERT partners with approximately 36 

agencies, which include law enforcement, prosecutors’ offices, social service agencies, and animal abuse 

programs. The program emerged from the Minneapolis project, a National Institute of Justice (NIJ)-funded 

study researching the impact of law enforcement arrests in domestic violence cases. Serious or high-risk 

domestic violence cases are referred to DVERT, and the DVERT team meets to determine whether a case 

warrants the full use of the team’s resources. If so, DVERT directs every aspects of the case, including 

investigation, intervention, and advocacy services, by collaborating with partnering agencies. For more 

information, visit http://www.dvert.org. 

services. Child maltreatment reports that reveal safety 

threats to victims and children will require further 

investigation. 

CPS agencies should develop policies that specify the 

criteria for when a report involving domestic violence 

is accepted for ongoing assessment. The variations in 

State and local child welfare statutes, policies, and 

practices will result in different standards for when 

child exposure to domestic violence warrants CPS 

involvement.96 In general, the following criteria can be 

used when considering accepting a report for 

investigation: 

•	 A caretaker is physically or sexually abusing 

the child. 

•	 The child has physically intervened in an incident 

of domestic violence. 

•	 The child has been physically injured because of 

intervening in or being present during a violent 

incident. 

•	 The child exhibits emotional, psychological, or 

physical effects due to the domestic violence. 

•	 The abuser has made threats of homicide or 

suicide and has access to weapons or firearms. 

•	 There exists serious, recurring domestic violence 

or domestic violence in combination with other 

significant risk factors (e.g., substance abuse). 

PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR FAMILY ASSESSMENT 

Routine screening for domestic violence should occur 

at every phase of the child protection process. If a 

child abuse report is accepted for investigation but 

does not contain allegations of domestic violence, 

CPS caseworkers should continue to screen for its 

presence throughout the life of the case. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 37 
Preparing for Family Assessment 

If the agency accepts a report containing domestic 

violence allegations, several steps (outlined below) 

should be completed before interviewing the family.97 

Issues of confidentiality pertaining to the gathering 

and sharing of this information are addressed in the 

section “Documenting Domestic Violence in Child 

Protection Case Records” later in this chapter. 

Step One: Information Collection 

•	 Conduct a criminal records check for 

domestic violence-related charges or convictions, 

civil protection or restraining orders, or 

probation violations. 

•	 Review the agency’s case file for prior allegations 

or a history of domestic violence. 

•	 Contact the local police department to inquire 

about domestic violence-related service calls 

(911) made from the home. 

Collecting this information can inform CPS 

caseworkers about the alleged perpetrator’s level of 

dangerousness and the precautions to consider in 

preparation for their interviews with individual family 

members. For example, a caseworker might complete 

a criminal records check and discover that the alleged 

perpetrator has three prior convictions of domestic 

assault, one of which involved a gun. An individual 

with a history of previous assaults and use of weapons 

should be considered a high risk for committing 

further violence. Thus, the CPS caseworker should 

choose a safe location with security nearby for 

interviewing the alleged perpetrator. In addition, 

supplemental information that supports allegations of 

domestic violence will help CPS caseworkers facilitate 

a discussion with the parties involved, some or all of 

whom may be afraid to disclose the abuse. 

Step Two: Initial Contact with the Family 

Inquiry into private family matters often is viewed by 

the abuser as a threat to his or her control over the 

family. It should be noted, however, that many 

nonabusive families will respond negatively to such 

inquiries as well. Promoting safety for all parties is the 

primary goal when intervening in cases where there 

are allegations of domestic violence. Thus, it is 

critical that CPS caseworkers ensure that their 

involvement does not compromise their own safety or 

the safety of anyone in the family. 

To safeguard domestic violence information from the 

alleged abuser, CPS caseworkers should not leave 

domestic violence resource information, letters, or 

voice-mail messages asking to speak with the alleged 

victim about the abuse. Such information can 

jeopardize not only the alleged victim’s safety, but also 

the nature of the caseworker’s interview with family 

members who may be threatened or forced to deny 

the allegations. Caseworkers need to make direct 

contact with the alleged victim to avoid any attempts 

by the alleged abuser to sabotage their efforts. If 

caseworkers are not able to make initial contact with 

the alleged victim, they should find alternative, 

creative means of contact (e.g., at the alleged victim’s 

place of work or through the children’s school). 

Ideally, separate interviews should be conducted with 

the children, alleged victim, and alleged perpetrator of 

domestic violence. Because these cases involve child 

maltreatment, CPS caseworkers should follow agency 

protocol and interview the individuals in that order 

unless it compromises someone’s safety. Separate 

interviews allow adults and children to talk safely 

about the violence. There will be times when 

caseworkers arrive at the home and find both partners 

present. In these instances, caseworkers should collect 

general family information and refrain from direct 

inquiry about the domestic violence. CPS 

caseworkers can use their authority to request 

separate, follow-up interviews and inform family 

members that it is a routine agency procedure. 

Step Three: Collaborate with Service Providers 

CPS caseworkers are expected to assess a number of 

risk factors in addition to domestic violence. Families 

involved with the CPS system often have multiple 

needs requiring complex interventions. Caseworkers 

38 Child Protection Practices with Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 
are not expected to have specialized knowledge on 

every social problem affecting their clients. Therefore, 

in cases involving domestic violence, caseworkers are 

strongly encouraged to seek the expertise of service 

providers who can provide consultation regarding 

assessment and intervention techniques and assistance 

with accessing relevant services. At times, CPS 

caseworkers simply need support when they are 

working with the multiple needs of alleged 

perpetrators, victims, and children. Enlisting the help 

of service providers (as well as other substance abuse 

and mental health service providers, when 

appropriate) can make these challenging cases 

more manageable. (See the section “Partnering with 

Service Providers” in Chapter 6 for more information 

on this topic.) 

Domestic Violence Risk Assessment 

The purpose of performing a risk assessment for 

domestic violence with a family entering the CPS 

system is to gather critical information regarding: 

•	 The nature and extent of the domestic violence; 

•	 The impact of the domestic violence on adult and 

child victims; 

•	 The risk to and protective factors of the alleged 

victim and children; 

•	 The help-seeking and survival strategies of the 

alleged victim; 

•	 The alleged perpetrator’s level of dangerousness; 

•	 The safety and service needs of the family 

members; 

•	 The availability of practical community resources 

and services.98 

A thorough assessment of the above factors will help 

CPS caseworkers develop a comprehensive 

understanding of the domestic violence and the level 

of harm it poses. Most importantly, it will help 

caseworkers build case plan recommendations that 

reflect the safety and service needs of the family. Since 

competent CPS practice involves ongoing assessment 

of individual family members, risk assessments should 

be included during every phase of the child protection 

process. 

The safety of adult and child victims can vary 

depending on the shifting dynamics of abuse. Thus, 

CPS caseworkers may need to revise service 

recommendations as the safety levels and needs of the 

victim and children change. For example, if a victim’s 

case plan includes a recommendation for a protective 

order, but this strategy actually escalates the abusive 

behaviors, the caseworker will need to modify the case 

plan and recommend a safer alternative. It is critical 

that ongoing risk assessment occur in cooperation 

with the abused partner, victim advocates, and other 

community service providers. 

Practice Recommendations 


for Assessing the Alleged Victim
 

Victims of domestic violence are not always compliant 

clients. CPS caseworkers may be surprised or 

confused to meet an angry, uncooperative victim 

when they were expecting a scared, passive individual 

desperate for help. Often, there are legitimate 

explanations for an alleged victim’s reluctance to work 

with CPS. Fear of losing their children or of further 

violence are significant factors explaining why victims 

can become defensive, protective, or difficult to 

engage. Some victims have additional problems such 

as substance abuse or mental illness, which can 

contribute to their unwillingness or inability to accept 

help. CPS caseworkers should not assume that 

resistant or uncooperative alleged victims want or 

choose to be in violent relationships. CPS 

caseworkers who recognize and attend to these issues, 

as well as to any identified fears, will increase their 

ability to engage the alleged victim’s participation in 

pursuing safety. Regardless of a victim’s behavior, he 

or she and the children deserve to be safe and have 

access to services that will address the violence in their 

lives. Caseworkers also should remember that the 

greatest risk to the victim’s safety is usually at the time 

of intervention or separation from the abuser.99 

The following practice recommendations will assist 

CPS caseworkers during assessment with the 

alleged victim. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 39 
Interview the alleged victim alone. Many victims 

will not disclose information about their partner’s 

violent behavior because they fear retaliation. 

Interviewing the alleged victim alone allows 

caseworkers to communicate that they are acutely 

aware of the safety needs. By doing so, caseworkers 

can build trust and rapport, which typically allows 

someone who has been victimized to feel more 

comfortable with disclosing the abuse. This can be 

especially important with victims who are afraid of 

any type of intervention from a responding agency or 

organization. Difficulty in arranging a meeting with 

the victim may be an indicator of the abuser’s level of 

control or of the victim’s level of fear. CPS 

caseworkers must be creative and flexible when 

scheduling the interview and not just assume that the 

alleged victim is being resistant. The assessment can 

be held at a public place that is less likely to raise the 

alleged abuser’s suspicion, at unusual hours when the 

alleged abuser is working, or away from the home. 

The alleged victim may be able to provide other 

suggestions of how and where to meet. 

Develop trust by creating a climate of safety. 

Victimization often, understandably, leads to feelings 

of mistrust, anger, and anxiousness. CPS caseworkers 

can create a climate of trust by acknowledging the 

alleged victim’s feelings, explaining that the abuse is 

not the victim’s fault, and expressing concern for the 

alleged victim and children’s well-being. Caseworkers 

can demonstrate their willingness to safeguard the 

abused partner’s safety by not disclosing the accounts 

of the abuse to the alleged perpetrator. It is 

imperative, however, that CPS caseworkers explain 

the limits of their confidentiality. Victims need to 

understand that if the family is involved in juvenile 

court proceedings, case file information can be 

obtained by the perpetrator’s attorney, and 

information shared in court becomes part of the 

public record. 

Provide safe alternatives and access to 

domestic violence resources. CPS caseworkers 

should not demand that the victim leave the abusive 

relationship. Leaving can increase the risk to victims 

and their children as perpetrators can become 

increasingly violent during times of separation. 

Leaving also can create additional problems, such as 

homelessness or loss of income. Economic 

circumstances such as these often affect the decision 

to leave. Instead, CPS caseworkers should look at 

several viable options aimed at promoting the family’s 

safety and include the victim in developing safe 

alternatives. Safety options can include obtaining a 

protective order; seeking domestic violence shelter; 

staying with a relative or friend; sending the children 

to a safe, temporary living arrangement; or developing 

a safety plan that details the steps to take if the abuser 

becomes threatening or violent. Services for victims 

of domestic violence and how they can be accessed 

always should be provided. 

Avoid “victim-blaming” questions or statements. 

CPS caseworkers should refrain from “victim 

blaming” questions that deepen an alleged victim’s 

feelings of shame, guilt, or responsibility for the 

alleged abuser’s violent behaviors. Inappropriate 

comments that suggest the alleged victim provoked or 

deserved the violence will likely discourage thorough 

disclosure of the abuse or negatively impact 

cooperation in the CPS process. Examples of victimblaming questions include the following: 

•	 What did you do to make your partner so mad? 

•	 What could you have done to stop him or her 

from hitting you? 

•	 Why don’t you just leave? 

•	 Why do you put up with the violence? 

•	 Why do you hit each other? 

•	 What do you get out of the violent situation? 

•	 If you care about your children, why would 

you stay? 

Conduct the assessment with sensitivity and in a 

nonthreatening manner. The CPS caseworker may 

be the first person to ask the victim about domestic 

violence. Questions about the nature of one’s 

40 Child Protection Practices with Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 
intimate relationships are private and not shared by 

most people, particularly with strangers. Asking for 

information about a partner’s coercive or degrading 

treatment can make victims feel ashamed. Thus, CPS 

caseworkers should begin their assessment by 

acknowledging the sensitive matter of abuse. 

Caseworkers can initiate the interview with a 

nonthreatening inquiry regarding the alleged victim’s 

relationship with his or her partner. While it is 

important to obtain relevant information, caseworkers 

typically do not need to elicit small or salacious details 

regarding the abuse, which may trigger a reliving of 

the experience. The following questions are helpful if 

domestic violence was not identified in the initial 

report and can be used to screen for domestic violence 

at the assessment phase. Suggested questions to begin 

the assessment include the following: 

•	 Could you tell me about your relationship with 

your partner? 

•	 All couples argue. How do you and your 

partner argue? 

•	 Has there been a time when you felt afraid of your 

partner? If so, can you tell me what happened? 

•	 Do you feel free to think, speak, and act 

independently around your partner? 

•	 How does your family make important decisions? 

•	 Does your partner ever act jealous or possessive of 

you? Can you tell me more about that? 

Appendix E provides a sample assessment for 

domestic violence victims. 

Practice Recommendations for 


Assessing the Children
 

CPS’s core mission is to protect the safety of the child 

and assess risks. This includes evaluating the potential 

harm to children who witness domestic violence. 

Unfortunately, caretakers often underestimate the 

effect that domestic violence has on their children. 

Approximately 90 percent of children who live with 

domestic violence can provide detailed descriptions of 

the incidents in their homes.100 Although children 

frequently provide the most accurate accounts of the 

violence, CPS caseworkers must proceed cautiously 

during their interviews with children.101 Children 

receive messages, either directly or indirectly, that 

domestic violence is a “family secret.” It is usually 

uncomfortable and frightening for children to talk 

about the abuse. Some children may be afraid that 

discussing the violence will create problems at home, 

such as further violence or the separation of their 

parents. Other children may align with the abuser 

and attempt to provide protection by not discussing 

the violence or even blaming the victim. CPS 

caseworkers may want to consider asking the alleged 

victim about how they might interview the children 

about domestic violence in order to have an initial 

understanding of the children’s likely attitude or 

behavior. The following are practice 

recommendations for CPS caseworkers when 

performing assessments with children. 

Provide an atmosphere that supports children’s 

comfort in discussing sensitive issues. CPS 

caseworkers should create a safe, supportive, and ageappropriate environment that helps children feel 

comfortable talking about a difficult topic. It is 

essential that the caseworker establish trust and 

rapport before asking children direct questions about 

domestic violence. It also is important to use 

developmentally appropriate language and 

techniques, such as having the children draw what 

they saw or to demonstrate with figurines. 

Validate the children’s feelings during the 

assessment interview. Caseworkers should 

encourage children to discuss their feelings about any 

violence in the home and the alleged perpetrator and 

victim. It also is critical to tell children that the 

violence is not their fault and that their feelings are 

normal. 

Promote safe and healthy coping skills and 

responses to domestic violence. CPS caseworkers 

should assist children in developing positive and 

effective methods to protect themselves. Where 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 41 
appropriate, safety plans need to include tips for 

children such as what to do and whom to contact for 

help in domestic violence situations. Whenever 

possible, the nonoffending parent should be included 

in the process of developing safety skills and plans. 

Begin direct inquiry regarding domestic violence 

with a general statement. Caseworkers can help 

make the child feel more at ease by starting with 

broad-based statements before asking specific 

questions about the child’s family.102 For example: 

“Sometimes when moms and dads (or boyfriends) 

fight, they get angry. Sometimes even too angry, and 

they may start to yell at each other or even hit each 

other. I know fights can be scary. I want to ask you 

a few questions about whether your parents fight and 

what you think about it. Would that be ok?”103 

If the child is not willing to discuss the situation, 

assure him or her it is understandable to feel reluctant 

talking about such matters. It is never appropriate to 

attempt to instill any type of guilt or fear in the child 

in an effort to gain compliance or obtain information. 

Appendix F provides a sample domestic violence 

assessment appropriate for children. 

Practice Recommendations for Assessing 

the Alleged Domestic Violence Perpetrator 

It is not easy to talk with anyone about abusive 

behaviors. Thus, interviewing alleged offenders can 

make some CPS caseworkers feel uneasy and nervous, 

which may make it more difficult to remain openminded. As discussed earlier, perpetrators vary in 

their patterns and levels of violent behavior. 

Collecting information before the interview can 

inform CPS caseworkers about safety precautions 

they may want to consider. Some abusers will be 

solicitous and cooperative or even charming in an 

effort to avoid exposure and to decrease the 

caseworker’s involvement with the family. 

Nevertheless, in order to assess harm to children and 

alleged victims of domestic violence accurately, it is 

critical that an assessment occur regarding the alleged 

abuser’s level of dangerousness and the risks his or her 

behavior presents to family members. The 

following are practice recommendations for CPS 

caseworkers when performing an assessment with 

alleged perpetrators. 

Plan for caseworker safety. Ideally, CPS caseworkers 

should conduct the assessment in a public place, such 

as the agency office or at the alleged perpetrator’s 

place of employment. Interviewing the alleged abuser 

outside the home decreases their comfort level and the 

likelihood that he or she will engage in posturing, 

manipulating, or threatening behaviors. As always, 

caseworkers should notify a coworker or a supervisor 

about their whereabouts and expected time of return. 

If preliminary information suggests that an alleged 

perpetrator is extremely dangerous, CPS caseworkers 

should request the accompaniment of another 

caseworker or police. It also may be helpful to ask 

the partner the best approach for interviewing the 

alleged abuser. 

Use third party reports when interviewing the 

alleged abuser. Perpetrators routinely deny, 

minimize, or blame the victim for their violent 

behaviors. Therefore, the use of third party reports, 

such as police and criminal records, civil protection 

orders, hospital records, or prior CPS information, 

may assist CPS caseworkers with discussing domestic 

violence allegations and counteracting the alleged 

perpetrator’s attempts to avoid accountability for 

prior abusive behavior. CPS caseworkers should 

never confront the alleged abuser with information 

provided by the alleged victim. This can compromise 

the alleged victim’s safety if the alleged perpetrator 

retaliates for the disclosure. It is important to 

remember that prior domestic violence does not prove 

that abuse occurred in the situation being assessed. 

Conversely, the absence of a criminal history does not 

prove that an individual is not abusive as there are 

perpetrators who have never been arrested, charged, 

or convicted of domestic violence or any other crime. 

If supplemental information is not available, 

caseworkers should inform the alleged perpetrator 

that it is routine procedure for child protection to 

inquire about domestic violence. 

42 Child Protection Practices with Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 
Focus on obtaining information about the alleged 

abuser’s behaviors and the degree to which he or 

she accepts responsibility. CPS caseworkers should 

not try to obtain a “confession” or hold a “debate” 

regarding domestic violence allegations. This can 

result in the interview ending abruptly, and the 

caseworker will not be able to gather critical 

information regarding the alleged abusive behavior. 

Caseworkers can be more effective by presenting 

information, inquiring about patterns and tactics of 

abuse, and listening to the alleged perpetrator’s 

responses. Gaining the alleged perpetrator’s 

perspective, in addition to information contained in 

the child abuse referral, third party reports, and 

interviews with the alleged victim and children, will 

inform the CPS caseworkers’ assessment. Some 

perpetrators will admit to being abusive, which 

usually increases the likelihood that he or she will 

cooperate with case planning efforts. 

Engage the alleged abuser in an assessment that is 

respectful and structured. The interview should 

begin in a nonthreatening, nonconfrontational 

manner by asking the alleged perpetrator general 

questions regarding his or her intimate relationship. 

It is essential to communicate respect during the 

assessment and avoid treating the alleged perpetrator 

as a “bad person” or a liar. Showing respect can lower 

the alleged abuser’s defensiveness and encourage him 

or her to provide needed information. It may be 

useful to say something in a low-key way, such as “I 

need to speak with you about your family; everybody 

gets a chance to talk about what’s going on.” In 

addition, CPS caseworkers should clearly 

communicate the goals and format of the assessment. 

This will help caseworkers focus the interview, as well 

as convey that they are in charge of the process and are 

not intimidated. If the child abuse report contains 

allegations of domestic violence or if caseworkers have 

third party information, they should begin the 

interview by presenting the information and asking 

for the alleged perpetrator’s perspective of the events. 

Appendix G provides a sample domestic violence 

assessment for alleged perpetrators. 

Additional Factors to Consider During Assessment 

Other factors can influence the nature and severity of 

presenting domestic violence issues. The diversity and 

multiple needs of families affected by domestic 

violence require thoughtful consideration of 

additional variables that can augment the complexity 

of these cases. The following are important issues for 

CPS caseworkers to be aware of and address during 

assessment and case planning efforts. 

Cultural Practices 

The values, beliefs, and customs of some cultures can 

create additional barriers for victims of domestic 

violence and dictate certain interactions between CPS 

caseworkers and the family. Caseworkers will need to 

account for cultural factors that can influence the 

victim’s resistance to help and the unique obstacles 

facing victims who are of minority, ethnic, or racial 

status, including: 

•	 Some ethnic cultures where a strong emphasis on 

preserving family unity is more pronounced than 

in Anglo cultures.104 For example, if a Hispanic or 

Asian victim of domestic violence refuses help, it 

may be because the ethnic community would 

shame and isolate the victim for disclosing the 

abuse. There might be added pressure from 

immediate and extended family members who are 

vested in maintaining the family equilibrium and, 

as such, refuse to believe the victim or to hold the 

perpetrator accountable for the abusive behavior. 

For more information on working with perpetrators, visit the Family Violence Prevention Fund’s Web site 

at http://www.endabuse.org. Read about their programs designed to reach fathers and enhance parenting 

after abuse at http://www.endabuse.org/programs/display.php3?DocID=149 and 

http://www.endabuse.org/programs/display.php3?DocID=197. The Violence Against Women Online 

Resources Web site also has information on perpetrator intervention programs at 

http://www.vaw.umn.edu/library/dv. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 43 
•	 Immigrant victims who are not legal U.S. 

residents and who face enormous challenges in 

freeing themselves from violence.105 

Undocumented immigrants who are abused 

typically will not disclose it because they fear 

deportation. Victims who are not legal citizens 

may rely on their partner’s status as a U.S. 

resident to secure their and their children’s 

citizenship. Thus, victims are subject to being 

threatened with deportation and loss of their 

children as a coercive tactic by the abuser. 

Additionally, the illegal status of these victims 

prevents them from seeking and obtaining a 

variety of legal and social services intended to 

assist victims. Many communities continue to 

develop and provide services specifically designed 

for undocumented immigrants. 

•	 Language barriers that present obstacles for CPS 

caseworkers who are trying to communicate with 

non-English speaking victims or family members. 

A victim of domestic violence may appear 

uncooperative, when in reality he or she does not 

understand what is being asked. Additionally, 

victims who cannot communicate with 

caseworkers in their primary language may not be 

able to convey their needs accurately and may 

confront additional challenges when 

communities do not have culturally sensitive 

services or resources. Identifying translators, 

hiring bilingual staff, and translating resource 

materials can help address this issue. CPS 

caseworkers, however, should refrain from using 

children as translators because the information 

collected may be distressing for them. Some 

adult family members or friends may break 

confidentiality or pose other risks for the victim if 

used as translators. 

“Mutual” Domestic Violence 

Perpetrators of domestic violence routinely accuse 

their partner of being equally abusive and claim to be 

the “real” victim. There are women who are 

perpetrators and there are victims who use physical 

force against their partners in self-defense.106 Women, 

however, represent only a small minority of 

perpetrators of serious violence against intimates.107 

Even in cases where both partners perpetrate abusive 

action, there is little doubt that women get hurt more 

often than men.108 Caseworkers who are uncertain 

about mutual domestic violence dynamics will want 

to take prudent steps to identify the primary aggressor 

in the relationship. Caseworkers can consider: 

•	 Who is afraid of whom? 

•	 Who controls or makes the decisions in the 

relationship? 

•	 Who has more access to financial and economic 

resources? 

Documentation such as police reports or court 

records can help in this determination. It may be 

helpful to get help from both service providers and 

the caseworker’s supervisor in these particularly 

complex situations. 

Substance Abuse 

Alcohol and illicit drugs commonly are cited as a 

factor in and precursor to domestic violence. 

Research studies indicate that approximately 25 to 50 

percent of domestic violence incidents involve alcohol 

and that nearly one-half of all abusers entering 

perpetrator intervention programs abuse alcohol. Yet, 

despite evidence that many perpetrators abuse 

alcohol, there is no empirical evidence that substance 

abuse directly causes domestic violence. Nevertheless, 

substance abuse is a significant variable that increases 

the severity and frequency of the perpetrator’s 

violence and interferes with domestic violence 

interventions. In fact, the presence of substance abuse 

increases the likelihood of severe injury and death in 

domestic violence incidents. Furthermore, women 

who abuse alcohol and other drugs are more likely to 

be victims of domestic violence.109 Substance abuse by 

victims compounds their problems as addiction or 

substance use can affect their ability to protect 

themselves and their children. CPS caseworkers need 

to determine if the victim’s substance abuse is a coping 

44 Child Protection Practices with Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 
mechanism or a barrier to safety by affecting 

judgment and parenting. The risk of co-occurring 

substance abuse and domestic violence requires that 

assessments include screening and referral for 

substance abuse issues. Caseworkers should be 

prepared to assess for the presence of both issues and 

to make referrals for both. 

Underserved Populations Affected by 

Domestic Violence 

The diversity of victims of domestic violence includes 

such special populations as gay, lesbian, and 

transgender individuals as well as persons with 

physical, developmental, and sensory disabilities.110 

Their minority status or special needs, in addition 

to their victimization, have left these groups 

largely unattended in community responses to 

domestic violence. 

While historically domestic violence has not been 

perceived as a significant problem in some 

underserved populations, research indicates this may 

not be the case. For instance, a recent study 

sponsored by the National Institutes of Health 

indicates that the rates of domestic violence 

experienced by urban gay and bisexual men may be 

comparable to that of heterosexual women. This 

study found that 34 percent of these gay men were 

psychologically abused by a partner, 22 percent were 

physically abused, and 5 percent were sexually 

abused.111 Other studies also estimate that 20 to 35 

percent of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender 

persons experience intimate partner violence.112 

Unfortunately, there are usually little or no available 

resources or services for these populations. Domestic 

violence shelters do not house abused men (although 

there may be safe houses or arrangements with 

particular hotels), service providers rarely have 

specialized knowledge regarding gay and lesbian issues 

in abusive relationships, and physically disabled 

women who need assistance with daily activities or 

medications cannot be adequately cared for in most 

shelter settings. Shelters are not the only existing 

form of domestic violence intervention. Caseworkers 

also should be aware of other services such 

as advocacy, support groups, or counseling that 

are available. 

Disabilities can include mobility, sensory, and 

cognitive impairments, as well as mental illness. They 

cover a broad range of severity and visibility to others. 

Individuals with disabilities are vulnerable to different 

abusive actions and often are more easily isolated from 

potential sources of help. In addition to abusive acts 

anyone might suffer, people with disabilities may be 

subjected to: 

•	 Having medical treatment or medications 

withheld; 

•	 Being prevented from using assistive devices; 

•	 Receiving inadequate or no care for 

personal hygiene; 

•	 Rough handling when care is provided; 

•	 Not being provided access to information that 

may increase their independence or autonomy. 

The disability often affects an individual’s capacity to 

protect him- or herself or to escape a situation of 

imminent danger. For instance, studies have reported 

a history of sexual abuse experienced by 25 percent of 

adolescent girls with mental retardation, 31 percent of 

individuals having congenital physical disabilities, and 

36 percent of multi-handicapped children admitted to 

psychiatric hospitals.113 Unfortunately, many people 

with disabilities are conditioned to believe that 

enduring certain abuses is an inevitable part of having 

a disability. Too often, they are afraid to discuss or 

report abuse because the perpetrator is also their 

primary caretaker. Some additional barriers 

for individuals with disabilities in reporting 

abuse include: 

•	 An increased risk of being institutionalized. If the 

perpetrator is the primary caregiver and no other 

viable caregivers are available, being admitted into 

an institution may be the victim’s only option. 

•	 An increased risk of losing custody of his or her 

children, particularly if the perpetrator is no 

longer in the home or if the disability is perceived 

to impact the victim’s level of parenting skills. 

•	 A fear of being perceived as less credible than the 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 45 
perpetrator because of the disability, particularly 

when the disability impacts the individual’s 

speech. 

•	 The misconception that abuse against people 

with disabilities is expected or justified. Some 

view people with disabilities as difficult to care for 

and believe that harsh, abusive treatment is 

appropriate or necessary to manage them. 

CPS caseworkers should pay special attention to the 

risks and obstacles faced by these unique groups and 

ensure that their assessments and case plan 

recommendations address these issues. For instance, 

referrals to gay and lesbian services may be an option 

as opposed to traditional domestic violence service 

programs. A victim in a wheelchair will need 

accommodation at a service program or shelter, such 

as doorways that are wide enough for the chair and a 

ramp to gain access to and from the building. 

Poverty 

Domestic violence can affect a victim’s ability to be 

financially self-sufficient. Domestic violence and 

poverty are connected and statistics show that victims 

of domestic violence are over represented in the 

welfare system.114 Unquestionably, a lack of viable job 

skills, education, and income presents huge challenges 

for victims. Low-income victims who want to leave 

their violent relationship are left with few and, often, 

less desirable choices. Homelessness and unsafe 

housing are common realities for low-income victims 

and their children who escape domestic violence. 

Thus, it is critical that CPS caseworkers address 

financial barriers faced by victims and link them to 

economic services such as Temporary Assistance for 

Needy Families, vocational skills training, job 

retention, and educational support. 

SAFETY PLANNING WITH
 

ADULT AND CHILD VICTIMS
 

Safety planning is an individualized plan developed to 

reduce the immediate and long-term risks faced by 

the victim and their children.115 Ideally, safety 

planning should begin at assessment and continue 

through case closure. The plan includes strategies 

that reduce the risk of physical violence and harm by 

the perpetrator and enhance the protection of the 

victim and the children. It also contains strategies 

that address other barriers to safety such as income, 

housing, health care, child care, and education.116 Risk 

assessment and safety planning for domestic violence 

should be ongoing and should occur concurrently 

with risk assessment and safety planning for child 

maltreatment. The safety plans of victims of domestic 

violence will vary depending on whether they are 

separated from the abuser, thinking about leaving, or 

returning to or remaining in the relationship. 

CPS caseworkers should involve the victim in 

developing safety plans. Otherwise, it is merely one 

more thing being done “to” the victim and is not 

really a service plan. Specific safety planning activities 

can include: 

•	 Engaging the victim in a discussion about the 

options available to keep him or her and 

the children safe, including what has been 

tried before. 

•	 Exploring the benefits and disadvantages of 

specific options, and creating individualized 

solutions for each family. 

•	 Collecting and gathering important documents 

and various personal items that will be necessary 

for relocation of the victim and the children. 

•	 Determining who to call, where to go, and 

what to do when a violent situation begins or 

is occurring. 

46 Child Protection Practices with Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 
•	 Developing a security plan that might involve 

changing or adding door and window locks, 

installing a security system, or having additional 

outside lighting. 

•	 Informing friends, coworkers, school personnel, 

and neighbors of the situation and restraining 

orders that are in effect. 

•	 Writing down a list of phone numbers of 

neighbors, friends, family, and community service 

providers that the victim can contact for safety, 

resources, and services. This requires CPS 

caseworkers to stay current about resources, 

contacts, and legal options. 

Additionally, CPS caseworkers can help victims 

develop a safety plan with their children. This often 

depends on the child’s age and circumstances—some 

children feel that developing a safety plan helps them 

feel safer and can provide life-saving strategies, while 

others need to know that their parents can protect 

them. CPS caseworkers also should review and 

practice the safety plan steps with the children. 

Children’s safety plans can include how to: 

•	 Find a safe adult and ask for help whenever they 

experience violence. This may involve calling 

supportive family members, friends, or 

community agencies for help. 

•	 Escape from the house if an assault is imminent 

or in progress. If they cannot escape, discuss 

where they can go to be safe in the house. 

•	 Avoid being in the middle of the domestic 

violence. 

•	 Find a place to go in an emergency and the steps 

to take to find safety. 

•	 Call the police.117 

Safety plans are not intended to hold victims 

responsible for possible future abuse. Instead, these 

plans can help victims feel empowered and provide 

concrete steps to help avoid or positively respond to 

abusive actions. Incorporating domestic violence 

safety plans into service plans provides realistic and 

relevant actions for family members living with abuse. 

The safety plans of victims and children should not be 

shared with the perpetrator. This is especially true if 

the plan involves the victim leaving the abusive 

relationship. In fact, some victims will need to hide 

their safety plans to avoid potential harm by the 

abuser. In some cases, safety planning can be 

conducted with the abuser as a way to hold him or her 

responsible and should include steps to take to stop 

the violence (e.g., honoring protection orders, leaving 

the house, time-outs, going to abuser intervention 

groups). Appendix H provides sample domestic 

violence safety plans for a victim and a child. 

CASE DECISION 

After completing the domestic violence assessment 

and safety planning with family members, CPS 

caseworkers are confronted with one of the most 

critical steps in the child protection process—the case 

decision. For domestic violence cases, unless the child 

has an actual injury or there is a specific allegation that 

meets the definition of abuse or neglect in that 

jurisdiction, CPS caseworkers are left with making 

subjective interpretations as to whether a child is at 

risk for imminent danger or harm.118 Unfortunately, 

this leads to inconsistent decision-making among CPS 

caseworkers or among jurisdictions. 

Not all families experiencing domestic violence 

require child protective services, and some are best 

served through community-based services. Child 

exposure to domestic violence does not necessarily 

constitute child maltreatment, but it often can be a 

significant risk factor in determining child safety.

119 

Other elements such as the nature of the domestic 

violence, the impact on victims and children, their 

protective and risk factors, and the presence of other 

issues, such as substance abuse or mental illness, need 

to be considered in the final determination for 

ongoing child protective services. In situations where 

the abuser’s violence poses a significant safety threat to 

children, difficult decisions regarding substantiation 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 47 
and whether children can remain safely in the home 

also require thoughtful deliberation. CPS 

intervention may be required in the following 

domestic violence situations: 

•	 The batterer or adult victim is physically or 

sexually abusing the child; 

•	 The child is physically harmed as a result of 

intervening in a violent incident; 

•	 The batterer’s abusive behavior includes frequent 

use of weapons or threats of homicide/suicide 

towards the adult victim or children. 

Substantiation and “Failure to Protect” 

Whether to substantiate child maltreatment in cases 

involving exposure to domestic violence varies from 

State to State and across jurisdictions, according to 

established statutes. In some jurisdictions, a common 

child protection practice is to substantiate “neglect” 

against victims of domestic violence for “failure to 

protect” even when they have not maltreated their 

children.120 “Failure to protect” is a widely used 

phrase in legal and child welfare literature but is not 

found in all child maltreatment statutes. “Failure to 

protect” allegations imply that victims are neglectful 

because their actions or inactions in response to the 

domestic violence place their children at risk for 

harm. This has raised concerns among domestic 

violence service advocates who view this procedure as 

punitive, inaccurate, and harmful to victims and their 

children. Service providers have accused CPS of 

“revictimizing” victims of domestic violence by 

punishing them for the abuser’s violent behavior.121 

“Failure to protect” allegations focus on the victim 

and not on the actual perpetrator who is jeopardizing 

the children’s safety. It also discounts the victim’s 

protective strategies and efforts to secure protection 

for their children. Unfortunately, this practice 

prevents many victims of domestic violence from 

seeking help because they are terrified of losing their 

children and being labeled a “neglectful” parent. 

Some victims of domestic violence do neglect or 

physically abuse their children, place their children in 

dangerous situations, or are so affected by their abuse 

that they are unable to adequately protect or care for 

their children. In these situations, victims should be 

substantiated for maltreatment. CPS caseworkers 

should make diligent efforts to help victims protect 

their children before coercive measures, such as 

substantiation or protective custody, are considered. 

Caseworkers need to consult with their supervisors 

and service providers before making a final decision. 

In circumstances where CPS does not have legal 

jurisdiction over the abuser, caseworkers should make 

every effort to hold the perpetrator accountable by 

working with other court and service systems that can 

impose sanctions and consequences for the behavior. 

“Failure to protect” is a complex issue that varies from 

case to case. Not all of the outcomes are negative— 

there are instances where a “failure to protect” finding 

can help the victim obtain assistance from the courts. 

Court-ordered case plans can include provisions that 

require victims to obtain domestic violence services. 

In some cases, adult victims may not seek domestic 

violence services without a court-ordered mandate or 

the threat of losing custody of their children if they 

are noncompliant. 

Removal of Children 

In cases involving domestic violence, the removal of 

the child from the home is usually unnecessary. 

While children’s safety is the primary and mandated 

responsibility of CPS caseworkers, removal of 

children should only be contemplated when all other 

means of safety have been considered and offered; 

when the children are at imminent risk; or the victim 

is unable to protect the children or accept services. 

Unfortunately, obstacles in deterring the abuser’s 

violent behavior have led some CPS agencies to 

believe that protective custody is the only viable 

method to ensure children’s safety. As a result, 

children are removed from victims who, in addition 

to their abuse, suffer the agonizing loss of their 

children. If removing the children from the home is 

considered a possibility and the victim is not willing 

or able to leave the abusive relationship, CPS 

48 Child Protection Practices with Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 
caseworkers should discuss their concerns and ask the 

victim to provide options for the children’s safety.122 

CPS caseworkers also should seek the guidance of 

their supervisor and service providers to ensure that 

they have explored every possible opportunity to keep 

children safely with the nonoffending parent. 

Additionally, caseworkers should consult with the 

offender’s intervention services provider as well as his 

or her probation or parole officer, where applicable, in 

order to hold the offender responsible and maintain 

some legal leverage. As in every CPS case, out-ofhome placement should be the last option and CPS 

caseworkers should work with the adult victim to 

develop safe alternatives. 

Courts are beginning to address this issue. In a 2001 

Federal lawsuit, Nicholson v. Scoppetta, a judge issued 

an injunction ruling that New York City’s 

Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) was 

violating the constitutional rights of mothers and 

their children by removing children from their homes 

simply because their parents are victims of domestic 

violence. It ordered ACS to stop its policy of 

separating adult victims from their children and to 

adopt new policies and practices to improve the 

agency’s response to families experiencing domestic 

violence. Although the ruling was being appealed at 

the time of publication, it will have tremendous 

implications for practice in the future.123 (At the 

time of publication, the case remains in the 

appeals process.) 

CASE PLANNING FOR CASES
 

INVOLVING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
 

The primary goal of case planning with victims and 

their children is to promote enhanced protection and 

safety and to hold perpetrators accountable for their 

abusive behaviors. CPS intervention with families 

experiencing domestic violence requires ongoing risk 

assessment and safety planning to ensure that service 

recommendations are practical, viable, and achievable. 

CPS caseworkers can help accomplish this by 

consulting service providers and incorporating their 

expertise in case plan recommendations. 

Additionally, caseworkers can involve an adult victim 

in case planning efforts by validating experiences, 

identifying strengths, and building on those strengths 

to help him or her regain control over his or her life 

and achieve safety.124 In doing so, CPS caseworkers 

avoid victim’s perceptions that they are forced into 

receiving services. Often, when caseworkers prescribe 

a set of case plan activities without the victim’s input, 

this may mirror the abuser’s behavior in that it dictates 

control over choices. Further, case planning efforts 

with victims of domestic violence need to be culturally 

sensitive, supportive, and creative. CPS caseworkers 

can empower victims by allowing them to make 

informed decisions regarding safe alternatives and 

services that will enhance their children’s safety. 

This section presents case planning activities in cases 

involving domestic violence, discusses specialized 

issues related to family team conferencing and 

assessing community resources and cultural factors, 

and underscores the importance of careful 

documentation of domestic violence in CPS case 

records. 

Case Planning for Victims, Children, 

and Perpetrators of Domestic Violence 

Two separate case plans are recommended in CPS 

cases involving domestic violence. Writing separate 

case plans for the victim and the perpetrator achieves 

two goals: (1) they enhance the victim’s and children’s 

safety, and (2) they hold abusers accountable for their 

abusive behaviors. A separate case plan for abusers 

enhances CPS efforts by focusing on the perpetrator’s 

abusive behaviors and the interventions required to 

address them. 

Certain recommendations may be threatening to 

perpetrators and can create additional risk to adult 

and child victims. For safety measures, individual case 

plans should be developed when service 

recommendations are as follows: 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 49 
• The victim plans to leave the home and is For victims 

coordinating with service providers or other 

support systems (e.g., church, family members, 

and friends). 

•	 The victim plans to obtain a restraining order 

against the abuser. 

•	 The victim plans to call the police as a 

safety option. 

•	 The victim plans to contact the probation or 

parole officer regarding violations of the abuser’s 

probation or parole terms. 

The victim and children’s service plans do not need to 

be shared with the abuser. CPS caseworkers can seek 

the victim’s guidance on service recommendations to 

include in the perpetrator’s case plan. 

Case planning activities are strengthened through 

collaboration with domestic violence advocacy 

programs. Service providers can provide consultation 

on the feasibility of recommended services, educate 

victims on available or appropriate services, and assist 

caseworkers with creative ways to engage and help 

victims and their children. Collaborating with other 

community service providers (e.g., substance abuse, 

mental health, economic, and housing services), law 

enforcement, and the courts also can enhance CPS 

efforts. These multiple issues, in addition to domestic 

abuse, will necessitate working with other service 

providers to help alleviate family conditions that 

affect children’s safety. Caseworkers should assist 

victims, either directly or by collaborating with 

others, in the court proceedings processes. Additional 

information on working with the courts is available in 

other User Manual Series publications at 

http://www.nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/profess/tools/ 

usermanual.cfm. 

For families experiencing domestic violence, case 

planning services should include: 

•	 Safety planning with child protection and service 

providers; 

•	 Individual or group counseling with a domestic 

violence program; 

•	 Specialized assessment services or crisis 

counseling with a victim’s advocate; 

•	 Legal advocacy, housing, medical, economic and 

daycare services; 

•	 Shelter or transitional living services; 

•	 Visitation or supervised exchange services; 

•	 A review of domestic violence information 

regarding the dynamics of domestic violence, 

victim resources, and its effects on the children; 

•	 Mental health or substance abuse referrals, if 

applicable. 

For children 

•	 Safety planning with the CPS caseworker, 

battered parent, or domestic violence service 

provider; 

•	 Safety skills development; 

•	 Specialized individual or group counseling for 

children exposed to domestic violence; 

•	 Mentoring and after-school program referrals; 

•	 Daycare or Head Start referrals; 

•	 Safe visitation and exchange services; 

•	 Community-based enrichment programs. 

For perpetrators 

•	 Safety planning with the CPS caseworker or 

victims of domestic violence advocate; 

•	 Abuser intervention program referrals; 

•	 Safe visitation and supervised exchange services; 

50 Child Protection Practices with Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 
•	 Compliance with probation or parole, restraining 

orders, and custody orders; 

•	 Parenting programs that include a focus on 

domestic violence issues; 

•	 Substance abuse and mental health referrals, if 

applicable; 

•	 Fatherhood programs when appropriate. 

In the initial stages of case planning, activities that are 

not recommended until further risk assessment 

include: 

•	 Couples or family counseling; 

•	 Court or divorce mediation; 

•	 Visitation arrangements that endanger the victim 

and children or are in conflict with a restraining 

or custody order; 

•	 Anger management classes.125 

Participation in these types of services can increase 

risks to victims and their children. Couples 

counseling and divorce mediation is predicated on the 

assumption that partners who possess equal amounts 

of power can negotiate a resolution. In abusive 

relationships, however, there is an unequal balance of 

power between victims and perpetrators as well as a 

fear of physical violence or coercive attacks when the 

abuser feels challenged. Couples counseling or 

divorce mediation is acceptable only when the victim 

feels equally empowered and is not afraid that his or 

her participation will result in retaliation by the 

abuser. Anger management classes often are not 

appropriate because they do not focus on the 

overarching patterns of behavior common in abusive 

relationships. In addition, anger management classes 

are not effective in holding perpetrators accountable 

because it implies that they only have a problem with 

“managing” their anger. 

The Parenting Component in Intervention Programs 

Most intervention programs for perpetrators of domestic violence do not include significant content on 

appropriate parenting, but there are several examples of emerging programs that incorporate training on how 

to parent without violence. These include information and activities that focus on: 

• The perpetrator’s parental role in the family; 

• Communication skills, assertiveness, and expressing feelings appropriately; 

• Understanding the difference between discipline and punishment; 

• Nonviolent means for changing children’s behaviors by using logical and natural consequences; 

• Child development information; 

• The effects of child exposure to domestic violence.126 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 51 
Finally, perpetrators are known to escalate their 

coercive and violent behaviors during times of 

separation and divorce. Visitations with the children 

provide perpetrators with access to their partners 

where they frequently try to intimidate and threaten 

them. Thus, CPS caseworkers need to be especially 

cautious when scheduling agency visits with the 

abuser and the children. Caseworkers also should be 

certain that visitation schedules do not violate any 

existing restraining or child custody orders; it may be 

useful for the caseworkers to obtain a copy of the 

court orders to prevent conflicts. CPS caseworkers 

should adapt the case plan to include these services 

only when the victim and service providers believe 

they are reasonably safe options. 

Family Team Conferencing 

in Domestic Violence Cases 

Family team conferencing is a strength-based, familycentered approach that involves engaging family 

members, friends, community service providers, and 

other interested parties in a joint effort to help 

families protect their children and rebuild their 

lives.127 This model can be used in CPS cases 

involving domestic violence. In these cases, its goal 

includes supporting efforts to enhance the protection 

and safety of victims and children through a network 

of systems that provide services and abuser 

accountability.

128 Family team conferencing in 

domestic violence cases incorporates the safety needs 

identified by victims and builds on their strengths. It 

helps victims expand on their existing protective 

strategies and resources by linking them with informal 

and formal resources that they have not accessed. 

Focusing on a family’s strengths does not imply that 

problems, such as the perpetrator’s abusive and 

controlling behavior, are to be ignored or minimized. 

Rather, strength-based practice promotes use of a 

family’s coping and adaptive patterns, their natural 

support networks, and other available resources.129 

Initially, perpetrators are not usually involved in 

family case conferencing until safety mechanisms are 

secured for adult and child victims. Over time, family 

case conferencing with domestic abusers can include 

system accountability and support services that help 

them with ending their violent behaviors. 

Assessing Community Resources 

and Cultural Factors in Case Plans 

In addition to individual barriers, victims encounter 

community barriers to protecting themselves and 

their children. This is especially challenging for 

victims of domestic violence within ethnic, racial, 

disabled, gay and lesbian, and other marginalized 

groups. Successful case planning efforts include an 

assessment of available community resources and 

their effectiveness so that service recommendations 

are realistic for and accessible to family members. 

CPS caseworkers who do not take into consideration 

a community’s inability to provide for or respond to 

the needs of victims of domestic violence will prepare 

ineffective case plans. 

Assessment questions that CPS caseworkers may want 

to consider include: 

•	 Are there culturally sensitive resources, materials, 

and services available for non-English speaking 

victims? 

•	 Are there specialized services for gays, lesbians, 

and heterosexual men who are victimized by their 

partners? 

•	 How will a victim’s immigration status affect her 

ability to obtain services recommended in the 

case plan? 

•	 How does the family view American culture? 

How will this impact the family’s ability to seek 

help? 

For more information regarding family team meeting guidelines in cases involving domestic violence, see the 

Family Violence Prevention Fund’s Guidelines for Conducting Family Team Conferences When There Is a 

History Of Domestic Violence at http://www.endabuse.org/programs/display.php3?DocID=159. 

52 Child Protection Practices with Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 
•	 Are daycare and transportation services available 

so that the victim can attend domestic violence 

counseling or meet other service plan 

requirements? 

•	 Does the local domestic violence shelter have 

food and living accommodations appropriate for 

ethnic families, disabled victims, or victims of 

domestic violence with older male children? 

•	 Is the response by local police and the courts 

nonjudgmental, nonpunitive, and responsive to 

victims? Do they hold abusers accountable in 

their systems? 

•	 Do substance abuse programs address domestic 

violence and provide temporary living facilities 

for the children of victims of domestic violence 

ordered into inpatient treatment? 

•	 Is there transitional or affordable housing or 

economic support for victims once they leave the 

domestic violence shelter? 

•	 Do victims who live in rural communities have 

accessible transportation to domestic violence 

advocacy programs and other supportive services? 

Documenting Domestic Violence 

in Child Protection Case Records 

Documenting domestic violence in CPS cases can be 

helpful or harmful to victims and their children. 

Disclosing domestic violence can be a difficult process 

for victims and their children. Feelings of shame, 

guilt, and fear are connected with their reluctance to 

reveal the violence in their lives. CPS caseworkers can 

demonstrate their sensitivity to domestic violence 

issues by safeguarding information that can 

compromise victims’ and their children’s safety and by 

engaging in documentation practices that reflect 

competent case practice with families affected by 

domestic violence. 

The goals of documenting domestic violence in cases 

are to minimize abuser-generated risks to victims and 

their children, avoid language that blames victims for 

the violence, and hold perpetrators accountable for 

their abusive behavior. More specifically, case records 

and forms should accurately identify the victim and 

perpetrator of domestic violence, document the 

effects of domestic violence on the abused partner and 

children, and delineate the specific domestic violence 

tactics that are posing a safety threat to family 

members. Skillful documentation of domestic abuse 

issues also can be a learning tool for those who have 

access to the case record. For example, case notes and 

court reports can educate family court judges and 

parent attorneys about the complexities of domestic 

violence dynamics, the challenges faced by victims of 

domestic violence, and the reasons victims of 

domestic violence may struggle with meeting certain 

conditions of a case plan. 

Since documentation and disclosure can increase the 

threat of harm to victims and children, the following 

guidelines and examples can help CPS caseworkers 

reduce these risks when information must be shared: 

•	 Any information in the case record or public 

documents (e.g., court records) pertaining to a 

confidential address of the victims (e.g., shelter 

location or relocation to new housing) should be 

flagged and never shared with the abuser. 

•	 Disclosures made by the victim and children 

regarding their safety plan or their accounts of the 

violence should not be shared with the abuser. 

•	 When information must be shared in court 

proceedings, victims should be notified in 

advance of the court date so they may plan for 

their safety. In some States, the caseworker can 

ask for the information to be kept sealed or the 

victim can appoint an agent on his or her behalf. 

•	 In cases where disclosure of the domestic violence 

is made during court proceedings, the parents’ 

attorneys may want to share privately with the 

judge the possible consequences of such 

disclosure and ask that it be kept sealed. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 53 
•	 The safety of the victim and the children must be 

considered in the planning of case transfer. To 

protect the mother and children’s confidentiality 

(e.g., new address), the case record should be 

flagged so that the transferring CPS caseworker 

will receive this information. 

•	 All documentation of domestic violence (case 

dictation, affidavits, court petitions, court 

reports) should be written in a manner that holds 

the abuser responsible and avoids blaming the 

victim.130 

Examples of inappropriate case documentation 

practices: 

•	 “There is domestic violence between the parents.” 

This implies that domestic violence is “mutual” and 

consenting behavior and does not hold the abuser 

accountable for the violence. 

•	 “The victim will notify the abuser’s probation 

officer or police when she is assaulted.” 

This forces the victim to provide sanctions for the 

perpetrator’s behavior and places the victim at risk for 

harm by the abuser. 

•	 “The victim will prevent the children from 

witnessing domestic violence.” 

The victim cannot stop the violence. It is the 

perpetrator’s responsibility to end the abusive 

behavior. 

Examples of appropriate case documentation: 

•	 “The perpetrator will not verbally, emotionally, 

psychologically, or physically abuse the victim or 

children.” 

•	 “The abuser will not use threatening or coercive 

tactics against the victim that compromise his or 

hers or the children’s safety.” 

•	 “The offender will take responsibility for his or 

her coercive, threatening, and abusive behavior 

by participating in a perpetrator’s intervention 

program and complying with all civil, criminal, 

and probation orders.” 

CASE CLOSURE 

Case closure is a critical decision that involves a final 

and careful analysis of the harm posed by domestic 

violence. Some CPS caseworkers assume that if a 

victim leaves an abusive relationship or if the 

perpetrator is removed from the home, completes a 

perpetrator’s intervention program, or stops 

physically assaultive behaviors, it is sufficient evidence 

to terminate a case. Since some perpetrators are very 

skilled at manipulative behavior to avoid detection 

and accountability, CPS caseworkers should be 

judicious in believing that victims and children are at 

lower risk for harm when perpetrators express remorse 

for their violent behaviors, are vehement in their 

claims that they will not engage in violent behavior, or 

have completed a perpetrator intervention program. 

The threat of harm may still be present for victims 

and children as some perpetrators are likely to 

revictimize them despite completion of a perpetrator 

intervention program.131 

In addition to conducting the final risk assessment for 

case closure, other criteria that CPS caseworkers 

should consider in determining whether the victim’s 

and children’s safety has been reasonably, if not 

absolutely, assured include the following: 

•	 The victim and children, when interviewed 

separately, report feeling safer. 

•	 The victim has knowledge of and access to 

relevant support services, information, and safety 

options. 

•	 The victim and the abuser understand the effects 

of domestic violence on their children. 

54 Child Protection Practices with Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 
•	 The victim of domestic violence has a primary 

connection to a community service provider who 

will have ongoing contact with him or her and the 

children. 

•	 The children and victim have safety plans. The 

protective parent also can demonstrate what they 

will do should domestic violence resume. Role 

playing exercises may be helpful in familiarizing 

the victims with this process. 

•	 Service providers are in agreement with CPS 

assessments that the threat of harm has been 

lowered for the victim and children. 

•	 Domestic violence intervention programs, 

criminal and civil courts, probation and parole, 

and other community service providers will 

continue to monitor and respond with immediate 

sanctions to any new violent behavior by the 

abuser. 

•	 New child maltreatment reports have not been 

filed. 

•	 The perpetrator has access to intervention 

programs and support services. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 55 
Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 

CHAPTER 5 

Enhancing Caseworker
 

Safety and Support in Child
 

Protection Cases Involving
 

Domestic Violence
 

Given the involuntary nature of child 

protective services (CPS) intervention, every 

child protection case has the potential for 

unexpected confrontation. Cases involving 

domestic violence may pose additional risks of 

threats and violence for CPS caseworkers. As such, 

CPS caseworkers need to understand the specific 

situations that might prompt violent 

confrontations and learn ways to protect their own 

safety. 

SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS FOR CASEWORKERS 

In general, people experience apprehension when 

confronted by a violent situation or person. 

Domestic violence situations can potentially result 

in serious harm, injury, or death for anyone 

involved. Therefore, it is common for CPS 

caseworkers to have feelings of fear or discomfort 

when they receive a case involving domestic 

violence. Some caseworkers think they lack the 

necessary knowledge and experience to address the 

dynamics involved in domestic violence, while 

others may find that their own personal history or 

beliefs regarding abuse provoke feelings of distress 

or anger. 

In addition to the above uncertainties, some CPS 

activities can incite a violent confrontation because 

they threaten the perpetrator’s control and 

authority over the home and family members. 

Since violence is already a dynamic in many of 

these families, other members (such as teenagers or 

the adult victim) also may resort to violence when 

interacting with others, including caseworkers. 

Specific situations and child protection procedures 

that can increase risks to caseworkers, victims, and 

children include: 

•	 Preparation by the victim to leave the 

relationship, seek shelter, initiate divorce 

proceedings, or obtain a restraining order. 

•	 Receipt by the perpetrator of agency 

documentation with allegations of neglect or 

abuse or information about how CPS will 

continue to be involved with the family. 

•	 Allegations made directly to the 

perpetrator regarding domestic violence or 

child maltreatment. 

•	 Requests by the perpetrator for information 

regarding the victim and children’s location. 

•	 Activities involving the children’s removal 

from the home. 

•	 Pursuit of permanency planning goals of 

adoption and termination of parental rights. 

•	 Release of the perpetrator from jail or 

confrontation with serious criminal charges 

and possible incarceration.132 

57 
STEPS TO ENHANCE CASEWORKER SAFETY 

Perpetrators of domestic violence frequently engage in 

manipulative behavior to escape detection of and the 

consequences for their violent and abusive behaviors. 

When perpetrators sense that calculating tactics such 

as charming or colluding with the caseworker are not 

effective, they may resort to threatening behaviors to 

intimidate caseworkers into decreasing their 

involvement with the family. For example, the 

perpetrator may stare intently at the caseworker or act 

agitated by pacing the floor during an interview. 

Some perpetrators even make subtle threats to “make 

trouble” for caseworkers by calling their supervisor or 

warning them to “watch their back.” Such actions 

should be documented in the case file. If CPS 

caseworkers are confronted by an aggressive abuser or 

are uncomfortable with a potentially hostile situation, 

they should consult with their supervisor or service 

provider to discuss ways in which they can protect 

themselves. Recommendations to enhance 

caseworker safety include: 

•	 Conducting meetings or interviews with the 

perpetrator in the agency office or in a public 

place. If this is not possible, ask a coworker, 

supervisor, or law enforcement official to be 

present during any interaction with the abuser. 

•	 Being aware of the surroundings when leaving 

the office or home and parking in a safe place. 

•	 Notifying coworkers or a supervisor that a 

potentially dangerous client is visiting the office. 

Provide the time and place of the interview. If 

possible, try to have a building security officer 

nearby. 

•	 Notifying coworkers or a supervisor of the exact 

location and expected time frame when visiting a 

perpetrator in the home. 

•	 Ensuring accessible exits when meeting with the 

abuser. 

•	 Attempting to avoid verbal confrontations or 

debates with the perpetrator as this may escalate 

the situation. 

•	 Receiving training on working with perpetrators 

and conducting nonconfrontational interviews. 

•	 Refraining from giving the perpetrator the sense 

that one is afraid. Caseworkers who feel 

threatened should try to de-escalate the situation 

by explaining that the perpetrator’s anger is 

misplaced and CPS simply wants to help the 

family. Caseworkers should then immediately 

end the interview or visit. 

•	 Informing the victim if their partner’s anger has 

escalated, posing a risk to the victim or the 

children. Engage in safety planning to address 

possible harm to the victim, children, or 

caseworker.133 

CPS agencies can provide additional resources that 

help caseworkers feel more comfortable and safe when 

they intervene in domestic violence cases. CPS 

administrators and supervisors can ensure that 

caseworkers have access to cellular telephones, pagers, 

trauma debriefings, and caseworker safety planning 

efforts. Enhanced building security, secure meeting 

space, and protocols requesting law enforcement 

assistance should also be provided to staff. Finally, 

CPS agencies can develop human resource policies 

that take a “zero tolerance” approach to violence by 

ensuring caseworkers receive agency assistance that is 

supportive and confidential. 

58 Enhancing Caseworker Safety and Support 
THE ROLE OF THE CPS SUPERVISOR 

IN SUPPORTING CASEWORKERS 

CPS supervisors may not have frequent or direct 

contact with families experiencing domestic violence, 

but they have an instrumental role in ensuring 

families have safe outcomes. Supervisors play a 

critical part in establishing an agency culture that 

prioritizes cases involving domestic violence. CPS 

supervisors can set a positive example by attending 

agency and community-based domestic violence 

trainings; participating on interagency committees 

and advisory boards; and advocating for domestic 

violence protocols, resources, and assistance for staff. 

Further, by staying current on salient issues involving 

overlapping domestic violence and child 

maltreatment, supervisors can assist caseworkers by 

remaining sensitive to the needs of these families and 

ensuring competent case practice. 

Specific supervisory activities that can provide 

additional support to CPS caseworkers confronted 

with these complex and challenging cases include: 

•	 Providing oversight and review of appropriate 

child welfare practices. Intake, assessment, case 

disposition, case review, removal, and case closure 

are critical decision-making points in the CPS 

process. Supervisors may need to provide 

additional guidance to caseworkers who are 

trying to make difficult decisions and 

recommendations that will not compromise the 

safety of victims and children. Specialized 

policies or protocols as well as additional training 

for cases involving domestic violence can serve as 

guides for supervisors and caseworkers. It is 

imperative that CPS managers are knowledgeable 

about and enforce compliance with specific 

agency procedures for domestic violence cases so 

they can help caseworkers integrate specialized 

case practice guidelines in their assessments and 

interventions. Supervisors should continue to 

monitor and enforce compliance with agency 

protocols as a means to determine caseworker 

capability with cases involving domestic violence. 

•	 Supporting and encouraging collaborative 

relationships. Supervisors should encourage 

staff to partner with service providers and other 

community agencies that can offer additional 

consultation on domestic violence assessment and 

intervention. Supervisors also can encourage 

caseworkers to access domestic violence expertise 

and resources, which might be located internally 

in the form of specialized domestic violence staff 

that are available for guidance and assistance. 

Cross-training is another approach to foster 

collaboration between child welfare and domestic 

violence programs. CPS managers who support 

caseworker participation in cross-training 

opportunities demonstrate their commitment to 

promoting competence in achieving safe 

outcomes for violent families. 

•	 Promoting caseworker safety. Supervisors 

ought to provide support for caseworkers who are 

intimidated or afraid of working with families 

experiencing domestic violence. It is important 

for CPS managers to demonstrate that they are 

available to discuss staff concerns and will help 

caseworkers alleviate their apprehension. 

Developing a caseworker safety plan, 

accompanying caseworkers on home visits, or 

allowing caseworkers to travel in pairs are several 

significant ways supervisors can enhance the 

safety of their staff. On an administrative level, 

supervisors can advocate that their staff have 

access to resources, such as cellular phones, 

pagers, and security assistance, which can increase 

the comfort levels of caseworkers responding to 

potentially volatile situations.134 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 59 
Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 

CHAPTER 6 

Building Collaborative
 

Responses for Families
 

Experiencing 


Domestic Violence
 

Child protective services (CPS) caseworkers 

cannot comprehensively address all of the 

multiple needs of the families they encounter. 

Effectively responding to the needs of families 

experiencing domestic violence and ensuring the 

safety and well-being of all family members require 

close collaboration with service providers. This 

chapter describes specific activities that build 

collaborative responses between CPS and service 

providers, presents principles of collaboration, and 

provides examples of promising initiatives, models, 

and programs from across the Nation. 

PARTNERING WITH SERVICE PROVIDERS 

Safety for children and adults impacted by 

domestic violence can be enhanced greatly through 

collaborative partnerships and integrative practice 

approaches between CPS caseworkers and service 

providers. It is essential that these groups 

understand the unique challenges inherent within 

each system that can compromise case sensitive 

practice and seamless service delivery. Similar to 

when CPS partners with substance abuse treatment 

providers, CPS caseworkers and service providers 

can engage in daily activities that teach one another 

about relevant field issues and incorporate their 

areas of expertise into case practice. 

CPS caseworkers can take active roles in building 

relationships with service providers and in 

developing a shared understanding of their 

respective roles and responsibilities through the 

following: 

•	 Shadowing activities. While visiting another 

practitioner’s office may appear to be a 

simplistic suggestion, it can be a powerful tool 

in building relationships. CPS caseworkers 

can visit domestic violence shelters, observe a 

domestic violence intake, listen to hotline calls, 

and participate in domestic violence trainings. 

These visits will help them to integrate 

practical domestic violence knowledge and 

competency into their child protection efforts. 

Similarly, CPS caseworkers can invite service 

providers to listen in on child abuse hotline 

calls or accompany them on a child abuse 

investigation. By doing so, service providers 

can learn when CPS accepts a referral for 

assessment, what they assess for in determining 

child safety, and how they make the 

determination that a case meets the legal 

definitions for abuse or neglect. Domestic 

violence workers will see that many of the 

families entering the CPS system have multiple 

needs and CPS caseworkers face the daunting 

task of assessing and responding to several 

problems in addition to child maltreatment 

and domestic violence. 

61 
•	 Cross-training opportunities. Regardless of 

who hosts or the focus of the training, crosstraining allows child welfare and domestic 

violence professionals to receive and provide 

relevant information simultaneously about their 

respective processes and subject areas. CPS 

caseworkers can invite service providers to 

inservice trainings where they provide critical 

information regarding the definitions of child 

maltreatment, the criteria for reporting to CPS, 

and the CPS process. This provides an 

opportunity to clarify misconceptions about their 

roles, responsibilities, and authority. 

Caseworkers likely will see that some domestic 

violence workers struggle with mandatory 

reporting requirements because they fear victims 

will be “revictimized” by punitive child welfare 

practices, that it will cause them to lose their 

children, or that they are breaking victims’ 

confidentiality. CPS caseworkers can ease such 

apprehensions by explaining the criteria for case 

substantiation, the course of protective custody 

decisions, and the required steps in the child 

protection process. Further, caseworkers can 

offer to help victim advocates develop protocols 

and staff trainings on mandatory reporting to 

CPS. Similarly, service providers and 

organizations can invite CPS caseworkers to 

trainings such as appropriate safety measures for 

victims, perpetrator intervention programs, and 

the dynamics of domestic violence. 

•	 Integrating case practice knowledge and 

expertise. CPS caseworkers can include service 

providers in case decisions and hold interagency 

staffings at critical decision-making points. It 

also may be helpful to have the service providers 

facilitate the family team meetings for CPS cases 

involving domestic violence. This integration of 

specialized domestic violence knowledge 

contributes to more informed decisions 

benefiting the safety and well-being of all family 

members. It also engages service providers in the 

CPS process, helps them understand ASFA 

timelines, and increases their awareness of service 

planning efforts. Service providers can observe 

juvenile court proceedings to learn when 

protective custody is necessary, the implications 

of child protection reunification efforts, and the 

conditions for recommending termination of 

parental rights. Service providers also can be 

involved in family court proceedings by 

providing expert testimony that educates 

attorneys, judges, and other parties about the 

impact of domestic violence on families. 

•	 Sharing information. Information sharing and 

confidentiality issues frequently present barriers 

to collaboration and generate negative stereotypes 

about CPS caseworkers. Service providers often 

are accused of being uncooperative with CPS and 

overly protective of their clients. In turn, service 

providers often perceive CPS caseworkers as 

unwilling to share information even when these 

same caseworkers ask them for information about 

shared clients. CPS caseworkers can help 

counteract this misconception by explaining that 

case record information is protected through 

agency policy or statutes limiting their ability to 

share information. Caseworkers can collaborate 

to the extent allowed by informing service 

providers of case decisions, explaining the CPS 

process, consulting with them on practice 

approaches, and including them in case planning 

efforts. Service providers also can explain their 

confidentiality policies to CPS caseworkers along 

with the victim’s expectations that the sensitive 

information they share will not be used against 

them. Service providers can explain this delicate 

balance and ask CPS caseworkers for guidance in 

developing practice guidelines regarding 

reporting to CPS and for sharing client 

information. In some instances, victims may be 

asked to sign a confidentiality release form so that 

case information may be shared with other service 

providers. 

Service providers and CPS caseworkers, despite their 

differences, share one primary goal—safety and 

freedom from violence. They can work to accomplish 

this for all victims of violence by joining in 

partnership to develop new ways to work on behalf of 

the families they serve. Establishing a Memorandum 

of Understanding (MOU) can also aid in 

communication and understanding of roles. See 

62 Building Collaborative Responses for Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 
Appendix I for an example of how to develop an Regrettably, these discrepancies can lead to systemic 

MOU between a CPS agency and a domestic violence barriers that can make collaboration difficult and 

services agency. frustrating. Community partnerships can be created 

if they are based upon a set of general principles that 

include the following: 

COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS AND PRINCIPLES 

Domestic violence and child maltreatment are not 

issues limited to CPS and domestic violence 

programs. Many of the families who become involved 

in the child protection system often face additional 

challenges such as substance abuse, poverty, or mental 

illness. As a result, a number of communities find 

that a comprehensive, coordinated approach is needed 

to meet the diverse and multiple needs of these 

families adequately.135 Other key members involved in 

responding to these families include the following: 

•	 Health care providers (e.g., physicians, nurses, 

and public health agencies); 

•	 Criminal justice personnel (e.g., legal aids, law 

enforcement officers, attorneys, and judges); 

•	 Mental health care providers (e.g., therapists, 

psychologists, and psychiatrists); 

•	 Educators (e.g., teachers, guidance counselors, 

and Head Start personnel); 

•	 Substance abuse programs; 

•	 Housing programs; 

•	 Economic support programs; 

•	 Daycare and family support providers; 

•	 Faith-based programs and clergy; 

•	 Neighborhood groups and community residents; 

•	 Survivors of domestic abuse and child 

maltreatment. 

A lack of interagency cooperation frequently stems 

from the different and, at times, conflicting 

philosophies, mission, and goals of each system. 

•	 Finding common ground. As a starting point, 

partnership members need to begin talking to one 

another. Asking questions about one another will 

help clarify misconceptions and confusion about 

each system. It will help participants find 

similarities and areas of agreement related to the 

safety and well-being of families and individuals 

in their communities. Perhaps one of the most 

important benefits from establishing common 

ground is that it often helps to develop trust 

among partners, which can be instrumental in a 

partnership’s success and longevity. 

•	 Developing a shared mission. Open and 

respectful discussion can move participants 

toward identifying common values, beliefs, and 

goals. Through informal or formal meetings, 

partners can work toward developing a collective 

vision for ending domestic violence in their 

communities. Once a unified mission is 

established, this mission will provide the 

foundation and focus in mobilizing the efforts of 

all those involved. 

•	 Developing leadership. As in any successful 

initiative, leadership is essential for capacity 

building and sustainability. Participants need to 

identify persons among themselves or within the 

community who are influential, impassioned, and 

committed to leading the charge of the collective 

group. 

•	 Taking action. With a common vision as the 

focus and leadership in place, community 

members can move towards identifying gaps in 

services, needed resources, and strategies for 

crafting a comprehensive response for families in 

need. Examples of these approaches might 

include legislative or policy changes, 

demonstration projects, or multidisciplinary 

boards that address co-occurring domestic 

violence and child maltreatment issues.136 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 63 
PROMISING INITIATIVES, MODELS, AND PROGRAMS 

The above principles of collaboration merely serve as 

a beginning for groups seeking to improve outcomes 

for adult and child victims of violence. Institutional 

and societal changes can only begin when CPS, 

domestic violence programs, and an expansive 

network of providers integrate their expertise, 

resources, and services to eliminate domestic violence 

in their communities. A number of innovative 

approaches for addressing overlapping child abuse 

and domestic violence problems are emerging at the 

national, State, and local level. For example, CPS 

agencies are developing agency protocols and 

specialized units that integrate domestic violence 

knowledge into existing child welfare practice. In 

turn, domestic violence organizations are 

incorporating children’s programs into shelter-based 

services. Other professional groups, such as hospital 

personnel and law enforcement officers, are including 

procedures to identify and respond to victims and 

their children. Child advocates, service providers, and 

an array of social service providers are forming 

interagency collaborations to develop comprehensive 

solutions that provide safety and stability for families. 

Model Initiatives 

The following are descriptions of nationally 

recognized pilot initiatives and programs that have 

been replicated in States and local communities 

throughout the country.137 Currently, conclusive data 

regarding the effectiveness of these programs is not 

available. The “Greenbook Project,” a Federal 

demonstration project funded by the U.S. 

Departments of Health and Human Services and 

Justice, is the first, multisite evaluation project that is 

anticipated to provide outcome data on the 

effectiveness of systems collaboration between child 

protective services, domestic violence, and the courts 

in addressing overlapping domestic violence and child 

abuse. While these examples provide a model for best 

practice, they are constantly being refined and 

expanded as emerging information and other creative 

solutions develop. 

Domestic Violence Unit (DVU) and Domestic 

Violence Protocol—Massachusetts Department of 

Social Services 

The Massachusetts Department of Social Services 

(DSS) was the first CPS agency to hire a service 

provider to provide education and consultation to 

CPS staff. This practice integration model has 

expanded into the establishment of an internal 

Domestic Violence Unit (DVU) consisting of 

specialized service providers staffed throughout local 

area offices. The DVU provides case consultation, 

direct advocacy, liaison and referral information, and 

other assistance to CPS staff. In addition, the 

Massachusetts DSS Domestic Violence Protocol was 

the first protocol in the country for CPS caseworkers 

and has been replicated by numerous State and 

county child welfare agencies. This protocol provides 

guidance to caseworkers regarding procedures for 

assessing risk, interviewing, intervention strategies, 

and service planning.138 For more information, visit 

http://www.aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/cyp/dv/pt4.htm. 

“Domestic Violence: A National Curriculum for 

Child Protective Services”—Family Violence 

Prevention Fund, San Francisco, California 

The Family Violence Prevention Fund, a national 

domestic violence advocacy and public policy 

organization, developed the first national crosstraining curriculum regarding the overlap between 

domestic violence and child abuse. This training 

curriculum provides practical information, guidelines, 

and tools for identifying, assessing, and intervening 

with families who are experiencing domestic abuse 

and child maltreatment.139 For more information, 

visit http://www.endabuse.org. 

Community Partnerships for Protecting 

Children—Jacksonville, Florida, and Cedar 

Rapids, Iowa 

Sponsored by the Edna McConnell-Clark 

Foundation, Jacksonville, Florida, and Cedar Rapids, 

Iowa, are two of four sites that are implementing a 

community-based, child protection response to 

domestic violence. In this model, formal and 

64 Building Collaborative Responses for Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 
informal community networks, such as CPS agencies, 

domestic violence programs, substance abuse facilities, 

neighborhood centers, and community residents, 

share the responsibility for protecting children and 

strengthening families. In Cedar Rapids, domestic 

violence and CPS staff are located in neighborhoodbased centers to provide onsite consultation, support, 

and advocacy to families affected by violence. 

Hubbard House, in Jacksonville, is one of the first 

domestic violence shelters to train CPS caseworkers, 

who then come onsite to interview the victim and 

children. CPS and domestic violence workers also 

“shadow” one another, participate 

in cross-training, and pair off on 

consultation teams.140 For more information, visit 

http://www.emcf.org/programs/children/ 

index.htm. 

Advocacy for Women and Kids (AWAKE) 

Program—Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, 

Massachusetts 

Boston Children’s Hospital was one of the first 

organizations that identified the link between child 

maltreatment and domestic violence. Subsequently, 

this discovery led to the establishment of the 

Advocacy for Women and Kids (AWAKE) Program. 

The AWAKE Program incorporates domestic violence 

advocacy in a pediatric setting and offers services to 

victims and their abused children. AWAKE also 

provides training and case consultation to Children’s 

Hospital staff on domestic violence and 

child abuse.141 For more information, visit 

http://www.aecf.org/tarc/resource/show.php? 

object=example&id=196&topic_id=21. 

The Child Development–Community Policing 

(CDCP) Program—New Haven, Connecticut 

The Child Development–Community Policing 

Intervention (CDCP) Program was created in 1992 

by the Child Study Center at Yale University School 

of Medicine and the New Haven Police Department. 

This initiative convenes community police officers, 

service providers, and mental health clinicians to 

provide joint responses to victims of domestic 

violence and their children. Law enforcement officers 

are trained to identify children exposed to violence 

and refer them to mental health providers for further 

assessment. Police officers also connect victims with 

domestic violence services. For more information, 

visit http://www.info.med.yale.edu/chldstdy/ 

CDCP. 

Dependency Court Intervention Program for 

Family Violence (DCIPFV)—Miami-Dade 

County, Florida 

The Dependency Court Intervention Program for 

Family Violence (DCIPFV), located in the 11th 

Judicial Circuit Court of Florida, was the first national 

demonstration project to develop a coordinated 

approach to victims and children involved in child 

protection and dependency court proceedings. The 

judiciary, along with other key systems, employs a 

two-pronged approach to enhance the safety and wellbeing of children and victims involved with CPS and 

experiencing domestic violence. DCIPFV locates 

staff at juvenile court proceedings where domestic 

violence service workers are available for assessment 

and referral. They also provide support to victims and 

their children. DCIPFV staff assists victims in 

navigating the child welfare and juvenile 

court systems and helps them obtain civil 

protection orders. For more information, visit 

http://www.frca.org/lcenter/showtopic.php?action 

=viewprog&categoryid=7. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 65 
Effective Interventions in Domestic Violence and 

Child Maltreatment Cases: Guidelines for Policy 

and Practice—The Greenbook Project 

The Greenbook Project is a Federal demonstration 

project consisting of six pilot sites selected to test and 

implement the recommendations of the National 

Council for Juvenile Federal Court Judges’ Effective 

Intervention in Domestic Violence and Child 

Maltreatment Cases: Guidelines for Policy and Practice. 

Published in 1999, this document offers a set of 

principles and guidelines for designing comprehensive 

approaches to co-occurring domestic violence and 

child abuse. The Greenbook Project focuses on three 

primary systems in the development of this 

coordinated response—juvenile and family courts, 

CPS, and domestic violence programs. A concurrent, 

cross-site evaluation measures the extent to which the 

demonstration sites’ collaborative 

efforts result in system change and improvements 

in safety, recidivism rates, and abuser 

accountability.142 For more information, visit 

http://www.thegreenbook.info. 

CONCLUSION 

Domestic violence and child maltreatment cannot be 

viewed separately by professionals responding to 

family violence. The mission of CPS is to ensure the 

safety, stability, and well-being of child victims. This 

calling, however, is consistent with the domestic 

violence field’s goal of providing protection and 

strength to victims of abuse. Adult and child victims 

suffer similarly and often in the same families. Thus, 

a thoughtful and synchronized approach is needed by 

the two systems charged with intervening. CPS 

caseworkers and service providers can and must join 

together to achieve their shared goal of freeing victims 

from the violence in their lives and working to 

prevent future violence. 

66 Building Collaborative Responses for Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 
Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 

Endnotes
 

1 

Carlson, B.E. (2000) Children exposed to intimate partner 

violence: Research findings and implications for interventions. 

Trauma, Violence and Abuse, 1 (4), 321–340. 

2 

Appel, A.E., & Holde, G. W. (1998). The co-occurrence of 

spouse and physical child abuse: A review and appraisal. Journal 

of Family Psychology, 12 (4), 578–599; Edleson, J. L. (1999). 

The overlap between child maltreatment and women battering. 

Violence Against Women, 5(2), 134–154. 

3 

Appel, A. E., & Holden, G. W. (1998). The co-occurrence of 

spouse and physical child abuse: A review and appraisal. 

Journal of Family Psychology, 12(4), 578-599; Edleson, J. L. 

(1999). The overlap between child maltreatment and woman 

battering. Violence Against Women, 5(2), 134-154; Jaffe, P. G., 

Wolfe, D. A., & Wilson, S. K. (1990). Children of battered 

women. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; Stark, E., & Filcraft, A. H. 

(1988). Women and children at risk: A feminist perspective on 

child abuse. International Journal of Health Services, 18(1), 97­

118; Straus, M. A., & Gelles, R. J. (Eds.). (1990). Physical 

violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to 

violence in 8,145 families. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. 

4 

Rennison, C. M. (2003, February). Intimate partner violence, 

1993–2001 (p. 1). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics; Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. 

(2000). Extent, nature, and consequences of intimate partner 

violence. National violence against women survey (p. 10). 

Washington, DC: National Institute for Justice and U.S. 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 

5 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

Administration on Children, Youth and Families. (2003). Child 

maltreatment 2001 (p. 21). Washington, DC: U.S. Government 

Printing Office. 

6 

Appel, A. E., & Holden, G. W. (1998). Co-occurring spouse 

and child abuse: Implications for CPS practice. APSAC 

Advisor, 11(1), 11-14; Edleson, J. L. (1999); Stark, E., & 

Filcraft, A. H. (1988); Hughes, H. M., Parkinson, D., & 

Vargo, M. (1989). Witnessing spouse abuse and experiencing 

physical abuse: A “double whammy”? Journal of Family 

Violence, 4(2), 197-209. 

7 

Barnett, O. W., Miller-Perrin, C. L., & Perrin, R. D. (1997). 

Family violence across the lifespan: An introduction. Thousand 

Oaks, CA: Sage; Hughes, H. M., et al. (1989). 

8 

Edleson, J. L. (1995). Mothers and children: Understanding the 

links between woman battering and child abuse [On-line]. 

Available: www.mincava.umn.edu/papers/nij.htm. 

9 

Suh, E., & Abel, E. M. (1990). The impact of spousal violence 

on the children of the abused. Journal of Independent Social 

Work, 4(4), 27-34. 

10 

U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2002, 

September). Crime and the nation’s households, 2000. Bureau of 

Justice Statistics Bulletin (NCJ 194107). Washington, DC: 

Author. 

11 

Carlson, B. E. (1984). Children’s observation of interparental 

violence. In A. R. Roberts (Ed.), Battered women and their 

families (pp.146-147). New York: Springer; Edleson, J. L. 

(1999); Fantuzzo, J. W., & Lindquist, C. U. (1989). The 

effects of observing conjugal violence on children: A review 

and analysis of research methodology. Journal of Family 

Violence, 4(1), 77-94; Henning, K., Leitenber, H., Coffey, P., 

Turner, T., & Bennett, R. T. (1996). Long-term psychological 

and social impact of witnessing conflict between parents. 

Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 11(1), 35-51; Margolin, G. 

(1998). Effects of witnessing violence on children. In P. K. 

Trackett & C. D. Schellenback (Eds.), Violence against children 

in the family and community from backgrounds of domestic 

violence (pp. 57-101). Washington, DC: American 

Psychological Association. 

67 
12 

Straus, M., Gelles, R. J., & Steinmetz, S. K. (1980). Behind Closed 

Doors: Violence in the American Family. Garden City, NY: Anchor 

Press/Doubleday. 

13 

Straus, M. (1992). Children as witnesses to marital violence: A 

risk factor for lifelong problems among a nationally representative 

sample of American men and women. In D. F. Schwartz (Ed.). 

Children and violence: Report of the 23rd Ross Roundtable on critical 

approaches to common pediatric problems (pp. 98–104). Columbus, 

OH: Ross Laboratories. 

14 

Edleson, J. (1999). Children’s witnessing of adult domestic 

violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14(1), 839–870. 

15 

Straus, M. A., & Gelles, R. J. (Eds.). (1990); Walker, L. E. (1984). 

The battered woman syndrome. New York: Springer. 

16 

Appel, A. E., & Holden, G. W. (1998); Edleson, J. L. (1999); 

Hughes, H. M., et al. (1989); Shipman, K. L., Rossman, B. B., & 

West, J. C. (1999). Co-occurrence of spousal violence and child 

abuse: Conceptual implications. Child Maltreatment, 4(2), 93-102. 

17 

Spears, L. (2000). Building bridges between domestic violence 

organizations and child protective services [On-line]. Available: 

www.vawnet.org/vnl/library/ general/bcs7_cps.htm#fn7. 

18 

Doyne, S. E., Bowermaster, J. M., Meloy, J. R., Dutton, D., Jaffe, 

P., Temko, S., & Mones, P. (1999). Custody disputes involving 

domestic violence: Making children’s needs a priority. Juvenile and 

Family Court Journal, 50(2), 1-12; Jaffe, P., et al. (1990). 

19 

Appel, A. E., & Holden, G. W. (1988); Carlson, B. E. (2000). 

Children exposed to intimate partner violence: Research findings 

and implications for intervention. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 1(4), 

321-342; Edleson, J. L. (1999); Fantuzzo, J. W., & Lindquist, C. 

U. (1989); Graham-Bermann, S. A., & Brescoll, V. (2000). 

Gender, power and violence: Assessing the family stereotypes of the 

children of batterers. Journal of Family Psychology, 14(4), 600-612; 

Hughes, H. M., Graham-Bermann, S. A., & Gruber, G. (2001). 

Resilience in children exposed to domestic violence. In S. A. 

Graham-Bermann & J. L. Edleson (Eds.), Domestic violence in the 

lives of children: The future of research, intervention, and social policy 

(pp. 67-90). Washington, DC: American Psychological 

Association; Jaffe, P. G., et al. (1990); Margolin, G. (1998); 

Rossman, B. B. (2001). Longer term effects of children’s exposure 

to domestic violence. In S. A. Graham-Bermann & J. L. Edleson 

(Eds.), Domestic violence in the lives of children: The future of 

research, intervention, and social policy (pp. 35-66). Washington, 

DC: American Psychological Association. 

20 

Edleson, J. L. (1999). 

21 

Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996). Domestic violence: A 

national curriculum for children’s protective services. San Francisco, 

CA: Family Violence Prevention Fund. 

22 

Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996). 

23 

Taylor, L., Zuckerman, B., Harik, V., & Groves, B. (1994). 

Witnessing violence by young children and their mothers. Journal 

of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 15(2), 120-123. 

24 

Rossman, B. R. R., & Rosenberg, M. S. (1997). Psychological 

maltreatment: A needs analysis and applications for children in 

violent families. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment, and Trauma, 

1(1), 245-262; Edleson, J. L. (1997). The overlap between child 

maltreatment and woman abuse [On-line]. Available: 

www.vaw.umn.edu/documents/ vawnet/overlap/overlap.html; 

Edleson, J. L. (2000). Should childhood exposure to adult domestic 

violence be defined as child maltreatment under the law? St. Paul, 

MN: Minnesota Center Against Violence and Abuse; Magen, R. 

H. (1999). In the best interests of battered women: 

Reconceptualizing allegations of failure to protect. Child 

Maltreatment, 4(2), 127-135; Norman, J. (2000). Should 

children’s protective services intervene when children witness 

domestic violence? Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 1(3), 291-293. 

25 

Fantuzzo, J. W., DePaula, L. M., Lambert, L., Martino, T., Ander, 

G., & Sutton, S. (1991). Effects of interpersonal violence on the 

psychological adjustment and competencies of young children. 

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59(2), 258-265; 

Suderman, M., Jaffe, P. G., & Hastings, E. (1995). Violence 

prevention programs in secondary (high) schools. In P. E. Peled, 

P. G. Jaffe, & J. L. Edleson (Eds.), Ending the cycle of violence: 

Community responses to children of battered women. Thousand 

Oaks, CA: Sage. 

26 

Silvern, L., Karyl, J., Waelde, L., Hodges, W. F., Starek, J., Heidt, 

E., & Min, K. (1995). Retrospective reports of parental partner 

abuse: Relationships to depression, trauma symptoms and selfesteem among college students. Journal of Family Violence, 10(2), 

177-202. 

27 

Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996). 

28 

Carlson, B. E. (2000); Edleson, J. L. (1999); Hughes, H. M., et 

al. (2001); Stocker, C. M., & Youngblade, L. (1999). Marital 

conflict and parental hostility: Links with children’s sibling and 

peer relationships. Journal of Family Psychology, 13(4), 598-609. 

29 

Carlson, B. E. (2000); Edleson, J. L. (1999); Fantuzzo, J. W., & 

Lindquist, C. U. (1989); Hughes, H. M., et al. (2001); Kolbo, J. 

R. (1996). Risk and resilience among children exposed to 

domestic violence. Violence and Victims, 11(2), 113-128; 

Margolin, G. (1998); Crockenberg, S., & Langrock, A. (2001). 

The role of specific emotions in children’s responses to 

interparental conflict: A test of the model. Journal of Family 

Psychology, 15(2), 163-182. 

68 Endnotes 
30 

Aron, L. Y., & Olson, K. K. (1997). Efforts by child welfare 

agencies to address domestic violence. Public Welfare 55(3), 4-13; 

Beeman, S. K., Hagemeister, A. K., & Edleson, J. L. (1999). Child 

protection and battered women services: From conflict to 

collaboration. Child Maltreatment, 4(2), 116-126; Carter, J., & 

Schechter, S. (1997). Child abuse and domestic violence: Creating 

community partnerships for safe families—Suggested components of an 

effective child welfare response to domestic violence. San Francisco, 

CA: Family Violence Prevention Fund; Findlater, J., & Kelly, S. 

(1999). Michigan’s domestic violence and child welfare 

collaboration. In J. L. Edleson & S. Schechter (Eds.), In the best 

interests of women and children: Child welfare and domestic violence 

services working together (pp. 167-174). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 

Spears, L. (2000); Whitney, P., & Davis, L. (1999). Child abuse 

and domestic violence: Can practice be integrated in a public 

setting? Child Maltreatment, 4(2), 158-166. 

31 

Aron, L. Y., & Olson, K. K. (1997); Beeman, S. K., et al. (1999); 

Carter, J., & Schechter, S. (1997); Findlater, J., & Kelly, S. (1999); 

Spears, L. (2000); Whitney, P., & Davis, L. (1999). 

32 

Aron, L. Y., & Olson, K. K. (1997); Beeman, S. K., et al. (1999); 

Carter, J., & Schechter, S. (1997); Findlater, J., & Kelly, S. (1999); 

Spears, L. (2000); Whitney, P., & Davis, L. (1999). 

33 

Edleson, J. L. (2000); Magen, R. H. (1999); Norman, J. (2000). 

34 

Carter, J., & Schechter, S. (1997); Edleson, J. L. (2000); Spears, L. 

(2000). 

35 

Kolbo, J. R. (1996); O’Keefe, M. (1995). Predictors of child abuse 

in maritally violent families. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 

10(1), 3-25; Shipman, K. L., et al. (1999); Straus, M. A., & Gelles, 

R. J. (Eds.) (1990). 

36 

Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996). 

37 

Rennison, C. M., & Welchans, S. (2000). Intimate partner 

violence. (Special Report NCJ 178247). Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Justice; Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (2000). Extent, 

nature and consequences of intimate partner violence: Findings from 

the National Violence Against Women Survey. (NCJ 181867). 

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice; Rennison C. M. 

(2001). Intimate partner violence and age of victim, 1999. (Special 

Report NCJ 187635). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Justice. 

38 

Rennison, C. M., & Welchans, S. (2000). 

39 

Rennison, C. M. (2001). 

40 

Greenfeld, L. A., Rand, M. R., Craven, D., Klaus, P. A., Perkins, 

C. A., Ringel, C., et al. (1998). Violence by intimates: Analysis of 

data on crimes by current or former spouses, boyfriends, and 

girlfriends. (NCJ-167237). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Justice. 

41 

Gazmararian, J. A., Petersen, R., Spitz A. M., Goodwin, M. M., 

Saltzman, L. E., & Marks, J. S. (2000). Violence and reproductive 

health: Current knowledge and future research directions. 

Maternal and Child Health Journal, 4(2), 79–84; Horon, I., & 

Cheng, D. (2001). Enhanced surveillance for pregnancyassociated mortality–Maryland, 1993–1998. Journal of the 

American Medical Association, 11(285), 1455-1459. 

42 

Rennison, C. M. & Welchans, S. (2000). 

43 

Rennison, C. M. & Welchans, S. (2000). 

44 

Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (2000). 

45 

U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2003, 

February). Intimate partner violence, 1993-2001, Bureau of Justice 

Statistics Crime Data Brief (NCJ 197838). Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Justice. 

46 

National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. (2003). Costs 

of intimate partner violence against women in the United States (p. 

19). Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 

47 

National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. (2003). (pp. 

30–31). 

48 

Rennison, C. M. (2003, February). (p. 2); Brustin, S. (1995). 

Legal responses to teen dating violence. Family Law Quarterly, 

29(2), 333-334; Huth-Bocks, A. C., Levendosky, A. A., & Bogat, 

G. A. (2002). The effects of domestic violence during pregnancy 

on maternal and infant health. Violence and Victims, 17(2), 169­

183; Gazmarian, J. A., Lazorick, S., Spitz, A. M., Ballard, T. J., 

Saltzman, L. E., & Marks, J. S. (1996). Prevalence of violence 

against pregnant women. Journal of the American Medical 

Association, 275, 1915–1920. 

49 

National Center for Victims of Crime. (1997). 

FYI: Domestic violence [On-line]. Available: 

www.ncvc.org/infolink/Info14.htm. 

50 

Appel, A. E., & Holden, G. W. (1998); Markowitz, F. E. (2001). 

Attitudes and family violence: Linking intergenerational and 

cultural theories. Journal of Family Violence, 16(2), 205-218; 

Ptacek, J. (1988); Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996); Straus, 

M. A., & Gelles, R. J. (Eds.) (1990); Wolfe, D. A., & Jaffe, P. G. 

(1999). Emerging strategies in the prevention of domestic 

violence. Future of Children, 9(3), 133-144. 

51 

Barrerra, M., Palmer, S., Brown, R., & Kalaher, S. (1994). 

Characteristics of court involved men and non-court involved men 

who abuse their wives. Journal of Family Violence, 9(4), 333-345; 

Daly, J. E., & Pelowski, S. (2000). Predictors of dropout among 

men who batter: A review of studies with implications for research 

and practice. Violence and Victims, 15(2), 137-160; Demaris, A. 

(1989). Attrition in batterer’s counseling: The role of social and 

demographic factors. Social Service Review, 63(1), 142-154; 

Demaris, A., & Jackson, J. K. (1987). Batterers’ reports of 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 69 
recidivism after counseling. Social Casework, 68(8), 458-465; 

Gondolf, E. W. (1988). Who are those guys? Toward a behavioral 

typology of batterers. Violence and Victims, 3(3), 187-203; 

Hastings, J. E., & Hamberger, L. K. (1988). Personality 

characteristics of spouse abusers: A controlled comparison. 

Violence and Victims, 3(1), 31-48; Ptacek, J. (1988). The clinical 

literature on men who batter: A review and critique. In G. T. 

Hotaling, D. Finkelhor, J. T. Kilpatrick, & M. A. Straus (Eds.), 

Family abuse and its consequences: New directions in research. 

Newbury Park, CA: Sage; Grusznski, R. J., & Carrillo, T. P. 

(1988). Who completes batterers’ treatment groups? An empirical 

investigation. Journal of Family Violence, 3(2), 141-150; Tolman, 

R. M., & Saunders, D. G. (1988). The case for the cautious use of 

anger control with men who batter. Response, 11, 15-20; Tolman, 

R. M., & Bennett, L. W. (1990). A review of quantitative research 

on men who batter. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 5(1), 87-118. 

52 

Pence, E., & Paymar, M. (1993). Education groups for men who 

batter: The Duluth model. New York: Springer; Schechter, S. 

(1982). Women and male violence. The visions and struggle of the 

battered women’s movement. Boston, MA: Southbend Press; 

Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996). 

53 

Schechter, S. (1982). 

54 

Schechter, S. (2000). New challenges for the battered women’s 

movement: Building collaboration and improving public policy [Online]. Available:

www.vawnet.org/vnl/library/general/BCS1_col.ht. 

55 

Saathoff, A. J., & Stoffel, E. A. (1999). Community-based 

domestic violence services. Future of Children, 9(3), 97-110; 

Family Violence Prevention and Services Act, P.L. 98-457, 

amended P.L. 103-322, 42 U.S.C. §§ 10401; Violence Against 

Women Act of 1994, P.L. 103-322, 108 Stat. 1796. 

56 

Family Violence Prevention and Services Act, 42 U.S.C §§ 10402. 

57 

Violence Against Women Act of 1994, P.L.103-322, 108 Stat. 

1796. 

58 

Pagelow, M. D. (1992). Adult victims of domestic violence, 

battered women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 7(1), 87-120; 

Walker, L. (1984). 

59 

Campbell, J. C., & Lewandowski, L. A. (1997). Mental and 

physical health effects of intimate partner violence on women and 

children. Psychiatric Clinical North American, 20, 353-374; 

Cascardi, M., & O’Leary, K. D. (1992). Depressive 

symptomatology, self-esteem and self-blame in battered women. 

Journal of Family Violence, 7(4), 249-259; Fischback, R. L., & 

Herbert, B. (1997). Domestic violence and mental health: 

Correlates and conundrums within and across cultures. Social 

Science Medicine, 45, 1161-1176; Plitcha, S. B., & Falik, M. 

(2001). Prevalence of violence and its implications for women’s 

health. Women’s Health Issues, 11(3), 244-258; Hotaling, G., & 

Sugarman, D. (1986). An analysis of risk markers in husband-towife violence: The current state of knowledge. Violence and 

Victims, 1(2), 101-112. 

60 

Campbell, J. C., & Lewandowski, L. A. (1997); Cascardi, M., & 

O’Leary, K. D. (1992); Fischback, R. L., & Herbert, B. (1997); 

Plitcha, S. B., & Falik, M. (2001); Hotaling, G., & Sugarman, D. 

(1986). 

61 

Dobash, R. P. (1979). Violence Against Wives. New York, NY: Free 

Press. 

62 

Plichta, S. B., & Falik, M. (2001); Huth-Bocks, A. C., et al. 

(2002). 

63 

Plichta, S. B., & Falik, M. (2001). 

64 

Plichta, S. B., & Falik, M. (2001); Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. 

(1996); Bennett, L. W. (1997, September). Substance abuse and 

woman abuse

by male partners [On-line]. Available:

www.vaw.umn.edu/finaldocuments/ Vawnet/substanc.htm;

Campbell, J. C., & Lewandowski, L. A. (1997); Cascardi, M., & 

O’Leary, K. D. (1992); Fischback, R. L., & Herbert, B. (1997); 

Kantor, G. K., & Straus, M. A. (1989). Substance abuse as a 

precipitant of wife abuse victimizations. American Journal of Drug 

and Alcohol Abuse, 15(2), 173-189; Martin, S. L., English, K. T., 

Clark, K. A., Cilenti, D., & Kupper, L. L. (1996). Violence and 

substance use among North Carolina pregnant women. American 

Journal of Public Health, 86(7), 991-998. 

65 

Holden, G. W., & Ritchie, K. L. (1991). Linking extreme marital 

discord, child rearing, and child behavior problems: Evidence 

from battered women. Child Development, 62(2), 311-327; 

Levendosky, A. A., & Graham-Bermann, S. A. (2001). Parenting 

in battered women: The effects of domestic violence on women 

and their children. Journal of Family Violence, 16(2), 171-192; 

Levendosky, A. A., & Graham-Bermann, S. A. (2000). Behavioral 

observations of parenting in battered women. Journal of Family 

Psychology, 14(1), 80-94; Levendosky, A. A., & Graham-Bermann, 

S. A. (1998). Traumatic stress symptoms in children of battered 

women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13(1), 111-128; 

McCloskey, L. A., Figueredo, A. J., & Koss, M. P. (1995). The 

effects of systemic family violence on children’s mental health. 

Child Development, 66(5), 1239-1261; Sullivan, C. M., Nguyen, 

H., Allen, N., Bybee, D., & Jura, J. (2000). Beyond searching for 

deficits: Evidence that physically and emotionally abused women 

are nurturing parents. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 2(1), 51-71; 

Wolfe, D. A., Jaffe, P., Wilson, S. K., & Zak, L. (1985). Children 

of battered women: The relation of child behavior to family 

violence and maternal stress. Journal of Consulting Clinical 

Psychology, 53(5), 657-665. 

66 

Holden, G. W., & Ritchie, K. L. (1991); Levendosky, A. A., & 

Graham-Bermann, S. A. (2001); Levendosky, A. A., & GrahamBermann, S. A. (2000); Levendosky, A. A., & Graham-Bermann, 

S. A. (1998); McCloskey, L. A., et al. (1995); Sullivan, C. M., et 

al. (2000); Wolfe, D. A., et al. (1985). 

67 

Straus, M. A., & Gelles, R. L. (Eds.). (1990); Walker, L. (1984). 

68 

Edleson, J. L. (1999); Levendosky, A. A., & Graham-Bermann, S. 

A. (2000); Sullivan, C. M., et al. (2000); Walker, L. (1999). The 

battered woman syndrome. (2nd ed.). New York: Springer. 

70 Endnotes
69 

Carlson, B. E. (2000); Levendosky, A. A., & Graham-Bermann, S. 

A. (2000); Sullivan, C. M., et al. (2000). 

70 

Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996). 

71 

Aldarondo, E. (1998). Perpetrators of domestic violence. In A. 

Bellack & M. Hersen (Eds.), Comprehensive clinical psychology. 

New York, NY: Pergammon Press; Barrerra, M., et al. (1994); 

Mederos, F. (2000). Child protection services, the judicial system and 

men who batter: Toward effective and safe intervention. Unpublished 

practice paper, Massachusetts Department of Social Services, 

Jamaica Plains, MA; Gondolf, E. W. (1999, November). An 

extended follow-up of batterers and their female partners: Research 

summary for October 1997 to September 1999. Presentation at U.S. 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for 

Injury Prevention and Control, Atlanta, Georgia; Gondolf, E. W. 

(1988); Hastings, J. E., & Hamberger, L. K. (1988); HoltzworthMunroe, A., Bates, L., Smutzler, N., & Sandin, S. (1997). A brief 

review of the research on husband violence. Part I: Maritally 

violent versus nonviolent men. Aggression and Violent Behavior: A 

Review Journal, 2(1), 65-99; Tolman, R. M., & Bennett, L. W. 

(1990). 

72 

Mederos, F. (2000). 

73 

Gondolf, E. W. (1988); Gondolf, E. W., & White, R. J. (2001). 

Batterer program participants who repeatedly reassault. Journal of 

Interpersonal Violence, 16(4), 361-380; Mederos, F. (2000). 

74 

Hart, B. J. (1996a). Rule making and enforcement: The violent and 

controlling tactics of men who batter. Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania 

Coalition Against Domestic Violence; Hart, B. J. (1996b). Rule 

compliance and resistance: The response of battered women. 

Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic 

Violence. 

75 

Demaris, A. (1989); Gondolf, E. W. (1988); Hastings, J. E., & 

Hamberger, L. K. (1988); Tolman, R. M., & Saunders, D. G. 

(1988). 

76 

Barrerra, M., et al. (1994); Demaris, A. (1989); Gondolf, E. W. 

(1988); Hastings, J. E., & Hamberger, L. K. (1988); Mederos, F. 

(2000); Ptacek, J. (1988); Grusznski, R. J., & Carrillo, T. P. 

(1988); Tolman, R. M., & Bennett, L. W. (1990). 

77 

Barrerra, M., et al. (1994); Demaris, A. (1989); Gondolf, E. W. 

(1988); Hastings, J. E., & Hamberger, L. K. (1988); Mederos, F. 

(2000); Ptacek, J. (1988); Grusznski, R. J., & Carrillo, T. P. 

(1988); Tolman, R. M., & Bennett, L. W. (1990). 

78 

Bennett, L., & Williams, O. (2001). The effectiveness of batterer 

intervention programs. Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Coalition 

Against Domestic Violence; Edleson, J. L. (1996). Controversy 

and change in batterers’ programs. In J. L. Edelson & Z. C. 

Eisikovits (Eds.), Future interventions with battered women and 

their families (pp. 154-169). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; Gondolf, 

E. W. (2002). Batterer intervention systems: Issues, implications 

and outcomes of a multi-site evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: 

Sage. 

79 

Zuskin, R. (2000). How do I protect children when there is a history 

of domestic violence in the family? In H. Dubowitz & D. DePanfilis 

(Eds.), Handbook for child protection practice (pp.246-249). 

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; Mederos, F. (2000). 

80 

Campbell, J. C. (1986). Assessment of risk of homicide for 

battered women. Advances in Nursing Science, 8(4), 36-51; Ganley, 

A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996); Mederos, F. (2000); Websdale, N. 

(2000). Lethality assessment tools: A critical analysis [On-line]. 

Available: www.vaw.umn.edu/vawnet/ lethality.htm. 

81 

Bancroft, L., & Silverman, J. G. (2002a). Power parenting: The 

batterer’s style with children. In L. Bancroft & J. G. Silverman 

(Eds.), The batterer as parent: Addressing the impact of domestic 

violence on family dynamics (pp. 29-53). Thousand Oaks, CA: 

Sage. 

82 

Bancroft, L., & Silverman, J. G. (2002a); Peled, E. (2000). The 

parenting of men who abuse women: Issues and dilemmas. British 

Journal of Social Work, 30, 25-36. 

83 

Bancroft, L., & Silverman, J. G. (2002b). Shock waves: The 

batterer’s impact on the home. In L. Bancroft & J. G. Silverman 

(Eds.), The batterer as parent: Addressing the impact of domestic 

violence on family dynamics (pp. 54-83). Thousand Oaks, CA: 

Sage; Roy, M. (1988). Children in the crossfire: Violence in the 

home—How does it affect our children? Deerfield Beach, FL: Health 

Communications. 

84 

Mandel, D. (2002). Batterers as fathers: Rethinking and 

reconceptualizing policy and practice. Middletown, CT: NonViolence Alliance. 

85 

Mandel, D. (2002). 

86 

Williams, O. J., Boggess, J. L., & Carter, J. (2001). Fatherhood 

and domestic violence: Exploring the role of men who batter in the 

lives of their children. In S. A. Graham-Bermann & J. L. Edleson 

(Eds.), Domestic violence in the live of children: The future of 

research, intervention, and social policy (pp. 157-187). Washington, 

DC: American Psychological Association. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 71 
87 

Williams, O. J., et al. (2001). 

88 

Stosny S., & Coughlin, R. J. (Retrieved October 6, 2003). 

Treating and preventing child abuse & domestic violence: The 

compassion workshop. [On-line]. Available:

http://www.compassionpower.com. 

89 

Beeman, S. K., et al. (1999); Edleson, J. L. (1998). Responsible 

mothers and invisible men: Child protection in the case of adult 

domestic violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13(2), 294­

298. 

90 

Beeman, S. K., et al. (1998). 

91 

Beeman, S. K., et al. (1998). 

92 

National Association of Public Child Welfare Administrators. 

(2001). Guidelines for public child welfare agencies serving children 

and families experiencing domestic violence. Washington, DC: 

American Public Human Services Association; Ganley, A. L., & 

Schechter, S. (1996); Whitney, P., & Davis, L. (1999). 

93 

Magen, R. H., & Conroy, K. (1997). Domestic violence in child 

welfare preventative services: Results from an intake-screening 

th questionnaire. Paper presented at the 5 International Family 

Violence Research Conference, University of New Hampshire, 

Durham, NH. 

94 

Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996). 

95 

Massachusetts Department of Social Services’ Domestic Violence 

Protocol. (1995). Unpublished practice protocol, Massachusetts 

Department of Social Services, Boston, MA. 

96 

Weithorn, L. A. (2002). Protecting children from exposure to 

domestic violence: The use and abuse of child maltreatment 

statutes. Hastings Law Journal, 53, 1–155. 

97 

Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996); Massachusetts Department 

of Social Services’ Domestic Violence Protocol. (1995); Bragg. L. 

(1998). Domestic violence protocol for child protective services 

intervention. Charlotte, NC: Mecklenburg County Department of 

Social Services. 

98 

Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996); Massachusetts Department 

of Social Services’ Domestic Violence Protocol. (1995); Bragg. L. 

(1998). 

99 

Campbell, J. C. (1992). Wife battering: Cultural contexts versus 

western social sciences. In D. A. Counts, J. K. Brown, & J. C. 

Campbell (Eds.), Sanction and sanctuary: Cultural perspectives on 

the beating of wives. Boulder, CO: Westview Press; Gillespie, C. 

(1989). Justifiable homicide. Columbus, OH: Ohio State 

University Press. 

100 

Doyne, S. E., et al. (1999); Jaffe, P. G., et al. (1990). 

101 

Graham-Bermann, S. A., & Brescoll, V. (2000); Jaffe, P. G., et al. 

(1990); Marcus, N. E., Lindahl, K. M., Malik, N. M. (2001). 

Interparental conflict, children’s social cognitions, and child 

aggression: A test of a meditational model. Journal of Family 

Psychology, 15(2) 315-333; Massachusetts Department of Social 

Services’ Domestic Violence Protocol. (1995). 

102 

Graham-Bermann, S. A., & Brescoll, V. (2000); Jaffe, P. G., et al. 

(1990); Marcus, N. E., et al. (2001); Massachusetts Department 

of Social Services’ Domestic Violence Protocol. (1995). 

103 

Massachusetts Department of Social Services’ Domestic Violence 

Protocol. (1995). 

104 

Carrillo, R., & Tello, J. (Eds.). (1998). Family violence and men of 

color: Healing the wounded male spirit. New York: Springer; 

Warrier, S. (2000). Unheard voices: Domestic violence in the Asian 

American community. San Francisco, CA: Family Violence 

Prevention Fund. 

105 

Volpp, L. (1995). Working with battered immigrant women: A 

handbook to make services accessible. San Francisco, CA: Family 

Violence Prevention Fund. 

106 

U.S. Department of Justice. (1997). Promising practices initiative 

report on the expert panels on domestic violence, sexual assault and 

state assistance project. Washington, DC: U.S. Government 

Printing Office. 

107 

Rennison, C. M. (2003, February). (p. 1). 

108 

Straus, M. A., & Gelles, R. J. (1998, November). Physical 

violence in American families, 1990. Prevalence, Incidence, and 

Consequences of Violence Against Women: Findings from the 

National Violence Against Women Survey. Washington, DC: 

National Institute of Justice and Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention. 

109 

Barrerra, M., et al. (1994); Daly, J. E., & Pelowski, S. (2000); 

Demaris, A., & Jackson, J. K. (1987); Gelles, R. (1993). Alcohol 

and other drugs are associated with violence—They are not its 

causes. In R. Gelles & D. Loseke (Eds.), Current controversies in 

family violence (pp. 182-196). Newbury Park, CA: Sage; Gondolf, 

E. W. (1988); Hastings, J. E., & Hamberger, L. K. (1988). 

110 

American Bar Association Commission on Domestic Violence. 

(n.d.) Who is most likely to be affected by domestic violence? [Online]. Available: www.abanet.org/domviol/whois.html; Lobel, K. 

(Ed.). (1986). Naming the violence: Speaking out about lesbian 

battering. Seattle, WA: Seal Press; Murphy, N. (1995). Queer 

justice: Equal protection for victims of same-sex domestic 

violence. University Law Review, 30, 335; Nosek, M. A., & 

Howland, C. A. (1998). Abuse and women with disabilities [Online]. Available: www.vaw.umn.edu/documents/vawnet/

disab/disab.html. 

72 Endnotes
111 

Greenwood, G. L., Relf, M. V., Huang, B., Pollack, L. M., 

Canchola, J. A., & Catania, J. A. (2002). Battering victimization 

among a probability-based sample of men who have sex with 

men. American Journal of Public Health, 92(12), 1964-1969. 

112 

National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs. (2001). Lesbian, 

gay, bisexual and transgender domestic violence in 2000; Lundy, S. 

(1993). Abuse that dare not speak its name: Assisting victims of 

lesbian and gay domestic violence in Massachusetts. New England 

Law Review, 28(2). 

113 

Chamberlain, A., Rauh, J., Passer, A., McGrath, M., & Burket, R. 

(1984). Issues in fertility control for mentally retarded female 

adolescents I: Sexual activity, sexual abuse, and contraception. 

Pediatrics, 73, 445–450; Brown, D. E. (1988). Factors affecting 

psychosexual development of adults with congenital physical 

disabilities. Physical and Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 

8(2–3), 43–58; Ammerman, R. T., Van Hasselt, V. B., Hersen, 

M., McGonigle, J. J., & Lubetsky, M. J. (1989). Abuse and 

neglect in psychiatrically hospitalized multihandicapped children. 

Child Abuse & Neglect, 13, 335–343. 

114 

Raphael, J., & Tolman, R. M. (1997). Trapped by poverty, trapped 

by abuse: New evidence documenting the relationship between 

domestic violence and welfare. Chicago, IL: Taylor Institute; Family 

Violence Prevention Fund. (2000). New ways to address poverty 

among victims of abuse. Policy Talks, 1(2), 1-5. San Francisco, 

CA: Author. 

115 

Davies, J. (1997). Safety planning. Hartford, CT: Greater 

Hartford Legal Assistance; Davies, J., Lyon, E., & Monti-Catania, 

D. (1998). Safety planning with battered women: Complex lives, 

difficult choices. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; Ganley, A. L., & 

Schechter, S. (1996). 

116 

Davies, J. (1997). 

117 

Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996). 

118 

Norman, J. (2000). 

119 

Edleson, J. (2000); Norman, J. (2000). 

120 

Magen, R. H. (1999). In the best interests of battered women: 

Reconceptualizing allegations of failure to protect. Child 

Maltreatment, 4(2), 127-135; Fugate, J. A. (2000). Who’s failing 

whom? A critical look at failure-to-protect laws [On-line]. Available: 

www.nyu.edu/pages/lawreview/76/1/fugate.pdf; Wilson, C. 

(1998). Are battered women responsible for protection of their 

children in domestic violence cases? Journal of Interpersonal 

Violence, 13(2), 289-293. 

121 

Magen, R. H. (1999); Fugate, J. A. (2000); Wilson, C. (1998). 

122 

Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996). 

123 

Family Violence Prevention Fund. (2002, February 12). New 

York City lawsuit resolved. Family Violence Prevention Fund 

Newsflash [On-line]. Available: www.endabuse.org/newsflash/ 

index.php3?Search=Article&NewsFlashID=307. 

124 

Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996). 

125 

National Association of Public Child Welfare Administrators. 

(2001); Bancroft, L., & Silverman, J. G. (2002c). Impeding 

recovery: The batterer in custody and visitation disputes. In L. 

Bancroft & J. G. Silverman (Eds.), The batterer as parent: 

Addressing the impact of domestic violence on family dynamics (pp. 

98-129). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; Demaris, A. (1989); 

Gondolf, E. W. (1988); Hastings, J. E., & Hamberger, L. K. 

(1988); Tolman, R. M., & Saunders, D. G. (1988). 

126 

Edleson, J. L., Mbilinyi, L. F., & Shetty, S. (2002). Parenting in 

the aftermath of domestic violence (p. 4). Unpublished paper for the 

Administrative Office of the Court, Center for Families, Children 

and the Courts, Judicial Council of California. 

127 

National Association of Public Child Welfare Administrators. 

(1999). Guidelines for a model system of protective services for abused 

and neglected children and their families. Washington, DC: 

American Public Human Services Association; Child Welfare 

Policy and Practice Group. (1999). Handbook for family team 

conferencing: Promoting safe and stable families. In Community 

partnerships for child protection. Montgomery, AL: Author. 

128 

National Association of Public Child Welfare Administrators. 

(2001); Carrillo, R., & Carter, J. (2001). Guidelines for conducting 

family team conferences when there is a history of domestic violence. 

San Francisco, CA: Family Violence Prevention Fund. 

129 

National Association of Public Child Welfare Administrators. 

(2001). 

130 

Massachusetts Department of Social Services’ Domestic Violence 

Protocol. (1995). 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 73 
131 

Demaris, A., & Jackson, J. K. (1987); Edleson, J. L., & 

Grusznski, R. J. (1988). Treating men who batter: Four years of 

outcome data from the Domestic Abuse Project. Journal of Social 

Service Research, 12(1/2), 3-22; Gondolf, E. W. (1987). 

Evaluating programs for men who batter: Problems and 

prospects. Journal of Family Violence, 2(1), 95-108; Petrick, N. 

D., Gildersleeve-High, L., McEllistrem, J. E., & Sobotnik, L. S. 

(1994). The reduction of male abusiveness as a result of 

treatment: Reality or myth? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 9(4), 

307-316; Tolman, R. M., & Edleson, J. L. (1995). Intervention 

for men who batter: A review of research. In S. R. Stith & M. A. 

Straus (Eds.), Understanding partner violence: Prevalences, causes, 

consequences and solutions (pp. 262-273). Minneapolis, MN: 

National Council on Family Relations; American Bar Association 

Commission on Domestic Violence. (n.d.). Domestic violence 

statistics – Separation violence [On-line]. Available: 

www.abanet.org/domviol/ stats.html; Florida’s Governor’s Task 

Force on Domestic and Sexual Assault. (1997). Florida mortality 

review project (p.45, Table 11). Tallahassee, FL: Office of the 

Governor. 

132 

Massachusetts Department of Social Services’ Domestic Violence 

Protocol. (1995). 

133 

Massachusetts Department of Social Services’ Domestic Violence 

Protocol. (1995). 

134 

Aron, L. Y., & Olson, K. K. (1997). 

135 

Aron, L. Y., & Olson, K. K. (1997); Beeman, S. K., et al. (1999); 

Carter, J., & Schechter, S. (1997); Findlater, J., & Kelly, S. 

(1999); Spears, L. (2000). 

136 

Aron, L. Y., & Olson, K. K. (1997); Beeman, S. K., et al. (1999); 

Carter, J., & Schechter, S. (1997); Findlater, J., & Kelly, S. 

(1999); Spears, L. (2000). 

137 

National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. (1999). 

Family violence: Emerging programs for battered mothers and their 

children. Reno, NV: Author. 

138 

Massachusetts Department of Social Services’ Domestic Violence 

Protocol. (1995); Whitney, P., & Davis, L. (1999). 

139 

Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996). 

140 

Carter, J. (1998). Addressing domestic violence: The vision of 

community partnerships. Safekeeping, 3(1), 1-12. 

141 

Schechter, S., & Gary, L. T. (1992). Health care services for 

battered women and their abused children: A manual about 

AWAKE. Boston, MA: Boston Children’s Hospital. 

142 

Edleson, J. L., & Schechter, S. (1995). Effective interventions in 

domestic violence and child maltreatment cases: Guidelines for policy 

and practice. Reno, NV: National Council of Juvenile and Family 

Court Judges. 

74 Endnotes 
Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 

APPENDIX A 

Glossary of Terms 

Adjudicatory Hearings – held by the juvenile and 

family court to determine whether a child has been 

maltreated or whether another legal basis exists for 

the State to intervene to protect the child. 

Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) – signed 

into law November 1997 and designed to improve 

the safety of children, to promote adoption and 

other permanent homes for children who need 

them, and to support families. The law requires 

CPS agencies to provide more timely and focused 

assessment and intervention services to the 

children and families that are served within the 

CPS system. 

Bad Touch – a term used by primary prevention 

programs for children to describe hitting, 

punching, biting, sexually stimulating touch, and 

other harmful acts. 

CASA – court-appointed special advocates (usually 

volunteers) who serve to ensure that the needs and 

interests of a child in child protection judicial 

proceedings are fully protected. 

Case Closure – the process of ending the 

relationship between the CPS worker and the 

family that often involves a mutual assessment of 

progress. Optimally, cases are closed when families 

have achieved their goals and the risk of 

maltreatment has been reduced or eliminated. 

Case Plan – the casework document that outlines 

the outcomes, goals, and tasks necessary to be 

achieved in order to reduce the risk of 

maltreatment. 

Case Planning – the stage of the CPS case process 

where the CPS caseworker develops a case plan 

with the family members. 

Caseworker Competency – demonstrated 

professional behaviors based on the knowledge, 

skills, personal qualities, and values a person holds. 

Central Registry – a centralized database 

containing information on all 

substantiated/founded reports of child 

maltreatment in a selected area (typically a State). 

Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act 

(CAPTA) – see Keeping Children and Families 

Safe Act. 

Child Protective Services (CPS) – the designated 

social services agency (in most States) to receive 

reports, investigate, and provide intervention and 

treatment services to children and families in which 

child maltreatment has occurred. Frequently, this 

agency is located within larger public social service 

agencies, such as Departments of Social Services. 

Concurrent Planning – identifies alternative 

forms of permanency by addressing both 

reunification or legal permanency with a new 

parent or caregiver if reunification efforts fail. 

75 
Confusing Touch – a term used by primary 

prevention programs for children to describe any type 

of contact that “does not feel right.” 

Cultural Competence – a set of attitudes, behaviors, 

and policies that integrates knowledge about groups 

of people into practices and standards to enhance the 

quality of services to all cultural groups being served. 

Differential Response – an area of CPS reform that 

offers greater flexibility in responding to allegations of 

abuse and neglect. Also referred to as “dual track” or 

“multi-track” response, it permits CPS agencies to 

respond differentially to children’s needs for safety, the 

degree of risk present, and the family’s needs for 

services and support. See “dual track.” 

Dispositional Hearings – held by the juvenile and 

family court to determine the legal resolution of cases 

after adjudication, such as whether placement of the 

child in out-of-home care is necessary and what 

services the children and family will need to reduce 

the risk of maltreatment and to address the effects of 

maltreatment. 

Domestic Violence Offender Intervention 

Program – typically court-ordered programs for 

domestic violence offenders that hold them 

accountable for their actions and identify alternate 

appropriate and non-violent behaviors. Usually held 

in a group format where participants learn about the 

dynamics of domestic violence, its effects on both the 

adult and child victims, and issues of power and 

control. Also known as Batterer Intervention 

Program. 

Domestic Violence Victims Advocates – individuals, 

both professional and volunteer, who advocate for the 

rights and safety of adult victims and children and 

help connect them to appropriate resources. 

Dual Track – term reflecting new CPS response 

systems that typically combine a nonadversarial 

service-based assessment track for cases where 

children are not at immediate risk with a traditional 

CPS investigative track for cases where children are 

unsafe or at greater risk for maltreatment. See 

“differential response.” 

Evaluation of Family Progress – the stage of the 

CPS case process where the CPS caseworker measures 

changes in family behaviors and conditions (risk 

factors), monitors risk elimination or reduction, 

assesses strengths, and determines case closure. 

Exposure to Violence – situation in which children 

live in an environment of domestic violence; applies 

to children who witness the violence as well as to 

those that do not (i.e., hearing, observing, or 

intervening in the violence or its aftermath). 

Family Assessment – the stage of the child protection 

process when the CPS caseworker, community 

treatment provider, and the family reach a mutual 

understanding regarding the behaviors and conditions 

that must change to reduce or eliminate the risk of 

maltreatment, the most critical treatment needs that 

must be addressed, and the strengths on which to 

build. 

Family Group Conferencing – a family meeting 

model used by CPS agencies to optimize family 

strengths in the planning process. This model brings 

the family, extended family, and others important in 

the family’s life (e.g., friends, clergy, neighbors) 

together to make decisions regarding how best to 

ensure safety of the family members. 

Family Unity Model – a family meeting model used 

by CPS agencies to optimize family strengths in the 

planning process. This model is similar to the Family 

Group Conferencing model. 

Full Disclosure – CPS information to the family 

regarding the steps in the intervention process, the 

requirements of CPS, the expectations of the family, 

the consequences if the family does not fulfill the 

expectations, and the rights of the parents to ensure 

that the family completely understands the process. 

Guardian ad Litem – a lawyer or lay person who 

represents a child in juvenile or family court. Usually 

this person considers the “best interest” of the child 

and may perform a variety of roles, including those of 

independent investigator, advocate, advisor, and 

guardian for the child. A lay person who serves in this 

role is sometimes known as a court-appointed special 

advocate or CASA. 

76 Appendix A—Glossary of Terms 
Home Visitation Programs – prevention programs 

that offer a variety of family-focused services to 

pregnant mothers and families with new babies. 

Activities frequently encompass structured visits to the 

family’s home and may address positive parenting 

practices, nonviolent discipline techniques, child 

development, maternal and child health, available 

services, and advocacy. 

Immunity – established in all child abuse laws to 

protect reporters from civil law suits and criminal 

prosecution resulting from filing a report of child 

abuse and neglect. 

Initial Assessment or Investigation – the stage of the 

CPS case process where the CPS caseworker 

determines the validity of the child maltreatment 

report, assesses the risk of maltreatment, determines if 

the child is safe, develops a safety plan if needed to 

assure the child’s protection, and determines services 

needed. 

Intake – the stage of the CPS case process where the 

CPS caseworker screens and accepts reports of child 

maltreatment. 

Interview Protocol – a structured format to ensure 

that all family members are seen in a planned strategy, 

that community providers collaborate, and that 

information gathering is thorough. 

Juvenile and Family Courts – established in most 

States to resolve conflict and to otherwise intervene in 

the lives of families in a manner that promotes the 

best interest of children. These courts specialize in 

areas such as child maltreatment, domestic violence, 

juvenile delinquency, divorce, child custody, and child 

support. 

Keeping Children and Families Safe Act – The 

Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003 (P.L. 

108-36) included the reauthorization of the Child 

Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) in its 

Title I, Sec. 111. CAPTA provides minimum 

standards for defining child physical abuse and neglect 

and sexual abuse that States must incorporate into 

their statutory definitions in order to receive Federal 

funds. CAPTA defines child abuse and neglect as “at 

a minimum, any recent act or failure to act on the part 

of a parent or caretaker, which results in death, serious 

physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or 

exploitation, or an act or failure to act which presents 

an imminent risk of serious harm.” 

Kinship Care – formal child placement by the 

juvenile court and child welfare agency in the home of 

a child’s relative. 

Level of lethality (or dangerousness) – assessing 

both the number and types of indicators (e.g., use of 

weapons, stalking, threats of homicide, sexual abuse, 

mental illness) that help determine the risk of a 

batterer severely harming or killing the adult victim or 

the children. 

Liaison – the designation of a person within an 

organization who has responsibility for facilitating 

communication, collaboration, and coordination 

between agencies involved in the child protection 

system. 

Mandated Reporter – individuals required by State 

statutes to report suspected child abuse and neglect to 

the proper authorities (usually CPS or law 

enforcement agencies). Mandated reporters typically 

include professionals, such as educators and other 

school personnel, health care and mental health 

professionals, social workers, childcare providers, and 

law enforcement officers. Some States identify all 

citizens as mandated reporters. 

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) – a 

written agreement that serves to clarify relationships 

and responsibilities between two or more 

organizations that share services, clients, or resources. 

Multidisciplinary Team – established between 

agencies and professionals within the child protection 

system to discuss cases of child abuse and neglect and 

to aid in decisions at various stages of the CPS case 

process. These terms may also be designated by 

different names, including child protection teams, 

interdisciplinary teams, or case consultation teams. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 77 
Neglect – the failure to provide for the child’s basic 

needs. Neglect can be physical, educational, or 

emotional. Physical neglect can include not providing 

adequate food or clothing, appropriate medical care, 

supervision, or proper weather protection (heat or 

coats). Educational neglect includes failure to provide 

appropriate schooling, special educational needs, or 

allowing excessive truancies. Psychological neglect 

includes the lack of any emotional support and love, 

chronic inattention to the child, exposure to spouse 

abuse, or drug and alcohol abuse. 

Out-of-Home Care – child care, foster care, or 

residential care provided by persons, organizations, 

and institutions to children who are placed outside 

their families, usually under the jurisdiction of 

juvenile or family court. 

Parent or caretaker – person responsible for the care 

of the child. 

Parens Patriae Doctrine – originating in feudal 

England, a doctrine that vests in the State a right of 

guardianship of minors. This concept has gradually 

evolved into the principle that the community, in 

addition to the parent, has a strong interest in the care 

and nurturing of children. Schools, juvenile courts, 

and social service agencies all derive their authority 

from the State’s power to ensure the protection and 

rights of children as a unique class. 

Penalty for Failure to Report – all State child abuse 

reporting laws delineate penalties for mandated 

reporters who fail to report suspected instances of 

child abuse to the designated State agency. The 

penalty usually results in a misdemeanor charge and a 

fine or time in jail. 

Physical Abuse – the inflicting of a nonaccidental 

physical injury upon a child. This may include, 

burning, hitting, punching, shaking, kicking, beating, 

or otherwise harming a child. It may, however, have 

been the result of over-discipline or physical 

punishment that is inappropriate to the child’s age. 

Primary Prevention – activities geared to a sample of 

the general population to prevent child abuse and 

neglect from occurring. Also referred to as “universal 

prevention.” 

Protocol – an interagency agreement that delineates 

joint roles and responsibilities by establishing criteria 

and procedures for working together on cases of child 

abuse and neglect. 

Protective Factors – strengths and resources that 

appear to mediate or serve as a “buffer” against risk 

factors that contribute to vulnerability to 

maltreatment or against the negative effects of 

maltreatment experiences. 

Psychological Maltreatment – a pattern of caregiver 

behavior or extreme incidents that convey to children 

that they are worthless, flawed, unloved, unwanted, 

endangered, or only of value to meeting another’s 

needs. This can include parents or caretakers using 

extreme or bizarre forms of punishment or 

threatening or terrorizing a child. The term 

“psychological maltreatment” is also known as 

emotional abuse or neglect, verbal abuse, or mental 

abuse. 

Reporting Laws – all States have child abuse and 

neglect reporting laws that mandate who must report 

“suspected” child abuse and neglect cases, designate 

which agencies are charged with investigating alleged 

cases of abuse and neglect, and delineate the 

responsibilities of State and local agencies in 

responding to these children and families. 

Response Time – a determination made by CPS and 

law enforcement regarding the immediacy of the 

response needed to a report of child abuse or neglect. 

Restraining Order – a civil legal document in which 

the adult victim is granted protection by the courts by 

ordering the batterer to commit no acts of violence 

against the adult victim or child. Usually orders the 

perpetrator to keep physically away from the victims. 

Also known as a protection order. 

78 Appendix A—Glossary of Terms 
 

Review Hearings – held by the juvenile and family 

court to review dispositions (usually every 6 months) 

and to determine the need to maintain placement in 

out-of-home care or court jurisdiction of a child. 

Risk – the likelihood that a child will be maltreated in 

the future. 

Risk Assessment – to assess and measure the likelihood 

that a child will be maltreated in the future, frequently 

through the use of checklists, matrices, scales, and other 

methods of measurement. 

Risk Factors – behaviors and conditions present in the 

child, parent, or family that will likely contribute to 

child maltreatment occurring in the future. 

Safety – absence of an imminent or immediate threat of 

moderate-to-serious harm to the child. 

Safety Assessment – a part of the CPS and domestic 

violence case process in which available information is 

analyzed to determine whether the adult victim or the 

child is in immediate danger of moderate or serious 

harm. 

Safety Plan – a casework document developed when it 

is determined that the adult victim or child is in 

imminent or potential risk of serious harm. In the 

safety plan, the caseworker targets the factors that are 

causing or contributing to the risk of serious harm and 

identifies, along with the adult victim, the interventions 

that will control the safety factors and assure the victim 

and child’s protection. 

Secondary Prevention – activities targeted to prevent 

breakdowns and dysfunctions among families who have 

been identified as at risk for abuse and neglect. 

Service Agreement – the casework document 

developed between the CPS caseworker and the family 

that outlines the tasks necessary to achieve goals and 

outcomes necessary for risk reduction. 

Service Provision – the stage of the CPS casework 

process when CPS and other service providers provide 

specific services geared toward the reduction of risk of 

maltreatment. 

Sexual Abuse – inappropriate adolescent or adult 

sexual behavior with a child. It includes fondling a 

child’s genitals, making the child fondle the adult’s 

genitals, intercourse, incest, rape, sodomy, 

exhibitionism, sexual exploitation, or exposure to 

pornography. To be considered child abuse, these acts 

have to be committed by a person responsible for the 

care of a child (for example a baby-sitter, a parent, or a 

daycare provider) or related to the child. If a stranger 

commits these acts, it would be considered sexual 

assault and handled solely be the police and criminal 

courts. 

Shelter – a short-term, undisclosed haven for adult 

victims of intimate partner violence and their children 

where they are provided with safety, confidentiality, 

advocacy, and access to resources related to their 

victimization. 

Substantiated – an investigation disposition 

concluding that the allegation of maltreatment or risk of 

maltreatment was supported or founded by State law or 

State policy. A CPS determination means that credible 

evidence exists that child abuse or neglect has occurred. 

Tertiary Prevention – treatment efforts geared to 

address situations where child maltreatment has already 

occurred with the goals of preventing child 

maltreatment from occurring in the future and of 

avoiding the harmful effects of child maltreatment. 

Treatment – the stage of the child protection case 

process when specific services are provided by CPS and 

other providers to reduce the risk of maltreatment, 

support families in meeting case goals, and address the 

effects of maltreatment. 

Universal Prevention – activities and services directed 

at the general public with the goal of stopping the 

occurrence of maltreatment before it starts. Also 

referred to as “primary prevention.” 

Unsubstantiated (not substantiated) – an 

investigation disposition that determines that there is 

not sufficient evidence under State law or policy to 

conclude that the child has been maltreated or is at risk 

of maltreatment. A CPS determination means that 

credible evidence does not exist that child abuse or 

neglect has occurred. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 79 
Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 

APPENDIX B 

Resource Listings of
 

Selected National Organizations
 

Concerned with Domestic Violence
 

and Child Maltreatment
 

Listed below are several representatives of the many national organizations and groups dealing with 

various aspects of child maltreatment. Please visit http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov to view a more 

comprehensive list of resources and visit http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/ general/organizations/index.cfm 

to view an organization database. Inclusion on this list is for information purposes and does not constitute 

an endorsement by the Office on Child Abuse and Neglect or the Children’s Bureau. 

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ORGANIZATIONS 

Family Violence Prevention Fund 

address:	 383 Rhode Island St., Suite #304 

San Francisco, CA 94103-5133 

phone:	 (415) 252-8900 

(800) 595-4889 (TDD line) 

fax:	 (415) 252-8991 

e-mail:	 fund@endabuse.org 

Web site:	 http://www.endabuse.org 

Focuses on domestic violence education, 

prevention, and public policy reform. Its Web site 

includes fact sheets, descriptions of programs, 

publications, and links to other relevant 

organizations. 

The Greenbook Initiative 

address: Family Violence Department 

National Council of Juvenile and 

Family Court Judges 

P.O. Box 8970 

Reno, NV 89507 

phone: 888-55-GREEN 

Web site: http://www.thegreenbook.info 

Provides recommendations designed to help 

dependency courts and child welfare and domestic 

violence agencies better serve families experiencing 

violence and to achieve safety. Developed by the 

Family Violence Department of the National 

Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, the 

initiative has spawned activities in States and 

localities across the country, as well as a Federal 

initiative spearheaded by the U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services and the U.S. 

Department of Justice. 

81 
Minnesota Center Against Violence and Abuse 

address:	 School of Social Work 

University of Minnesota 

105 Peters Hall, 

1404 Gortner Avenue 

St. Paul, MN 55108-6142 

phone:	 (612) 624-0721 

fax:	 (612) 625-4288 

Web site:	 http://www.mincava.umn.edu 

Supports education, research, and access to 

information on violence-related topics by providing 

resources for professionals, researchers, and survivors, 

and houses two of the Nation’s leading Web sites 

about violence listed below: 

Violence Against Women Online Resources 

Web site: 	 http://www.vaw.umn.edu/dv.asp 

Minnesota Center Against Violence and Abuse 

Electronic Clearinghouse 

Web site: 	 http://www.mincava.umn.edu 

National Council of Juvenile and Family 

Court Judges 

address:	 NCJFCJ 

Family Violence Department 

P.O. Box 8970 

Reno, NV 89507 

phone:	 (775) 784-6012 

fax:	 (775) 784-6628 

e-mail:	 admin@ncjfcj.org 

Web site:	 http://www.ncjfcj.org/dept/fvd 

Improves the way courts, law enforcement, and others 

respond to family violence while recognizing the legal, 

cultural, and psychological dynamics involved with 

the ultimate goal of improving the lives of domestic 

violence victims and their children. 

National Domestic Violence Hotline 

address: PO Box 161810 

Austin, TX 78716 

phone: (800) 799-SAFE (7283) 

(800) 787-3224 (TDD line) 

fax: (512) 453-8541 

e-mail: ndvh@ndvh.org; for hearing 

impaired: deafhelp@ndvh.org 

Web site: http://www.ndvh.org 

Provides crisis intervention, information about 

domestic violence, and referrals to local service 

providers for victims of domestic violence and those 

calling on their behalf. Assistance is provided in both 

English and Spanish, and volunteers also have access 

to translators in 139 languages. 

National Resource Center on Domestic Violence: 

Child Protection and Custody 

address:	 Family Violence Department 

National Council of Juvenile and 

Family Court Judges 

P.O. Box 8970 

Reno, NV 89507 

phone:	 (800) 52-PEACE 

fax:	 (775) 784-6160 

e-mail:	 info@dvlawsearch.com 

Web site: 	 http://www.nationalcouncilfvd.org/ 

res_center 

Provides access to the best possible source of 

information and tangible assistance to those working 

in the field of domestic violence and child protection 

and custody. The center was established by the U.S. 

Department of Health and Human Services and is 

part of the Family Violence Department of the 

National Council of Juvenile and Family Court 

Judges. 

82 Appendix B—Resource Listings 
CHILD WELFARE ORGANIZATIONS 

American Humane Association Children’s Division 

address: 63 Inverness Dr., East 

Englewood, CO 80112-5117 

phone: (800) 227-4645 

(303) 792-9900 

fax: (303) 792-5333 

e-mail: children@americanhumane.org 

Web site: http://www.americanhumane.org/ 

site/PageServer?pagename=pc_home 

Conducts research, analysis, and training to help 

public and private agencies respond to child 

maltreatment. 

American Professional Society on the Abuse of 

Children 

address:	 940 N.E. 13th St. 

CHO 3B-3406 

Oklahoma City, OK 73104 

phone: (405) 271-8202 

fax: (405) 271-2931

e-mail: tricia-williams@ouhsc.edu

Web site: http://www.apsac.org 

Provides professional education, promotes research to 

inform effective practice, and addresses public policy 

issues. Professional membership organization. 

American Public Human Services Association 

address: 810 First St., NE, Suite 500 

Washington, DC 20002-4267 

phone: (202) 682-0100 

fax: (202) 289-6555 

Web site: http://www.aphsa.org 

Addresses program and policy issues related to the 

administration and delivery of publicly funded 

human services. Professional membership 

organization. 

AVANCE Family Support and Education Program 

address:	 301 South Frio, Suite 380 

San Antonio, TX 78207 

phone:	 (210) 270-4630 

fax:	 (210) 270-4612 

Web site:	 http://www.avance.org 

Operates a national training center to share and 

disseminate information, material, and curricula to 

service providers and policy-makers interested in 

supporting high-risk Hispanic families. 

Child Welfare League of America 

address:	 440 First St., NW, 3rd Floor 

Washington, DC 20001-2085 

phone:	 (202) 638-2952 

fax:	 (202) 638-4004 

Web site:	 http://www.cwla.org 

Provides training, consultation, and technical 

assistance to child welfare professionals and agencies 

while also educating the public about emerging issues 

affecting children. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 83 
National Black Child Development Institute 

address: 1023 15th St., NW, Suite 600 

Washington, DC 20005 

phone: (202) 387-1281 

fax: (202) 234-1738 

e-mail: moreinfo@nbcdi.org 

Web site: http://www.nbcdi.org 

Operates programs and sponsors a national training 

conference through Howard University to improve 

and protect the well-being of African-American 

children. 

National Children’s Advocacy Center 

address:	 200 Westside Sq., Suite 700 

Huntsville AL 35801 

phone: (256) 533-0531

fax: (256) 534-6883

e-mail: webmaster@ncac-hsv.org 

Web site: http://www.nationalcac.org 

Provides prevention, intervention, and treatment 

services to physically and sexually abused children and 

their families within a child-focused team approach. 

National Indian Child Welfare Association 

address:	 5100 SW Macadam Ave., Suite 300 

Portland, OR 97201 

phone:	 (503) 222-4044 

fax:	 (503) 222-4007 

e-mail:	 info@nicwa.org 

Web site:	 http://www.nicwa.org 

Disseminates information and provides technical 

assistance on Indian child welfare issues. Supports 

community development and advocacy efforts to 

facilitate tribal responses to the needs of families and 

children. 

NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTERS 

National Center on Substance Abuse and Child 

Welfare 

e-mail: ncsacw@samhsa.gov

Web site: http://www.ncsacw.samhsa.gov/ 

index.asp 

The mission of the National Center on Substance 

Abuse and Child Welfare is to improve systems and 

practice for families with substance use disorders who 

are involved in the child welfare and family judicial 

systems by assisting local, State, and tribal agencies. 

National Child Welfare Resource Center for 

Family-Centered Practice 

address:	 Learning Systems Group 

1150 Connecticut Ave., NW, 

Suite 1100 

Washington, DC 20036 

phone:	 (800) 628-8442 

fax:	 (202) 628-3812 

e-mail:	 info@cwresource.org 

Web site:	 http://www.cwresource.org 

Helps child welfare agencies and Tribes use familycentered practice to implement the tenets of the 

Adoption and Safe Families Act to ensure the safety 

and well-being of children while meeting the needs of 

families. 

84 Appendix B—Resource Listings 
National Child Welfare Resource Center on Legal 

and Judicial Issues 

address: ABA Center on Children 

and the Law 

740 15th St., NW 

Washington, DC 20005-1019 

phone: (800) 285-2221 (Service Center) 

(202) 662-1720 

fax: (202) 662-1755 

e-mail: ctrchildlaw@abanet.org 

Web site: http://www.abanet.org/child/rclji/ 

home.html 

Promotes improvement of laws and policies affecting 

children and provides education in child-related law. 

National Resource Center on Child Maltreatment 

address:	 Child Welfare Institute 

3950 Shackleford Rd., Suite 175 

Duluth, GA 30096 

phone:	 (770) 935-8484 

fax:	 (770) 935-0344 

e-mail:	 tsmith@gocwi.org 

Web site:	 http://www.gocwi.org/nrccm 

Helps States, local agencies, and Tribes develop 

effective and efficient child protective services systems. 

Jointly operated by the Child Welfare Institute and 

ACTION for Child Protection, and responds to needs 

related to prevention, identification, intervention, and 

treatment of child abuse and neglect. 

National Resource Center on Domestic Violence 

address: Pennsylvania Coalition Against 

Domestic Violence 

6400 Flank Dr., Suite 1300 

Harrisburg, PA 17112 

phone: (800) 537-2238 

(800) 553-2508 (TTY line) 

fax: (717) 671-8149 

Web site: http://www.nrcdv.org 

Supports organizations and individuals working to 

end domestic violence through training, technical 

assistance, and dissemination of information on 

relevant issues. 

PREVENTION ORGANIZATIONS 

National Alliance of Children’s Trust and 

Prevention Funds 

address:	 Michigan State University 

Department of Psychology 

East Lansing, MI 48824-1117 

phone:	 (517) 432-5096 

fax:	 (517) 432-2476 

e-mail:	 millsda@msu.edu 

Web site:	 http://www.ctfalliance.org 

Assists State children’s trust and prevention funds to 

strengthen families and protect children from harm. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 85 
Prevent Child Abuse America 

address: 200 South Michigan Ave., 17th Floor 

Chicago, IL 60604-2404 

phone: (800) 835-2671 (orders) 

(312) 663-3520 

fax: (312) 939-8962 

e-mail: mailbox@preventchildabuse.org 

Web site: http://www.preventchildabuse.org 

Conducts prevention activities such as public 

awareness campaigns, advocacy, networking, research, 

and publishing, and provides information and 

statistics on child abuse. 

Shaken Baby Syndrome Prevention Plus 

address:	 649 Main St., Suite B 

Groveport, OH 43125 

phone: 	 (800) 858-5222 

(614) 836-8360 

fax: (614) 836-8359

e-mail: sbspp@aol.com

Web site: http://www.sbsplus.com 

Develops, studies, and disseminates information and 

materials designed to prevent shaken baby syndrome 

and other forms of child abuse and to increase positive 

parenting and child care. 

COMMUNITY PARTNERS 

The Center for Faith-Based and Community 

Initiatives 

e-mail:	 CFBCI@hhs.gov 

Web site:	 http://www.hhs.gov/faith/ 

Welcomes the participation of faith- and communitybased organizations as valued and essential partners 

with the U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services. Funding goes to faith-based organizations 

through Head Start and to programs for refugee 

resettlement, runaway and homeless youth, 

independent living, childcare, child support 

enforcement, and child welfare. 

Family Support America 

(formerly Family Resource Coalition of America) 

address: 20 N. Wacker Dr., Suite 1100 

Chicago, IL 60606 

phone: (312) 338-0900 

fax: (312) 338-1522 

e-mail: info@familysupportamerica.org 

Web site: 

http://www.familysupportamerica.org 

Works to strengthen and empower families and 

communities so that they can foster the optimal 

development of children, youth, and adult family 

members. 

86 Appendix B—Resource Listings 
National Exchange Club Foundation for the 

Prevention of Child Abuse 

address: 3050 Central Ave. 

Toledo, OH 43606-1700 

phone: (800) 924-2643 

(419) 535-3232 

fax: (419) 535-1989 

e-mail: info@preventchildabuse.com 

Web site: 

http://www.nationalexchangeclub.com 

Conducts local campaigns in the fight against child 

abuse by providing education, intervention, and 

support to families affected by child maltreatment. 

National Fatherhood Initiative 

address: 101 Lake Forest Blvd., Suite 360 

Gaithersburg, MD 20877 

phone: (301) 948-0599 

fax: (301) 948-4325 

Web site: http://www.fatherhood.org 

Works to improve the well-being of children by 

increasing the proportion of children growing up with 

involved, responsible, and committed fathers. 

FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC 

Childhelp USA 

address:	 15757 North 78th St. 

Scottsdale, AZ 85260 

phone:	 (800) 4-A-CHILD 

(800) 2-A-CHILD (TDD line) 

(480) 922-8212 

fax: (480) 922-7061 

e-mail: help@childhelpusa.org 

Web site: http://www.childhelpusa.org 

Provides crisis counseling to adult survivors and child 

victims of child abuse, offenders, and parents, and 

operates a national hotline. 

National Center for Missing and Exploited 

Children 

address: Charles B. Wang International 

Children’s Building 

699 Prince St. 

Alexandria, VA 22314-3175 

phone: (800) 843-5678 

(703) 274-3900 

fax: (703) 274-2220 

Web site: http://www.missingkids.com 

Provides assistance to parents, children, law 

enforcement, schools, and the community in 

recovering missing children and raising public 

awareness about ways to help prevent child abduction, 

molestation, and sexual exploitation. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 87 
National Center for Victims of Crime 

address: 2000 M St., NW, Suite 480 

Washington, DC 20036 

phone: (800) FYI-CALL 

(202) 467-8701 

(800) 211-7996 (TDD line) 

fax: (202) 467-8701 

Web site: http://www.ncvc.org 

Provides direct services and resources; advocates for 

the passage of laws and policies that create resources 

for and secure the rights of vicitms of crime; and 

delivers training and technical assistance to victim 

service organizations, counselors, attorneys, criminal 

justice agencies, and allied professionals. 

Parents Anonymous 

address: 675 West Foothill Blvd., Suite 220 

Claremont, CA 91711 

phone: (909) 621-6184 

fax: (909) 625-6304 

e-mail: parentsanon@msn.com 

Web site: www.parentsanonymous.org 

Leads mutual support groups to help parents provide 

nurturing environments for their families. 

FOR MORE INFORMATION 

National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and 

Neglect Information 

address:	 330 C St., SW 

Washington, DC 20447 

phone: (800) 394-3366 

(703) 385-7565 

fax: (703) 385-3206 

e-mail: nccanch@calib.com 

Web site: nccanch.acf.hhs.gov 

Collects, stores, catalogs, and disseminates 

information on all aspects of child maltreatment and 

child welfare to help build the capacity of 

professionals in the field. A service of the Children’s 

Bureau. 

88 Appendix B—Resource Listings 
Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 

APPENDIX C 

State Toll-free Telephone
 

Numbers for Reporting
 

Child Abuse
 

Each State designates specific agencies to receive and investigate reports of suspected child abuse and 

neglect. Typically, this responsibility is carried out by child protective services (CPS) within a 

Department of Social Services, Department of Human Resources, or Division of Family and Children 

Services. In some States, police departments also may receive reports of child abuse or neglect. 

Many States have an in-State toll-free telephone number, listed below, for reporting suspected abuse. The 

reporting party must be calling from the same State where the child is allegedly being abused for 

most of the following numbers to be valid. 

For States not listed, or when the reporting party resides in a different State from the child, please call 

Childhelp, 800-4-A-Child (800-422-4453), or your local CPS agency. 

Alaska (AK) Florida (FL) Maryland (MD) 

800-478-4444 800-96-ABUSE 800-332-6347 

(800-962-2873) 

Arizona (AZ) Massachusetts (MA) 

888-SOS-CHILD Illinois (IL) 800-792-5200 

(888-767-2445) 800-252-2873 

Michigan (MI) 

Arkansas (AR) Indiana (IN) 800-942-4357 

800-482-5964 800-800-5556 

Mississippi (MS) 

Connecticut (CT) Iowa (IA) 800-222-8000 

800-842-2288 800-362-2178 

800-624-5518 (TDD) Missouri (MO) 

Kansas (KS) 800-392-3738 

Delaware (DE) 800-922-5330 

800-292-9582 Montana (MT) 

Kentucky (KY) 866-820-KIDS (5437) 

District of Columbia (DC) 800-752-6200 

202-671-SAFE (7233) Nebraska (NE) 

Maine (ME) 800-652-1999 

800-452-1999 

89 
Nevada (NV) Oklahoma (OK) Vermont (VT) 

800-992-5757 800-522-3511 800-649-5285 

New Hampshire (NH) Oregon (OR) Virginia (VA) 

800-894-5533 800-854-3508, ext. 2402 800-552-7096 

800-852-3388 (after hours) 

Pennsylvania (PA) Washington (WA) 

New Jersey (NJ) 800-932-0313 866-END-HARM 

800-792-8610 (866-363-4276) 

800-835-5510 (TDD) Rhode Island (RI) 

800-RI-CHILD West Virginia (WV) 

New Mexico (NM) (800-742-4453) 800-352-6513 

800-797-3260 

Texas (TX) Wyoming (WY) 

New York (NY) 800-252-5400 800-457-3659 

800-342-3720 

Utah (UT) 

North Dakota (ND) 800-678-9399 

800-245-3736 

90 Appendix C—State Toll-free Telephone Numbers for Reporting Child Abuse 
Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 

APPENDIX D 

Stages of Change 

I

ndividuals frequently differ in their state of readiness to change, and client readiness to change may 

fluctuate over time. Motivation is clearly linked to the degree of hope that change is possible. The 

degree to which clients are ready to change varies over time and is described in the pattern presented in 

the table below: precontemplation, contemplation, determination, action, and maintenance. 

Since most children and families are involved with child protective services (CPS) involuntarily, they enter 

the CPS system at the precontemplation stage. This is true of the victims and the perpetrator more so 

than the children in cases where domestic violence is involved. By the end of the initial assessment or 

investigation phase, it is hoped that caseworkers will have moved victims and the offender to the 

contemplation stage or, even better, to the determination stage. It is essential for the victim to be at the 

determination stage when developing the service and safety plans. If those involved have not moved to 

that point, the likelihood of change is compromised. 

91 
Stages of Change1 

Stage Description Caseworker Actions 

Precontemplation Sees no need to change. 

At this stage, the person has not even 

contemplated having a problem or 

needing to make a change. This is the 

stage where denial, minimization, 

blaming, and resistance are most 

commonly present. 

Provide information and feedback to raise 

the client’s awareness of the problem and 

the possibility of change. Do not give 

prescriptive advice. 

Contemplation Considers change, but also rejects it. 

At this stage, there is some awareness that 

a problem exists. This stage is 

characterized by ambivalence; the person 

wants to change, but also does not want 

to. They will go back and forth between 

reasons for concern and justification for 

unconcern. This is the stage where clients 

feel stuck. 

Help the client tip the balance in favor of 

change. Help the client see the benefits of 

changing and the consequences of not 

changing. 

Determination Wants to do something about the problem. 

At this stage, there is a window of 

opportunity for change: the person has 

decided to change and needs realistic and 

achievable steps to change. 

Help the client find a change strategy that 

is realistic, acceptable, accessible, 

appropriate, and effective. 

Action Takes steps to change. 

At this stage, the person engages in 

specific actions to bring about change. 

The goal during this stage is to produce 

change in a particular area or areas. 

Support and be an advocate for the client. 

Help accomplish the steps for change. 

Maintenance Maintains goal achievement. 

Making the change does not guarantee 

that the change will be maintained. The 

challenge during this stage is to sustain 

change accomplished by previous action 

and to prevent relapse. Maintaining 

change often may require a different set of 

skills than making the change. 

Help the client identify the possibility of 

relapse and identify and use strategies to 

prevent relapse. 

92 

1 

Prochaska, J. O., & DiClemente, C. C. (1982). Transtheoretical therapy: Toward a more integrative model of change. Psychotherapy: Theory, 

Research, and Practice, 19, 276-288. 

Appendix D—Stages of Change 
Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 

APPENDIX E 

Domestic Violence
 

Assessment: Victim
 

Do not initiate an assessment with a series of rapid fire, personal questions, which can be intimidating 

and off-putting. The caseworker should talk with the victim about his or her situation, which helps 

engage the victim in the process. It is important to ask specific questions, however, to determine the level 

of domestic violence affecting the victim. 

1. Types and patterns of abusive tactics. 

a.	 Controlling, coercive, and threatening 

tactics 

• Does your partner prevent you from 

visiting friends and family? 

• Does your partner prevent you from going 

to school or work? 

• Does your partner tell you what to wear, 

what to do, where you can go, or whom you 

can talk to? 

• Does your partner control the household 

income? 

• Does your partner follow you to “check up” 

on you or check the mileage on your car? 

• Does your partner telephone you constantly 

while you are at work or home? 

• Does your partner give you threatening 

looks or stares when he does not agree with 

something you said or did? 

b. Verbal, 	emotional, sexual, or 

physical abuse 

• Does your partner call you degrading 

names, put you down, or humiliate you in 

public or in front of friends or family? 

• Does your partner blame you or tell you 

that you are at “fault” for the abuse or any 

problems you are having? 

• Does your partner deny or minimize his 

abusive behaviors towards you? 

• Has your partner ever destroyed your 

personal possessions? Broken or destroyed 

household items? 

• Has your partner ever pushed, kicked, 

slapped, punched, or choked you? 

• Has your partner ever threatened to kill or 

harm himself, you, the children, or a pet? 

• Has your partner ever threatened you with 

a weapon or gun? Does your partner have 

access to a dangerous weapon or gun? 

• Has your partner ever been arrested for a 

violent crime or behaved violently in 

public? 

• Has your partner ever forced you to 

commit illegal activities, use illegal drugs, 

or abuse alcohol? 

• Has your partner ever forced you to engage 

in unwanted sexual activity or practices 

(e.g., pornography, multiple sexual 

partners, prostitution)? 

93 
2. Risks and impact on the adult victim. 

• How has your partner’s abusive behavior 

affected you? 

• Do you suffer from anxiety or depression? 

• Do you have difficulty sleeping, eating, 

concentrating, etc.? 

• Do you suffer from headaches, stomachaches, 

breathing difficulties, or other health 

problems? 

• Have you had to seek medical assistance for 

injuries or health problems resulting from 

your partner’s violence? 

• Have you been physically assaulted during 

pregnancy? Have you suffered prenatal 

problems or a miscarriage as a result of the 

abuse? 

• Do you abuse alcohol or other substances? 

• Have you ever been hospitalized for a mental 

illness? Do you have a mental health 

diagnosis? Are you taking psychotropic 

medication? 

• Have you ever thought about or tried to hurt 

yourself or someone else? 

3. Risks and impact on the children. 

• Has your partner called your children 

degrading names or verbally threatened them? 

• Has your partner ever threatened to make a 

report to CPS, take custody of the children, or 

kidnap the children? 

• Does your partner physically discipline or 

touch the children in a manner that you don’t 

agree with or that makes you uncomfortable? 

• Has your partner ever asked the children to 

report your daily activities or to “spy” on you? 

• Has your partner ever forced your children to 

watch or participate in his abuse of you? 

• Has your partner physically hurt you in front 

of the children? 

• How do you think the violence at home affects 

your children? 

• Do your children exhibit problems at school 

or at home (e.g., sleeping and eating 

difficulties, difficulty concentrating in school, 

aggressive behaviors)? 

• Have your children ever intervened in a 

physical or verbal assault to protect you or to 

stop the violence? 

• Do your children behave in ways that remind 

you of your partner? 

• Has a school or daycare center ever contacted 

you regarding behavioral problems of your 

children? 

4. Help seeking and protective strategies. 

• Have you told anyone about the abuse? 	What 

happened? 

• Have you ever left home because of the abuse? 

Where did you go and what happened? 

• Have you ever called the police or 911? 	What 

was their response? 

• Have you ever filed a restraining order or 

criminal charges? What was your partner’s 

response? 

• Have you ever used a domestic violence shelter 

or services? Was it helpful? 

• Have you fought back? What happened? 

• How do you survive the abuse? 

• What have you tried to keep you and your 

children safe from your partner? 

• What has made it difficult for you to keep you 

and your children safe? 

• How will your partner react if he finds out you 

talked with me?1 

1 

Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996). Domestic violence: A national curriculum for child protective services. San Francisco, CA: Family 

Violence Prevention Fund; Massachusetts Department of Social Services’ Domestic Violence Protocol. (1995). Unpublished practice 

protocol, Massachusetts Department of Social Services, Boston, MA; Bragg. L. (1998). Domestic violence protocol for child protective services 

intervention. Charlotte, NC: Mecklenburg County Department of Social Services. 

94 Appendix E—Domestic Violence Assessment: Victim 
Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 

APPENDIX F 

Domestic Violence
 

Assessment: Child
 

I

n order to obtain accurate and reliable information from a child regarding a domestic violence situation, 

it is critical that the language and questions are appropriate for the child’s age and developmental stage. 

Training and experience in working with young children in particular may be necessary. 

1. Types and frequency of exposure to domestic 

violence.

• What kinds of things do mom and dad (or 

girlfriend or boyfriend) fight about? 

• What happens when they argue? 

• Do they yell at each other or call each other 

bad names? 

• Does anyone break or smash things when 

they get angry? Who? 

• Do they hit one another? 	What do they hit 

with? 

• How does the hitting usually start? 

• How often do your mom and dad argue or 

hit? 

• Have the police ever come to your home? 

Why? 

• Have you ever seen your mom or dad get 

hurt? What happened? 

2. Risks posed by the domestic violence. 

• Have you ever been hit or hurt when 

mom and dad (or girlfriend or boyfriend) 

are fighting? 

• Has your brother or sister ever been hit or 

hurt during a fight? 

• What do you do when they start arguing or 

when someone starts hitting? 

• Has either your mom or dad hurt your pet? 

3. Impact of exposure to domestic violence. 

• Do you think about mom and dad (or 

girlfriend or boyfriend) fighting a lot? 

• Do you think about it when you are at 

school, while you’re playing, when you’re 

by yourself? 

• How does the fighting make you feel? 

• Do you ever have trouble sleeping at night? 

Why? Do you have nightmares? If so, what 

are they about? 

• Why do you think they fight so much? 

• What would you like them to do to make it 

better? 

• Are you afraid to be at home? 	To 

leave home? 

• What or who makes you afraid? 

95 
• Do you think it’s okay to hit when you’re 

angry? When is it okay to hit someone? 

• How would you describe your mom? 	How 

would you describe your dad? 

4. Protective factors. 

• What do you do when mom and dad (or 

girlfriend or boyfriend) are fighting? 

• If the child has difficulty responding to an 

open-ended question, the worker can ask if the 

child has: 

- Stayed in the room 

- Left or hidden 

- Gotten help 

- Gone to an older sibling 

- Asked parents to stop 

- Tried to stop the fighting 

• Have you ever called the police when your parents 

are fighting? 

• Have you ever talked to anyone about your parent’s 

fighting? 

• Is there an adult you can talk to about what’s 

happening at home? 

• What makes you feel better when you think about 

your parent’s fighting?1 

1 

Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996). Domestic violence: A national curriculum for child protective services. San Francisco, CA: Family 

Violence Prevention Fund; Massachusetts Department of Social Services’ Domestic Violence Protocol. (1995). Unpublished practice 

protocol, Massachusetts Department of Social Services, Boston, MA; Bragg. L. (1998). Domestic violence protocol for child protective services 

intervention. Charlotte, NC: Mecklenburg County Department of Social Services. 

96 Appendix F—Domestic Violence Assessment: Child 
Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 

APPENDIX G 

Domestic Violence
 

Assessment: Alleged
 

Perpetrator
 

I

ncreasingly, CPS develops service plans with perpetrators, as appropriate. These plans not only work 

toward holding the perpetrator accountable for the abuse, but also guide decisions about involvement 

and interaction with the children. It is as important to engage the perpetrator as it is the victim and 

children in order to obtain accurate and useful information. 

1. Expectations of the abused partner and • Has your partner made you so mad that 

the relationship.	 you pushed, kicked, or slapped him or her? 

Held him or her down? Grabbed him or 

• Describe your relationship with your her by the neck? partner. For example, how do you 

communicate with one another? • Have you ever threatened to harm or kill 

yourself, your partner, your children, or • What type of things do you expect from your pet? your partner? 

• Have you ever threatened or used a weapon • How would you describe your partner? or gun against your partner? Do you have 

• What do you do when you and your	 access to a weapon or gun?
 

partner disagree? 
 • Have the police ever come to your home? 

• What do you do when you become angry? How many times? Why? What happened? 

2. Types of abusive behavior and tactics. 	 • Have you ever been arrested, charged, or 

convicted of a domestic violence assault? If • Have people told you that your temper is a
 so, what happened?
 problem? Who? And why did they tell you
 

that? 3. Risks to the children.
 

• How do you feel about your partner visiting	 • How would you describe your children? 

his or her friends and family? • What kinds of things do you expect from 

• How do you and your partner manage your	 your children?
 

household duties and income?
 

• How do you discipline your children? 

• Do you ever yell at your partner? Call your • How do you think the children are affected partner degrading names? Put your partner when they see or hear you and your down? partner fighting? 

• Have you ever physically harmed or used • Have your children ever had to intervene force on anyone in your family? In what during an argument with your partner? way? When? Why and what happened? 

97 
4. Risk 	factors that may increase levels 

of dangerousness. 

• Did you ever see either of your parents harmed 

by a spouse or significant other? If so, what 

did you do and how did it make you feel? 

• Were you ever harmed as a child? 

• When was the last time you drank or used an 

illegal substance? How much? 

• Have you ever attended a substance abuse 

program or been arrested for DUI? 

• Have you ever been treated for depression? 

• Have you previously been violent with your 

partner? With others? 

• Have you experienced pervasive thoughts of 

homicide or suicide? Attempts?1 

1 Mederos, F. (2000). Child protection services, the judicial system and men who batter: Toward effective and safe intervention. Unpublished practice 

paper, Massachusetts Department of Social Services, Jamaica Plains, MA; Ganley, A. L., & Schechter, S. (1996). Domestic violence: A national 

curriculum for child protective services. San Francisco, CA: Family Violence Prevention Fund; Massachusetts Department of Social Services’ 

Domestic Violence Protocol. (1995). Unpublished practice protocol, Massachusetts Department of Social Services, Boston, MA; Bragg. L. 

(1998). Domestic violence protocol for child protective services intervention. Charlotte, NC: Mecklenburg County Department of Social Services. 

98 Appendix G—Domestic Violence Assessment: Alleged Perpetrator 
APPENDIX H 

Safety Plans 

Safety Plan—Victim 

I, Jane Smith, can do the following to pursue safety prior to and during a violent incident: 

1. 	 I can have my purse and car keys ready and place them in a closet near an exit door so that I can 

leave quickly. 

2. I can tell my neighbors about the violence and ask that they call the police if they hear yelling, 

screaming, or loud noises coming from my house. 

3. 	I can teach my children how to use the telephone to call 911 and provide our address and phone 

number. 

4. I will use “TIME” as the code word with my children, relatives, and friends so they can call for 

help. 

5. If I have to leave my home, I will go to the shelter for battered women or my friend’s home. 

6. When I expect we are going to have an argument, I will try to move to a space that is lowest risk 

such as the foyer or back hall where the doors are located. 

7. I will tell my children to go to their room or to my neighbor’s home. 	I will tell them NOT to 

intervene when we are arguing or if a violent incident occurs. 

Safety Plan—Child 

1. When my mom and I are not safe, I will not try to stop the fighting. 	I will go to my room or to 

my next-door neighbor’s home. 

2. If I call the police for help, I will dial 911 and tell them: 

• My name is Jack Smith. 

• I need help. 

• Send the police. 

• Someone is hurting my mom. 

3. My address is 5011 Crooked Oak Lane. 	I will remember not to hang up until 

the police get there. 

4. A code word for “help” or “I’m scared” is ___________. 

5. I will practice this with my mom every night. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 99 
APPENDIX I 

Developing a
 

Memorandum of
 

Understanding
 

During the past decade, traditional interventions designed to address family violence have provided 

marginal assistance to victims and maltreated children. Although domestic violence and child 

welfare professionals frequently serve the same families, they have historically operated in isolation from 

one another. Consequently, this “disconnect” between these two professions has produced negative 

outcomes for the actual victims that they attempt to serve. Recently, a number of communities have 

developed new strategies to address this disconnect and joined together to integrate domestic violence and 

child welfare services to best meet the needs of victims and maltreated children. One of these strategies is 

a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). 

What is an MOU? What is actually included in an MOU? 

It is a written agreement that serves to clarify 

relationships and responsibilities between two or 

more organizations that share services, clients, and 

resources. 

Why is it important to have an MOU? 

The purpose of an MOU is to strengthen 

partnerships between two or more organizations 

that seek solutions to mutual problems. The 

overall goal is to develop partnerships between all 

of the parties as they work more closely together 

and benefit from the interchange of ideas and 

practices. Communities with MOUs report that 

the strengthened partnerships result in enhanced 

services for adult victims and children affected by 

family violence. 

Generally, MOUs can include a variety of different 

issues and topics. Input from each partnering 

agency enhances the overall process of creating a 

jointly crafted MOU. Each MOU can range from 

one to several pages in length, with an allowance 

for signatures that represent the commitment from 

all involved leaders. MOU content areas may 

include: 

• Agency role clarification 

• Cross-agency referrals 

• Assessment protocols 

• Confidentiality parameters 

• Case management intervention 

• Interagency training of staff 

• Agency liaison/coordination 

• Interagency conflicts resolution management 

• Periodic review of the MOU. 

Child Protection in Families Experiencing Domestic Violence 101 
How do we know our community them understand each other’s language and history 

is ready to develop an MOU? and provide a context in which to view each other’s 

Communities that are concerned about reducing the 

growing incidence of domestic violence and child 

abuse and neglect are excellent candidates for creating 

an MOU. Communities with a history of 

collaboration will have a foundation with which to 

build. It is important to note, however, that in those 

communities that experience strained relationships, 

the MOU writing process provides an opportunity to 

address misperceptions and differences and to work 

together to resolve service delivery gaps. 

What strategies should we undertake 

as we begin the MOU process? 

philosophy and mission. Another area of tension 

involves confidentiality and the various implications 

for each agency. Additional problematic issues may 

include assessment decisions, levels of intervention, 

and out-of-home placement for children whose 

battered mother is not the maltreator. The MOU 

process provides an opportunity to address these 

critical issues to best meet the needs of the mothers 

and children. 

How does the MOU actually 

help families and children? 

Families affected by domestic violence and child 

Depending on pre-existing relationships within 

communities, one strategy may include inviting key 

supporters to meetings to explore the feasibility of 

MOU development. Communities report that once 

they have the commitment and investment from the 

leaders of the domestic violence and child welfare 

agencies, the MOU process quickly crystallizes and 

results in a written MOU. An additional strategy may 

include inviting an outside consultant to facilitate a 

mutual partnership that leads to the development of 

an MOU. 

What are the potential problems 

that arise during the MOU process? 

Problems may arise concerning misperceptions about 

each other’s goals, missions, and philosophy. 

Domestic violence and child welfare agency 

professionals report that the MOU meetings help 

maltreatment report that they are reluctant to request 

assistance, are required to participate in services that 

do not address the underlying issues, and frequently 

feel misunderstood by professionals. Communities 

with existing MOUs have found that children who 

are exposed to domestic violence were less likely to be 

placed in out-of-home settings and that families were 

more motivated to work with professionals to reduce 

their risk of future family violence. Families served in 

communities where MOUs have been established 

report a higher level of satisfaction in working with 

professionals. One mother commented: “Before, 

when I called, no one seemed to understand, and, 

now, I finally feel as though someone is really listening 

to what I have to say.” 

For an example of a current Memorandum of Understanding used by the partner agencies of the Domestic 

Violence Enhanced Response Team in Colorado, visit: 

http://www.dvert.org/overview/Downloads/Memorandum%20of%20Understanding%202002.rtf. 

102 Appendix I—Developing a Memorandum of Understanding