Cited by 106Intimate Partner and Family ViolenceFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsFamily and Matrimonial Law

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Post-Separation Abuse of Women and their Children: Boundary-Setting and Family Court Utilization among Victimized Mothers

Open access

Abstract

Continued abuse of themselves and their children is a concern for many mothers leaving intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetrating husbands. This research examines women's responses to abuse committed by ex-husbands with whom they had undergone custody disputes. In-depth, qualitative interviews were conducted with 19 mothers who had divorced IPV-perpetrating husbands between one and three years prior. Participants were located through publicly available family court divorce records and interviews were examined using analytic induction. Women's strategies to protect themselves and their children from abuse involved setting boundaries to govern their interactions with ex-husbands. Mothers often turned to family court for assistance in setting boundaries to keep children safe, but found that family court did not respond in ways they believed protected their children. Conversely, when women turned to the justice system for restraining orders or called the police for help against IPV, they generally found the justice system responsive.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10896-013-9528-7

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 106

Metadata

Authors
Zeoli, A. M., Rivera, E. A., Sullivan, C. M., & Kubiak, S.
Affiliations
Michigan State University (US)
Corresponding author
Zeoli, April M.
Venue
Journal of Family Violence
Published
2013-06-21
Volume
28
Issue
6
Pages
547-560
ISSN
  • 0885-7482 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2851
OpenAlex
W2089510009
Cited by
106
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 3
FWCI
5.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Family Violence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R24MH075941)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K12HD065879)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
  • Social Sciences › Law › Family and Matrimonial Law
Keywords
intimate partner violence, post-separation abuse, mothers, child protection, boundary setting, family court, divorce, protection orders, law enforcement response, domestic violence

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