MPM / Oliver Tambo Institute of Governance and Policy Studies

Child protection is one of the most demanding fields of social protection and requires comprehensive solutions which have a major impact on the lives of children and their families. It also includes the agenda of parental conflicts and related child custody proceedings. The thesis deals with the practice of child protection social workers at the municipal authorities with extended powers in the Czech Republic in solving parental disputes. The theoretical part introduces legal, educational and competence framework of child protection and sets it into the context of specific aspects and pitfalls associated with the profession and approach of child protection social workers to solving parental conflicts. It also provides recommendations on how to solve parental conflicts followed by a case study of child protection department at the Prague 8 Municipality District Authority. It identifies attributes of best practice that contribute to the best interests of the child, including participation of families, multidisciplinary cooperation, transparency of processes and neutrality, professionalism and reflexivity of child protection social workers. The empirical part focuses on the understanding of working conditions and attitudes of child protection social workers at the municipal authorities with extended...

The name of the thesis: Approaches of Selected Institucions to Domestic Violence Allegations during the Divorce Proceedings The author: Bc. Petra Vašinová The tutor: PhDr. Miloslav Čedík Pages, marks: 64, 145 176 Separate attachments: 2 Bibliography includes 71 items Abstract: The diploma thesis deals with issues of allegations of domestic violence in the process of custody proceeding before the divorce as viewed by related institutions. The key research subject covers different procedures of selected workers in a case of an allegation. Based on the initial interviews a question came up if the institutions use inner guidelines to deal with possible situations of clients manipulating workers. The next subject were the workers' opinions of the issues and of the allegation charges and sentences. The theoretical scope of the thesis contains relevant information about divorce, parental conflict, manipulation, ways of solving such problems, consequences, parental alienation syndrome and information about allegation in both Czech and foreign researching. The research method that I used was the Interpretative phenomenological analysis and the data was collected using semi-structured interviews. Open and Selective coding were used to evaluate the data. Based on the above mentioned method it has been found...

Child protection is one of the most demanding fields of social protection and requires comprehensive solutions which have a major impact on the lives of children and their families. It also includes the agenda of parental conflicts and related child custody proceedings. This thesis focuses on the practice of Czech social workers operating in the field of child protection at the municipal authorities with extended powers and on their approaches used to resolve parental disputes. The theoretical part is based on the conceptualization of practice from the perspective of a dynamic model of practice by Karen Healy, which builds on the interaction of several contexts, i.e. institutional contexts, formal professional base of social work, service users and their communities and framework for practice, and surveys them with regard to the agenda of parental disputes in detail. The empirical part aims to identify the variability of approaches used by Czech social workers operating in the field of child protection to resolve parental disputes. The research combines both qualitative and quantitative methodology and identifies a typology of defensive practice, reflexive practice, and intuitive practice. Individual types differ in the attitudes the child protection social workers express towards recognized...

Extensive research has been conducted about district courts granting abusive parents visitation rights, but less research has been done about an abusive parent being awarded sole custody of the child. This study is a discourse analysis aimed at examining how Swedish courts resonate when they award sole custody to a parent accused of abuse against a child or the other parent. In addition to this, the aim was to study how the courts take the child’s best interests, and right to have their views regarded, into account when reaching a verdict in custody cases. The result has shown that the court tends to focus on the child’s need for a good relationship with both parents, rather than the child’s own opinions, wishes and the potential risks caused by an abusive parent. Furthermore, the court tends to dismiss the child’s and the abused parent’s reports of abuse as untruthful. In the course of the analysis we have discovered that the court might see the abused child’s reports as deceptive for two reasons: either that the child isn’t considered to be competent enough to understand what it just expressed, or that the child has been coerced by the abused parent to express certain opinions. Additionally, the court sometimes uses the abused parent’s statement against them as a reason for them not being an appropriate custodian. The allegations of abuse can also be seen as a way for the abused parent to be granted sole custody. In conclusion, our result indicates that a child’s need for both parents is seen as the main reason for one parent to be awarded sole custody, which is aligned with the discourse of good contact. The risk of a child not having a relationship with both parents is considered to be greater than the risk of the child being abused and the abuse is therefore considered a non-risk, which aligns with the discourse of non-risk. If the court is to take the child’s views into account when reaching a decision, they must be considered as competent and truthful in their statements. As our results have shown, the court relying on the child’s statement is rarely the case. / Det har gjorts mycket forskning om att tingsrätter ger våldsamma föräldrar umgängesrätt, men mindre forskning har gjorts om att en våldsam förälder anförtros ensam vårdnad om barnet. Denna studie är en diskursanalys med syfte att undersöka hur svenska domstolar resonerar när de anförtror ensam vårdnad till en förälder som har anklagats för våld mot ett barn eller den andra föräldern. Förutom detta så var syftet också att studera hur domstolarna tar barnets bästa, och deras rätt komma till tals och bli lyssnade på, i beaktande när de kommer fram till ett beslut i vårdnadsmål. Resultatet har visat att domstolen tenderar att fokuserar på barnets behov av en god kontakt med båda föräldrarna, snarare än barnets egna åsikter, önskningar och den potentiella risk som en våldsam förälder kan medföra. Fortsättningsvis så har domstolen en tendens att förklara bort barnets och den våldsutsatta förälderns uppgifter om våld med att de är icke trovärdiga. Genom analysens gång så har vi upptäckt att domstolen kan anse att barnets uppgifter är icke trovärdiga av två anledningar: antingen att barnet inte ses som kompetent nog att förstå vad den precis har uttryckt, eller att barnet har blivit påverkat av en förälder att berätta diverse saker. Dessutom så använder domstolen ibland den våldsutsattas förälderns uppgifter emot den som en anledning för att den föräldern inte är en lämplig vårdnadshavare. Anklagelserna om våld kan också ses som ett sätt för den våldsutsatta föräldern att anförtros ensam vårdnad. Risken för att barnet inte får en god kontakt med båda föräldrarna anses vara mer betydande än risken för att barnet blir utsatt för våld och våldet anses därmed vara en icke-risk, vilket går i linje med icke-riskdiskursen. Om domstolen ska ta barnets synpunkter i beaktande när de kommer fram till ett beslut måste barnet anses vara kompetent och pålitlig i sina utsagor. Som vårt resultat har visat så förekommer det sällan att domstolen förlitar sig på barnets uppgifter.

La présente étude porte sur l’expérience vécue par les parents pendant une expertise en matière de garde d’enfant et de droits d’accès. Elle vise une meilleure compréhension de l’expérience des parents qui rencontrent un expert pour l’évaluation de leurs capacités parentales au nom du meilleur intérêt de leur enfant. Elle souhaite provoquer une réflexion des intervenants des milieux social et juridique sur les pratiques d’expertise, sur leur éthique et sur leur renouvellement. Il s’agit d’une étude qualitative de nature exploratoire. Les données proviennent d’entrevues semi-dirigées réalisées auprès de vingt parents, dix mères et dix pères. Ces parents ont été évalués par les experts du Service d’expertise psychosociale du Centre jeunesse de Montréal. L’analyse des données recueillies a été réalisée à partir de l’approche phénoménologique et de la méthode d’analyse de contenu. Les résultats permettent d’observer qu’en participant à une expertise psychosociale, les parents sont confrontés à un haut niveau de risque dans une relation de pouvoir avec l’expert où ils aspirent à être reconnus compétents en conformité avec la norme sociale régissant le meilleur intérêt de l’enfant. Le tiers des parents rencontrés ont été satisfaits de leur expérience, ce qui les a validés dans leur perception de la réalité ou restaurés dans leur dignité. Les deux tiers des parents rencontrés ont été insatisfaits de leur expérience, ce qui a confirmé leurs craintes quant aux comportements inadéquats de l’autre parent et alimenté une perte de confiance envers le système de justice. Ils ont eu l’impression d’avoir été invalidés et ont développé de l’amertume contre l’expert qui n’a pas répondu à leurs attentes et n’a pas su capter correctement, selon eux, leur dynamique familiale. Cette étude permet de comprendre l’importance primordiale pour le parent de la conservation ou de la restauration de sa dignité parentale. Par ailleurs, elle soulève la question du savoir-être et du savoir-faire des experts. La teneur critique des propos des parents face à certains experts oblige à une réflexion sérieuse sur les attitudes et les pratiques des experts en matière de garde d’enfant et de droits d’accès. / This study focuses on the experience of parents who have undergone an expertise in child custody and access rights. It seeks a better understanding of the experience lived by parents who meet with an expert to assess their parenting skills in regard with the best interest of their child. It aims to prompt stakeholders in the social and legal practices of expertise to reflect on their ethics and the improvement of their practices. This is an exploratory qualitative study. The data come from semi-directed interviews conducted with twenty parents, including ten mothers and ten fathers. These parents were evaluated by experts of the Service d'expertise psychosociale du Centre jeunesse de Montréal. Data analysis was carried out using the phenomenological approach and the method of content analysis. Results indicate that by participating in a psychosocial evaluation, parents are faced with a high level of risk in a power relationship with the expert, in which they aspire to be recognized as competent in accordance with social norms governing the best interest of their child. A third of the interviewed parents were satisfied with their experience, which has validated their perception of reality or restored their dignity. Two thirds of interviewed parents were however dissatisfied with their experience, which confirmed their fears about the inappropriate behaviour of the other parent and aggravated a loss of confidence in the justice system. These parents had the impression of having been invalidated and have developed some bitterness against the expert who did not meet their expectations and did not properly grasp, according to them, the family dynamics. This study helps understand the paramount importance for parents to preserve or restore their parental dignity. It also raises questions on the competency and adequacy of the experts. The critical views of the expertise that many parents shared emphasize the necessity for the experts to seriously hreview their attitude and practices in child custody and access rights.

Il est connu que de nombreux enfants vivent la séparation conjugale de leurs parents. Suite à cette séparation, les enfants vivent majoritairement avec leur mère (parent gardien), tout en maintenant des liens avec leur père (parent non gardien). Bien que les principes de droit suggèrent que l’enfant ait le droit de préserver des liens avec chacun de ses parents à la suite de la séparation conjugale, ces liens ne sont plus assurés sur une base quotidienne et peuvent être affectés. Vivant la séparation de ses parents, l’enfant peut être exposé aux conflits parentaux puisque la séparation peut augmenter leur intensité. L’objectif de ce mémoire est de mieux comprendre la perception des parents non gardiens de leur lien avec leur enfant dans un contexte où les conflits parentaux perdurent à la suite de la séparation conjugale. Un sous-objectif est de documenter les facteurs qui influencent les liens entre les parents non gardiens et leur enfant à la suite de la séparation conjugal. Pour ce faire, des entrevues individuelles semi-directives ont été effectuées auprès de huit parents non gardiens. Une analyse de contenu thématique concernant leur perspective sur l’objet de recherche a été effectuée. Selon la perspective des parents non gardiens, les résultats montrent que la qualité de la relation entre eux et leur enfant se maintient positivement. Le facteur le plus prédominant est les conflits parentaux post-séparation. Il en ressort qu’ils alimentent d’autres facteurs, tels que les modalités de garde d’enfant et droits d’accès, la fréquence de contacts entre les parents non gardiens et leur enfant, les comportements des enfants à l’égard de leur parent non gardien, l’engagement parental des parents non gardiens ainsi que la relation parentale post-séparation. / It is known that many children are living with parents who are conjugally separated. With this in mind, following the separation the children mostly live with their mother (resident parent), while maintaining contact with their father (non-resident parent). Although the principles of law suggest that the child has the right to maintain ties with both parents after marital separation, these visits are not always done on a daily basis and the qyality of their relationship can be affected. Living the separation of his parents, the child may be exposed to parental conflict because the separation can increase their intensity. The objective of this thesis is to better understand the perception of the non-resident parents and their relationship with their child in a context where parental conflict persists after marital separation. A fundamental objective is to document the factors that influence the relationship between non-resident parents and their children after the marital separation. In order to achieve these objectives, eight non-resident parents were interviewed using individual, semi-directive interview techniques. An analysis of the thematic content pertaining to their perspective on this research subject was then conducted. From the perspective of the non-resident parents, the results have shown that the quality of the relationship between them and their child remains positive. The most dominant factor is post-separation parental conflict. It appears they feed on other factors such as, child care arrangements and access rights. Also, the frequency of visits between the non-resident parents and their child, the child's attitude towards their non-resident parent, the parental involvement of non-resident parents and the parental relationship post-separation, all have an impact.

With the maturation of the child custody investigative process, the role of investigators and the process of these investigations have come under increasing scrutiny. The investigators are expected to be objective, neutral, and professional while following procedures that conform to model standards. However, this assumption of a lack of bias has been largely overlooked in the literature regarding the investigative process. It is assumed that investigators should self-monitor to ensure that their stance is objective and neutral. Furthermore, this position of neutrality and objectivity is assumed to be intuitive and natural. By using a case study, this thesis investigates and describes the process of a child custody investigation predicated on a constructivist epistemology. It highlights the impossibility of any investigator to be objective and neutral in any investigation automatically, regardless of the procedures and methods employed. The thesis highlights the participant observer status of investigators. An aim of the thesis is thus to sensitise investigators to this inevitable vulnerability with the expectation that such an awareness may allow investigators to establish processes to render investigations consciously more balanced, considered, and transparent. A further aim is to describe a child custody evaluation from an eco-systemic perspective by contextualising the investigation in the larger ecosystem to which it belongs. This description includes the investigation as part of an evolving problem-determined system. An awareness of this wider and evolving context may enable investigators to approximate a position of objectivity and neutrality more effectively. It may also act as an inoculation against the ‘contamination’ of the investigator by the investigative system. With the maturation of the child custody investigative process, the role of investigators and the process of these investigations have come under increasing scrutiny. The investigators are expected to be objective, neutral, and professional while following procedures that conform to model standards. However, this assumption of a lack of bias has been largely overlooked in the literature regarding the investigative process. It is assumed that investigators should self-monitor to ensure that their stance is objective and neutral. Furthermore, this position of neutrality and objectivity is assumed to be intuitive and natural. By using a case study, this thesis investigates and describes the process of a child custody investigation predicated on a constructivist epistemology. It highlights the impossibility of any investigator to be objective and neutral in any investigation automatically, regardless of the procedures and methods employed. The thesis highlights the participant observer status of investigators. An aim of the thesis is thus to sensitise investigators to this inevitable vulnerability with the expectation that such an awareness may allow investigators to establish processes to render investigations consciously more balanced, considered, and transparent. A further aim is to describe a child custody evaluation from an eco-systemic perspective by contextualising the investigation in the larger ecosystem to which it belongs. This description includes the investigation as part of an evolving problem-determined system. An awareness of this wider and evolving context may enable investigators to approximate a position of objectivity and neutrality more effectively. It may also act as an inoculation against the ‘contamination’ of the investigator by the investigative system. xviii In South Africa, we have yet to formulate a document that establishes a model standard of practice or specific, dedicated training in this area. This thesis identifies what could be included in both areas (in addition to the expected protocols and procedures) by describing the investigator’s position as an expert learner, rather than just an ‘expert’. In line with current literature, it highlights the benefits of thinking consciously and in a considered manner. Furthermore, it indicates the benefits of a team approach to investigations, which could be considered an area for further investigation. In South Africa, we have yet to formulate a document that establishes a model standard of practice or specific, dedicated training in this area. This thesis identifies what could be included in both areas (in addition to the expected protocols and procedures) by describing the investigator’s position as an expert learner, rather than just an ‘expert’. In line with current literature, it highlights the benefits of thinking consciously and in a considered manner. Furthermore, it indicates the benefits of a team approach to investigations, which could be considered an area for further investigation. / Psychology / D. Litt. et Phil. ( Psychology)

La présente étude porte sur l’expérience vécue par les parents pendant une expertise en matière de garde d’enfant et de droits d’accès. Elle vise une meilleure compréhension de l’expérience des parents qui rencontrent un expert pour l’évaluation de leurs capacités parentales au nom du meilleur intérêt de leur enfant. Elle souhaite provoquer une réflexion des intervenants des milieux social et juridique sur les pratiques d’expertise, sur leur éthique et sur leur renouvellement. Il s’agit d’une étude qualitative de nature exploratoire. Les données proviennent d’entrevues semi-dirigées réalisées auprès de vingt parents, dix mères et dix pères. Ces parents ont été évalués par les experts du Service d’expertise psychosociale du Centre jeunesse de Montréal. L’analyse des données recueillies a été réalisée à partir de l’approche phénoménologique et de la méthode d’analyse de contenu. Les résultats permettent d’observer qu’en participant à une expertise psychosociale, les parents sont confrontés à un haut niveau de risque dans une relation de pouvoir avec l’expert où ils aspirent à être reconnus compétents en conformité avec la norme sociale régissant le meilleur intérêt de l’enfant. Le tiers des parents rencontrés ont été satisfaits de leur expérience, ce qui les a validés dans leur perception de la réalité ou restaurés dans leur dignité. Les deux tiers des parents rencontrés ont été insatisfaits de leur expérience, ce qui a confirmé leurs craintes quant aux comportements inadéquats de l’autre parent et alimenté une perte de confiance envers le système de justice. Ils ont eu l’impression d’avoir été invalidés et ont développé de l’amertume contre l’expert qui n’a pas répondu à leurs attentes et n’a pas su capter correctement, selon eux, leur dynamique familiale. Cette étude permet de comprendre l’importance primordiale pour le parent de la conservation ou de la restauration de sa dignité parentale. Par ailleurs, elle soulève la question du savoir-être et du savoir-faire des experts. La teneur critique des propos des parents face à certains experts oblige à une réflexion sérieuse sur les attitudes et les pratiques des experts en matière de garde d’enfant et de droits d’accès. / This study focuses on the experience of parents who have undergone an expertise in child custody and access rights. It seeks a better understanding of the experience lived by parents who meet with an expert to assess their parenting skills in regard with the best interest of their child. It aims to prompt stakeholders in the social and legal practices of expertise to reflect on their ethics and the improvement of their practices. This is an exploratory qualitative study. The data come from semi-directed interviews conducted with twenty parents, including ten mothers and ten fathers. These parents were evaluated by experts of the Service d'expertise psychosociale du Centre jeunesse de Montréal. Data analysis was carried out using the phenomenological approach and the method of content analysis. Results indicate that by participating in a psychosocial evaluation, parents are faced with a high level of risk in a power relationship with the expert, in which they aspire to be recognized as competent in accordance with social norms governing the best interest of their child. A third of the interviewed parents were satisfied with their experience, which has validated their perception of reality or restored their dignity. Two thirds of interviewed parents were however dissatisfied with their experience, which confirmed their fears about the inappropriate behaviour of the other parent and aggravated a loss of confidence in the justice system. These parents had the impression of having been invalidated and have developed some bitterness against the expert who did not meet their expectations and did not properly grasp, according to them, the family dynamics. This study helps understand the paramount importance for parents to preserve or restore their parental dignity. It also raises questions on the competency and adequacy of the experts. The critical views of the expertise that many parents shared emphasize the necessity for the experts to seriously hreview their attitude and practices in child custody and access rights.

Syftet med studien är att bidra med kunskap kring hur diskurser konkurrerar om vad som är barns bästa och hur dessa styr tingsrättens beslut vid vårdnadstvister när det finns uppgifter om pappans våld mot mamma och eventuellt barn. Det empiriska materialet utgick ifrån 14 domar där det fanns uppgifter om pappans våld inom familjen. Tingsrätten hade som uppgift att döma huruvida vårdnaden skulle vara gemensam eller ensam för föräldrarnas gemensamma barn. Studien är kvalitativ och Norman Faircloughs diskursanalys används både som teori och metod tillsammans med socialkonstruktionism, med betoning på genus som social konstruktion. Resultatet i studien visar på två diskurser som tingsrätten motiverar sina beslut utifrån, där båda syftar till att argumentera eller göra trovärdigt vad som är för barnets bästa. I ”behovsdiskursen” betonas vikten av en god och nära relation till båda föräldrarna, emedan ”riskdiskursen” betonar risken för att barnet kan fara illa. Dessa två diskurser påverkar domstolens syn på föräldrarnas samarbete, vilket i sin tur påverkar tingsrättens beslut om gemensam respektive ensam vårdnad. Även på vilket sätt tingsrätten tar upp våldet och benämner våldet påverkas också utifrån vilken av de två diskurserna som råder. Inom behovsdiskursen bedömdes samarbetet som tillräckligt bra vid minsta möjliga tecken på att föräldrarna kunde enas i olika gemensamma beslut rörande barnet, vilket resulterade i gemensam vårdnad. Uppgifter om våld från pappan omformulerades eller omnämndes aldrig, vilket gjorde att våldet inom behovsdiskursen förminskades och fick en underordnad betydelse. Inom riskdiskursen bedömdes det svåra samarbetet mellan föräldrarna utgöra en risk för att barnet skulle fara illa, vilket gjorde att utfallet här blev ensam vårdnad. Inom riskdiskursen synliggjordes och problematiserades våldet i mycket högre grad. / The purpose of the study is to contribute with knowledge about how discourses compete for what is in the best interests of the child and how these govern the district court's decisions in custody disputes when there is information about the father's violence against the mother and any children. The empirical material was based on 14 judgments where there was information about the father's violence within the family. The district court's task was to judge whether custody should be joint or single for the parents' common children. The study is qualitative and Norman Fairclough's discourse analysis is used both as a theory and method together with social constructionism with emphasis on a gender perspective as an additional theory. The results of the study show two discourses from which the district court justifies its decisions, there both aim to argue or make credible what is in the best interests of the child. The “Discourse of needs” emphasizes the importance of a good and close relationship with both parents, while the “Discourse of risk” emphasizes the risk that the child may be harmed. The court's reasoning regarding the parents' cooperation is affected by which of the two discourses prevails. The way in which they address the violence and denominates it violence is also affected on the basis of the discourse on which the court is based. Violence tended to be deminished in both discourses, however, it became clear within the discourse of needs.