Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T11:19:45.965Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Taking account of the ‘to and fro’ of children’s experiences in family law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 February 2016

Anne Graham  and
Robyn Fitzgerald
Anne Graham
Affiliation:
Centre for Children and Young People, Southern Cross UniversityLismore, New South Wales 2480. Email: agraham@scu.edu.au Email: rfuzgerald@scu.edu.au
Robyn Fitzgerald
Affiliation:
Centre for Children and Young People, Southern Cross UniversityLismore, New South Wales 2480. Email: agraham@scu.edu.au Email: rfuzgerald@scu.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper outlines the possibilities and tensions that emerge in legal and social discourse when popular images and narratives of children as ‘at risk’ are juxtaposed with more revised constructions of the child as capable and autonomous. The paper explores this shift in representation of children against a background of extensive family law reform currently under way in Australia. It then reports insights from a pilot study which found that children ‘to and fro’ between accounts of hurt and powerlessness associated with divorce, and their desire to participate in the processes and decisions taking place around them. The paper posits that discourses of participation taken up in research, practice and policy need to acknowledge a dialectic relationship between agency and vulnerability if we are to respond to children in ways that include rather than marginalise. The paper concludes by highlighting some of the challenges that exist for researchers and practitioners seeking to be open to new ways of thinking about children’s lives – ways based on an ethic that refuses the kind of normalisation and neat analyses conventionally pursued through research endeavours.

Type
Research Article
Information
Children Australia , Volume 31 , Issue 2 , 2006 , pp. 30 - 36
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amato, P. (1993) ‘Children’s adjustment to divorce: Theories, hypotheses and empirical support’, Journal of Marriage and the Family, 55, 23–38.Google Scholar
Amato, P. & Booth, A. (1997) A generation at risk: Growing up in an era of family upheaval, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Australian Government (2005) A new family law system: Government response to Every picture tells a story, Canberra: AGPS.Google Scholar
Bagshaw, D. (1998) Determining the best interests of the child – A grief and loss perspective, paper presented at the Third National Family Court Conference, Melbourne, October 20–24.Google Scholar
Ball, S. (1990) ‘Introducing Monsieur Foucault’, in Ball, S. (ed.), Foucault and Education, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Belenky, M., Field, B., McVicker, C., Goldberger, N. & Tarule, J. (1986) Women’s ways of knowing. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Britzman, D. (1995) ‘The question of belief: Writing poststructural ethnography’, Qualitative Studies in Education, 8(3), 229–238.Google Scholar
Brown, L. & Gilligan, C. (1992) Meeting at the Crossroads, New York: Ballantine Books.Google Scholar
Butler, I., Scanlon, L., Robinson, M., Douglas, G. & Murch, M. (2002) ‘Children’s involvement in their parents’ divorce: Implications for practice’, Children and Society, 16(2), 89–102.Google Scholar
Cashmore, J. (2003) ‘Children’s participation in family law matters’, in Hallett, C. & Prout, A. (eds), Hearing the voices of children. Social policy for a new century, London: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
Dewar, J. (1986) ‘The normal chaos of family life’, Modern Law Review, 61, 467–485.Google Scholar
Dunlop, R. & Burns, A. (1988) Don’t feel as if the world is caving in: A case study of adolescents in divorcing families, Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.Google Scholar
Emery, R. (1994) Renegotiating family relationships: Divorce, child custody and mediation, New York: Guildford Press.Google Scholar
Family Court of Australia (2003) Standing Committee on Family and Community Affairs Inquiry into Joint Custody arrangements in the Event of Family Separation: Part B Statistical Analysis and Part C Full Court Analysis, Family Court of Australia submission, 16 October.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, R. & Graham, A. (2003) Children’s voices in family law proceedings, paper presented at the Fifth Child and Family Policy Conference, Dunedin, June 26–28.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1980) Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977, New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1981) ‘Questions of method: An interview with Michel Foucault’, Ideology & Consciousness, 8, 3–14.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1982) “The subject and power’, in Dreyfus, H. & Rabinow, P. (eds.), Michel Foucault: Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics, Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1988) Michel Foucault: Politics, philosophy, culture: Interviews and other writings, 1977–1984, in Kritzman, L. (ed.), New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Funder, K. (1996) Remaking families: Adaption of parents and children to divorce, Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1993) New rules of sociological method, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Gorrell Barnes, G. (1999) ‘Divorce transitions: Identifying risk and promoting resilience for children and their parental relationships’, Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 5(4), 425–441.Google Scholar
Graham, A. (1996). Seasons for Growth Loss and Grief Education Program, Sydney: MacKillop Foundation.Google Scholar
Graham, A. (2004) ‘Life is like the seasons: Responding to change, loss and grief through a peer based education program’, Childhood Education, 80(6), 317–321.Google Scholar
Grover, S. (2004) ‘Why won’t they listen to us? On giving power and voice to children participating in social research’, Childhood, 11(1), 81–93.Google Scholar
Hart, R. (1992) Children’s participation from tokenism to citizenship, London: UNICEF.Google Scholar
Hetherington, E. (1999) ‘Should we stay together for the sake of the children?’ in Hetherington, E. (ed.), Coping with divorce, single parenting, and remarriage: A risk and resiliency perspective, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Hill, M., Davis, J., Prout, A. & Tisdall, K. (2004) ‘Moving the participation agenda forward’, Children and Society, 18(2), 77–96.Google Scholar
House of Representatives Standing Committee on Family and Community Affairs (2003) Every picture tells a story: Report on the inquiry into child custody arrangements in the event of family separation, Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.Google Scholar
House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs (2005) Report on the exposure draft of the Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Bill, Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.Google Scholar
James, A. & James, A. (1999) ‘Pump up the volume: Listening to children in separation and divorce’, Childhood, 6(2), 189–206.Google Scholar
James, A. Jenks, C. & Prout, A. (1998) Theorizing childhood, Cornwall: Polity.Press.Google Scholar
Kaganas, F. & Diduck, F. (2004) ‘Incomplete citizens: Changing images of post separation children’, Modern Law Review, 67(6), 959–981.Google Scholar
Lansdown, G. (1995) Taking part: Children’s participation in decision making, London: Institute for Public Policy Research.Google Scholar
Masten, A., Nest, K. & Garmezy, N. (1990) ‘Resilience and development: Contributions from the study of children who overcome adversity’, Development and Psychopathology. 2, 425–444.Google Scholar
National Children’s and Youth Law Centre & Defence for Children International (Australia) (2005) Non-Government Report on the Implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, Sydney: NCYLC.Google Scholar
Neale, B. & Smart, C. (1999) ‘In whose best interests? Theorising family life following parental separation or divorce’, in Day Sclater, S. & Piper, C. (eds.), Undercurrents of divorce, Hants: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
Neale, B. (2002) ‘Dialogues with children: Children, divorce and citizenship’, Childhood, 9(4), 455–475.Google Scholar
Ochiltree, G. & Amato, P. (1985) The child’s eye view of family life, Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.Google Scholar
Prout, A. & James, A. (1997) ‘A new paradigm for the sociology of childhood? Provenance, promise and problems’, in James, A. and Prout, A. (eds.), Constructing and reconstructing childhood, London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
Prout, A. (2000) ‘Children’s participation: Control and self-realisation in British late modernity’, Children and Society, 14, 304–315.Google Scholar
Pryor, J. & Rodgers, B. (2001) Children in changing families: Life after-parental separation, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Robinson, M., Butler, I., Scanlan, L., Douglas, G. & Murch, M. (2004) ‘Children’s experience of their parents’ divorce’, in Jensen, A. & McKee, L. (eds.), Children and the changing family. Between transformation and negotiation, London: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
Rodgers, B. & Pryor, J. (1998) Divorce and separation: The outcomes for children, York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.Google Scholar
Sampson, E. (1993) ‘Identity polities’, American Psychologist, 48, 1219–1230.Google Scholar
Sclater, S. & Piper, C. (2001) ‘Social exclusion and the welfare of the child’, Journal of Law & Society, 28(3), 409–29.Google Scholar
Smart, C., Neale, B. & Wade, A. (2001) The changing experience of childhood, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Smart, C., Wade, A. & Neale, B. (1999) ‘Objects of concern? Children and divorce’. Child and Family Law Quarterly, 11(4), 365–376.Google Scholar
Smith, A., Taylor, N. & Tapp, P. (2001) ‘Rethinking assumptions about children’s competence to participate in family decision-making after parental separation, divorce, separation and changing family practices’, Childhood, 10(2), 201–216.Google Scholar
Smith, A. (2002) ‘Interpreting and supporting participation rights: Contributions from sociocultural theory’, International Journal of Children’s Rights, 10, 73–88.Google Scholar
Smith, A., Taylor, N. & Tapp, P. (2003) ‘Rethinking children’s involvement in decision-making after parental separation’, paper presented at the Eighth Institute of Family Studies Conference: Steps Forward for Families: Research, Practice and Policy, Melbourne, November.Google Scholar
Smith, C. (1997) ‘Children’s rights: Judicial ambivalence and social resistance’, International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 11, 103–139.Google Scholar
Taylor, N.J. (1998) ‘The voice of children in family law’, Children’s Legal Rights Journal, 18(1), 2–14.Google Scholar
van Krieken, R. (2005) ‘The “best interests of the child” and parental separation: On the civilizing of parents’, Modern Law Review, 68(1), 25–48.Google Scholar
Wallerstein, J. & Kelly, J. (1980) Surviving the breakup, New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Worden, J.W. (1996) Children and grief. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar