Effective, accessible prevention programs are needed for adults at heightened risk for intimate partner violence (IPV). This parallel group randomized controlled trial examines whether such couples receiving the American version of Couple CARE for Parents of Newborns (CCP; Halford et al. 2009) following the birth of a child, compared with controls, report fewer first occurrences of clinically significant IPV, less frequent physical and psychological IPV, and improved relationship functioning. Further, we test whether intervention effects are moderated by level of risk for IPV. Couples at elevated risk for IPV (N = 368) recruited from maternity units were randomized to CCP (n = 188) or a 24-month waitlist (n = 180) and completed measures of IPV and relationship functioning at baseline, post-program (when child was 8 months old), and two follow-ups (at 15 and 24 months). Intervention effects were tested using intent to treat (ITT) as well as complier average causal effect (CACE; Jo and Muthén 2001) structural equation models. CCP did not significantly prevent clinically significant IPV nor were there significant main effects of CCP on clinically significant IPV, frequency of IPV, or most relationship outcomes in the CACE or ITT analyses. Risk moderated the effect of CCP on male-to-female physical IPV at post-program, with couples with a planned pregnancy declining, but those with unplanned pregnancies increasing. This study adds to previous findings that prevention programs for at-risk couples are not often effective and may even be iatrogenic for some couples.

This study examined whether violations of partner expectations-and attributions and perceptions of these violations-are associated with relationship satisfaction across the transition to parenthood. First-time parents (N = 99) mixed-sex couples completed mail-in packets during pregnancy (Time 1; T1) and when their babies were 3-5 months old (Time 2; T2). Hypotheses were largely confirmed. Multilevel modeling results indicated a significant T1-to-T2 decrease in relationship satisfaction. Expectation violations significantly predicted change in satisfaction; undermet expectations are associated with decreased satisfaction. T2 perception of expectation confirmation predicted change in satisfaction at T2 and moderated the relationship between expectation violation and relationship satisfaction. Likewise, benign postnatal attributions were significantly associated with the change in satisfaction at T2 and moderated the relationship between expectation violation and relationship satisfaction. Clinical and research implications are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Two studies examined the impact of the implementation of the Field-tested Assessment, Intervention-planning, and Response (FAIR) system, a system-level intervention for determining whether allegations of family maltreatment meet threshold for abuse or neglect, on alleged recidivism. Data were collected at the 10 U.S. Army installations with the largest family maltreatment caseloads. Participants were family members who had an allegation of family maltreatment (i.e., child maltreatment or partner abuse) during one of the two study periods. Data were collected when Family Advocacy Program staff used the then-in-place system (Case Review Committee) and later the FAIR system. In Study 1, cases were followed for 6 months following the initial maltreatment allegation to measure the occurrence of subsequent allegations of any type. Additionally, at five installations, alleged victims of partner abuse were recruited into a study (Study 2) in which they anonymously reported on intimate partner violence via telephone. In Study 1, the advantage for the FAIR condition was concentrated in cases with unsubstantiated initial determinations; the mean relative risk reduction for recidivism was 0.48. In Study 2, FAIR extended median time to recidivism by approximately 170%. These results replicate and extend earlier findings that employing the FAIR system can result in decreased family maltreatment re-offense.

Participation rates in couple relationship education (CRE) programs for low-income couples are typically low. We examined predictors of session attendance and early dropout (i.e., dropout after 1 session) among a sample of low-income, unmarried parents of a newborn (N = 467 couples) enrolled in an evidence-based CRE program. Predictors included demographics and socioeconomic status, as well as baseline indicators of relationship commitment, family and individual functioning, infant health, preventive health care utilization, and CRE coach perceptions of participant engagement and alliance in the first session of the program. Couples attended an average of 4.4 (SD = 2.5) of the 7 sessions, with nearly a quarter of couples dropping out after the first session. Attendance at fewer sessions was predicted by younger age. Early dropout was predicted by lower ratings of females’ engagement and both partners’ therapeutic alliance and, unexpectedly, by commitment. We discuss considerations for engaging low-income couples in CRE.

Introduction: The U.S. Air Force (USAF) conducted a program of research to develop and disseminate reliable and valid criteria for partner and child maltreatment (comprising abuse [physical, emotional/psychological, and sexual] and neglect). These criteria are now used in all branches of the U.S. military. The U.S. Army was the first service outside the USAF to adopt the criteria sets and computerized decision support tool but maintained the original committee composition (the “Case Review Committee” [CRC]) instead of adopting the entire assessment, allegation determination, and treatment planning process (the “Field-tested Assessment, Intervention-planning, and Response” [FAIR] system). The Army commissioned this study to compare the CRC and FAIR processes by testing (1) intra-committee process (i.e., three facets of committee functioning—fidelity to regulations, cohesion and team process, outsized influence of unit representatives); (2) coordinated community response to maltreatment (i.e., perceptions of fairness to alleged offenders and victims, impact on unit representatives, and (3) collaboration between the Family Advocacy Program (FAP, the military’s maltreatment response agency) and outside agencies; and (4) the time expended and cost. Materials and Methods: New York University’s Institutional Review Board approved the study protocol, and the Army’s Human Research Protection Office provided permission to collect data. The ten Army garrisons with the most annual maltreatment cases participated. Committee members, FAP social workers, unit commanders, and independent observers completed assessments of individual meetings and of their overall impression of the processes. A test of whether the means significantly differed between phases was then performed separately for each outcome, and 95% CIs of the unstandardized mean difference between phases were estimated. Results: Independent observers rated FAIR meetings as significantly more faithful to regulations. Unit representatives (i.e., commanders and/or first sergeants) perceived the committee to function better during FAIR (although other committee members and independent observers did not perceive differences). Unit representatives not only rated FAIR as significantly more fair to both alleged offenders and victims (ratings from other committee members did not differ), but also were more likely to attend FAIR meetings and, when they did, rated their ability to serve soldiers and families higher during FAIR. However, FAP social workers rated their relationships with units as being better during CRC, and outside agencies rated their relationship with FAP as significantly better during CRC. Costs to the Army were nearly identical in the two committee structures. Conclusion: Results indicated that the CRC and FAIR processes cost almost identical amounts to run and that the FAIR system was superior in ways most likely to impact service members: (1) independent observers judged its meetings to be more faithful to Army and DoD Instructions; (2) unit representatives were more likely to attend and believed the FAIR system to be fairer (to both alleged offenders and victims) and better functioning. Care should be taken, however, in nurturing relationships between FAP and (1) unit representatives and (2) outside agencies, which may have weakened during FAIR.