Search

Many divorcing/separating parties seeking mediation to resolve family-related issues report intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization from the other party in the case. It is imperative that mediation staff screen parties for IPV so they can make informed decisions regarding how to proceed with mediation. Existing IPV screens for mediation have significant limitations. We examined three methodological approaches using item response theory that address these limitations by increasing the efficiency and clinical utility of an existing standardized IPV screen for mediation, the Mediator's Assessment of Safety Issues and Concerns ( N = 904 mediating parties). We identified three subsets of items, with initial evidence for their validity, focused on helping mediation staff identify high levels of IPV or parties at risk for potentially negative mediation outcomes or needing specialized safety accommodations in mediation. Clinical recommendations are provided indicating which approach is most promising to be used in mediation settings. Overall, findings help advance understanding of how item response theory methodology can enhance the precision of IPV screening in mediation.

We investigated reliability and validity of the Mediator's Assessment of Safety Issues and Concerns (MASIC), a screening interview for intimate partner violence and abuse (IPV/A) in family mediation settings. Clients at three family mediation clinics in the United States and Australia (N = 391) provided reports of the other parent's IPV/A. Internal consistency of the total screen was excellent. A confirmatory factor analysis provided evidence that the MASIC assesses seven types of IPV/A: psychological abuse, coercive controlling behaviors, threats of severe violence, physical violence, severe physical violence, sexual violence, and stalking. Sex differences on differing types of violence victimization were generally consistent with previous research. Higher levels of victimization predicted self-reported consequences of abuse (e.g., fear, injuries). More abusive parties, as identified by their partners on the MASIC, had more Protective Orders and No Contact Orders and criminal convictions and crimes potentially related to IPV/A. Results provide initial evidence of the reliability and validity of the MASIC but more research is needed., (© The Author(s) 2014.)