放宽对儿童有害的科学规定

Q1 Social Sciences Journal of Child Custody Pub Date : 2016-01-02 DOI:10.1080/15379418.2016.1130596
Toby G. Kleinman, Phil Kaplan
{"title":"放宽对儿童有害的科学规定","authors":"Toby G. Kleinman, Phil Kaplan","doi":"10.1080/15379418.2016.1130596","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article examines the impact of the current role of evaluators in divorce and child custody cases where there are allegations of domestic violence and/or child abuse and what the courts permit as testimony by experts. The authors explore the courts’ permissive rules in family courts, and the influence evaluators have on the resulting decisions in those court cases as well as how personal beliefs, knowledge, experiences, and biases of the evaluators can affect evaluators’ recommendations to family court judges. The rules which permit less use of traditional normative tools, such as tests and assessments, in the specialized environment of a divorce proceeding or allegations of abuse are examined by the authors. This exploration takes place in the context of the scientific and professional associations that govern the psychology community. Finally, the article examines how a child’s report of abuse can negatively impact the court when in the hands of an evaluator who lacks sufficient training in domestic violence and child abuse and/or lacks the tools necessary to properly assess the issues before the court.","PeriodicalId":45478,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Child Custody","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Relaxation of rules for science detrimental to children\",\"authors\":\"Toby G. Kleinman, Phil Kaplan\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15379418.2016.1130596\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article examines the impact of the current role of evaluators in divorce and child custody cases where there are allegations of domestic violence and/or child abuse and what the courts permit as testimony by experts. The authors explore the courts’ permissive rules in family courts, and the influence evaluators have on the resulting decisions in those court cases as well as how personal beliefs, knowledge, experiences, and biases of the evaluators can affect evaluators’ recommendations to family court judges. The rules which permit less use of traditional normative tools, such as tests and assessments, in the specialized environment of a divorce proceeding or allegations of abuse are examined by the authors. This exploration takes place in the context of the scientific and professional associations that govern the psychology community. Finally, the article examines how a child’s report of abuse can negatively impact the court when in the hands of an evaluator who lacks sufficient training in domestic violence and child abuse and/or lacks the tools necessary to properly assess the issues before the court.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45478,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Child Custody\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Child Custody\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15379418.2016.1130596\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Child Custody","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15379418.2016.1130596","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

本文探讨了评估人员在离婚和儿童监护案件中当前角色的影响,其中存在家庭暴力和/或虐待儿童的指控,以及法院允许专家作证的内容。作者探讨了法院在家事法院的许可规则,以及评估者对这些法院案件的最终判决的影响,以及评估者的个人信仰、知识、经验和偏见如何影响评估者对家事法院法官的建议。提交人审查了允许在离婚诉讼或虐待指控的专门环境中较少使用传统规范工具(如测试和评估)的规则。这种探索发生在管理心理学社区的科学和专业协会的背景下。最后,本文探讨了儿童虐待报告在评估人员缺乏足够的家庭暴力和儿童虐待培训和/或缺乏必要的工具来正确评估法院面前的问题时,如何对法院产生负面影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Relaxation of rules for science detrimental to children
ABSTRACT This article examines the impact of the current role of evaluators in divorce and child custody cases where there are allegations of domestic violence and/or child abuse and what the courts permit as testimony by experts. The authors explore the courts’ permissive rules in family courts, and the influence evaluators have on the resulting decisions in those court cases as well as how personal beliefs, knowledge, experiences, and biases of the evaluators can affect evaluators’ recommendations to family court judges. The rules which permit less use of traditional normative tools, such as tests and assessments, in the specialized environment of a divorce proceeding or allegations of abuse are examined by the authors. This exploration takes place in the context of the scientific and professional associations that govern the psychology community. Finally, the article examines how a child’s report of abuse can negatively impact the court when in the hands of an evaluator who lacks sufficient training in domestic violence and child abuse and/or lacks the tools necessary to properly assess the issues before the court.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Child Custody
Journal of Child Custody FAMILY STUDIES-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Since the days of Solomon, child custody issues have demanded extraordinary wisdom and insight. The Journal of Child Custody gives you access to the ideas, opinions, and experiences of leading experts in the field and keeps you up-to-date with the latest developments in the field as well as discussions elucidating complex legal and psychological issues. While it will not shy away from controversial topics and ideas, the Journal of Child Custody is committed to publishing accurate, balanced, and scholarly articles as well as insightful reviews of relevant books and literature.
期刊最新文献
The Child Abuse Risk Evaluation Dutch Version (CARE-NL): A retrospective validation study Assessment criteria in relocation cases: An exploratory study of Spanish family court Judges Adjustment of children in joint custody and associated variables: A systematic review First, do no harm to self: Perspectives around trauma-informed practice and secondary traumatic stress among rural child protective services workers Understanding the relationship between mothers’ childhood exposure to intimate partner violence and current parenting behaviors through adult intimate partner violence: A moderation analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1