Technology and Family Violence in the Context of Post‐Separated Parenting
Abstract
Whilst the advent of new and increasingly accessible communication technologies undoubtedly provides new, positive, and effective ways for individuals to communicate and connect with their communities, it simultaneously provides additional means and forums for perpetrators to abuse and harass their victims. Furthermore, such technologies enable perpetrators of family violence to overcome geographical boundaries and continue their abuse post‐separation, particularly where there are children of the relationship. This paper reviews and classifies the existing literature on technology‐facilitated abuse, identifying predominant themes in relation to context and focus, as well as the gaps. New forms of criminality as well as new ways to perpetrate existing forms of criminality are described.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Technology allows perpetrators to overcome geographical boundaries even when a survivor is physically separated.
“Although a survivor may be separated in physical space, technology allows perpetrators to overcome geographical boundaries (Markwick et al., 2019; Messing et al., 2020).”
From Post‐separation abuse: A concept analysis (2023) · cites this paper as Markwick et al., 2019
Batterers may deploy other tactics that circumvent physical barriers, such as electronic harassment.
“Batterers may also deploy other tactics that circumvent physical barriers such as electronic harassment (Markwick et al., 2019; Messing et al., 2020).”
From Post‐separation abuse: A concept analysis (2023) · cites this paper as Markwick et al., 2019
Cites
Cyberbullying among adolescents: Measures in search of a construct.
Mehari, K. R., Farrell, A. D., & Le, A.-T. H. (2014) · Psychology of Violence · doi:10.1037/a0037521 · Cited by 131 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Post‐separation abuse: A concept analysis
Spearman, K. J., Hardesty, J. L., & Campbell, J. (2023) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/jan.15310 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
“Although a survivor may be separated in physical space, technology allows perpetrators to overcome geographical boundaries (Markwick et al., 2019; Messing et al., 2020).”
Background
- Authors
- Markwick, K., Bickerdike, A., Wilson‐Evered, E., & Zeleznikow, J.
- Affiliations
- Relationships Australia Victoria
- Victoria University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Markwick, Katrina
- Venue
- Australian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2019-03
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 143-162
- ISSN
- 0814-723X (ISSN-L)
- 1467-8438
- OpenAlex
- W2928221124
- Cited by
- 38
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 6
- FWCI
- 12.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Australian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy (publishedVersion)
- Victoria University Research Repository (Victoria University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Stalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
- Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies
- Keywords
- technology-facilitated abuse, domestic violence, post-separation parenting, online harassment, perpetrators, digital communication tools
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
