Family court typically wants separated parents to agree on child custody, but when there is court-identified high-conflict between parents, judges may need to intervene and decide custody without both parties agreeing to the recommendation. This study examines the influence of agreements, the mutual agreement between litigating parties in custody arrangements, and single-party petitions (Petitions to Modify Custody) on the ultimate custodial outcome of court-identified high-conflict family court cases. We found that as the number of agreements increased, the likelihood of a case's outcome being an agreed-upon custody arrangement also increased. This study further examines an exploration of gender bias, which showed that deference to the mother may be occurring and can be further analyzed through more research. This study can inform legal professionals in their efforts to foster agreement and sustain equitable litigatory processes. Further research is needed to continue as this subset is only 100 out of 182 total PCR cases.

When allegations of sexual abuse are tried in criminal court, children are questioned about the abuse that occurred, including questions about the sexual body parts involved in the abuse. Miscommunication is likely to occur between the child and the attorney due to unsupportive questioning techniques and child’s developing understanding of sexual body terms. Given this, we examined how body term type, body term consistency, and attorney-type contributed to miscommunications. We found that children most often used Colloquially Understood-Vague terms (e.g., privates), less often used Colloquially Understood-Specific (e.g., pee-pee) and Anatomically Correct terms (e.g., penis), and least often used Unique terms (e.g., cookie). We had so few miscommunications (N = 19) and defense attorneys asked so few questions about body terms (N = 12) that we were unable to accomplish our original research aims. Instead, we conducted exploratory analyses on age and gender. Younger children (5-8) used Colloquially Understood-Vague terms significantly more often, while older children (9-12) used Colloquially Understood-Specific terms significantly more often. Boys were significantly more likely to use Colloquially Understood-Specific terms than girls but less likely to use Anatomically Correct and Unique terms. The findings of this study can be used to support a shift in educational practices for child sexual body terms towards specific anatomical terms and lead prosecutors to use body mechanic questions rather than open-ended ones.

Many children who testify to alleged sexual abuse struggle to answer questions about touching, likely because attorneys and children may operate under different definitions of “touch.” However, little is known about how children define touch, and the most productive question type for eliciting reports of touching has yet to be determined. In the present investigation, Study 1 examined (N = 64, 5 - 12 years of age) children’s testimonies to identify the sources of misunderstanding when children report abusive touch in court. In light of the language difficulties observed in Study 1, specifically, that attorneys and children appeared to be operating under different definitions of touch, a laboratory study (Study 2) was conducted to examine (N = 95, 4 - 7 years of age) children’s definition of touch, and how children reported touching in response to open-ended wh- questions, compared to close-ended yes
o questions. Body contact (i.e., manual and non-manual touch, compared to touching with an object) was most closely representative of children’s definition of touch. Additionally, children reported touch more often, and provided more informative reports of touch, in response to wh- questions, compared to yes
o questions. These findings demonstrated that children’s definition of touch exists on a scale, and through asking specific, open-ended wh- questions attorneys can elicit reports of touching from children even when definitional discrepancies are present.