- Email: [email protected]
The role of parental communication, child's wishes and child's gender in social workers' custody recommendations
Children and Youth Services Review 70 (2016) 302–308
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Children and Youth Services Review journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth
The role of parental communication, child's wishes and child's gender in social workers' custody recommendations Hani Nouman, Ph.D., Guy Enosh, Ph.D. ⁎, Pnina Niselbaum-Atzur, M.S.W. School of Social Work, University of Haifa, Israel
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 9 June 2016 Received in revised form 28 September 2016 Accepted 28 September 2016 Available online 29 September 2016 Keywords: Custody Decision making Parents communication Child wishes Professional judgement Maternal bias
a b s t r a c t Social-workers' custody recommendations are influenced by professional and personal factors. In this study, we examine three factors: parental-communication, child's-wishes, and child's-gender. An experimental-survey-design was implemented, using case-descriptions, as well as professional-characteristic of the social-workers. Data were collected from 120 Israeli social-workers. The study findings reveal that interparental communication plays a significant role in the social worker's decision. Whereas deficient interparental communication leads to bias in the decision to award parental custody according to the parent's gender, with a preference for the mother over the father, as hypothesized, intact interparental communication increases the likelihood of joint custody, but still gives preference to the mother. Social workers tend to consider the children's wishes as long as their preference is for maternal custody. When children express a paternal preference, their wishes carry no weight. Furthermore, child's gender does not influence social workers' parental custody recommendation. In cases where the preference for sole maternal custody may appear as biased or untoward, a preference was awarded to joint-custody rather than to paternal-custody. The findings highlight that traditional-social-norms impact social-worker's decision. We emphasize the importance organizational mechanisms and standards that provide more efficient and egalitarian decision-making. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction With today's high divorce rates, many children around the world are caught in the custody conflict between parents. This dispute may be resolved as the parents come to an agreement. However, if an agreement has not been reached, in Israel, as in most other countries, the court is required to decide which parent will receive custody as well as dictating the rights of the non-custodial parent regarding contact with the child (Legal Capacity and Guardianship Law, 1962). This decision should, as far as possible, consider the best interest of the children and their rights, and reflect their psychological well-being (Zafran, 2013). To assess the best interest of the child, according to Israeli law (Legal Procedures Regarding Minors, Mentally Ill and Missing Persons, 1955), the courts are authorized to appoint expert social workers to express their opinions on this issue in a review to be submitted to the court (Ben-Ami, 2011). These opinions serve the family courts on three levels (Zafran, 2013): (1) on the factual level, by describing the reality of the children and their familial and life circumstances (Silman Committee, 2014); (2) on the professional level, by providing an authorized interpretation of the reality (Tippins & Wittmann, 2005), namely an evaluation of parental efficacy and prediction of future parental functioning ⁎ Corresponding author at: School of Social Work, University of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel. E-mail address: [email protected] (G. Enosh).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.09.034 0190-7409/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
based on parents' personal characteristics and past and present functioning (Tzaddik, 2001); and (3) on the recommendation level, by helping to channel the decision regarding custody as well as the extent of responsibility that will be given to each parent. Studies show that, in most cases, the court follows the social worker's recommendations (Arkin, 2005; Frishtik & Yagelnik, 2007). 1.1. Factors influencing social workers' decision making The social workers' opinion regarding parental custody draws on the principle of ‘best interest of the child’, which anchors the range of the child's rights, needs, interests, and provides a benchmark for making decisions (Silman Committee, 2014). However, a major criticism undermines the use of this interpretive system due to the lack of clear definition and agreement on what is the best interest of the child (e.g., Chambers, 1984; Sagi, 1987; Sagi & Dvir, 1993; Braver, Cookston, & Cohen, 2002; Warshak, 2011). Those criticisms are summarized by Warshak (2011) in four arguments against the best interest standard: First, the “best interest” standard is inherently subjective by nature, open to personal interpretation, thus both parties may persuade themselves that they stand a chance of getting custody. Second, the lack of one decisive factor leads the parties to engage in character assassination of each other. Third, courts are left with no guidance or objective basis to choose between fit parents. Fourth, courts tend to depend too heavily on mental health professionals in their decision making processes.
H. Nouman et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 70 (2016) 302–308
Braver et al. (2002) bring along a fifth concern – the gender bias. While some researchers claim that the system is biased against women who are relatively lacking in financial resources to engage in the custody battle, others claim that the system is biased against men and in favor of women as the more “fit” parents. Therefore, this view holds that the doctrine of the best interest of the child is subject to manipulation, abuse, and ethical bias according to the worldview of the determining authority and does not faithfully serve the child's needs (Rotlevy Committee, 2003). An additional criticism raises doubts about the possibility of forming a professional opinion based on this principle to determine parental efficacy and to decide on the optimal custodial arrangement (Tippins & Wittmann, 2005) due to the limited ability to predict future parental functioning (Schnitt, 1979; Ministry of Justice, 2011). Furthermore, researchers (e.g., Greenberg, Gould-Saltman, & Gottlieb, 2008; Martindale, 2005) have warned against the tendency to look for confirming evidence for one's beliefs and biases, while overlooking and dismissing disconfirming evidence (“confirmatory bias” and “confirmatory distortion”; Martindale, 2005), the possible influence of cognitive dissonance, and suggestibility of mental health professionals (Martindale, 2005; Strohmer, Shivy, & Chiodo, 1990), and thus recommended self criticism and other checks and balances, including consultation with colleagues (Greenberg et al., 2008); comparison of notes taken contemporaneously with final reports, external inspection of documentation used in forming reports, and evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of the assessment-tools used (Martindale, 2005). Thus, this decision, which is supposed to be a rational consideration, unprejudiced, and take into account the implications of each of the outcomes for the child (van Bemmel & Helder, 1997), is often influenced by heuristic factors, that lead to bias in professional judgment (e.g., Enosh & Bayer-Topilsky, 2015; Enosh, Nouman, & Anabtawi, in press; Enosh, Nouman, & Sharon, in press). This question is sharpened against the background of research findings indicating that personal, professional (Lulu, 2000; Mattison, 2000), social, and cultural factors (Cohen & Segal-Engelchin, 2000; Hacker & Frenkel, 2005; Hall & Paradice, 2007) cause bias in social workers' professional discretion in situations in which they are required to predict future behavior. Previous research (Enosh, Nouman, & Anabtawi, in press; Enosh, Nouman, & Sharon, in press) indicated that cultural norms may cause bias in favor of the mother due to a tendency to reject untraditional models of joint custody or sole custody of the father (Crawford & Bradley, 2016). The traditional models are anchored in the accepted legislative system in Israel based on the “Tender Years Doctrine” (Legal Capacity and Guardianship Law, 1962), according to which, preference is given to the mother for custody of children up to age six. The legislation is based on the social construction that sees the mother figure as more ideal than the father to fulfill the needs of the child at this age (Frishtik, 2005; Ministry of Justice, 2011; Schnitt, 1994) Although the “Doctrine” is limited to early ages, and the law does not declare anything specific regarding older ages, the traditional social norms that underlie this doctrine still persist in that the mother is considered the “natural” custodial parent even when dealing with older ages (Enosh, Nouman, & Anabtawi, in press; Perlman, 2012). The practices that prioritize traditional gender role models, by which the mother is considered the “natural” caretaker of the children, while the father is not, have been the target of much criticism (Crawford & Bradley, 2016; Fagan, Day, Lamb, & Cabrera, 2014). It has been claimed that this approach violates the children's right to a meaningful relationship with their father, hinders the court from making a decision appropriate for each individual child, and expresses a social gender norm according to which the mother is primarily responsible for raising the children (Crawford & Bradley, 2016; Perlman, 2012). However, is joint responsibility possible without interparental communication? Moreover, are positive communication and mutual appreciation prerequisites for joint responsibility? (Fransson, Sarkadi, Hjern, & Bergström, 2016; Nielsen, 2015). Recent summary of 40 studies
303
(Nielsen, 2015) has demonstrated that the answer is not straightforward. Indeed, it is not clear that poorer communication and higher levels of conflict between parents are associated with poorer outcomes for children. Furthermore, Warshak (2014), relating to studies regarding timesharing and sleep-over of small children (four year old or younger) at the fathers' home, indicate a beneficial role and do not indicate any harmful influences. Thus, according to Warshak, time sharing among divorced parents should be considered even at very early ages, let alone older ones. These questions illustrate the complexity of the issue of “the best interest of the child” and require the social workers' assessment and critical reflexivity (D'Cruz, Gillingham, & Melendez, 2007; Schön, 1983) when forming a professional opinion. It seems that despite the divorcing parents' wish to jump the hurdle of separating parenthood from couple-hood, the post-crisis reality is often different. In many cases, the interpersonal conflict penetrates the childparent relationship so that the children are intensively and chronically exposed to a tense family climate, which may even include severe verbal and physical violence (Hetherington, 1999). The conflict is sometimes intensified if the parents are combating over custody and visiting rights in court (Kelly, 2002). Research shows that chronic interparental conflict that is rife with confrontations has negative implications for the children's behavior and emotional adjustment (Kelly, 2000; Kelly & Emery, 2003). Nevertheless, the breakup of the family unit sometimes ends in a less destructive fashion, accompanied by cooperative and mutually respectful interparental interaction. Even so, it is clear that the situation is not completely dispute-free and requires cooperation between the parents to create a safety-net for the children. The advantage of this partnership is in arrangements involving both parents to a large extent, so that the father also can provide significant support for the child's development (Kuehnle & Drozd, 2012). The wishes and gender of the child in question are additional important components to consider when examining the best interest of the child in the process of determining custody in divorce cases. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989; Section 12) obliges the signatory countries to give any children, who are capable, the right to express an opinion freely on any issue pertaining to them, while giving appropriate weight to their opinions, in accordance with their age and maturity. Accordingly, in Israel, there is support for the approach that examines the child's wishes, and an examination of the child's viewpoint is anchored in the social workers' functioning within the framework of preparing the report to file with the court. According to the report of the last professional review in Israel by the “Schnitt public committee for the examination of the legal aspects of parental responsibility in divorce cases” (Ministry of Justice, 2011), in Section 9 dealing with “parental custody arrangements by courts in cases of separation”, it was declared that the court will take into account the child's wishes, contingent on the developmental faculties of the child as well as the willingness of the two parents to cooperate in fulfilling their parental responsibility, the parents abilities to fulfill such responsibility, the treatment given by the parents to the child, and the willingness and ability of each of the parents to facilitate the relationships. Furthermore, research indicates that social workers rarely tend to relate to children's wishes in various contexts, including family reunification (DavidsonArad & Benbenishty, 2008), as well as custody disputes (Mantle, Leslie, Parsons, Plenty, & Shaffer, 2006; Prout, 2003; Skjørten, 2013; Smart, 2002). Regarding the child's gender, the question is raised as to whether the gender context is relevant when assessing the best interest of the child. For the child's developmental requirements, is it preferable to award custody of sons to the father and custody of daughters to the mother? Previous research indicated that cultural norms may cause bias in favor of the mother due to a tendency to reject untraditional models of joint custody or sole custody of the father (Crawford & Bradley, 2016; Enosh, Nouman, & Anabtawi, in press; Enosh, Nouman, & Sharon, in press). Prevailing social policy emanates from the traditional
304
H. Nouman et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 70 (2016) 302–308
perception that still gives the father an employment-related role, despite his significant involvement in his family's life (Lamb & Sagi, 2014), and gives the mother the primary responsibility for childcare (Cabrera, Tamis-LeMonda, Bradley, Hofferth, & Lamb, 2000; Frishtik, 2005). The professional literature indicates that fathers are awarded custody of their sons more often than custody of their daughters (Dahl & Moretti, 2004). This is attributed to the emotional relationship that forms between fathers and sons, leading to their investing greater effort in the fight for custody of their sons, and to the view that the father is perceived as able to provide better quality and more efficient parenting for boys in light of the developmental requirements in the gender context (Lundberg, McLanahan, & Rose, 2007). According to the review thus far, social workers' considerations in the process of determining parental custody in divorce cases requires theoretical and practical rationalization to pave the way for the judges who have to make the final decision. However, these considerations, as broadly described, might be biased and influenced by various personal and professional factors. Therefore, this study focused on examining three factors that might impact this bias in the process of forming the professional opinion: parental communication, the child's wishes, and the child's gender. We examined the following three hypotheses – H1: In situations in which the inter-parental communication is conflictual, social workers will recommend custody to the mother; H2: Social workers will tend to consider the child's wishes when determining parental custody; and H3: Social workers will tend to consider the child's gender when recommending parental custody; father's custody will be recommended for boys and mother's custody will be recommended for girls. 2. Methods 2.1. Sample and sampling procedures A purposive nonprobability sample (Patton, 2011) of social workers, including child-welfare officers from the general municipal agencies in Israel who work with families and with children of divorced parents, that were involved in processes of parental custody allocation. The questionnaires were admininistered to the social workers personally by one of the researchers, as well as via professionals in the field, alongside an introductory letter explaining the essence and aims of the study. Overall, 200 social workers were approached, of whom 120 responded (60% response rate) (Table 1). Of those, most were female (87%), married (87%), the average age was 38.2 (SD = 10.7), the average seniority was 9.5 years (SD = 7.98). In terms of education, 39% had a BSW degree
Table 1 Sample characteristics (N = 120). Characteristic
Mean (±SD)/percent
Female Married Age Children Seniority Education BSW degree Studying toward their MSW degree MSW degree PhD degree Rolea Family social workers Youth protection officers Child protection officers for legal proceedings Child social workers Youth social workers
87% 87% 38.2 (±10.7) 3.85 (±2.07) 9.5 (±7.98) 39% 24% 35% 2% 80% 11% 10% 54% 47%
a Many workers held two or more roles simultaneously, therefore the list of roles sums up to more than 100%.
(the basic professional degree in Israel), 24% were studying toward their MSW degree; 35% had achieved their MSW degree, and 2% held PhD degree. Most of them (80%) were family social workers. Most carried symoultaneusly other functions (roles) at the child welfare system, including youth protection officers (11%), child protection officers for legal proceedings (10%), child social workers (54%), and youth social workers (47%). 2.2. Instruments Each study respondent was given a two-part questionnaire consisting of background questions and eight case-descriptions (vignettes). Background questionnaire: the socio-demographic background questionnaire included issues such as age, years of professional experience (seniority), gender, professional education, and professional role (general practitioner, family social worker, youth protection officer, and child protection officer for legal proceedings). It should be noted that in many cases the same respondent could fulfill more than one role at a time. Case descriptions: eight detailed case descriptions (vignettes) were presented to each participant, each followed by one question: What type of custody would you recommend? 1) Father, 2) Mother, 3) Other (please specify).1 The case descriptions were based on factorial design (Alexander & Becker, 1978; Atzmüller & Steiner, 2010), consisting of an experimental design embedded within a survey framework. The vignettes were derived from real-life case descriptions obtained from social services records. The manipulated variables in the 2 × 2 × 2 experimental design included parental communication (cooperative/conflictual), child's wishes (live with father/live with mother), and child's gender (male/female). To neutralize the possible effects of the order in which the cases appeared we systematically shuffled all eight cases by constructing four variously arranged versions; those four versions were distributed randomly to the respondents. By embedding factorial manipulations of such issues within a generalized description of a family unit, we intended to achieve a reduction of the decision process to the specific factors, while controlling for the myriad idiosyncratic factors that are present within each case, by unifying the general description. In order to avoid the legal ramifications of the Tender Years Doctrine, all children were described as seven or older and younger than sixteen. Validity and relaiability of cases: We validated the case descriptions using inter-rater reliability among three researchers and three highranking practitioners from the child protection services. We presented each expert with case description of cooperative and conflictual couples involved in custody dispute and asked to rank the level of conflict involved. These case descriptions were based on real-life cases from social workers' experience. Only cases on which high agreement on parental communication (cooperative/conflictual) was achieved, were included in the final vignettes. Inter-rater agreement among the six judges retained was 0.94 (for procedures, see Ebel, 1951; MacLennan, 1993). 2.3. Analysis The social workers' recommendations regarding parental custody were examined in the study, as mentioned, through the eight cases presented to them. Therefore, the results were analyzed according to the number of cases rather than the number of respondents. Approximately 120 social workers evaluated 960 cases. All the analyses were conducted using the 14-STATA (StataCorp, 2015) software. To analyze the effects of the experimental manipulations on the recommendation, a logistic regression analysis was performed. All the regression models controlled for the respondents' personal and professional 1 It should be noted that in the current study, 98% of participants marked “joint custody” in the “other” parental custody item, thus, this category was eventually so defined.
H. Nouman et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 70 (2016) 302–308
characteristics, which included family status, gender, number of children, year of birth, and job. Furthermore, since all the analyses were conducted at the case level, in order to control for possible clustering at the respondent level, we used robust logistic-regression in STATA (StataCorp, 2015), a procedure equivalent to Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE; Rogers, 1993; Williams, 2000).
2.4. Ethical considerations The participants were informed about the goals of the study, which were defined as examining attitudes of social workers regarding custody recommendations in disputed cases. They were also informed that participation is anonymous, and that by filling the questionnaire they consent to participate in the study. The study was approved by the committee for ethical research with human beings.
3. Results 3.1. The influence of interparental communication, child's wishes, and child's gender on parental custody recommendations Table 2 presents chi-square tests for the impact of quality of parental communication, child's wishes, and child's gender, on the custody recommendation of the social workers. We hypothesized that interparental communication will influence the type of parental custody recommendation. Indeed, a chi-square test indicated as hypothesized (χ2 = 46.74, df = 2, p b 0.001), that in cases in which interparental communication was conflictual, the tendency was to recommend custody of the mother over custody of the father (65% versus 12%), even though a tendency to recommend joint custody was also observed (23%). In contrast, when the interparental communication was cooperative, the social workers did not tend to recommend paternal or maternal custody equally, but continued to show preference for awarding custody to the mother (47.5% versus 8.5%). However, in nearly half of these cases, the tendency was to recommend joint custody (44%). When we examined the hypothesis that social workers will consider the child's wishes when recommending parental custody, we found this to be partially true. It applied when the child expressed a preference for the mother (74%) but not when the child expressed a preference for the father (18%) (χ2 = 145.40, df = 2, p b 0.001). In cases by which the child's preference was for the father, either maternal custody was recommended (38.5%), or more often, joint custody was recommended (43.5%). An examination of the hypothesis regarding the child's gender showed no difference in child custody recommendations for boys and girls (χ2 = 5.28, df = 2, p N 0.1). Regarding cases in which custody was awarded to the father, 12% were awarded custody when the child was male and 8% when the child was female. We further examined whether there were any differences between male and female social workers in their recommendations, and found no significant difference (χ2 = 4.65, df = 2, p = 0.1).
305
3.2. The influence of interparental communication, child's wishes, child's gender, and social workers' personal and professional characteristics on parental custody recommendations To examine the influence of interparental communication, the child's wishes, and the child's gender on predicting parental custody recommendations, controlling for the social worker's personal characteristics (gender, education, number of children) and professional characteristics (job and professional seniority), we performed three logistic regression models, one for each type of parental custody. Each model was performed in two steps. The first step included only the manipulated variables, the second step added to those variables the background variables. The purpose of adding the background variables was to control for any possible effect of those variables, and to demonstrate that the effects of the manipulated variables persist over and beyond any possible effect of such socio-demographic variable. The findings are presented in Table 3. The three regression models that were examined were found to be statistically significant (χ2 = 173.90, df = 14, p b 0.01; χ2 = 80.13, df = 14, p b 0.01; χ2 = 104.04, df = 14, p b 0.01). The findings indicate that interparental communication had the strongest influence on the tendency to recommend maternal or joint custody, as presented in Table 2. As hypothesized, the child's wishes influenced the social worker's parental custody recommendation, but the child's gender did not necessarily weight the recommendation for paternal custody. That is to say, when the children preferred to stay with the mother, their wish was usually granted, regardless of their gender. The findings also showed that the social workers' personal and professional characteristics did not affect the recommendation for parental custody, except for the number of children. The more children the social workers had, the greater was their tendency to recommend maternal custody and lesser their tendency to recommend joint custody. 4. Discussion Social workers shoulder a large amount of responsibility when forming an opinion on parental custody. At all times, they have to ensure that they have the necessary tools and conceptual knowledge to evaluate the child's psychological well-being and parental functioning. Notwithstanding the demand for objectivity, decision making in a complex and ambiguous reality might lead to bias according to the decision maker's worldview. This study examined the influence of interparental communication, the child's wishes, and the child's gender on the social worker's decision regarding parental custody. The study hypotheses, which examined the influence of these factors using an experimental manipulation procedure, presented a complex picture. The study findings reveal that interparental communication plays a significant role in the social worker's decision in the case under discussion. Whereas conflictual interparental communication leads to a tendency to award parental custody according to the parent's gender, with a preference for the mother over the father, as hypothesized. Cooperative interparental communication does not indicate equal preference for mother and father, but still gives preference to the mother and
Table 2 Comparison of parental communication, child's wishes, and child's gender for each type of recommended parental custody.
Parental communication (deficient) Parental communication (intact) Child's wishes (mother) Child's wishes (father) Child's gender (male) Child's gender (female) ⁎ p b 0.001.
Mother custody
Father custody
Joint custody
χ2(df = 2)
313 (65%) 229 (47.5%) 357 (74%) 185 (38.5%) 259 (54%) 283 (59%)
56 (12%) 40 (8.5%) 9 (2%) 87 (18%) 58 (12%) 38 (8%)
111 (23%) 211 (44%) 114 (24%) 208 (43.5%) 163 (34%) 159 (33%)
46.74⁎ 145.40⁎ 5.28
306
H. Nouman et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 70 (2016) 302–308
Table 3 Logistic regression models for predicting custody recommendations of social workers, by manipulated variables, controlling for background variables. Mother custody
Father custody
Joint custody
Step 1
Step 2
Step 1
Step 2
Step 1
Step 2
Parental communication (intact) Child's gender (male) Child's wishes (mother)
0.432⁎⁎ 1.275⁎ 4.955⁎⁎
0.419⁎⁎ 1.199 5.027⁎⁎
0.666⁎ 0.601⁎ 0.085⁎⁎
0.744 0.499⁎⁎ 0.096⁎⁎
2.732⁎⁎ 0.959 0.388
2.699⁎⁎ 1.097 0.379⁎⁎
Professional characteristics Youth protection officer Child protection officer for legal proceedings Family social worker Seniority (years of experience)
– – – –
0.609 0.540 1.620 0.974
– – – –
1.110 1.317 0.994 0.976
– – – –
1.569 1.685 0.908 1.034
Personal characteristics Gender (female) Education Number of children R2 χ2(14)
– – – 0.126 160.95⁎⁎
1.215 0.837 1.284⁎⁎ 0.165 173.90⁎⁎
– – – 0.142 66.11⁎⁎
1.847 0.825 0.917 0.155 80.13⁎⁎
– – – 0.075 95.42⁎⁎
0.657 1.312 0.797⁎⁎ 0.121 104.04⁎⁎
⁎ p b 0.05. ⁎⁎ p b 0.01.
increases the likelihood of joint custody. These findings of inclined decisions toward custody of the mother are consistent with traditional perceptions anchored in the Tender Years Doctrine, which gives preference to custody of the mother for young children. This legislation is based on the social perception that the mother is the ideal figure to fulfill young children's needs better than the father (Frishtik, 2005; Ministry of Justice, 2011; Schnitt, 1994) and studies indicate the tendency of social workers to recommend maternal custody in divorce proceedings (Cohen & Segal-Engelchin, 2000; Gofna-Pinto, 1996; Hacker, 2008). Interestingly, in cases where the preference for sole maternal custody may appear as biased or untoward, a preference was awarded to joint-custody rather than to paternal-custody, indicating an inherent mistrust of fathers' parenthood skills. However, one alternative explanation to these findings can be that they reflect a natural, experience based assumption that mothers are more likely to have played a larger role in the day-to-day care prior to the separation. The tendency found in this study can be attributed to several sources. First, the social workers' prior acquaintance with the mothers through the social services (Zafran, 2013). In this context, study findings show that an “informal” relationship develops between the social worker and the mother, as can be seen in many social workers' personal notes, which contain far more expansive reporting about the mother than about the father (Cohen & Segal-Engelchin, 2000). This bias might also be derived from the social workers' perceptions of the judge's preference against the background of the legal preference granted to mothers in the Tender Years Doctrine. It is possible that the social workers' opinion, either consciously or unconsciously, is affected by the sociopolitical agenda of the state, of which they are agents, to promote what they perceive as “proper family life” and the desirable role division in the family (Zafran, 2013). Second, regarding the absence of stringent procedural and evidence rules as well as problems with the validity and trustworthiness of the evaluations: The absence of guidelines for forming opinions and the agents' mode of activity might increase the degree of subjectivity in the evaluation process, create a lack of uniformity between the evaluators, and cast a doubt on the trustworthiness of the evaluation (Martindale, 2005; Strohmer et al., 1990; Warshak, 2011; Zafran, 2013). At the same time, relevant theoretical knowledge about the development and needs of the child, which is required for assessing the best interest of the child, is not absolute and includes a wide range of potentially contradictory theories. In these cases, as shown by research findings, the space that has been created is “filled by the experts” according to their own belief systems (Mattison, 2000), which are often derived from the perception of norms and traditional cultures that shape their worldview.
Nevertheless, while the findings indicate a bias toward granting custody to the mother, it was not as sweeping as expected. Rather, the findings also indicate that social workers often prefer to award joint custody rather than custody to the father. This finding is consistent with psychological perceptions that emphasize the children's developmental need for both parents (Kurki-Suonio, 2000). This indicates a crack in the longstanding accepted social perception, in Israel, that mothers naturally receive custody of their children. It might even point to the initiation of a tendency to implement the recently suggested policy of joint parental responsibility in Israel (Silman Committee, 2014). Despite this policy, the bias toward granting custody to the mother in most cases, as was found in the present study, illustrates that the longstanding accepted norms, even though not accepted by the court, are still considered valid and significant among the social workers. Regarding the child's wishes in the decision about parental custody, the study findings indicate that, in accordance with the hypothesis, social workers tend to consider the children's wishes as long as their preference is for maternal custody, but when children express a preference to live with the father, their wishes carry no significance in the decision making process. These findings are consistent with previous studies, which showed that good functioning by the father and the child's preference for paternal custody does not necessarily lead to the father receiving custody (Crawford & Bradley, 2016; Enosh, Nouman, & Anabtawi, in press; Enosh, Nouman, & Sharon, in press). However, when the mother is functioning well, and the children's preference is for maternal custody, in the overwhelming majority of cases, custody will be given to the mother (Crawford & Bradley, 2016; Enosh, Nouman, & Sharon, in press). The Child Participation Principle as defined by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), calls for the principle of listening to the child. However, this issue is debated, as Warshak (2003) has elaborated: “The plea to hear children's voices carries almost axiomatic appeal to career child advocates, but it is not universally accepted” (p. 373). According to Warshak (2003), in many cultures, accepting a child's wishes and demands may be considered inappropriate and an “inversion of the proper relationships between adults and children.” Still, the findings of our study indicate that the pattern of recommendations by the respondents is such that when the child's wishes are in line with the basic tendency of the worker to grant mothers custody, the whishes carry weight and increase the odds for such decision, whereas when the child's wish is contrary to this basic tendency, it has no effect. In other words, the social workers used the children's expressed preferences to rationalize the social workers' bias for mother custody and did not really place great weight on the children's preferences. They also strengthen the understanding
H. Nouman et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 70 (2016) 302–308
that social workers traditionally show a significant bias toward the mother. The child's gender, as shown by the study findings, does not influence the social workers' parental custody recommendation, even though the child's identification with the parents is a central component in child socialization. Our study did not find that the child's gender was a significant factor in the judgments of social workers. Limitations and implications of future research. Methodologically, the study examined specific variables, which might affect the trustworthiness of the measurement because it does not test additional variables, such as the child's residential environment or other family variables which might also influence this complex decision (Enosh, Nouman, & Anabtawi, in press; Enosh, Nouman, & Sharon, in press). Therefore, this limitation can serve as the basis for recommending future studies examining comprehensive variables, including those tested in the present study, as well as additional variables. This comprehensive examination might negate the present claim according to which child custody allocation in Israel is still influenced by longstanding social norms, which favor the mother. Future research should incorporate all those variables into data collection and analysis. Furthermore, our findings indicate that the more children the social workers had, the greater was their tendency to recommend maternal custody and lesser their tendency to recommend joint custody. Since this issue was not examined previously in the extant research, we recommend that future research will explore this issue more deeply. A question may be raised regarding the way by which social workers have interpreted their participation in the study, and whether they tried to respond based on social desirability and intention to appear “scientific” or “modern”. Based on previous studies of social workers in Israel, and their approach to “science” “research” and related issues such as “evidence based practice” (Shapira, Enosh, Havron-Shapira, forthcoming), there is ample basis to assume that there was no such social desirability bias in their responses. In light of the fact that the social workers' recommendation has a great impact on the judge's decision is very important for separating the personal and professional considerations of social workers, in order to place both parents on an equal footing, without prejudice. The social workers' ability to broaden their perspective and to examine their considerations through a theoretical and practical rationale will, in the end, influence their recommendations to the legal system that has to decide on this complex issue. Overall, the findings of the current paper indicate that social workers working with parents engaged in custodial disputes tend to be biased in favor of mother custody. This bias is likely to influence custody decisions in a direction that does not favor the best interests of children. Given that extant research comparing mother custody, father custody, and joint custody demonstrates that fathers do as good a job as mothers in the role of custodial parent, but that children experience considerable benefits in joint custody arrangements, the current findings call for an extensive systemic educational rethinking and reforming the education of social workers dealing with custodial issues. References Alexander, C. S., & Becker, H. J. (1978). The use of vignettes in survey research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 42, 93–104. Arkin, K. (2005). Approaches and values of judges regarding equality and division of roles between the parents in judgments of courts concerning custody of minors. (Unpublished master's thesis) Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Atzmüller, C., & Steiner, P. M. (2010). Experimental vignette studies in survey research. Methodology, 6, 128–138. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241/a000014. Ben-Ami, H. (2011). Child protection officers in the era of the family court. In R. Tzur (Ed.), Dossier for child protection officers for legal proceedings (pp. 15–16) (Hebrew). Braver, S. L., Cookston, J. T., & Cohen, B. R. (2002). Experiences of family law attorneys with current issues in divorce practice. Family Relations, 51(4), 325–334. http://dx. doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2002.00325.x. Cabrera, N., Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., Bradley, R. H., Hofferth, S., & Lamb, M. E. (2000). Fatherhood in the twenty-first century. Child Development, 71(1), 127–136. http://dx.doi. org/10.1111/1467-8624.00126.
307
Chambers, D. L. (1984). Rethinking the substantive rules for custody disputes in divorce. Michigan Law Review, 83(3), 477–569. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1288561. Cohen, O., & Segal-Engelchin, D. (2000). Suzi and Mr. S.: Gender role stereotyping in social workers court reports in custody and access cases. Smith College Studies in Social Work. 70. (pp. 475–500). http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00377310009517606. Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child – Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 44/25 of 20 November 1989, Article 12. (Retrieved from http://www.ohchr. org/Documents/Professional Interest/crc.pdf). Crawford, B., & Bradley, M. S. (2016). Parent gender and child removal in physical abuse and neglect cases. Children and Youth Services Review, 65, 224–230. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.04.013. Dahl, G. B., & Moretti, E. (2004). The demand for sons: Evidence from divorce, fertility, and shotgun marriage. National Bureau of Economic Research. http://dx.doi.org/10.3386/ w10281. Davidson-Arad, B., & Benbenishty, R. (2008). The role of workers' attitudes and parent and child wishes in child protection workers' assessments and recommendations regarding removal and reunification. Children and Youth Services Review, 30(1), 107–121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.07.003. D'Cruz, H., Gillingham, P., & Melendez, S. (2007). Reflexivity, its meanings and relevance for social work: A critical review of the literature. British Journal of Social Work, 37, 73–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcl001. Ebel, R. L. (1951). Estimation of the reliability of ratings. Psychometrika, 16(4), 407–424. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02288803. Enosh, G., & Bayer-Topilsky, T. (2015). Reasoning and bias: Heuristics in safety assessment and placement decisions for children at risk. British Journal of Social Work, 45, 1771–1787. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ bjsw/bct213. Enosh, G., Nouman, H., & Anabtawi, R. (2016). Evaluating child-custody recommendations of Israeli Arab social workers between traditionalism and professional decision-making. Research on Social Work Practice. http://dx.doi.org/1049731516666382 (in press). Enosh, G., Nouman, H., & Sharon, O. (2016b). Between professionalism and traditional social norms: Social workers’ parental custody recommendations. British Journal of Social Work. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ bjsw/bcw062 (in press). Fagan, J., Day, R., Lamb, M. E., & Cabrera, N. J. (2014). Should researchers conceptualize differently the dimensions of parenting for fathers and mothers? Journal of Family Theory & Review, 6(4), 390–405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12044. Fransson, E., Sarkadi, A., Hjern, A., & Bergström, M. (2016). Why should they live more with one of us when they are children to us both?: Parents' motives for practicing equal joint physical custody for children aged 0–4. Children and Youth Services Review, 66, 154–160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.05.011. Frishtik, M. (2005). The considerations guiding protection officers in their recommendations to the family court on child custody. Social Security Journal, 69, 91–115 (Hebrew). Frishtik, M., & Yagelnik, T. (2007). The considerations guiding the family courts in determining child custody. Society and Welfare, 27, 9–36 (Hebrew). Gofna-Pinto, T. (1996). Custody and visitation of children after divorce–recommendations in the social worker report, the judicial decisions, the execution by the family and the non-custodial parent–child contact. Unpublished Master's Thesis. Tel Aviv University (Hebrew). Greenberg, L. R., Gould-Saltman, D. J., & Gottlieb, M. C. (2008). Playing in their sandbox: Professional obligations of mental health professionals in custody cases. Journal of Child Custody, 5(3–4), 192–216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 15379410802583684. Hacker, D. (2008). Parenthood in the law: Behind the scene of custody and visitation upon divorce. Hakibbutz Hameuchad: Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Hacker, D., & Frenkel, M. (2005). Active parenthood and employment equal opportunities: The need to change the characteristics of the labor force. Labor, society and law. 11. (pp. 275–303) (Hebrew). Hall, D. J., & Paradice, D. (2007). Investigating value-based decision bias and mediation: do you do as you think? Communications of the ACM. 50(4). (pp. 81–85). http://dx. doi.org/10.1145/1232743.1232752. Hetherington, E. M. (1999). Should we stay together for the sake of the children. In E. M. Hetherington (Ed.), Coping with divorce, single parenting, and remarriage: A risk and resiliency perspective (pp. 93–116). Oxford, UK: Routledge. Kelly, J. B. (2000). Children's adjustment in conflicted marriage and divorce: A decade review of research. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 39(8), 963–973. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00004583-200008000-00007. Kelly, J. B. (2002). Psychological and legal interventions for parents and children in custody and access disputes: Current research and practice. Virginia Journal of Social Policy and the Law, 10(1), 129–163. Kelly, J. B., & Emery, R. E. (2003). Children's adjustment following divorce: Risk and resilience perspectives. Family Relations, 52(4), 352–362. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j. 1741-3729.2003.00352.x. Kuehnle, K. F., & Drozd, L. M. (2012). Evidence-based practice. In K. Kuehnle, & L. Drozd (Eds.), Parenting plan evaluations: Applied research for the family court (pp. 577–582). New York: Oxford University Press. Kurki-Suonio, K. (2000). Joint custody as an interpretation of the best interests of the child in critical and comparative perspective. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 14(3), 183–205. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/14.3.183. Lamb, M. E., & Sagi, A. (2014). Fatherhood and family policy. New York, NY: Routledge. Legal Capacity and Guardianship Law. (1962). (Retrieved from http://index.justice.gov.il/ Units/BetDinDroziLerorim/hukimtakanot). Legal Procedures Regarding Minors, Mentally Ill and Missing Persons Law (1955g). Section 2. (Retrieved from http://index.justice.gov.il). Lulu, R. (2000). Attitudes of social workers and child protection officers for legal proceedings in a social services department to out-of-home placement of children. (Unpublished master's thesis) Bar-Ilan University. Ramat Gan (Hebrew).
308
H. Nouman et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 70 (2016) 302–308
Lundberg, S., McLanahan, S., & Rose, E. (2007). Child gender and father involvement in fragile families. Demography, 44(1), 79–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/dem.2007. 0007. MacLennan, R. N. (1993). Interrater reliability with SPSS for Windows 5.0. American Statistician, 47(4), 292–296. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00031305.1993.10476000. Mantle, G., Leslie, J., Parsons, S., Plenty, J., & Shaffer, R. (2006). Establishing children's wishes and feelings for family court reports the significance attached to the age of the child. Childhood, 13(4), 499–518. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0907568206068560. Martindale, D. A. (2005). Confirmatory bias and confirmatory distortion. In J. R. Flens, & L. Drozd (Eds.), Psychological testing in child custody evaluations (pp. 31–48). New York, NY: Haworth. Mattison, M. (2000). Ethical decision making: The person in the process. Social Work, 45(3), 201–212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sw/45.3.201. Ministry of Justice (2011). Intermediary and supplementary report to the Schnitt Commission of 2011. (http://www.justice.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/F8171E9C-03DE-4FF5-943913AEC429BD2E/10149/dochShnit3.pdf). Nielsen, L. (2015). Shared physical custody: Does it benefit most children. Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, 28, 79–138. Patton, M. Q. (2011). Essentials of utilization-focused evaluation. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Perlman, N. (2012). The Tender Years Doctrine in Israel and around the world: Knesset website: Legal branch. Legislation and Legal Research (Hebrew) http://www.knesset. gov.il Prout, A. (2003). Participation, policy and the changing conditions of childhood. In C. Hallett, & A. Prout (Eds.), Hearing the voices of children. Social policy for a new century (pp. 11–25). Routhledge Falmer: London and New York. Rogers, W. H. (1993). Regression standard errors in clustered samples. Stata Technical Bulletin, 13, 19–23. Rotlevy Committee (2003). Conclusions of the committee on the rights of the child. Jerusalem: Ministry of Justice (Hebrew). Sagi, A. (1987). Value biases in child custody disputes and recommendations: A study of Israeli social work students. Journal of Divorce, 10(3–4), 27–42. Sagi, A., & Dvir, R. (1993). Value biases of social workers in custody disputes. Children and Youth Services Review, 15(1), 27–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0190-7409(93)90051-A. Schnitt, D. (1979). Interaction between behavioral science experts and the legal system. 32. (pp. 365–368). Hapraklit, 365–368 (Hebrew). Schnitt, D. (1994). “The tender years doctrine” in resolving child custody disputes: Continuity, change, or elimination. 19(1). (pp. 185–203). Iyunei Mishpat, 185–203 (Hebrew).
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. NY: Basic books. Shapira, Y., Enosh, G., & Havron-Shapira, N. (2016). What makes social-work students implement evidence based practice behaviors? Journal of Social Work Education (forthcoming). Silman Committee (2014). Report examining the Ministry's policy on out-of-home placement of children and the issue of visiting rights. (Hebrew). (Retrieved from http:// www.molsa.gov.il/About/OfficePolicy/Documents). Skjørten, K. (2013). Children's voices in Norwegian custody cases. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 27(3), 289–309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/ebt003. Smart, C. (2002). From children's shoes to children's voices. Family Court Review, 40(3), 307–319. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.174-1617.2002.tb00842.x. StataCorp (2015). Stata statistical software: Release 14. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP. Strohmer, D. C., Shivy, V. A., & Chiodo, A. L. (1990). Information processing strategies in counselor hypothesis testing: The role of selective memory and expectancy. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37(4), 465–472. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.37.4.465. Tippins, T. M., & Wittmann, J. P. (2005). Empirical and ethical problems with custody recommendations. Family Court Review, 43(2), 193–222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j. 1744-1617.2005.00019. Tzaddik, Y. (2001). How can parental efficacy be evaluated? In A. Levy (Ed.), Medicine and law: Jubilee issue (pp. 328–331) (Hebrew). Van Bemmel, J. H., & Helder, J. C. (Eds.). (1997). Handbook of medical informatics. Houten, Netherlands: Bohn Stafleu Van Loghum. Warshak, R. A. (2003). Payoffs and pitfalls of listening to children. Family Relations, 52(4), 373–384. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2003.00373.x. Warshak, R. A. (2011). Parenting by the clock: The best-interest-of-the-child standard, judicial discretion, and the American Law Institute's Approximation Rule. 41(1). (pp. 83–163). University of Baltimore Law Review, 83–163 (https://law.ubalt.edu/ academics/publications/lawreview/volumes/6_Warshak.41.1.pdf). Warshak, R. A. (2014). Social science and parenting plans for young children: A consensus report. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 20(1), 46–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ law0000005. Williams, R. L. (2000). A note on robust variance estimation for cluster-correlated data. Biometrics, 56(2), 645–646. Zafran, R. (2013). The professional difficulties involved in professional opinion: Another reason for reshaping the law about the question of division of parental responsibility. 36. (pp. 269–345). Iyunei Mishpat, 269–345 (Hebrew).
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Children and Youth Services Review journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth
The role of parental communication, child's wishes and child's gender in social workers' custody recommendations Hani Nouman, Ph.D., Guy Enosh, Ph.D. ⁎, Pnina Niselbaum-Atzur, M.S.W. School of Social Work, University of Haifa, Israel
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 9 June 2016 Received in revised form 28 September 2016 Accepted 28 September 2016 Available online 29 September 2016 Keywords: Custody Decision making Parents communication Child wishes Professional judgement Maternal bias
a b s t r a c t Social-workers' custody recommendations are influenced by professional and personal factors. In this study, we examine three factors: parental-communication, child's-wishes, and child's-gender. An experimental-survey-design was implemented, using case-descriptions, as well as professional-characteristic of the social-workers. Data were collected from 120 Israeli social-workers. The study findings reveal that interparental communication plays a significant role in the social worker's decision. Whereas deficient interparental communication leads to bias in the decision to award parental custody according to the parent's gender, with a preference for the mother over the father, as hypothesized, intact interparental communication increases the likelihood of joint custody, but still gives preference to the mother. Social workers tend to consider the children's wishes as long as their preference is for maternal custody. When children express a paternal preference, their wishes carry no weight. Furthermore, child's gender does not influence social workers' parental custody recommendation. In cases where the preference for sole maternal custody may appear as biased or untoward, a preference was awarded to joint-custody rather than to paternal-custody. The findings highlight that traditional-social-norms impact social-worker's decision. We emphasize the importance organizational mechanisms and standards that provide more efficient and egalitarian decision-making. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction With today's high divorce rates, many children around the world are caught in the custody conflict between parents. This dispute may be resolved as the parents come to an agreement. However, if an agreement has not been reached, in Israel, as in most other countries, the court is required to decide which parent will receive custody as well as dictating the rights of the non-custodial parent regarding contact with the child (Legal Capacity and Guardianship Law, 1962). This decision should, as far as possible, consider the best interest of the children and their rights, and reflect their psychological well-being (Zafran, 2013). To assess the best interest of the child, according to Israeli law (Legal Procedures Regarding Minors, Mentally Ill and Missing Persons, 1955), the courts are authorized to appoint expert social workers to express their opinions on this issue in a review to be submitted to the court (Ben-Ami, 2011). These opinions serve the family courts on three levels (Zafran, 2013): (1) on the factual level, by describing the reality of the children and their familial and life circumstances (Silman Committee, 2014); (2) on the professional level, by providing an authorized interpretation of the reality (Tippins & Wittmann, 2005), namely an evaluation of parental efficacy and prediction of future parental functioning ⁎ Corresponding author at: School of Social Work, University of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel. E-mail address: [email protected] (G. Enosh).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.09.034 0190-7409/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
based on parents' personal characteristics and past and present functioning (Tzaddik, 2001); and (3) on the recommendation level, by helping to channel the decision regarding custody as well as the extent of responsibility that will be given to each parent. Studies show that, in most cases, the court follows the social worker's recommendations (Arkin, 2005; Frishtik & Yagelnik, 2007). 1.1. Factors influencing social workers' decision making The social workers' opinion regarding parental custody draws on the principle of ‘best interest of the child’, which anchors the range of the child's rights, needs, interests, and provides a benchmark for making decisions (Silman Committee, 2014). However, a major criticism undermines the use of this interpretive system due to the lack of clear definition and agreement on what is the best interest of the child (e.g., Chambers, 1984; Sagi, 1987; Sagi & Dvir, 1993; Braver, Cookston, & Cohen, 2002; Warshak, 2011). Those criticisms are summarized by Warshak (2011) in four arguments against the best interest standard: First, the “best interest” standard is inherently subjective by nature, open to personal interpretation, thus both parties may persuade themselves that they stand a chance of getting custody. Second, the lack of one decisive factor leads the parties to engage in character assassination of each other. Third, courts are left with no guidance or objective basis to choose between fit parents. Fourth, courts tend to depend too heavily on mental health professionals in their decision making processes.
H. Nouman et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 70 (2016) 302–308
Braver et al. (2002) bring along a fifth concern – the gender bias. While some researchers claim that the system is biased against women who are relatively lacking in financial resources to engage in the custody battle, others claim that the system is biased against men and in favor of women as the more “fit” parents. Therefore, this view holds that the doctrine of the best interest of the child is subject to manipulation, abuse, and ethical bias according to the worldview of the determining authority and does not faithfully serve the child's needs (Rotlevy Committee, 2003). An additional criticism raises doubts about the possibility of forming a professional opinion based on this principle to determine parental efficacy and to decide on the optimal custodial arrangement (Tippins & Wittmann, 2005) due to the limited ability to predict future parental functioning (Schnitt, 1979; Ministry of Justice, 2011). Furthermore, researchers (e.g., Greenberg, Gould-Saltman, & Gottlieb, 2008; Martindale, 2005) have warned against the tendency to look for confirming evidence for one's beliefs and biases, while overlooking and dismissing disconfirming evidence (“confirmatory bias” and “confirmatory distortion”; Martindale, 2005), the possible influence of cognitive dissonance, and suggestibility of mental health professionals (Martindale, 2005; Strohmer, Shivy, & Chiodo, 1990), and thus recommended self criticism and other checks and balances, including consultation with colleagues (Greenberg et al., 2008); comparison of notes taken contemporaneously with final reports, external inspection of documentation used in forming reports, and evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of the assessment-tools used (Martindale, 2005). Thus, this decision, which is supposed to be a rational consideration, unprejudiced, and take into account the implications of each of the outcomes for the child (van Bemmel & Helder, 1997), is often influenced by heuristic factors, that lead to bias in professional judgment (e.g., Enosh & Bayer-Topilsky, 2015; Enosh, Nouman, & Anabtawi, in press; Enosh, Nouman, & Sharon, in press). This question is sharpened against the background of research findings indicating that personal, professional (Lulu, 2000; Mattison, 2000), social, and cultural factors (Cohen & Segal-Engelchin, 2000; Hacker & Frenkel, 2005; Hall & Paradice, 2007) cause bias in social workers' professional discretion in situations in which they are required to predict future behavior. Previous research (Enosh, Nouman, & Anabtawi, in press; Enosh, Nouman, & Sharon, in press) indicated that cultural norms may cause bias in favor of the mother due to a tendency to reject untraditional models of joint custody or sole custody of the father (Crawford & Bradley, 2016). The traditional models are anchored in the accepted legislative system in Israel based on the “Tender Years Doctrine” (Legal Capacity and Guardianship Law, 1962), according to which, preference is given to the mother for custody of children up to age six. The legislation is based on the social construction that sees the mother figure as more ideal than the father to fulfill the needs of the child at this age (Frishtik, 2005; Ministry of Justice, 2011; Schnitt, 1994) Although the “Doctrine” is limited to early ages, and the law does not declare anything specific regarding older ages, the traditional social norms that underlie this doctrine still persist in that the mother is considered the “natural” custodial parent even when dealing with older ages (Enosh, Nouman, & Anabtawi, in press; Perlman, 2012). The practices that prioritize traditional gender role models, by which the mother is considered the “natural” caretaker of the children, while the father is not, have been the target of much criticism (Crawford & Bradley, 2016; Fagan, Day, Lamb, & Cabrera, 2014). It has been claimed that this approach violates the children's right to a meaningful relationship with their father, hinders the court from making a decision appropriate for each individual child, and expresses a social gender norm according to which the mother is primarily responsible for raising the children (Crawford & Bradley, 2016; Perlman, 2012). However, is joint responsibility possible without interparental communication? Moreover, are positive communication and mutual appreciation prerequisites for joint responsibility? (Fransson, Sarkadi, Hjern, & Bergström, 2016; Nielsen, 2015). Recent summary of 40 studies
303
(Nielsen, 2015) has demonstrated that the answer is not straightforward. Indeed, it is not clear that poorer communication and higher levels of conflict between parents are associated with poorer outcomes for children. Furthermore, Warshak (2014), relating to studies regarding timesharing and sleep-over of small children (four year old or younger) at the fathers' home, indicate a beneficial role and do not indicate any harmful influences. Thus, according to Warshak, time sharing among divorced parents should be considered even at very early ages, let alone older ones. These questions illustrate the complexity of the issue of “the best interest of the child” and require the social workers' assessment and critical reflexivity (D'Cruz, Gillingham, & Melendez, 2007; Schön, 1983) when forming a professional opinion. It seems that despite the divorcing parents' wish to jump the hurdle of separating parenthood from couple-hood, the post-crisis reality is often different. In many cases, the interpersonal conflict penetrates the childparent relationship so that the children are intensively and chronically exposed to a tense family climate, which may even include severe verbal and physical violence (Hetherington, 1999). The conflict is sometimes intensified if the parents are combating over custody and visiting rights in court (Kelly, 2002). Research shows that chronic interparental conflict that is rife with confrontations has negative implications for the children's behavior and emotional adjustment (Kelly, 2000; Kelly & Emery, 2003). Nevertheless, the breakup of the family unit sometimes ends in a less destructive fashion, accompanied by cooperative and mutually respectful interparental interaction. Even so, it is clear that the situation is not completely dispute-free and requires cooperation between the parents to create a safety-net for the children. The advantage of this partnership is in arrangements involving both parents to a large extent, so that the father also can provide significant support for the child's development (Kuehnle & Drozd, 2012). The wishes and gender of the child in question are additional important components to consider when examining the best interest of the child in the process of determining custody in divorce cases. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989; Section 12) obliges the signatory countries to give any children, who are capable, the right to express an opinion freely on any issue pertaining to them, while giving appropriate weight to their opinions, in accordance with their age and maturity. Accordingly, in Israel, there is support for the approach that examines the child's wishes, and an examination of the child's viewpoint is anchored in the social workers' functioning within the framework of preparing the report to file with the court. According to the report of the last professional review in Israel by the “Schnitt public committee for the examination of the legal aspects of parental responsibility in divorce cases” (Ministry of Justice, 2011), in Section 9 dealing with “parental custody arrangements by courts in cases of separation”, it was declared that the court will take into account the child's wishes, contingent on the developmental faculties of the child as well as the willingness of the two parents to cooperate in fulfilling their parental responsibility, the parents abilities to fulfill such responsibility, the treatment given by the parents to the child, and the willingness and ability of each of the parents to facilitate the relationships. Furthermore, research indicates that social workers rarely tend to relate to children's wishes in various contexts, including family reunification (DavidsonArad & Benbenishty, 2008), as well as custody disputes (Mantle, Leslie, Parsons, Plenty, & Shaffer, 2006; Prout, 2003; Skjørten, 2013; Smart, 2002). Regarding the child's gender, the question is raised as to whether the gender context is relevant when assessing the best interest of the child. For the child's developmental requirements, is it preferable to award custody of sons to the father and custody of daughters to the mother? Previous research indicated that cultural norms may cause bias in favor of the mother due to a tendency to reject untraditional models of joint custody or sole custody of the father (Crawford & Bradley, 2016; Enosh, Nouman, & Anabtawi, in press; Enosh, Nouman, & Sharon, in press). Prevailing social policy emanates from the traditional
304
H. Nouman et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 70 (2016) 302–308
perception that still gives the father an employment-related role, despite his significant involvement in his family's life (Lamb & Sagi, 2014), and gives the mother the primary responsibility for childcare (Cabrera, Tamis-LeMonda, Bradley, Hofferth, & Lamb, 2000; Frishtik, 2005). The professional literature indicates that fathers are awarded custody of their sons more often than custody of their daughters (Dahl & Moretti, 2004). This is attributed to the emotional relationship that forms between fathers and sons, leading to their investing greater effort in the fight for custody of their sons, and to the view that the father is perceived as able to provide better quality and more efficient parenting for boys in light of the developmental requirements in the gender context (Lundberg, McLanahan, & Rose, 2007). According to the review thus far, social workers' considerations in the process of determining parental custody in divorce cases requires theoretical and practical rationalization to pave the way for the judges who have to make the final decision. However, these considerations, as broadly described, might be biased and influenced by various personal and professional factors. Therefore, this study focused on examining three factors that might impact this bias in the process of forming the professional opinion: parental communication, the child's wishes, and the child's gender. We examined the following three hypotheses – H1: In situations in which the inter-parental communication is conflictual, social workers will recommend custody to the mother; H2: Social workers will tend to consider the child's wishes when determining parental custody; and H3: Social workers will tend to consider the child's gender when recommending parental custody; father's custody will be recommended for boys and mother's custody will be recommended for girls. 2. Methods 2.1. Sample and sampling procedures A purposive nonprobability sample (Patton, 2011) of social workers, including child-welfare officers from the general municipal agencies in Israel who work with families and with children of divorced parents, that were involved in processes of parental custody allocation. The questionnaires were admininistered to the social workers personally by one of the researchers, as well as via professionals in the field, alongside an introductory letter explaining the essence and aims of the study. Overall, 200 social workers were approached, of whom 120 responded (60% response rate) (Table 1). Of those, most were female (87%), married (87%), the average age was 38.2 (SD = 10.7), the average seniority was 9.5 years (SD = 7.98). In terms of education, 39% had a BSW degree
Table 1 Sample characteristics (N = 120). Characteristic
Mean (±SD)/percent
Female Married Age Children Seniority Education BSW degree Studying toward their MSW degree MSW degree PhD degree Rolea Family social workers Youth protection officers Child protection officers for legal proceedings Child social workers Youth social workers
87% 87% 38.2 (±10.7) 3.85 (±2.07) 9.5 (±7.98) 39% 24% 35% 2% 80% 11% 10% 54% 47%
a Many workers held two or more roles simultaneously, therefore the list of roles sums up to more than 100%.
(the basic professional degree in Israel), 24% were studying toward their MSW degree; 35% had achieved their MSW degree, and 2% held PhD degree. Most of them (80%) were family social workers. Most carried symoultaneusly other functions (roles) at the child welfare system, including youth protection officers (11%), child protection officers for legal proceedings (10%), child social workers (54%), and youth social workers (47%). 2.2. Instruments Each study respondent was given a two-part questionnaire consisting of background questions and eight case-descriptions (vignettes). Background questionnaire: the socio-demographic background questionnaire included issues such as age, years of professional experience (seniority), gender, professional education, and professional role (general practitioner, family social worker, youth protection officer, and child protection officer for legal proceedings). It should be noted that in many cases the same respondent could fulfill more than one role at a time. Case descriptions: eight detailed case descriptions (vignettes) were presented to each participant, each followed by one question: What type of custody would you recommend? 1) Father, 2) Mother, 3) Other (please specify).1 The case descriptions were based on factorial design (Alexander & Becker, 1978; Atzmüller & Steiner, 2010), consisting of an experimental design embedded within a survey framework. The vignettes were derived from real-life case descriptions obtained from social services records. The manipulated variables in the 2 × 2 × 2 experimental design included parental communication (cooperative/conflictual), child's wishes (live with father/live with mother), and child's gender (male/female). To neutralize the possible effects of the order in which the cases appeared we systematically shuffled all eight cases by constructing four variously arranged versions; those four versions were distributed randomly to the respondents. By embedding factorial manipulations of such issues within a generalized description of a family unit, we intended to achieve a reduction of the decision process to the specific factors, while controlling for the myriad idiosyncratic factors that are present within each case, by unifying the general description. In order to avoid the legal ramifications of the Tender Years Doctrine, all children were described as seven or older and younger than sixteen. Validity and relaiability of cases: We validated the case descriptions using inter-rater reliability among three researchers and three highranking practitioners from the child protection services. We presented each expert with case description of cooperative and conflictual couples involved in custody dispute and asked to rank the level of conflict involved. These case descriptions were based on real-life cases from social workers' experience. Only cases on which high agreement on parental communication (cooperative/conflictual) was achieved, were included in the final vignettes. Inter-rater agreement among the six judges retained was 0.94 (for procedures, see Ebel, 1951; MacLennan, 1993). 2.3. Analysis The social workers' recommendations regarding parental custody were examined in the study, as mentioned, through the eight cases presented to them. Therefore, the results were analyzed according to the number of cases rather than the number of respondents. Approximately 120 social workers evaluated 960 cases. All the analyses were conducted using the 14-STATA (StataCorp, 2015) software. To analyze the effects of the experimental manipulations on the recommendation, a logistic regression analysis was performed. All the regression models controlled for the respondents' personal and professional 1 It should be noted that in the current study, 98% of participants marked “joint custody” in the “other” parental custody item, thus, this category was eventually so defined.
H. Nouman et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 70 (2016) 302–308
characteristics, which included family status, gender, number of children, year of birth, and job. Furthermore, since all the analyses were conducted at the case level, in order to control for possible clustering at the respondent level, we used robust logistic-regression in STATA (StataCorp, 2015), a procedure equivalent to Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE; Rogers, 1993; Williams, 2000).
2.4. Ethical considerations The participants were informed about the goals of the study, which were defined as examining attitudes of social workers regarding custody recommendations in disputed cases. They were also informed that participation is anonymous, and that by filling the questionnaire they consent to participate in the study. The study was approved by the committee for ethical research with human beings.
3. Results 3.1. The influence of interparental communication, child's wishes, and child's gender on parental custody recommendations Table 2 presents chi-square tests for the impact of quality of parental communication, child's wishes, and child's gender, on the custody recommendation of the social workers. We hypothesized that interparental communication will influence the type of parental custody recommendation. Indeed, a chi-square test indicated as hypothesized (χ2 = 46.74, df = 2, p b 0.001), that in cases in which interparental communication was conflictual, the tendency was to recommend custody of the mother over custody of the father (65% versus 12%), even though a tendency to recommend joint custody was also observed (23%). In contrast, when the interparental communication was cooperative, the social workers did not tend to recommend paternal or maternal custody equally, but continued to show preference for awarding custody to the mother (47.5% versus 8.5%). However, in nearly half of these cases, the tendency was to recommend joint custody (44%). When we examined the hypothesis that social workers will consider the child's wishes when recommending parental custody, we found this to be partially true. It applied when the child expressed a preference for the mother (74%) but not when the child expressed a preference for the father (18%) (χ2 = 145.40, df = 2, p b 0.001). In cases by which the child's preference was for the father, either maternal custody was recommended (38.5%), or more often, joint custody was recommended (43.5%). An examination of the hypothesis regarding the child's gender showed no difference in child custody recommendations for boys and girls (χ2 = 5.28, df = 2, p N 0.1). Regarding cases in which custody was awarded to the father, 12% were awarded custody when the child was male and 8% when the child was female. We further examined whether there were any differences between male and female social workers in their recommendations, and found no significant difference (χ2 = 4.65, df = 2, p = 0.1).
305
3.2. The influence of interparental communication, child's wishes, child's gender, and social workers' personal and professional characteristics on parental custody recommendations To examine the influence of interparental communication, the child's wishes, and the child's gender on predicting parental custody recommendations, controlling for the social worker's personal characteristics (gender, education, number of children) and professional characteristics (job and professional seniority), we performed three logistic regression models, one for each type of parental custody. Each model was performed in two steps. The first step included only the manipulated variables, the second step added to those variables the background variables. The purpose of adding the background variables was to control for any possible effect of those variables, and to demonstrate that the effects of the manipulated variables persist over and beyond any possible effect of such socio-demographic variable. The findings are presented in Table 3. The three regression models that were examined were found to be statistically significant (χ2 = 173.90, df = 14, p b 0.01; χ2 = 80.13, df = 14, p b 0.01; χ2 = 104.04, df = 14, p b 0.01). The findings indicate that interparental communication had the strongest influence on the tendency to recommend maternal or joint custody, as presented in Table 2. As hypothesized, the child's wishes influenced the social worker's parental custody recommendation, but the child's gender did not necessarily weight the recommendation for paternal custody. That is to say, when the children preferred to stay with the mother, their wish was usually granted, regardless of their gender. The findings also showed that the social workers' personal and professional characteristics did not affect the recommendation for parental custody, except for the number of children. The more children the social workers had, the greater was their tendency to recommend maternal custody and lesser their tendency to recommend joint custody. 4. Discussion Social workers shoulder a large amount of responsibility when forming an opinion on parental custody. At all times, they have to ensure that they have the necessary tools and conceptual knowledge to evaluate the child's psychological well-being and parental functioning. Notwithstanding the demand for objectivity, decision making in a complex and ambiguous reality might lead to bias according to the decision maker's worldview. This study examined the influence of interparental communication, the child's wishes, and the child's gender on the social worker's decision regarding parental custody. The study hypotheses, which examined the influence of these factors using an experimental manipulation procedure, presented a complex picture. The study findings reveal that interparental communication plays a significant role in the social worker's decision in the case under discussion. Whereas conflictual interparental communication leads to a tendency to award parental custody according to the parent's gender, with a preference for the mother over the father, as hypothesized. Cooperative interparental communication does not indicate equal preference for mother and father, but still gives preference to the mother and
Table 2 Comparison of parental communication, child's wishes, and child's gender for each type of recommended parental custody.
Parental communication (deficient) Parental communication (intact) Child's wishes (mother) Child's wishes (father) Child's gender (male) Child's gender (female) ⁎ p b 0.001.
Mother custody
Father custody
Joint custody
χ2(df = 2)
313 (65%) 229 (47.5%) 357 (74%) 185 (38.5%) 259 (54%) 283 (59%)
56 (12%) 40 (8.5%) 9 (2%) 87 (18%) 58 (12%) 38 (8%)
111 (23%) 211 (44%) 114 (24%) 208 (43.5%) 163 (34%) 159 (33%)
46.74⁎ 145.40⁎ 5.28
306
H. Nouman et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 70 (2016) 302–308
Table 3 Logistic regression models for predicting custody recommendations of social workers, by manipulated variables, controlling for background variables. Mother custody
Father custody
Joint custody
Step 1
Step 2
Step 1
Step 2
Step 1
Step 2
Parental communication (intact) Child's gender (male) Child's wishes (mother)
0.432⁎⁎ 1.275⁎ 4.955⁎⁎
0.419⁎⁎ 1.199 5.027⁎⁎
0.666⁎ 0.601⁎ 0.085⁎⁎
0.744 0.499⁎⁎ 0.096⁎⁎
2.732⁎⁎ 0.959 0.388
2.699⁎⁎ 1.097 0.379⁎⁎
Professional characteristics Youth protection officer Child protection officer for legal proceedings Family social worker Seniority (years of experience)
– – – –
0.609 0.540 1.620 0.974
– – – –
1.110 1.317 0.994 0.976
– – – –
1.569 1.685 0.908 1.034
Personal characteristics Gender (female) Education Number of children R2 χ2(14)
– – – 0.126 160.95⁎⁎
1.215 0.837 1.284⁎⁎ 0.165 173.90⁎⁎
– – – 0.142 66.11⁎⁎
1.847 0.825 0.917 0.155 80.13⁎⁎
– – – 0.075 95.42⁎⁎
0.657 1.312 0.797⁎⁎ 0.121 104.04⁎⁎
⁎ p b 0.05. ⁎⁎ p b 0.01.
increases the likelihood of joint custody. These findings of inclined decisions toward custody of the mother are consistent with traditional perceptions anchored in the Tender Years Doctrine, which gives preference to custody of the mother for young children. This legislation is based on the social perception that the mother is the ideal figure to fulfill young children's needs better than the father (Frishtik, 2005; Ministry of Justice, 2011; Schnitt, 1994) and studies indicate the tendency of social workers to recommend maternal custody in divorce proceedings (Cohen & Segal-Engelchin, 2000; Gofna-Pinto, 1996; Hacker, 2008). Interestingly, in cases where the preference for sole maternal custody may appear as biased or untoward, a preference was awarded to joint-custody rather than to paternal-custody, indicating an inherent mistrust of fathers' parenthood skills. However, one alternative explanation to these findings can be that they reflect a natural, experience based assumption that mothers are more likely to have played a larger role in the day-to-day care prior to the separation. The tendency found in this study can be attributed to several sources. First, the social workers' prior acquaintance with the mothers through the social services (Zafran, 2013). In this context, study findings show that an “informal” relationship develops between the social worker and the mother, as can be seen in many social workers' personal notes, which contain far more expansive reporting about the mother than about the father (Cohen & Segal-Engelchin, 2000). This bias might also be derived from the social workers' perceptions of the judge's preference against the background of the legal preference granted to mothers in the Tender Years Doctrine. It is possible that the social workers' opinion, either consciously or unconsciously, is affected by the sociopolitical agenda of the state, of which they are agents, to promote what they perceive as “proper family life” and the desirable role division in the family (Zafran, 2013). Second, regarding the absence of stringent procedural and evidence rules as well as problems with the validity and trustworthiness of the evaluations: The absence of guidelines for forming opinions and the agents' mode of activity might increase the degree of subjectivity in the evaluation process, create a lack of uniformity between the evaluators, and cast a doubt on the trustworthiness of the evaluation (Martindale, 2005; Strohmer et al., 1990; Warshak, 2011; Zafran, 2013). At the same time, relevant theoretical knowledge about the development and needs of the child, which is required for assessing the best interest of the child, is not absolute and includes a wide range of potentially contradictory theories. In these cases, as shown by research findings, the space that has been created is “filled by the experts” according to their own belief systems (Mattison, 2000), which are often derived from the perception of norms and traditional cultures that shape their worldview.
Nevertheless, while the findings indicate a bias toward granting custody to the mother, it was not as sweeping as expected. Rather, the findings also indicate that social workers often prefer to award joint custody rather than custody to the father. This finding is consistent with psychological perceptions that emphasize the children's developmental need for both parents (Kurki-Suonio, 2000). This indicates a crack in the longstanding accepted social perception, in Israel, that mothers naturally receive custody of their children. It might even point to the initiation of a tendency to implement the recently suggested policy of joint parental responsibility in Israel (Silman Committee, 2014). Despite this policy, the bias toward granting custody to the mother in most cases, as was found in the present study, illustrates that the longstanding accepted norms, even though not accepted by the court, are still considered valid and significant among the social workers. Regarding the child's wishes in the decision about parental custody, the study findings indicate that, in accordance with the hypothesis, social workers tend to consider the children's wishes as long as their preference is for maternal custody, but when children express a preference to live with the father, their wishes carry no significance in the decision making process. These findings are consistent with previous studies, which showed that good functioning by the father and the child's preference for paternal custody does not necessarily lead to the father receiving custody (Crawford & Bradley, 2016; Enosh, Nouman, & Anabtawi, in press; Enosh, Nouman, & Sharon, in press). However, when the mother is functioning well, and the children's preference is for maternal custody, in the overwhelming majority of cases, custody will be given to the mother (Crawford & Bradley, 2016; Enosh, Nouman, & Sharon, in press). The Child Participation Principle as defined by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), calls for the principle of listening to the child. However, this issue is debated, as Warshak (2003) has elaborated: “The plea to hear children's voices carries almost axiomatic appeal to career child advocates, but it is not universally accepted” (p. 373). According to Warshak (2003), in many cultures, accepting a child's wishes and demands may be considered inappropriate and an “inversion of the proper relationships between adults and children.” Still, the findings of our study indicate that the pattern of recommendations by the respondents is such that when the child's wishes are in line with the basic tendency of the worker to grant mothers custody, the whishes carry weight and increase the odds for such decision, whereas when the child's wish is contrary to this basic tendency, it has no effect. In other words, the social workers used the children's expressed preferences to rationalize the social workers' bias for mother custody and did not really place great weight on the children's preferences. They also strengthen the understanding
H. Nouman et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 70 (2016) 302–308
that social workers traditionally show a significant bias toward the mother. The child's gender, as shown by the study findings, does not influence the social workers' parental custody recommendation, even though the child's identification with the parents is a central component in child socialization. Our study did not find that the child's gender was a significant factor in the judgments of social workers. Limitations and implications of future research. Methodologically, the study examined specific variables, which might affect the trustworthiness of the measurement because it does not test additional variables, such as the child's residential environment or other family variables which might also influence this complex decision (Enosh, Nouman, & Anabtawi, in press; Enosh, Nouman, & Sharon, in press). Therefore, this limitation can serve as the basis for recommending future studies examining comprehensive variables, including those tested in the present study, as well as additional variables. This comprehensive examination might negate the present claim according to which child custody allocation in Israel is still influenced by longstanding social norms, which favor the mother. Future research should incorporate all those variables into data collection and analysis. Furthermore, our findings indicate that the more children the social workers had, the greater was their tendency to recommend maternal custody and lesser their tendency to recommend joint custody. Since this issue was not examined previously in the extant research, we recommend that future research will explore this issue more deeply. A question may be raised regarding the way by which social workers have interpreted their participation in the study, and whether they tried to respond based on social desirability and intention to appear “scientific” or “modern”. Based on previous studies of social workers in Israel, and their approach to “science” “research” and related issues such as “evidence based practice” (Shapira, Enosh, Havron-Shapira, forthcoming), there is ample basis to assume that there was no such social desirability bias in their responses. In light of the fact that the social workers' recommendation has a great impact on the judge's decision is very important for separating the personal and professional considerations of social workers, in order to place both parents on an equal footing, without prejudice. The social workers' ability to broaden their perspective and to examine their considerations through a theoretical and practical rationale will, in the end, influence their recommendations to the legal system that has to decide on this complex issue. Overall, the findings of the current paper indicate that social workers working with parents engaged in custodial disputes tend to be biased in favor of mother custody. This bias is likely to influence custody decisions in a direction that does not favor the best interests of children. Given that extant research comparing mother custody, father custody, and joint custody demonstrates that fathers do as good a job as mothers in the role of custodial parent, but that children experience considerable benefits in joint custody arrangements, the current findings call for an extensive systemic educational rethinking and reforming the education of social workers dealing with custodial issues. References Alexander, C. S., & Becker, H. J. (1978). The use of vignettes in survey research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 42, 93–104. Arkin, K. (2005). Approaches and values of judges regarding equality and division of roles between the parents in judgments of courts concerning custody of minors. (Unpublished master's thesis) Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Atzmüller, C., & Steiner, P. M. (2010). Experimental vignette studies in survey research. Methodology, 6, 128–138. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241/a000014. Ben-Ami, H. (2011). Child protection officers in the era of the family court. In R. Tzur (Ed.), Dossier for child protection officers for legal proceedings (pp. 15–16) (Hebrew). Braver, S. L., Cookston, J. T., & Cohen, B. R. (2002). Experiences of family law attorneys with current issues in divorce practice. Family Relations, 51(4), 325–334. http://dx. doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2002.00325.x. Cabrera, N., Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., Bradley, R. H., Hofferth, S., & Lamb, M. E. (2000). Fatherhood in the twenty-first century. Child Development, 71(1), 127–136. http://dx.doi. org/10.1111/1467-8624.00126.
307
Chambers, D. L. (1984). Rethinking the substantive rules for custody disputes in divorce. Michigan Law Review, 83(3), 477–569. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1288561. Cohen, O., & Segal-Engelchin, D. (2000). Suzi and Mr. S.: Gender role stereotyping in social workers court reports in custody and access cases. Smith College Studies in Social Work. 70. (pp. 475–500). http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00377310009517606. Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child – Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 44/25 of 20 November 1989, Article 12. (Retrieved from http://www.ohchr. org/Documents/Professional Interest/crc.pdf). Crawford, B., & Bradley, M. S. (2016). Parent gender and child removal in physical abuse and neglect cases. Children and Youth Services Review, 65, 224–230. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.04.013. Dahl, G. B., & Moretti, E. (2004). The demand for sons: Evidence from divorce, fertility, and shotgun marriage. National Bureau of Economic Research. http://dx.doi.org/10.3386/ w10281. Davidson-Arad, B., & Benbenishty, R. (2008). The role of workers' attitudes and parent and child wishes in child protection workers' assessments and recommendations regarding removal and reunification. Children and Youth Services Review, 30(1), 107–121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.07.003. D'Cruz, H., Gillingham, P., & Melendez, S. (2007). Reflexivity, its meanings and relevance for social work: A critical review of the literature. British Journal of Social Work, 37, 73–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcl001. Ebel, R. L. (1951). Estimation of the reliability of ratings. Psychometrika, 16(4), 407–424. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02288803. Enosh, G., & Bayer-Topilsky, T. (2015). Reasoning and bias: Heuristics in safety assessment and placement decisions for children at risk. British Journal of Social Work, 45, 1771–1787. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ bjsw/bct213. Enosh, G., Nouman, H., & Anabtawi, R. (2016). Evaluating child-custody recommendations of Israeli Arab social workers between traditionalism and professional decision-making. Research on Social Work Practice. http://dx.doi.org/1049731516666382 (in press). Enosh, G., Nouman, H., & Sharon, O. (2016b). Between professionalism and traditional social norms: Social workers’ parental custody recommendations. British Journal of Social Work. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ bjsw/bcw062 (in press). Fagan, J., Day, R., Lamb, M. E., & Cabrera, N. J. (2014). Should researchers conceptualize differently the dimensions of parenting for fathers and mothers? Journal of Family Theory & Review, 6(4), 390–405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12044. Fransson, E., Sarkadi, A., Hjern, A., & Bergström, M. (2016). Why should they live more with one of us when they are children to us both?: Parents' motives for practicing equal joint physical custody for children aged 0–4. Children and Youth Services Review, 66, 154–160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.05.011. Frishtik, M. (2005). The considerations guiding protection officers in their recommendations to the family court on child custody. Social Security Journal, 69, 91–115 (Hebrew). Frishtik, M., & Yagelnik, T. (2007). The considerations guiding the family courts in determining child custody. Society and Welfare, 27, 9–36 (Hebrew). Gofna-Pinto, T. (1996). Custody and visitation of children after divorce–recommendations in the social worker report, the judicial decisions, the execution by the family and the non-custodial parent–child contact. Unpublished Master's Thesis. Tel Aviv University (Hebrew). Greenberg, L. R., Gould-Saltman, D. J., & Gottlieb, M. C. (2008). Playing in their sandbox: Professional obligations of mental health professionals in custody cases. Journal of Child Custody, 5(3–4), 192–216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 15379410802583684. Hacker, D. (2008). Parenthood in the law: Behind the scene of custody and visitation upon divorce. Hakibbutz Hameuchad: Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Hacker, D., & Frenkel, M. (2005). Active parenthood and employment equal opportunities: The need to change the characteristics of the labor force. Labor, society and law. 11. (pp. 275–303) (Hebrew). Hall, D. J., & Paradice, D. (2007). Investigating value-based decision bias and mediation: do you do as you think? Communications of the ACM. 50(4). (pp. 81–85). http://dx. doi.org/10.1145/1232743.1232752. Hetherington, E. M. (1999). Should we stay together for the sake of the children. In E. M. Hetherington (Ed.), Coping with divorce, single parenting, and remarriage: A risk and resiliency perspective (pp. 93–116). Oxford, UK: Routledge. Kelly, J. B. (2000). Children's adjustment in conflicted marriage and divorce: A decade review of research. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 39(8), 963–973. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00004583-200008000-00007. Kelly, J. B. (2002). Psychological and legal interventions for parents and children in custody and access disputes: Current research and practice. Virginia Journal of Social Policy and the Law, 10(1), 129–163. Kelly, J. B., & Emery, R. E. (2003). Children's adjustment following divorce: Risk and resilience perspectives. Family Relations, 52(4), 352–362. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j. 1741-3729.2003.00352.x. Kuehnle, K. F., & Drozd, L. M. (2012). Evidence-based practice. In K. Kuehnle, & L. Drozd (Eds.), Parenting plan evaluations: Applied research for the family court (pp. 577–582). New York: Oxford University Press. Kurki-Suonio, K. (2000). Joint custody as an interpretation of the best interests of the child in critical and comparative perspective. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 14(3), 183–205. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/14.3.183. Lamb, M. E., & Sagi, A. (2014). Fatherhood and family policy. New York, NY: Routledge. Legal Capacity and Guardianship Law. (1962). (Retrieved from http://index.justice.gov.il/ Units/BetDinDroziLerorim/hukimtakanot). Legal Procedures Regarding Minors, Mentally Ill and Missing Persons Law (1955g). Section 2. (Retrieved from http://index.justice.gov.il). Lulu, R. (2000). Attitudes of social workers and child protection officers for legal proceedings in a social services department to out-of-home placement of children. (Unpublished master's thesis) Bar-Ilan University. Ramat Gan (Hebrew).
308
H. Nouman et al. / Children and Youth Services Review 70 (2016) 302–308
Lundberg, S., McLanahan, S., & Rose, E. (2007). Child gender and father involvement in fragile families. Demography, 44(1), 79–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/dem.2007. 0007. MacLennan, R. N. (1993). Interrater reliability with SPSS for Windows 5.0. American Statistician, 47(4), 292–296. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00031305.1993.10476000. Mantle, G., Leslie, J., Parsons, S., Plenty, J., & Shaffer, R. (2006). Establishing children's wishes and feelings for family court reports the significance attached to the age of the child. Childhood, 13(4), 499–518. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0907568206068560. Martindale, D. A. (2005). Confirmatory bias and confirmatory distortion. In J. R. Flens, & L. Drozd (Eds.), Psychological testing in child custody evaluations (pp. 31–48). New York, NY: Haworth. Mattison, M. (2000). Ethical decision making: The person in the process. Social Work, 45(3), 201–212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sw/45.3.201. Ministry of Justice (2011). Intermediary and supplementary report to the Schnitt Commission of 2011. (http://www.justice.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/F8171E9C-03DE-4FF5-943913AEC429BD2E/10149/dochShnit3.pdf). Nielsen, L. (2015). Shared physical custody: Does it benefit most children. Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, 28, 79–138. Patton, M. Q. (2011). Essentials of utilization-focused evaluation. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Perlman, N. (2012). The Tender Years Doctrine in Israel and around the world: Knesset website: Legal branch. Legislation and Legal Research (Hebrew) http://www.knesset. gov.il Prout, A. (2003). Participation, policy and the changing conditions of childhood. In C. Hallett, & A. Prout (Eds.), Hearing the voices of children. Social policy for a new century (pp. 11–25). Routhledge Falmer: London and New York. Rogers, W. H. (1993). Regression standard errors in clustered samples. Stata Technical Bulletin, 13, 19–23. Rotlevy Committee (2003). Conclusions of the committee on the rights of the child. Jerusalem: Ministry of Justice (Hebrew). Sagi, A. (1987). Value biases in child custody disputes and recommendations: A study of Israeli social work students. Journal of Divorce, 10(3–4), 27–42. Sagi, A., & Dvir, R. (1993). Value biases of social workers in custody disputes. Children and Youth Services Review, 15(1), 27–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0190-7409(93)90051-A. Schnitt, D. (1979). Interaction between behavioral science experts and the legal system. 32. (pp. 365–368). Hapraklit, 365–368 (Hebrew). Schnitt, D. (1994). “The tender years doctrine” in resolving child custody disputes: Continuity, change, or elimination. 19(1). (pp. 185–203). Iyunei Mishpat, 185–203 (Hebrew).
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. NY: Basic books. Shapira, Y., Enosh, G., & Havron-Shapira, N. (2016). What makes social-work students implement evidence based practice behaviors? Journal of Social Work Education (forthcoming). Silman Committee (2014). Report examining the Ministry's policy on out-of-home placement of children and the issue of visiting rights. (Hebrew). (Retrieved from http:// www.molsa.gov.il/About/OfficePolicy/Documents). Skjørten, K. (2013). Children's voices in Norwegian custody cases. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 27(3), 289–309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/ebt003. Smart, C. (2002). From children's shoes to children's voices. Family Court Review, 40(3), 307–319. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.174-1617.2002.tb00842.x. StataCorp (2015). Stata statistical software: Release 14. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP. Strohmer, D. C., Shivy, V. A., & Chiodo, A. L. (1990). Information processing strategies in counselor hypothesis testing: The role of selective memory and expectancy. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37(4), 465–472. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.37.4.465. Tippins, T. M., & Wittmann, J. P. (2005). Empirical and ethical problems with custody recommendations. Family Court Review, 43(2), 193–222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j. 1744-1617.2005.00019. Tzaddik, Y. (2001). How can parental efficacy be evaluated? In A. Levy (Ed.), Medicine and law: Jubilee issue (pp. 328–331) (Hebrew). Van Bemmel, J. H., & Helder, J. C. (Eds.). (1997). Handbook of medical informatics. Houten, Netherlands: Bohn Stafleu Van Loghum. Warshak, R. A. (2003). Payoffs and pitfalls of listening to children. Family Relations, 52(4), 373–384. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2003.00373.x. Warshak, R. A. (2011). Parenting by the clock: The best-interest-of-the-child standard, judicial discretion, and the American Law Institute's Approximation Rule. 41(1). (pp. 83–163). University of Baltimore Law Review, 83–163 (https://law.ubalt.edu/ academics/publications/lawreview/volumes/6_Warshak.41.1.pdf). Warshak, R. A. (2014). Social science and parenting plans for young children: A consensus report. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 20(1), 46–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ law0000005. Williams, R. L. (2000). A note on robust variance estimation for cluster-correlated data. Biometrics, 56(2), 645–646. Zafran, R. (2013). The professional difficulties involved in professional opinion: Another reason for reshaping the law about the question of division of parental responsibility. 36. (pp. 269–345). Iyunei Mishpat, 269–345 (Hebrew).