Table 2.
Articles reviewed.
| Study number |
Author (Year of publication) Title |
Location | Study objective | Sample Age (in years) |
Recruitment | Data collection |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Bemiller (2008) When battered mothers lose custody: A qualitative study of abuse at home and in the courts. |
USA | Women’s experiences of DFV and institutional violence. | Female (n = 16) 27–48 |
Flyers, court record searches and snowball sampling | Semi-structured interviews. |
| 2 | Coy et al. (2015) 'It’s like going through the abuse again’: Domestic violence and women and children’s (un)safety in private law contact proceedings |
UK | Women’s experiences of DFV and judicial decision making. | Female (n = 34) Age unreported |
Advertisements distributed via women’s specialist organisations and networks | Interviews |
| 3 | Douglas (2018a) Domestic and family violence, mental health and well-being, and legal engagement |
AUS | Women’s experiences of DFV, mental health and legal processes. | Female (n = 65) 23–68 |
Via DFV support workers or lawyers | Narrative interviews at three time points over 2.5 years. |
| (3.1) | Douglas (2018b) Legal systems abuse and coercive control |
As above | ||||
| 4 | Elizabeth (2019) 'It’s an invisible wound’: the disenfranchised grief of post-separation mothers who lose care time |
NZ | Mothers’ involuntary loss of care and shared-care parenting. | Female (n = 12) 30s–60s |
Advertisements through women’s centres and networks. | Semi-structured interviews. |
| (4.1) | Elizabeth (2020) The affective burden of separated mothers in PA(S) inflected custody law systems: a New Zealand case study |
As above | ||||
| 5 | Elizabeth et al. (2012b) The gendered dynamics of power in disputes over the postseparation care of children |
NZ | Women’s experiences of DFV and custody proceedings. | Femalea (n = 21) 20s–50s |
Newspaper advertising and snowball sampling. | Semi-structured interviews. |
| (5.1) | Elizabeth et al. (2010) Between a rock and a hard place: Resident mothers and the moral dilemmas they face during custody disputes |
As above | ||||
| (5.2) | Elizabeth et al. (2011) Gendered dynamics in family court counselling |
As above | ||||
| (5.3) | Elizabeth et al. (2012a) ‘…He’s just swapped his fists for the system’ the governance of gender through custody law |
As above | ||||
| (5.4) | Tolmie et al. (2010a) Imposing gender neutral standards on a gendered world: Parenting arrangements in family law post-separation |
As above | ||||
| (5.5) | Tolmie et al. (2010b) Is 50-50 shared card a desirable norm following family separation? Raising questions about current family law practices in New Zealand |
As above | ||||
| (5.6) | Tolmie et al. (2009) Raising questions about the importance of father contact withing current family law practices |
As above | ||||
| 6 | Elizabeth (2015) From domestic violence to coercive control: Toward the recognition of oppressive intimacy in the family court |
NZ | Women’s experiences of DFV and custody proceedings. | Female (n = 1) Age unreported |
Case study reconstructed from a range of interviews | |
| 7 | Elizabeth (2017) Custody stalking: A mechanism of coercively controlling mothers following separation |
NZ | Women’s experiences of post-separation, DFV and custody stalking | Female (n = 12) 30s–60s |
Advertisements in women’s local centres and snowball sampling. | Semi-structured interviews. |
| 8 | Fitch and Easteal (2018) Vexatious litigation in family law and coercive control: Ways to improve legal remedies and better protect the victims. |
AUS | Vexatious litigation and its similarities to coercive control. | Female (n = 1) Age unreported |
Participant contacted the researchers and asked to participate. | Unreported |
| 9 | Francia et al. (2020) Mothering – a mode of protecting rather than parenting in the aftermath of post separation family violence in AUS |
AUS | Women’s experiences of DFV, post separation violence and custody proceedings. | Female (n = 36) 34–71 |
Invitations via local law firms, national and state organisations, radio interviews, newspaper articles, social networks. | Semi-structured interviews. |
| (9.1) | Francia et al. (2019) Addressing family violence post separation – mothers and fathers’ experiences from AUS |
As above | ||||
| 10 | Gutowski and Goodman (2020) 'Like I'm invisible’: IPV survivor-mothers’ perceptions of seeking child custody through the family court system |
USA | Women’s experiences o DFV and custody proceedings. | Female (n = 19) 34–67 |
Snowball sampling via professional networks, DV support groups and newsletters. | Structured interviews and legal outcomes questionnaire |
| 11 | Hardesty and Ganong (2006) How women make custody decisions and manage co-parenting with abusive former husbands |
USA | Women’s experiences of DFV, post separation and custody proceedings. | Female (n = 19) 21–44 |
Identified through court-mandated education programmes for divorcing parents. | Unstructured interviews. |
| 12 | Harrison (2008) Implacable hostile or appropriately protective? |
UK | Women’s experiences of DFV, custody proceeding and post-court abuse | Female (n = 70) 16–45 |
Recruited from six contact centres | Semi-structured interviews. |
| 13 | Kaye et al. (2003a) Domestic violence and child contact arrangements |
AUS | Women’s experiences of DFV and negotiating custody proceedings. | Female (n = 40) Age unreported |
Recruited via women’s refuges, health centres, and family court. | Semi-structured interviews. |
| (13.1) | Kaye et al. (2003b) Domestic violence, separation and parenting: Negotiating safety using legal processes |
As above | ||||
| 14 | Khaw et al. (2021) 'The system had choked me too’: Abused mothers’ perceptions of the custody determination process that resulted in negative custody outcomes |
USA | Women’s experiences of DFV with negative court outcomes. | Female (n = 24) 23–48 |
Recruited through legal services and supervised visitation programmes. | Secondary analysis of semi-structured interviews. |
| 15 | Laing (2017) Secondary victimization: Domestic violence survivors navigating the family law system |
AUS | Women’s experiences of DFV and the family law system. | Female (n = 22) 24–54 |
Flyers distributed DV services in Sydney. | Semi-structured interviews. |
| 16 | Macdonald (2016) Domestic violence and private family court proceedings: Promoting child welfare or promoting contact? |
UK | Examines welfare reports of DFV, child welfare and family court. | Families (n = 70) Age not reported |
Reports sampled over 9-month time period from two teams with predetermined criteria. | Document analysis of 70 family welfare reports for the family court. |
| 17 | McInnes (2014) Madness in family law: Mothers’ mental health in the AUS family law system |
AUS | Women’s experience of DFV, mental health and child contact. | (n = 4) Age not reported |
Published family court judgments were generated; of this, four cases were selected. | Published judgements. |
| 18 | Miller and Smolter (2011) 'Paper abuse’: When all else fails, batterers use procedural stalking |
USA | Women’s experiences of systems abuse. | Female (n = 10) Age not reported |
Data collected through Women’s Resiliency Project (2009–2011) | Semi-structured interviews. |
| 19 | Rathus et al. (2019) 'It’s like standing on a beach, holding your children’s hands, and having a tsunami just coming towards you’: Intimate partner violence and 'expert’ assessments in Australian family law |
AUS | Women’s experiences of DFV and family court reporting. | Female (n = 10) 28–46 |
Recruited via Women’s Legal Service QLD, IPV organisations, and legal service providers. | Interviews. |
| 20 | Rivera et al. (2012a) Secondary victimisation of abused mothers by family court mediators |
USA | Women’s experiences of DFV and mediation. | Female (n = 19) 23–52 |
Cases located through dockets that indicated IPV might be present. | Semi-structured interviews and secondary victimisation scale. |
| (20.1) | Rivera et al. (2012b) Abused mothers’ safety concerns and court mediators’ custody recommendation |
As above | ||||
| (20.2) | Zeoli et al., (2013) Post-separation abuse of women and their children: Boundary-setting and family court utilization among victimized mothers |
As above | ||||
| 21 | Roberts et al., (2015) Women’s experiences of the processes associated with the family court of AUS in the context of domestic violence: A thematic analysis |
AUS | Women’s experiences of DFV and the psychological impact of the family court. | Female (n = 15) 25–56 |
DV service providers, electronic mailing lists and Justice for Children AUS. | Semi-structured interviews and questionnaire. |
| 22 | Shepard and Hagemeister (2013) Perspectives of rural women: Custody and visitation with abusive ex-partners |
USA | Rural women’s experiences, DFV and custody and visitation. | Female (n = 23) 20–48 |
Advocates of six different domestic violence programmes in towns with populations ranging from 1000 to 14,000 based on 2000 census data. | Focus groups and Use of Children Scale. |
| 23 | Silverman et al. (2004) Child custody determinations in cases involving intimate partner violence: A human rights analysis |
USA | Women’s experiences of DFV and the family court. | Female (n = 39) 24–58 |
Snowball sampling via social service agencies and legal providers for battered women. | Semi-structured interviews surveys and focus groups. |
| (23.1) | Slote et al. (2005) Battered mothers speak out – Participatory human rights documentation as a model for research and activism in the United States |
As above | ||||
| 24 | Varcoe and Irwin (2004) 'If I killed you, I'd get the kids’: Women’s survival and protection work with child custody and access in the context of women’s abuse |
CAN | Women’s experiences of DFV and custody requirements. | Female (n = 27) 21–63 |
Word of mouth, flyers, referrals to target women and open house events. | Interviews and focus groups. Documentary evidence provided. |
| 25 | Watson and Ancis (2013) Power and control in the legal system: From marriage/relationship to divorce and custody |
USA | Women’s experiences of DFV and custody proceedings. | Female (n = 27) 28 and 59 |
Snowball sampling via internet, flyers, personal contacts, a divorce-related listserv/legal website. | Semi-structured interviews. |
Note: DFV = domestic and family violence; AUS = Australia; CAN = Canada; NZ = New Zealand; UK = United Kingdom; USA = United States of America; QLD = Queensland; IPV = Intimate Partner Violence. Articles with multiple papers containing the same sample have been included and bracketed in the ‘study number’ for reference. Only findings relevant to those experiencing DFV were included. Where an article included those who had and had not experienced DFV only findings relevant to those experiencing DFV were included.
aArticle included participants who had and had not experienced DFV.