Within the field of child protection, there is a growing awareness of the negative impact on children of exposure to intimate partner violence (IPV) (Alaggia, Jenney, Mazuca & Redmond, 2007; English, Edleson & Herrick, 2005; Holt, Buckley & Whelan, 2008; McCloskey, Figueredo & Koss, 1995). In the United States, as well as in many other western countries, this has increased concern about the well-being of children in homes where IPV is occurring. As a result, many child protection practices and policies around IPV have changed (Edelson, 2004; Nixon, Tutty, Weaver-Dunlop & Walsh, 2007; Weithorn, 2001). In the United States, these policies vary state by state and are not always definitive (Davies, 2006; Postmus & Merritt, 2010). When decisions to investigate or substantiate a case involving IPV are left up to the worker's discretion (Hazen, Connelly, Kelleher, Lansverk & Barth, 2007; Postmus & Merritt, 2010), decision-making is sometimes inconsistent or based on the individual worker's experience and assumptions (Hazen et ak, 2007; Kohl , Edleson, English & Barth, 2005; Hughes & Chau, 2013; Postmus & Merritt, 2010; Postmus & Ortega, 2005).