Pub Date : 2018-01-02DOI: 10.1080/15379418.2018.1445057
P. Ludolph
ABSTRACT Infants and toddlers form critical attachments to both their mothers and fathers if the parent is caring and available to the child with regularity. Given that one secure attachment has been shown to promote healthy development in important ways and that it remains unknown at birth which parent will best generate that attachment, it is wise to provide each parent enough time with the child to foster attachment, including children whose parents do not live together. Although babies may be temporarily stressed by the early introduction of an unfamiliar parent, there is little likelihood of lasting harm if there is screening for violence and serious mental illness in parents who are of concern and if the unfamiliar parent is introduced with sensitivity.
{"title":"Safe and secure: Suggestions for sharing care of babies and toddlers","authors":"P. Ludolph","doi":"10.1080/15379418.2018.1445057","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15379418.2018.1445057","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Infants and toddlers form critical attachments to both their mothers and fathers if the parent is caring and available to the child with regularity. Given that one secure attachment has been shown to promote healthy development in important ways and that it remains unknown at birth which parent will best generate that attachment, it is wise to provide each parent enough time with the child to foster attachment, including children whose parents do not live together. Although babies may be temporarily stressed by the early introduction of an unfamiliar parent, there is little likelihood of lasting harm if there is screening for violence and serious mental illness in parents who are of concern and if the unfamiliar parent is introduced with sensitivity.","PeriodicalId":45478,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Child Custody","volume":"4 1","pages":"15 - 4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87797583","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-01-02DOI: 10.1080/15379418.2018.1425105
M. Lamb
ABSTRACT The changing family roles and evidence that most infants form attachment relationships with both of their parents have sparked a debate about parenting arrangements when the parents of infants and toddlers separate. Misunderstanding of attachment theory and the available empirical evidence has obscured rather than clarified evidence-based decision-making. In this report, I closely examine the five studies most frequently referenced in this context and show what they do and do not tell us about the ways in which children’s adjustment can be promoted when their parents separate. Consistent with attachment theory, the evidence suggests that children benefit when parenting plans allow them to maintain meaningful and positive relationships with both of their parents.
{"title":"Does shared parenting by separated parents affect the adjustment of young children?","authors":"M. Lamb","doi":"10.1080/15379418.2018.1425105","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15379418.2018.1425105","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The changing family roles and evidence that most infants form attachment relationships with both of their parents have sparked a debate about parenting arrangements when the parents of infants and toddlers separate. Misunderstanding of attachment theory and the available empirical evidence has obscured rather than clarified evidence-based decision-making. In this report, I closely examine the five studies most frequently referenced in this context and show what they do and do not tell us about the ways in which children’s adjustment can be promoted when their parents separate. Consistent with attachment theory, the evidence suggests that children benefit when parenting plans allow them to maintain meaningful and positive relationships with both of their parents.","PeriodicalId":45478,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Child Custody","volume":"76 1","pages":"16 - 25"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83020629","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-01-02DOI: 10.1080/15379418.2018.1431827
William G. Austin, S. Rappaport
ABSTRACT The parental gatekeeping, forensic evaluation model for child custody evaluators and other family court practitioners is presented. Gatekeeping refers to the ability of each parent to support the other parent–child relationships. The gatekeeping concept represents a common best interest statutory factor. Patterns or subtypes of gatekeeping are defined: facilitative, restrictive, and protective. A justification analysis is required when a parent is not supportive and/or restrictive on the other parent’s access to the child. The restrictive parent needs to identify the reasons for being restrictive/protective and show the nature of the harm. Relevant research is reviewed on joint parental involvement and gatekeeping. The gatekeeping model is applied to the context of relocation disputes. Relocation is framed as restrictive gatekeeping and the child custody relocation analysis is presented as a justification analysis in terms of the facts, context, reasons for moving, advantages/disadvantages, and legal factors that need to be assessed and considered.
{"title":"Parental gatekeeping forensic model and child custody evaluation: Social capital and application to relocation disputes","authors":"William G. Austin, S. Rappaport","doi":"10.1080/15379418.2018.1431827","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15379418.2018.1431827","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The parental gatekeeping, forensic evaluation model for child custody evaluators and other family court practitioners is presented. Gatekeeping refers to the ability of each parent to support the other parent–child relationships. The gatekeeping concept represents a common best interest statutory factor. Patterns or subtypes of gatekeeping are defined: facilitative, restrictive, and protective. A justification analysis is required when a parent is not supportive and/or restrictive on the other parent’s access to the child. The restrictive parent needs to identify the reasons for being restrictive/protective and show the nature of the harm. Relevant research is reviewed on joint parental involvement and gatekeeping. The gatekeeping model is applied to the context of relocation disputes. Relocation is framed as restrictive gatekeeping and the child custody relocation analysis is presented as a justification analysis in terms of the facts, context, reasons for moving, advantages/disadvantages, and legal factors that need to be assessed and considered.","PeriodicalId":45478,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Child Custody","volume":"24 1","pages":"55 - 75"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83246406","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-01-02DOI: 10.1080/15379418.2017.1411858
P. Parkinson, J. Cashmore
ABSTRACT This article is based upon the findings of a five-year prospective longitudinal study of relocation disputes in Australia, involving interviews with 80 parents and 33 children in 70 families. In the five years following the relocation dispute, much changed for some of these families. A few mothers left without their children; several mothers returned to the original location; some fathers followed. There were also changes in some custody arrangements. The mothers who moved were not surprisingly satisfied with the outcome; however, even mothers who were not allowed to move mostly showed greater improvements in stress levels and mental health than fathers over the five year period, even if the fathers successfully opposed the move. Several mothers adapted to staying if they could see the benefit to their children. All children who moved adapted to the new location and made new friends; however, those who had close relationships with their father found it very hard to be a long distance from him. Drawing upon these interviews, it is argued that decision making in relocation cases must be resolutely child-centered. It cannot be based upon adults’ rights. Children usually benefit from a continuing relationship with a nonresident parent who wants to be involved in their lives. In the adjudication of relocation disputes, careful attention is needed to how close and how developmentally important the child’s relationship is with their nonresident parent. Consideration must also be given to whether the nonresident parent can move to the preferred location of the primary caregiver.
{"title":"Relocation and the indissolubility of parenthood","authors":"P. Parkinson, J. Cashmore","doi":"10.1080/15379418.2017.1411858","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15379418.2017.1411858","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article is based upon the findings of a five-year prospective longitudinal study of relocation disputes in Australia, involving interviews with 80 parents and 33 children in 70 families. In the five years following the relocation dispute, much changed for some of these families. A few mothers left without their children; several mothers returned to the original location; some fathers followed. There were also changes in some custody arrangements. The mothers who moved were not surprisingly satisfied with the outcome; however, even mothers who were not allowed to move mostly showed greater improvements in stress levels and mental health than fathers over the five year period, even if the fathers successfully opposed the move. Several mothers adapted to staying if they could see the benefit to their children. All children who moved adapted to the new location and made new friends; however, those who had close relationships with their father found it very hard to be a long distance from him. Drawing upon these interviews, it is argued that decision making in relocation cases must be resolutely child-centered. It cannot be based upon adults’ rights. Children usually benefit from a continuing relationship with a nonresident parent who wants to be involved in their lives. In the adjudication of relocation disputes, careful attention is needed to how close and how developmentally important the child’s relationship is with their nonresident parent. Consideration must also be given to whether the nonresident parent can move to the preferred location of the primary caregiver.","PeriodicalId":45478,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Child Custody","volume":"110 1","pages":"76 - 92"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80822274","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-01-02DOI: 10.1080/15379418.2018.1438957
S. Braver, M. Lamb, Ned Holstein
ABSTRACT The article provides a brief introduction to a special issue focused on shared parenting. The articles in the special issue provide up-to-date summaries of the research and scholarship relating to key questions and controversies around the effects of divorce and contrasting custody arrangements. Two articles focus on infant–parent attachments in separated families, two on the factors affecting the adjustment of children whose parents have separated, and two on the thorny issues posed by relocation disputes.
{"title":"Factors associated with successful shared parenting following family dissolution","authors":"S. Braver, M. Lamb, Ned Holstein","doi":"10.1080/15379418.2018.1438957","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15379418.2018.1438957","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The article provides a brief introduction to a special issue focused on shared parenting. The articles in the special issue provide up-to-date summaries of the research and scholarship relating to key questions and controversies around the effects of divorce and contrasting custody arrangements. Two articles focus on infant–parent attachments in separated families, two on the factors affecting the adjustment of children whose parents have separated, and two on the thorny issues posed by relocation disputes.","PeriodicalId":45478,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Child Custody","volume":"71 1","pages":"1 - 3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91390710","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-01-02DOI: 10.1080/15379418.2018.1437002
K. Adamsons
ABSTRACT Over the last few decades, numerous studies have examined the impact of nonresident fathers on the well-being of their children, including two meta-analyses. Such research consistently has demonstrated that when nonresident fathers are involved with their children in positive ways, their children benefit substantially; however, studies also have found that the amount of nonresident father contact, in and of itself, typically is not associated with children’s well-being. Some scholars, practitioners, and policymakers have framed the nonsignificant associations between contact and child well-being as an argument against joint physical custody. This paper examines why such reasoning is flawed, and why both quality and quantity of nonresident father involvement are necessary to consider when wanting to promote the well-being of children.
{"title":"Quantity versus quality of nonresident father involvement: Deconstructing the argument that quantity doesn’t matter","authors":"K. Adamsons","doi":"10.1080/15379418.2018.1437002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15379418.2018.1437002","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Over the last few decades, numerous studies have examined the impact of nonresident fathers on the well-being of their children, including two meta-analyses. Such research consistently has demonstrated that when nonresident fathers are involved with their children in positive ways, their children benefit substantially; however, studies also have found that the amount of nonresident father contact, in and of itself, typically is not associated with children’s well-being. Some scholars, practitioners, and policymakers have framed the nonsignificant associations between contact and child well-being as an argument against joint physical custody. This paper examines why such reasoning is flawed, and why both quality and quantity of nonresident father involvement are necessary to consider when wanting to promote the well-being of children.","PeriodicalId":45478,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Child Custody","volume":"13 1","pages":"26 - 34"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88266909","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-01-01Epub Date: 2019-02-21DOI: 10.1080/15379418.2018.1509758
Alma P Olaguez, Amy Castro, Kyndra C Cleveland, J Zoe Klemfuss, Jodi A Quas
Statements made by children in a range of legal settings can irrevocably impact their family structure, relationships, and living environment. Because these statements can fundamentally alter children's futures, efforts have been made to identify methods to enhance children's reports by increasing comprehensiveness, completeness, and accuracy. Interviewer support has broadly been considered a method of interest, but variations in what constitutes "support" have highlighted the need for greater specificity in documenting how different facets of supportive behaviors relate to children's reporting tendencies. In this review, we describe work focused on the effects of interviewer support, on children's memory completeness and accuracy. We then describe to a subset of interviewer behaviors that encourage elaboration in dyadic interactions: back-channeling and vocatives. We present preliminary evidence suggesting that these utterances, referred to as implicit encouragement, can increase the amount of detail provided without compromising accuracy. Implications for custody evaluations are discussed.
{"title":"Using implicit encouragement to increase narrative productivity in children: Preliminary evidence and legal implications.","authors":"Alma P Olaguez, Amy Castro, Kyndra C Cleveland, J Zoe Klemfuss, Jodi A Quas","doi":"10.1080/15379418.2018.1509758","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15379418.2018.1509758","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Statements made by children in a range of legal settings can irrevocably impact their family structure, relationships, and living environment. Because these statements can fundamentally alter children's futures, efforts have been made to identify methods to enhance children's reports by increasing comprehensiveness, completeness, and accuracy. Interviewer support has broadly been considered a method of interest, but variations in what constitutes \"support\" have highlighted the need for greater specificity in documenting how different facets of supportive behaviors relate to children's reporting tendencies. In this review, we describe work focused on the effects of interviewer support, on children's memory completeness and accuracy. We then describe to a subset of interviewer behaviors that encourage elaboration in dyadic interactions: back-channeling and vocatives. We present preliminary evidence suggesting that these utterances, referred to as implicit encouragement, can increase the amount of detail provided without compromising accuracy. Implications for custody evaluations are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":45478,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Child Custody","volume":"15 4","pages":"286-301"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15379418.2018.1509758","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"37625626","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-10-02DOI: 10.1080/15379418.2017.1416723
M. S. Milchman
ABSTRACT This article analyzes 24 New York (NY) published child custody cases decided between 2001 and 2017 that contained parental alienation and child sexual allegations. It addresses whether there was a tendency toward gendered decisions and the evidence on which the decisions were based. It reveals that most decisions favored alienation allegations over child sexual abuse allegations and transferring custody from mothers communicating sexual abuse allegations in court to fathers defending against them by alleging parental alienation. On appeal, these family court decisions were overwhelmingly upheld. The analysis also shows that the decisions were based as often on implicit misogynistic cultural assumptions in the absence of allegation-specific evidence as they were on allegation-specific evidence. The article adds to the growing understanding of sources of bias by proposing four errors that support biased reasoning. It concludes with suggestions about how experts, attorneys, and judges can question themselves and others to reduce bias.
{"title":"Misogyny in New York custody decisions with parental alienation and child sexual abuse allegations","authors":"M. S. Milchman","doi":"10.1080/15379418.2017.1416723","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15379418.2017.1416723","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article analyzes 24 New York (NY) published child custody cases decided between 2001 and 2017 that contained parental alienation and child sexual allegations. It addresses whether there was a tendency toward gendered decisions and the evidence on which the decisions were based. It reveals that most decisions favored alienation allegations over child sexual abuse allegations and transferring custody from mothers communicating sexual abuse allegations in court to fathers defending against them by alleging parental alienation. On appeal, these family court decisions were overwhelmingly upheld. The analysis also shows that the decisions were based as often on implicit misogynistic cultural assumptions in the absence of allegation-specific evidence as they were on allegation-specific evidence. The article adds to the growing understanding of sources of bias by proposing four errors that support biased reasoning. It concludes with suggestions about how experts, attorneys, and judges can question themselves and others to reduce bias.","PeriodicalId":45478,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Child Custody","volume":"7 1","pages":"234 - 259"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79437821","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-10-02DOI: 10.1080/15379418.2017.1416722
M. S. Milchman
ABSTRACT This article argues that major advances in parental alienation (PA) theory, since its inception as the Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), have not consistently been applied in custody litigation practice, because they do not serve advocacy needs; whereas, the misogynistic cultural argument in PAS, when relied on implicitly but not stated explicitly, can win cases. It first discusses advances in modern PA theory that eliminate misogyny. It then reviews feminist advances (1960s to 1980s) to show the threat to patriarchal power, and the fathers’ rights backlash, to explain their demand for legal redress. The hypothesis that a misogynistic cultural framework undermines evidence-based reasoning in child custody cases is supported with studies associating misogynistic beliefs with irrational thinking in multiple scientific areas, including child custody; and documents that show misogyny is a serious concern in the U.S. legal system. The article concludes by stating the need for evidence of misogynistic bias in custody decisions.
{"title":"Misogynistic cultural argument in parental alienation versus child sexual abuse cases","authors":"M. S. Milchman","doi":"10.1080/15379418.2017.1416722","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15379418.2017.1416722","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article argues that major advances in parental alienation (PA) theory, since its inception as the Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), have not consistently been applied in custody litigation practice, because they do not serve advocacy needs; whereas, the misogynistic cultural argument in PAS, when relied on implicitly but not stated explicitly, can win cases. It first discusses advances in modern PA theory that eliminate misogyny. It then reviews feminist advances (1960s to 1980s) to show the threat to patriarchal power, and the fathers’ rights backlash, to explain their demand for legal redress. The hypothesis that a misogynistic cultural framework undermines evidence-based reasoning in child custody cases is supported with studies associating misogynistic beliefs with irrational thinking in multiple scientific areas, including child custody; and documents that show misogyny is a serious concern in the U.S. legal system. The article concludes by stating the need for evidence of misogynistic bias in custody decisions.","PeriodicalId":45478,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Child Custody","volume":"43 1","pages":"211 - 233"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90737492","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-10-02DOI: 10.1080/15379418.2017.1379367
A. Habib
{"title":"A review of Legal Issues in Clinical Practice with Victims of Violence, by John E. B. Myers","authors":"A. Habib","doi":"10.1080/15379418.2017.1379367","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15379418.2017.1379367","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45478,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Child Custody","volume":"515 1","pages":"301 - 302"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77095874","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：