{"title":"Schools, separating parents and family violence: a case study of the coercion of organisational networks","authors":"S. Saltmarsh, Kay Ayre, Eseta Tualaulelei","doi":"10.1080/17508487.2021.1919165","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper considers how complex family circumstances such as parental separation, custody disputes and family violence intersect with the organisational cultures and everyday practices of schools. In particular, we are concerned with the ways that coercive control – a strategy used predominantly by men to dominate, control and oppress women in the context of intimate partner relationships – can be deployed to manipulate and coerce the organisational networks of schools into furthering abusive agendas. Informed by cultural theory and research from sociology of education, legal studies, criminology and family violence, we show how what we term the ‘coercion of organisational networks’ (CON) both relies upon and exploits systemic misogyny and gendered unequal relations of power. These issues underpin institutional strategies often used by schools to keep parents – and mothers, in particular – at a distance. When affected by separation, divorce and family violence, being positioned in problematic terms can create additional risks for women and children. We argue that without adequate understandings of coercive control as practices within a broader constellation of systemic misogyny and gender inequalities, and in the absence of organisational cultures committed to addressing these, schools are considered complicit in perpetuating family violence and its effects.","PeriodicalId":47434,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies in Education","volume":"63 1","pages":"516 - 533"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508487.2021.1919165","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Studies in Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2021.1919165","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
ABSTRACT This paper considers how complex family circumstances such as parental separation, custody disputes and family violence intersect with the organisational cultures and everyday practices of schools. In particular, we are concerned with the ways that coercive control – a strategy used predominantly by men to dominate, control and oppress women in the context of intimate partner relationships – can be deployed to manipulate and coerce the organisational networks of schools into furthering abusive agendas. Informed by cultural theory and research from sociology of education, legal studies, criminology and family violence, we show how what we term the ‘coercion of organisational networks’ (CON) both relies upon and exploits systemic misogyny and gendered unequal relations of power. These issues underpin institutional strategies often used by schools to keep parents – and mothers, in particular – at a distance. When affected by separation, divorce and family violence, being positioned in problematic terms can create additional risks for women and children. We argue that without adequate understandings of coercive control as practices within a broader constellation of systemic misogyny and gender inequalities, and in the absence of organisational cultures committed to addressing these, schools are considered complicit in perpetuating family violence and its effects.
期刊介绍:
Critical Studies in Education is one of the few international journals devoted to a critical sociology of education, although it welcomes submissions with a critical stance that draw on other disciplines (e.g. philosophy, social geography, history) in order to understand ''the social''. Two interests frame the journal’s critical approach to research: (1) who benefits (and who does not) from current and historical social arrangements in education and, (2) from the standpoint of the least advantaged, what can be done about inequitable arrangements. Informed by this approach, articles published in the journal draw on post-structural, feminist, postcolonial and other critical orientations to critique education systems and to identify alternatives for education policy, practice and research.