Cover Letter

                This essay is for anyone who is passionate about justice for children and women in the family court system who believes in reform. This essay should be able to persuade you using emotions and factual evidence to show that this is a pressing crisis that needs more attention from lawmakers. The main strengths of this essay are using real life case scenarios that have occurred in family court causing harm to children and protective parents who try to help them. This piece touches on issues with custody battles when an abusive parent is involved and how the court system exacerbates this issue. You will learn that often family court is complicit in putting children in harm and even causing fatalities that are avoidable. After reading this essay you will realize how the family court system is used as a weapon by abusive parents to further abuse children and protective parents who try to get justice and some of the ways we can make changes to fix it.

02/19/2025                                                                                                                                                     Krista Kurt

ENG 201 04

 

Persuasive Essay: Speak Out for Justice

Hundreds of children have been killed due to the failures of the Family Court in the United States. The Family Court is the only court that has no oversight board to make sure ethics are being followed. There have been several whistleblowers within the Family Court who have come forward regarding egregious corruption, especially regarding cases involving domestic violence and child abuse. Too many times, women and children alike have come forward to testify that they were in danger and a misogynistic Family Court judge made a poor judgement in their case that caused irreparable damage or worse- was fatal.

The Family Court is also the only court that doesn’t appoint you an attorney if you cannot afford one unlike criminal or traffic court. Retainers for family court lawyers start at $2,000-$4,000 so if you are low on funds, you may be out of luck in fighting for child custody or protection for your child against the other parent. Another fault is many times when a protective parent reports abuse, they are the one who instead becomes ostracized from their child and is accused of being “hysterical” or “mentally unstable” for bringing the accusations to the court in the first place. According to USA Today, over 940 kids have been killed during custody battles. A lot of people within the family court are not knowledgeable about narcissistic abuse and the dangerous patterns this personality disorder presents in custody battles. Many lawyers are well versed and experienced in dealing with high conflict custody cases and divorces involving narcissistic parents, but the judges are nowhere near up to speed.

I have a friend who many years ago when her sons were under the age of twelve, (which is the legal age a child can testify on their own behalf in court), her abusive ex-husband had convinced the courts she was mentally unstable and took full custody of her kids. He ended up grooming and sexually assaulting both children multiple times orally and anally for years. A medical examiner found anal fissures in the boys and a forensic psychologist evaluated them for very abnormal hypersexual behaviors that concluded they were in fact being sexually abused by their father. Child services, the forensic psychologist and the medical examiner all provided detailed reports with sufficient evidence to show that the children were sexually abused but the judge still ruled in favor of the father keeping custody. It wasn’t until the boys were old enough to testify for themselves that the judge finally removed them from the abusive father’s custody and placed them back with their mother. They are now in her full custody and are both teenagers, however the irreparable damage that has been caused cannot be undone and these boys will have to deal with this severe trauma for the rest of their lives.

This brings me to the next important element that fails children yearly in the United States which is the incompetence and corruption of the Child Protective Services organization. According to a story done by CBS News on June 14, 2019, hundreds of children in America that were reported to be in potential danger to Child Protective Services die every year from neglect, maltreatment or abuse. In 2017 there was an estimated 1,720 children who reportedly died from abuse or neglect and over 25% of those children’s living situations were reported to Child Protective Services. I also have a friend who was a survivor of sex trafficking and the man who sex trafficked her was hired by ACS in New York City as a caseworker. This is a true story this was in 2023. He no longer holds the position but this is a real life example of the type of people that Child Protective Services hires to be caseworkers involving child abuse and neglect. Imagine a man who abused and sex trafficked women to be the final say on whether a child is in danger or being abused? You don’t have to imagine it because this is the reality. The lack of compassionate and competent case workers and social workers being hired by the agency is something that needs to be investigated more. Hiring guidelines surrounding any field involving children, especially something as sensitive as child abuse, needs to be a lot stricter than what is currently allowed. Not to mention the biases of many case workers such as sexism, racism and ableism that interfere with case workers being objective in their evaluations and assessments of children who are potentially in danger.

There are several measures that can be taken to reduce cases such as these. A major issue is that many people fear reporting family court judges for misconduct to be disbarred due to fear of a poor ruling in their custody case. People will avoid reporting judges because they do not want the judge to retaliate maliciously in their custody hearing. This is due to a lack of oversight of the Family court and its mishandling of so many cases. Most courts and legal institutions in general all have an oversight board that can monitor and hold corruption accountable. Family court basically operates freely without there being any “HR department”, if you will. There is no oversight committee or oversight board separate from the Family court that you can report mistreatment or injustice to. Basically, if you report a judge for misconduct, you are reporting them to the exact family court that they serve at. Meaning it is not a separate unbiased organization responsible for investigating the judges, but it is the Family court itself whom this judge has been serving at for most likely decades and has an overwhelming bias in that court. How can the Family court investigate itself objectively and fairly without nepotism interfering? How can a proper investigation of mishandling custody cases be executed justly and fairly when it is that exact corrupted court doing the investigation? The corrupt court is obviously not going to give the most honest and fair investigation, which ultimately lets this corruption persist and continue to fail hundreds of children across the country.

Another way these cases can be reduced is not only by having an oversight board to hold judges accountable but also to make sure judges are as educated about narcissistic abuse and patterns of abusive behavior as the forensic psychologists or medical examiners are. There needs to be more awareness in the family courts of coercive control, tactics that narcissistic abusers use in custody cases to further abuse the children and the other parent and having better insight into the patterns of narcissistic personalities so judges can have better discernment in these high conflict cases. Judges try to be impartial and make sure both parents are getting equal rights to their children. However, in cases where there is child abuse, or the child is in imminent harm, the rights of the parents need to be the last concern. The safety of the child and what is best for the child should always supersede parental rights. Many narcissistic abusers will weaponize their 50/50 custodial rights to continue to abuse the children. They manipulate judges with the argument of “fairness” and as a “parent” having equal access to the children also by manipulating the judge that they are the more “mentally stable” parent. This tends to work considering the parent who is a victim of the abuse is experiencing PTSD or symptoms of trauma and may very well appear less stable or emotionally well compared to the cool collected charming narcissist. However, with more knowledge into the ways abusers use the Family court to maintain control over the children, judges, social workers and forensic psychologists can work together to make sure the safety of the child/children is being prioritized over the parents’ rights to their children. Children are not property; they are vulnerable human beings who lack rights over their own autonomy in custody battles where they aren’t even legally able to testify on their own behalf until twelve years old. Under twelve they are considered the property of the parents and parental rights become more prioritized than the child’s right to safety and autonomy. If we reduce the importance of parental rights and focus more on the potential signs of abuse/ harm, coercive controlling behaviors and domestic violence, then abusive parents will be less likely to weaponize their parental rights in family court. There are many ways we can improve the family court so abusers cannot continue to use the system to harm children. With all of this being said, there is a silent crisis occurring in custody hearings in the United States that requires lawmakers’ immediate attention towards reform. The safety, lives and well-being of too many children depends on it.

 

 

          Critical Analysis Essay: Kill Bill Vol. 1 & 2

 

Krista Kurt

CUNY, John Jay College of Criminal Justice

ENG 201-04

Professor Lyndon Nicholas

Due: 03/23/2024

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

           

Cover Letter

In this essay I will be giving my critical analysis of the films “Kill Bill Vol. 1 & 2” by Quentin Tarantino using a feminist and psychological lens. I will touch on themes of chauvinistic cultural norms, hetero relationship norms being almost identical to “pimp culture”, how women are objectified as commodities under patriarchy, and or triangulated and pit against each other being used as pawns by men. I will touch on the psychological toll domestic violence and narcissistic/psychopathic abuse takes on survivors, how in many cases attempting to leave an abusive relationship can become fatal, how children become involved/ harmed by a high conflict divorce or the separation of their parents, how child custody can be weaponized by abusers and how this is all a misogynistic system designed specifically to keep women controlled, in fear and subordinate to men. After reading this essay you will see how the protagonist of the film metaphorically represents many women who are survivors of narcissistic abuse, domestic violence, high conflict divorces/custody battles and or human/sex trafficking. You will also see how the film shows the domino effect of children being dangled like carrots for leverage or attachment by abusive men and become objectified, sometimes even harmed, when women try to end the relationship. This essay also shows the rampant culture of misogyny, chauvinism, male supremacy and patriarchy that is fundamentally identical to “pimp culture”, and how many hetero relationships between men and women tend to have an unequal power dynamic where the woman is assumed to be property of her man and a subordinate; where she has to “get down or lay down”, which essentially translates to- ‘do what I want you to do, or die’.

 

 

 

Using a Feminist and Psychological Lens to Analyze How Kill Bill Vol 1 & 2 Represents the Way Abuse Psychologically Changes Survivors of Domestic Violence While Empowering Women Fighting Against Domestic Violence and High Conflict Custody Battles Involving Narcissistic Abuse in The Justice System and Family Court:

                 “Wiggle your big toe” – Uma Thurman’s character ‘Black Mamba’ in Kill Bill Vol. 1

In the film “Kill Bill Vol. 1 & 2” directed by Quentin Tarantino, Uma Thurman plays Beatrix Kiddo, a woman who attempted to escape a psychopathic abuser, Bill, while pregnant with his child. The movie begins as a scene in a small chapel in the middle of nowhere in a mid-western dessert where Beatrix was marrying a different man, the scene showing her pregnant belly in the wedding dress. It seems quiet enough, safe enough that maybe she has finally escaped and can happily move on, but we know escaping a psychopath or narcissist is never that simple and, in many cases, fatal. Homicide is one of the leading causes of death for young women and about 90% of cases are committed by their spouse/romantic partners. Women who are pregnant or have given birth are more likely to die from intimate partner violence and most commonly by firearms (cdc.gov, Petrosky, Blair, Betz, Fowler, Jack, Lyons, 2017, 66(28); 741-746). This grim real-life statistic is identically depicted in the first scene of the film showing the protagonist, Beatrix (Uma Thurman), as a pregnant woman in her third trimester ready to give birth who is shot in the head by her abuser for trying to leave the relationship.

 

 

 

 

When a woman attempts to leave an abusive relationship her chances of being killed dramatically increase, in fact the chances increase by 75% within the first two years of separation (jbws.org, 2022), making the first 18 months after ending an abusive relationship the most dangerous. Leaving the relationship is the most common and likely time a woman will be killed by her abuser. This is the main reason many women fear leaving their abusive relationships and feel they can’t escape abusers who use violence as coercive control tactics, which is what keeps these women in bondage.

Also, many abusers attempt to use pregnancy to trap their victims which could have very well been the case for Beatrix’s character in the movie. Perhaps Beatrix always wanted to escape Bill, and he impregnated her under the impression she would be trapped, and the child can be used as a weapon against Beatrix to further abuse and control her- which is what many women experience in high conflict divorces and custody battles against their abusive partners (cdc.gov, Petrosky, 2017). In many cases abusive men target the children and use them as weapons against women to maintain control and wreak havoc in their life. When an abuser loses control of the woman, for example when the woman ends the relationship, he tends to target the children instead to continue the abuse through the children – since that is the only way he can have any control over her.

 

 

 

 

 

While getting married, Bill shows up to Beatrix wedding with a few other women and his brother, which could metaphorically represent the abuser/narcissist’s family of enablers, ‘flying monkey’s’ that he recruits do his bidding and the women he has affairs with that he uses to triangulate against his victim, (Beatrix), to help him further abuse her. They kill everyone at the wedding in a massacre and Bill shoots Beatrix in the head while the “other women”, and Bill’s brother, stand over her lifeless body with faces of contempt. This scene reflects how abusers will involve their family members to assist with abusing the victim, and how abusers tend to also manipulate other women that they cheat/have affairs with to attack and further abuse their victims. They pin women against each other and turn the women that they cheat with into their ‘flying monkey’s’, (think Wizard of Oz), and alliances. Many survivors of narcissistic/ psychopathic abuse and domestic violence can relate to being further gaslit and abused by their abuser’s family members, and or other women that their abuser is having affairs with. In many cases family members and other romantic interests of the narcissist/psychopath will defend the narcissist’s/psychopath’s behavior and blame the victim for being abused. These toxic family members can also be used as witnesses in courts to lie on behalf of abusers and defend abusers from facing legal accountability for their violent actions, and in many cases even help abusers get full custody of the children.

 

 

 

 

 

After Beatrix was shot in the head by Bill, she survived but was in a 5-year coma. She woke up with a flat stomach to realize her baby was gone. She didn’t know whether she lost the baby or if Bill had taken the child from her, but she was full of rage and seeking revenge, like most survivors of abuse who suffer with CPTSD/PTSD. She wanted revenge on all of Bill’s “side chicks” and his brother for attempting to kill her, and not only because they attempted to kill her, but also because they were all an accomplice in losing her child. When Beatrix wakes up, she realizes the hospital employee, Buck, was making money off her by letting men have sex with her in the coma. She then starts getting flashbacks of Buck raping her while in the coma saying, “My name is Buck, and I like to fuck”, (Quentin Tarantino, 2003). The entire movie shows subliminal undertones, (really overtones if you’re paying attention but this is not always obvious to everyone that watches the film; perhaps some of these themes may go over a few heads), of toxic masculinity and the culture of patriarchy that glorifies women being tools used by men, the impact of misogyny on women and the depths of “pimp culture”, (treating women as commodities and possessions vs human beings with autonomy), in our society. Bill is a man who has a team of many women willing to “work for him”, however they are not prostitutes but assassins highly trained in combat and martial arts. This could be symbolism for a trafficking ring and the dangers of escaping a sex trafficking ring, or it could simply be a hyperbole representation of “the fighting”, (maybe figurately and or literally), that survivors of narcissistic abuse and domestic violence must partake in when ending an abusive relationship/ marriage.

 

 

 

The fighting in the film could represent metaphorically the obstacles women are faced with and the tribulations they are up against, whether it’s the abuser’s family, friends and or girlfriends, they can even represent the family court and the narcissist’s lawyers and the judge who sides with the abuser just off misogyny alone. Or it could potentially represent Bill as a head of a trafficking ring and the other women could be “working girls”, or other prostitutes in the ring who work for Bill, (since they are shown in the movie somewhat as a parody of Charlie’s Angels, where Bill is their boss, they all work for Bill), but there also seems to be romantic and sexual undertones as well between the women and Bill. Perhaps Bill is a ‘Romeo pimp’, a seducer, ‘a Mack’, and he is skilled in manipulating many women into being obedient to him while also fostering an emotional connection, or dependency in the women who “work for him”, (who he is clearly also having sex with…).

Beatrix in this scene pretends to still be asleep when Buck sends a “john”, (a man who pays for sex), into the room to get his rocks off on her lifeless body. The man gets on top of Beatrix, strokes her face and says, “Wow pretty like an angel” (Quentin Tarantino, 2003), Beatrix then bites his tongue out of his mouth causing him to start bleeding out and he then becomes hysterical, bleeding out uncontrollably until he eventually dies. Beatrix, unable to move her legs due to muscle dystrophy from being in the coma so long, (she tells herself to wiggle her big toe to make her regain feeling in her legs and feet), somehow she gets on the floor waiting for Buck to return with a knife she took out of the dead man’s pocket in her hand ready to defend herself.

 

 

Buck comes back into the room unsuspecting, and Beatrix slices his ankle with the knife, causing Buck to fall onto the floor. She repeatedly slams his head into the wall shouting, “Where is Bill?”, (Quentin Tarantino, 2003) which Buck, who is just a sleezy hospital employee, pleads with Beatrix that he does not know Bill or who she is talking about. She kills Buck then steals his car keys and hospital scrubs to disguise herself and escape the hospital without being detected. She then makes it to his car, somehow crawling all the way to the parking lot to Buck’s car from the hospital room, which she finds out to no surprise is called “The Pussy Wagon”. This scene shows the resilience of domestic violence survivors and how strong they must be to fight against the narcissistic/psychopathic abuse they’re enduring. It also shows how PTSD and CPTSD can cause heightened paranoia, (which is hypervigilance), which can put survivors in a mental state where they start to believe that everyone they encounter is involved with or connected to their abuser. For example, Beatrix screaming for the hospital employee, Buck, to tell her where Bill is when he most likely has no idea who Bill is, but after realizing she was being raped by him while in the coma, her fight or flight response caused her to react violently assuming he was also involved with Bill, without a second thought. Nope, he wasn’t one of Bill’s accomplices just another man who happens to also be an abuser, and under patriarchy, misogyny and chauvinism a large majority of men are more inclined to treat women as if they are disposable objects or less than human. Necrophilia is a real problem where men sexually assault women’s corpses and Buck profiting off Beatrix being sexually assaulted while in a coma shows how women are treated as commodities for sex in our society.

 

 

 

 

So, although he too abused Beatrix, he was not affiliated with her abuser, which also shows how prevalent abuse, degradation, and dehumanization towards women occurs in our society and how it is almost seen as “the norm”; sometimes even praised and encouraged. CPTSD/PTSD from psychopathic/narcissistic abuse causes survivors to become hypervigilant, paranoid and distrusting of everyone, irrationally believing that everyone is also a flying monkey helping their abuser, even if that’s realistically not the case. It also shows that survivors of domestic violence tend to be revenge seeking, become more violent and aggressive partaking in reactive abuse (fight or flight response), and start having homicidal ideation and fantasies of killing their abusers. This movie provides that satisfying fantasy to survivors of abuse who can relate to having homicidal thoughts towards their abuser. This can even be empowering, healing and give survivors of domestic violence feelings of “justice being served”.

After Beatrix escapes, she goes to one of Bill’s “working girls”, or “side chick’s” house, Vernita Green, who is played by Vivica A. Fox, to kill her. During this scene we see Vernita copping pleas in her nice suburban home begging for Beatrix not to kill her because “she is a mom now and has changed since then”- ‘since then’ being when she came to Beatrix’s wedding to help Bill kill everyone including her. Beatrix then explains how, due to her and Bill’s murdering spree at her wedding five years ago, she has not only been in a coma for the last five years due to being shot in her head, but she also had lost her child. Which makes Vernita realize

 

 

 

that Beatrix has no empathy for her, and in fact telling Beatrix that “she is a mother” will only enrage her more, triggering Beatrix’s PTSD into fight mode.

This scene, again, shows how PTSD/CPTSD causes issues with rage, hostility, aggressive behavior and thoughts of seeking revenge in survivors of domestic violence and narcissistic/psychopathic abuse. After killing Vernita Green in front of her child with no remorse, Beatrix then goes to visit Bill’s mentor and business acquaintance to find out more information on where Bill may be located, and he happens to be an old and well-respected pimp. The scene makes this known by him flat out saying and showing he has prostitutes and is in the business of sex trafficking women, which is even further depicted in the scene by showing one of his scantily clad “working girls” with a nasty scar vertically cut through her entire mouth. He starts boasting and showing off the scars that he inflicted on his “property”, (the girls), as punishment for their disobedience, another display of our culture of misogyny and how patriarchy combined with capitalism breeds an environment of “pimp culture”. This toxic masculine behavior and violence towards women is almost second nature in our society due to the severe generational social conditioning of seeing women as inferior to men, as if that is just a “biological fact that everyone must accept”. The everlasting resistance to feminism in our society, which is simply equality for women and a movement for basic human rights, also shows us that a large majority of society is deeply conditioned by misogynistic ideologies.

 

 

 

 

In this scene, the violence Bill’s ‘professor pimp’ uses against his women when “they don’t listen”, shows us the ideologies and belief systems about women that were instilled in Bill by this mentor. It also shows us the company Bill keeps are pimps and abusers, possibly hinting at Bill overseeing his own trafficking ring, (or assassin ring as displayed in the movie, either way he has a bunch of women working for him). This also shows us the glorification of misogyny, pimp culture, how pimps and abusers are praised, and victims/survivors are devalued and discarded. It also shows us that violence against women is normalized and even systematic, and many of these abusive narcissistic/psychopathic men are in positions of power with money and resources, who stick together ultimately to uphold patriarchy since it allows men to continue to disproportionately abuse and exploit women.

Throughout the movie of both Vol. 1 & 2, Beatrix goes on a mission fighting against Bill’s brother and all of Bill’s multiple women around the world, which shows us that misogyny and patriarchy are global issues that occur on a large scale. Again, these women could potentially be metaphors for his ‘working girls’, maybe Bill’s character is a metaphor for a pimp, but they can also simply be women metaphorically representing his affairs and “side pieces”, since many abusers partake in infidelity. She kills all of them but doesn’t stop until she finds out exactly where Bill is, because that is who she wants to seek revenge against more than anyone.

 

 

 

 

 

Again, many women in high conflict divorces, custody battles or women who are escaping abusive relationships with narcissists/psychopaths, find their selves fighting against their abuser’s enabling family members and the women that he was having affairs with. A man having multiple women is praised in our patriarchal society and it’s almost expected as a “normal” part of heterosexual relationships/marriages. Women are expected to tolerate infidelity, yet women are also expected to never partake in it.

In the final scene, Beatrix finally gets to Bill’s house and sees her 5-year-old daughter, who of course Bill knew would lead Beatrix back to him. Bill used their child as a weapon to keep an attachment between him and Beatrix, and this scene represents how many abusers will use the children as coercive control weapons to hoover and love bomb their victims, or to keep them in bondage/ break the woman into submission. Beatrix, however, kills Bill, (hence the title of the movie), and rides off into the sunset with her daughter. This emotional and relieving scene shows us that after all the abuse, after fighting with Bill’s family and his many love affairs, and fighting hard to get her daughter back out of his clutches, to be rid of her abuser once and for all, Beatrix gets “justice”, in her way, (in the way many survivors of narcissistic/psychopathic abuse wish they could). This powerful ending gives women who are dealing with these situations the inspiration to keep fighting. It can empower survivors to be resilient and overcome their trauma, showing the protagonist of the movie, Beatrix (Uma Thurman), in a role of strength rather than as vulnerable and weak, (which is how most victims of violence are portrayed).

 

 

 

This film can validate the complex feelings of rage and the homicidal ideations that many abuse survivors suffer with due to CPTSD/PTSD. It can also validate many women’s experiences living under a patriarchal society of misogyny and the way violence by men against women disproportionately affects women in society. This film also shows that even after all the trauma, fighting and suffering that Beatrix had endured, she was still able to have her ‘happy ending’ and get justice against her abuser in the end, which I believe overall is a powerful and meaningful message for many women who watch this film.

           

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

 

Petrosky E, Blair JM, Betz CJ, Fowler KA, Jack SP, Lyons BH. Racial and Ethnic Differences in Homicides of Adult Women and the Role of Intimate Partner Violence — United States, 2003–2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2017;66:741–746. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6628a1

 

Jbws.org, Jersey Battered Women’s Services, First 18 Months After Leaving An Abusive Partner Are The Most Dangerous, article on Sania Khan, United States, 2022

The First 18 Months After Leaving An Abusive Partner Are The Most Dangerous

 

 

Final Paper

How Do Writing Disciplines in The Field of Forensic Psychology Effect Outcomes in Family Court?

 

Krista Kurt

CUNY, John Jay College of Criminal Justice

ENG 201

Professor Lyndon Nicholas

04/19/2025

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cover Letter

 

This research paper explores the writing disciplines used by forensic psychologists in legal proceedings and the power dynamics involved that disproportionately affect women and marginalized communities in high conflict custodial battles and family court hearings. The research shows us that cultural biases play a key role in who is believed to have access to children or who is worthy of having custodial rights. The lack of diversity and inclusion in the field of forensic psychology, and in the field of psychology overall, has had major consequences on family court outcomes that have been disadvantageous for children of color or children in queer family systems. Negative views and perceptions towards those who live in poverty, or of the “incompetence” of single mothers, can contribute certain biases being held by certain demographics and how those biases shape the way social workers, forensic psychologists and family court judges participate in child placement. After reading this paper you will understand how these cultural biases influence the writing disciplines used in high conflict family court cases such as psychiatric and psychological evaluations, child protective services assessments and even law enforcement reports. You will likely come to the same conclusion that I did, which is the solution to this issue is to have a wider range of diversity and inclusion in the field of psychology. More representation in custodial rights equates to more understanding of the varying nuances of families that may be outside cultural norms or those families who due to class, race or gender lack a voice in the power structure of our society.

 

 

 

 

The Family Court system has been problematic for many children who are faced with parents that are divorcing or fighting for custody agreements and visitation time. Prior to the laws passed for women after the Civil Rights movement, children were automatically considered property of the husband and because of this historically in a divorce men would get full custody of the children. Supposedly this is now seen as an “issue of the past”, or furthermore, seen as the “roles being reversed” in our present times where a common societal myth tells us that Family Courts favor the mothers over the fathers in custody disputes. Forensic psychologists aren’t always involved in custody disputes or divorces, however, when abuse is involved or it’s a high conflict custody battle, forensic psychologists tend to play an important role in which residence a child resides, or which parent is deemed “safe and stable”. When applicable, forensic psychologists conduct psychiatric and psychological evaluations of the parents and child, or children, involved in high conflict custody disputes. There are many writing disciplines involved in family court cases which forensic psychologists use to come to conclusions regarding a child’s welfare in the legal system aside from psychiatric evaluations such as reports from child protective services and specific protocol that must be used when interviewing children that are potentially in danger of being neglected and/or abused. In this paper we will explore the role forensic psychologists play in high conflict Family Court cases that consist of child abuse, child sexual abuse and/or neglect and the types of legal proceedings regarding the types of writing that forensic psychologists utilize to influence outcomes in custody battles. We will also investigate how biases towards specific demographics from an intersectional lens, whether racial or gender, can also affect the outcome in these cases.

 

 

Cultural considerations are especially important in present parental access matters due to families becoming increasingly diverse with very nuanced differences in lifestyles and values (Harris-Britt, Ajoku. 2025). LGBTQ families are especially susceptible to discrimination regarding parental visitation and custodial rights. In America, depending on your region or geographical location, homophobic or transphobic belief systems can contribute to biases in child services assessments and in family court rulings. Custody disputes and fights for parental rights drastically exacerbate the stress that families already face trying to navigate a new way of life or sense of normalcy after a separation, which the grieving of the family system is quite traumatic not only for the children involved but also for the parents. If abuse was involved this can contribute to the development of PTSD in the parents and/or the children amongst a whole other slew of potential mental health issues. In extreme situations it can lead to suicidal ideations and attempts at suicide or worse, homicide of the children and/or the other parent fighting for custody. This is why narcissistic, or abusive parents can weaponize the Family Court system to further abuse the children and the other parent just through the stress and mental torture that these high conflict custody disputes cause. Even after separation, through the Family Court many abusers can still maintain some level of control and this is why it’s so important for forensic psychologists involved in these cases to be objective but also knowledgeable enough to recognize these complex family dynamics that can be missed by social workers, judges, law enforcement and child protective services.

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately, cultural biases and the ontological and epistemological systems we live under play a role in where social workers, law enforcement, judges and even forensic psychologists decide where a child should be placed or who can or cannot have parental access to their child.

In many cases, since these belief systems are typically religious, patriarchal and or racial in nature, these mental maps of reality that have been formed under these systems do factually determine outcomes in legal or medical writing disciplines, which are supposed to be unbiased and “fair”. In laments terms, depending on the race, gender and/or religious beliefs of the legal professionals, child protective services interviewers and/or the forensic psychologists involved in these cases, it will affect the outcome of their perception of “parental fitness” and whether they determine a child is being abused. There can even be subliminal or unprovoked vitriol and animosity towards a parent by these “trusted professionals” due to racism or sexism, especially in cases that involve children of color who the Family Court system notoriously let’s fall through the cracks with minimal advocation. This leads to a higher risk of neglect, abuse, sexual abuse and even fatalities amongst children of color whose parents are involved in high conflict divorces or custody disputes compared to other demographics.

Forensic psychology experts must perform assessments and psychological examinations of children involved in litigation between parents to decipher the “conflict of loyalty” which is when the child has a particular loyalty to one parent over the other regardless of the circumstances (Savina, Safuanov. 2024).

 

 

 

In many cases children who form loyalty to one parent over the other isn’t because that parent is more “safe” or not abusive, on the contrary this is how the child’s brain protects itself by pleasing the abusive parent in a desperate attempt to minimize being abused. It’s survival. Think about it like this, if you’re a child with no agency who depends on this parent to feed you and are afraid of being abused by them, you as a child learn to avoid getting on that parent’s bad side. Hence, the conflict of loyalty creates a confusing and complex situation that can be difficult for judges and social workers to decipher, which is why forensic psychologists must perform these detailed psychological evaluations and assessments responsibly but also objectively to ensure the child’s safety in these custody disputes. In other words, forensic psychologists cannot mistake this loyalty a child may subconsciously have adapted as a coping or defense mechanism to survive living with the abusive parent as a sign that this child is “content or safe”. Abusive and narcissistic parents can manipulate their child into having a toxic loyalty that causes the child to defend the parent and even lie for them despite being abused, sexually abused or neglected by this parent.

Only 8-10% of high conflict families resolve their issues of raising a child by going to Family court (Safuanov. 2024). Because of how many children end up abused, killed or neglected through poor outcomes in Family court and high conflict custody battles, along with cultural and societal biases that influence the writing disciplines used in such cases, in recent years there has been more judicial protections of the interests of the child. Increasingly, more forensic psychologists are working on creating a more in-depth and thorough analysis and examination of the possible negative impacts that each parent is or isn’t having on the mental development and mental state of the child. We can look at forensic psychologists beginning to try to improve the structure and quality of their forensic interview processes in cases regarding child sexual abuse and child abuse from almost 20 years ago using the NICHD Investigative Interview Protocol (Lamb, Orbach, Hershkowitz, Esplin, Horowitz. 2007). Experts and forensic psychologists in the field have determined that children should be interviewed as soon as possible so to have less interference by their parents and prevent the chances of the abusive parent coaching them into what to tell professionals.

Forensic psychologists are trained by this protocol to introduce as little information as possible using open-ended prompts such as, “Tell me what happened.”, to encourage children to provide as much information as they can without swaying or persuading their responses to ensure a more accurate evaluation. Any questions that insinuate abuse has occurred such as, “Did he touch you”, must be asked as late in the interview as possible and only if needed to elicit forensically relevant information that wasn’t disclosed from the prior answers the child provided. This line of questioning should not even occur if throughout the interview and based on the reports received from parents, from child protective services assessments/reports or from law enforcement, this type of abuse being present was not already initially inferred. This is to avoid a child erroneously being guided into falsely accusing a parent of abuse or neglect- which can be just as dangerous. In many high conflict cases, narcissists and abusers can use false reports to child protective services or lies about the other parent in court to unjustly take away their parental rights and depending on the cultural biases of the judge and social workers involved, without proper evaluation from an expert forensic psychologist, this “legal kidnapping” can occur more often than it should.

 

 

I interviewed a woman regarding her tragic and heartbreaking experience with forensic psychologists in the Family court and how they had a life destroying impact on her and her sons. She wants to remain anonymous and goes by the name “Birdy”. Birdy disclosed to me,

“I took my sons to be evaluated for sexual abuse by their father. The doctors found anal fissures and tears in their rectum. They were evaluated by child protective services for unusual hypersexual behavior such as claiming they wanted ‘hot dogs’ and biting on my ex-husband’s crotch area inappropriately. They found, after psychologically evaluating both of my sons, that their father was referring to his genitals as food, which is what most child predators do. I knew it was more than ‘cute fun words’ that the boys were using and there was something more going on. They were behaving violently and aggressively out of nowhere and I would even catch them trying to perform sexual acts on each other. They are teenagers now, so this is all years ago from when they were toddlers and elementary aged. My ex-husband was wealthy and knew majority of the police officers in our town. It’s a small town in Wisconsin. The forensic psychologist that testified in our custody dispute claimed my sons showed ‘no signs of sexual abuse or abuse’ from their father, which was bullshit. I had reports from doctors, and even the social workers at child protective services. There was so much evidence and due to my ex-husband having money and being connected and well respected in the community, the forensic psychologist and judge allowed my sons to continue to be raped and sexually abused until they were old enough to testify for themselves in court. This went on for years. I’m glad I have my boys back but the damage that has been done cannot be repaired. Between me and my sons our mental health has been shattered indefinitely.”

           

 

The prevalence of child sexual abuse disclosure in forensic settings, such as psychological interviews and assessments involved in high conflict custody cases conducted by forensic psychologists, was 64.1% (Azzopardi, Eirich, Rash, MacDonald, Madigan. 2019). Global and international child sexual abuse (CSA) remains high at nearly 12%. That number is not including the fact that majority of cases are not reported, especially where the victims are children of color or disabled children who cannot speak or advocate for themselves. Most cases of sexual abuse in general are grossly underreported and more so in minority communities and the disabled population. Marginalized communities receive less resources and assistance from law enforcement or other legal mediums and because of this, often most child sexual abuse in Black, Muslim, Hispanic and indigenous communities are rarely reported or held accountable. So, we can safely say the percentage and prevalence of child sexual abuse is much higher than what is statistically reported, and there is even more disparity in different racial demographics who are largely affected by this.

What can be done to improve the safety and well-being of children who are subject to high conflict disputes by divorcing or separating parents and to avoid these terrible outcomes for children and families enduring abuse, neglect and/or sexual abuse? The quantitative study of child sexual abuse has been met with many challenges, both conceptual and methodological, these “studies and data finding” are often shaped by sophisticated perpetrator grooming tactics and broader societal denial of the scope of the problem which tends to foster shame, stigma and fear that silences victims and their families making accurate estimates few and far between (Azzopardi, Eirich, Rash, MacDonald, Madigan. 2019). Aka, people tend to prioritize protecting the abusers and “keeping the peace in the family” or to avoid “rocking the boat”, therefore the

 

perpetrators well-being are prioritized over the children culturally. This is why cultural biases are so relevant to the data we have from “trusted professionals” such as the psychologists and forensic psychologists who conduct these examinations and evaluations because if the psychologist is a misogynist or comes from a family where inappropriate sexual relationships were normal, this can skew the information we have on child sexual abuse and make it harder for the Family courts to be operating based on integrity and the best interests of the child. As we know Western psychology has been dominated by White males for over a century and pedophilia and rape were not once considered crime under the laws made by these same people. The solution is to have more diversity in the forensic psychology field to give a more nuanced, detailed and accurate analysis of spotting potential abuse, neglect and/or sexual abuse in these high conflict custody cases. There is a lot of ambiguous and inconsistent flawed literature of what constitutes or defines sexual abuse and disclosure of sexual abuse with reliance on small or selective samples, biased data collection methods and weak control of extraneous variables therefore precluding generalizable findings (2019). It has even been found that more than three-quarters of adults from a sample set reported either never disclosing they were sexually abused in childhood or delaying their disclosure by more than 5 years from the first incident. There are many children who get the short end of the straw in these high conflict disputes involving abusive parents due to biases in the writing disciplines of forensic psychologists and the cultural biases that exist in most current Western psychology data and findings that we have today.

 

 

 

 

 

Thankfully, many professionals in the field of forensic psychology identify this crack in the foundation and are working to improve the psychological assessments and evaluations of children who are being abused while also embracing more diversity in the field to get a wider scope on a much larger picture of the areas that need improvement in our Family court system. We can’t eliminate all human biases or prejudices, but we can create more inclusion in the forensic psychology field, especially in high conflict custody cases regarding child abuse and child sexual abuse, to ensure advocacy and representation for a voiceless demographic that cannot advocate for themselves- our children.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

 

• Corry Azzopardi, Rachel Eirich, Christina L. Rash, Sarah MacDonald, Sheri Madigan,

A meta-analysis of the prevalence of child sexual abuse disclosure in forensic settings,

Child Abuse & Neglect, Volume 93, 2019, Pages 291-304, ISSN 0145-2134,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2018.11.020.

(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213418304411)

Abstract: Background

Identification, substantiation, prosecution, and treatment of child sexual abuse often rely heavily on a disclosure from the victim in the absence of corroborating evidence. For some, disclosure can be impeded by developmental or motivational barriers, thus compromising child safety and wellbeing. The literature on disclosure prevalence and mitigating influences does not yield a coherent picture. A more accurate estimate will help to inform investigation strategies to facilitate disclosure.

Objective

This study provides a meta-analysis of available research examining the prevalence of sexual abuse disclosure in forensic interviews with children under 18 years, and examines a range of factors that may influence the likelihood of disclosure.

Method

Databases were searched for published and unpublished studies up to May 2017. In total, 2393 abstracts were assessed for eligibility, 216 full-text articles were reviewed, and 45 samples (with 31,225 participants) provided estimates of effect sizes.

 

 

Results

The mean prevalence of child sexual abuse disclosure in forensic settings was 64.1% (95% CI: 60.0–68.1). Between-study variability was explained by: (1) child age and gender, with higher prevalence in older children and females; (2) prior disclosure, with higher prevalence when present; and (3) study year, with higher prevalence in more recent studies.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis confirms an upward trend in child sexual abuse disclosure prevalence. However, more than a third of children do not disclose when interviewed, with those who are younger, male, and without a prior disclosure at greatest risk. Important implications for forensic interviewing protocols and future research are discussed.

Keywords: Child sexual abuse; Abuse disclosure; Forensic interviews; Disclosure prevalence; Meta-analysis

 

• April Harris-Britt, Chioma Ajoku, Introduction: Family court review special issue on the importance of cultural considerations in parental access matters, Family Court Review, Volume 63, Issue 1, p. 8-9, 2025, https://doi-org.ez.lib.jjay.cuny.edu/10.1111/fcre.12833
• Michael E. Lamb, Yael Orbach, Irit Hershkowitz, Phillip W. Esplin, Dvora Horowitz,

 

 

A structured forensic interview protocol improves the quality and informativeness of investigative interviews with children: A review of research using the NICHD Investigative Interview Protocol,

Child Abuse & Neglect, Volume 31, Issues 11–12, 2007, Pages 1201-1231,

ISSN 0145-2134,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2007.03.021. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213407002438)

Abstract: Objective

To show how the results of research on children’s memory, communicative skills, social knowledge, and social tendencies can be translated into guidelines that improve the quality of forensic interviews of children.

Method

We review studies designed to evaluate children’s capacities as witnesses, explain the development of the structured NICHD Investigative Interview Protocol, and discuss studies designed to assess whether use of the Protocol enhances the quality of investigative interviews.

Results

Controlled studies have repeatedly shown that the quality of interviewing reliably and dramatically improves when interviewers employ the NICHD Protocol. No other technique has been proven to be similarly effective.

 

 

 

Conclusions

Use of the structured NICHD Protocol improves the quality of information obtained from alleged victims by investigators, thereby increasing the likelihood that interventions will be appropriate.

Keywords: Forensic interviews; Child sexual abuse; Interview strategies; Questioning styles

 

• Savina O.F, Safuanov F.S., Forensic Psychological Assessment of Conflict of Child’s Loyalty in Litigation between Parents on His Upbringing, Psychology and Law, 2024, Volume 14, No.3, pp. 39-49, doi:10.17759/psylaw.2024140304
  ISSN: 2222-5196 (online)

 

 

End-of-Semester Reflective Essay

 

At the beginning of this course, I wasn’t aware of certain dynamics that make writing more effective and engaging. I learned about utilizing pathos, logos and ethos, which are different approaches used in persuasive writing to convey a specific message to the intended audience. Logos is a writing mechanism that derives from logic, pathos derives from empathy and ethos is derived from ethics. When using logos, pathos and/or ethos in persuasive writing it can potentially change the mind of the reader, maybe regarding an important issue or it can be a call to action that demands immediate attention.

I not only learned how to utilize these persuasive writing techniques, but I also have been able to expand my vocabulary and read literature that was a bit more difficult than I have been accustomed to. There have been complex readings assigned in this course that I normally wouldn’t read on my own but reading them helped me advance my own writing skills. From reading academic journals and literature in this class I was able to be exposed to different forms of writing that helped me cultivate a better understanding of the types of writing expected in my field of study and in academia. I initially thought I was a decent writer, but my major is forensic psychology, and I was not educated on specific writing styles and techniques before this course.

 

 

 

Engaging with the themes of justice and social change in this class made writing more enjoyable and allowed me to express myself authentically and more creatively. I care deeply about these issues and it’s hard for me to really delve into other genres of literature that are not in my area of interest, so the topics of this course alleviated that. When I’m very interested in what I’m writing about I tend to perform better than if I’m being forced to write about things that don’t really matter as much to me. Sometimes I can get writer’s block and have issues developing my pieces, but the content of this course made me able to write more effortlessly and have more meaningful things to say.

I’ve been considering writing as a career, possibly writing a book or working in the field of journalism pertaining to subjects in my field of forensic psychology, and this class helped me sharpen my skills since I haven’t written in a long time. I used to write a lot passionately since childhood and I would create many different forms of writing including songs, poetry, short stories etc. As I became older life took me away from that part of myself but reading other people’s writing and taking classes like this helps me connect back to that piece of myself that I lost along the way. This class has helped to enhance my writing abilities that I hope I will be able to use going forward in my endeavors.