Search

This paper critically examines Louise Silverstein's and Carl Auerbach' s paper on Deconstructing the Essential Father. The paper provides research support for their position that children benefit from stable, consistent, loving, low-conflict parenting arrangements; irrespective of the gender of the parent. Silverstein and Auerbach, however, go beyond this conclusion to also recommend that children would benefit from being reconnected with their 'absent' fathers. The current paper challenges this particular conclusion to their critique and explores the apparently contradictory position that there is no essential need for fathers vet efforts should be made to proactively develop and support social and emotional connections between children and their fathers. The paper also examines other literature and research findings around the 'unique' contribution of social fathering in raising children, and concludes that there is no social, psychological, or developmental justification to legislate for father presence. There is no research-based credibility in promoting patriarchal, nuclear family formation as a preferred social and family structure to optimise children's emotional, social, physical, and economic outcomes. The political and social pretext that underlines 'hither absence fear' is just that; a pretext to retain the hegemony of patriarchal nuclear family life and restore fathers to their `rightful positions of power and control within families. In developing a conclusion to this critique, the paper draws on a briefcase-study from a lesbian-parented family research project conducted in Victoria, Australia, and illustrates implications for family therapists with a brief clinical vignette. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors claim that the recognition of interdependence as a guiding principle of child and family policy has the potential to transform legal systems to make them less punitive and more constructive, less judgmental towards individuals and more empathic to the protection of relationships and self-constructed identities. By embracing the notion of interdependence, our societies can be moved toward greater recognition of our common humanity to the great benefit of children and their families, particularly those who are most vulnerable. Four lenses are articulated in this paper Therapeutic jurisprudence, preventive law, family systems theory, and culture. The. paper shows how these lenses point toward mare supportive rather than punitive types of interventions in the lives of children and their families. The paper demonstrates that, despite the fact that questionable parental behavior may initially engender feelings of anger and aversion, an empathic public response-one that recognizes the reality of the interdependence between parents and children-not only comports with current enlightened interdisciplinary approaches, but also promotes child and family well-being. The authors suggest that such a response not only be contemplated and understood, but that it should also reframe child and family policies and practices. The family group conference model represents a tool for such reframing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on several important issues of family policy that affect women and their families around the world. It also offers an understanding of contemporary family structures and patterns, the changes taking place, and the implications of such changes for policy and practice. It reflects on the present condition of the international family policy of which feminist therapy should be aware of. It also discusses how Great Britain's social policy and feminist family therapy have been co-evolving, how family policy sustains limited and dominant gender roles and family construct, and how feminist-informed family therapy and family support are influencing change. The author also presents the two qualitative studies of women's experiences of family policy.