Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 59Family Dynamics and RelationshipsFamily and Matrimonial LawChild Welfare and Adoption

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Bench Book for Assessing Parental Gatekeeping in Parenting Disputes: Understanding the Dynamics of Gate Closing and Opening for the Best Interests of Children

Austin, William G., Fieldstone, Linda, Pruett, Marsha Kline·2013·Journal of Child Custody
DOI 10.1080/15379418.2013.778693
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This Bench Book summarizes theory, research, and a forensic assessment model of parental gatekeeping relevant for understanding and resolving child custody disputes. This concise format is geared primarily as a resource for judges, though it may be equally valuable to evaluators, parenting coordinators, and others. Gatekeeping encompasses a common statutory factor of support for the other parent–child relationship. The gatekeeping model includes a continuum ranging from facilitative to restrictive gatekeeping. Behavioral examples are presented. Implications of a gatekeeping analysis for crafting parenting plans are described, including in relocation cases and when there has been a history of intimate partner violence.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/15379418.2013.778693

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 32 references

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Austin , W. G. ( 2005a , February ). Considering the process of support for the other parent and gatekeeping in parenting evaluations . Colorado IDC News: The Newsletter of the State of Colorado Interdisciplinary Committee , 7 ( 1 ), 10 – 13 . Available at www.child-custody-services.com
  2. Austin , W. G. (2005b). The child and family investigator's evaluation for the relocation case. In R. M. Smith (Ed.), The role of the child and family investigator and the child's legal representative in Colorado (pp. C9–1–C9–28). Denver : Colorado Bar Association.
  3. Austin , W. G. ( 2011 ). Parental gatekeeping in custody disputes . American Journal of Family Law , 25 ( 4 ), 148 – 153 .
  4. Austin W. G. Drozd L. M. & Dale M. S. ( 2012 June 7 ). Intimate partner violence relocation gatekeeping and child custody evaluation. Workshop presented at Association of Family and Conciliation Courts 49th Annual Conference. Chicago IL.
  5. Dore , M. K. ( 2004 ). The “friendly parent” concept: A flawed factor for child custody . Loyola Journal of Public Interest Law , 6 , 41 – 56 .
  6. Maccoby , E. E. , & Mnookin , R. H. ( 1992 ). Dividing the child: Social & legal dilemmas of custody . Cambridge , MA : Harvard University Press .
  7. Zorza , J. ( 1992 ). “Friendly parent” provisions in custody determinations . Clearinghouse Review , 26 , 921 – 925 .

Cited by

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Austin, W. G., Fieldstone, L., & Pruett, M. K.
Affiliations
  • Independent Practice, Lakewood and Steamboat Springs
  • Family Court Services, 11th Judicial Circuit, Miami-Dade County
  • Smith College (US)
Corresponding author
Austin, William G.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Child Custody
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2013-01
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
1-16
ISSN
  • 1537-940X (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-9418
DOI
10.1080/15379418.2013.778693
OpenAlex
W2014627349
Cited by
59
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3
FWCI
13.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Child Custody (publishedVersion)
  • Smith ScholarWorks (Smith College) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
  • Social Sciences › Law › Family and Matrimonial Law
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Child Welfare and Adoption
Keywords
parental gatekeeping, child custody disputes, best interests of the child, parenting plans, intimate partner 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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.