Advocates’ Perspectives of Structural Barriers Inhibiting Parental Access to Domestic Violence Civil Protection Orders

Abstract

Advocates support diverse survivors through complex legal systems; this study explores their (n = 20) perspectives on structural barriers in obtaining civil protection orders (POs). Using frameworks of structural intersectionality, access to justice, and access to safety, we identified three major structural barriers for parents seeking POs: limited childcare, transportation, and time. Findings elicit who struggles to access civil POs, why these barriers exist, and whether justice and safety are attainable. The discussion highlights the need for systemic reforms and sustainable resource investment to improve the civil PO process and enhance survivor safety.

Keywords

intimate partner violence protection orders structural intersectionality motherhood access to justice access to safety

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

AZPoint. (n.d.). Arizona protective order initiation and notification tool. https://azpoint.azcourts.gov/

Bejinariu

Troshynski

E. I.

Miethe

T. D.

(2019). Civil protection orders and their courtroom context: The impact of gatekeepers on legal decisions. Journal of Family Violence, 34(3), 231–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-018-9999-7

Costello

Durfee

(2020). Survivor-defined advocacy in the civil protection order process. Feminist Criminology, 15(3), 299–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085119891250

Crenshaw

(1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory, and antiracist politics (vol. 139). University of Chicago Legal Forum.

Crenshaw

(1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039

Domingo-Cabarrubias

Woodlock

Alexander

Sato

Grant

Weinberg

(2023). The role of technology in improving access to justice for victims of family violence: Challenges and opportunities. Law, Technology and Humans, 5(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.5204/lthj.2469

Durfee

(2021). The use of structural intersectionality as a method to analyze how the domestic violence civil protective order process replicates inequality. Violence Against Women, 27(5), 639–665. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801220958495

Fitzpatrick

(2014). Breaking barriers to breaking the cycle. Seattle Journal of Social Justice, 13(2), 603. Article 16. https://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/sjsj/vol13/iss2/16

Futures Without Violence . (2025). Child care as a domestic violence issue: Policy brief. https://futureswithoutviolence.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Child-Care-as-a-Domestic-Violence-Issue-Policy-Brief-2-1.pdf

10.

Gaur

Ganguly

A. P.

Kuo

Martin

Alvarez

K. S.

Bhavan

K. P.

Kho

K. A.

(2024). Childcare needs as a barrier to healthcare among women in a safety-net health system. BMC Public Health, 24(1), 1608. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-19125-1

11.

Gezinski

L. B.

Gonzalez-Pons

K. M.

(2021). Legal barriers and re-victimization for survivors of intimate partner violence navigating courts in Utah, United States (pp. 1–13). Women & Criminal Justice.

12.

Hefner

M. K.

Baboolal

A. A.

Fleury-Steiner

R. E.

Miller

S. L.

(2021). Mediating justice: Women’s perceptions of fairness in the civil protection order process. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(7-8), 3331–3352. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518775749

13.

Kaba

Ritchie

A. J.

(2022). Reclaiming safety. Inquest. https://inquest.org/reclaiming-safety/

14.

Logan

Shannon

Walker

Faragher

T. M.

(2006). Protective orders: Questions and conundrums. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 7(3), 175–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838006288930

15.

Mentovich

Prescott

J. J.

Rabinovich-Einy

(2023). Legitimacy and online proceedings: Procedural justice, access to justice, and the role of income. Law & Society Review, 57(2), 189–213. https://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12653

16.

Messing

J. T.

Bagwell-Gray

M. E.

Ward-Lasher

Durfee

(2021). ‘Not bullet proof’: The complex choice not to seek a civil protection order for intimate partner violence. International Review of Victimology, 27(2), 173–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269758021993338

17.

National Center on Protection Orders and Full Faith & Credit . (2023). State venue and petition requirements, battered women’s justice project. https://bwjp.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/NCPOFFC-Venue-and-Petition-Requirements-Matrix.pdf

18.

National Domestic Violence Hotline . (2022). Barriers to transportation for domestic violence survivors. https://www.thehotline.org/resources/barriers-to-transportation-for-domestic-violence-survivors/

19.

Ragusa

A. T.

(2013). Rural Australian women’s legal help seeking for intimate partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28(4), 685–717. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260512455864

20.

Rhode

D. L.

(2004). Access to justice. Oxford University Press.

21.

Richie

B. E.

(2012). Arrested justice: Black women, violence, and America’s prison nation. New York University Press.

22.

Russell

Cox

Hamel

MacNeil

Stewart

(2025). A systematic review of intimate partner violence protection order research: A decade of insight. Partner abuse, 16(2), 159–220. https://doi.org/10.1891/pa-2024-0050

23.

Saldaña

(2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Sage.

24.

Sandefur

R. L.

Teufel

(2020). Assessing America’s access to civil justice crisis. UC Irvine Law Review, 11(3), 753. Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/33d7w37b

25.

Stoever

J. K.

(2019). Access to safety and justice: Service of process in domestic violence cases. Washington Law Review, 94(1), 333. https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol94/iss1/8.

26.

Stokols

Hall

Vogel

Haire-Joshu

McBride

(2013). Transdisciplinary public health: Core characteristics, definitions, and strategies for success. In Haire-Joshu

McBride

T. D.

(Eds.), Transdisciplinary public health research, methods, and practice (pp. 3–30). Jossey-Bass Publishers.

27.

Tolmie

Smith

Wilson

(2024). Understanding intimate partner violence: Why coercive control requires a social and systemic entrapment framework. Violence Against Women, 30(1), 54–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778012231205585

28.

Velonis

A. J.

Daoud

Matheson

Woodhall-Melnik

Hamilton-Wright

O’Campo

(2017). Strategizing safety: Theoretical frameworks to understand women’s decision making in the face of partner violence and social inequities. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 32(21), 3321–3345. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260515598953

29.

Watson

(2025). The silent crisis: How federal cuts are undermining victim advocacy in the U.S. The Advocacy Academy. https://www.advocacyacademy.org/blog/the-silent-crisis-how-federal-cuts-are-undermining-victim-advocacy-in-the-us

30.

Weisz

A. N.

Schell

(2020). Responding to intimate partner violence: Urban women’s decisions about getting personal protection orders when other resources are scarce. Violence Against Women, 26(10), 1242–1261. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801219854537