Search

Attachment theory and research are drawn upon in many applied settings, including family courts, but misunderstandings are widespread and sometimes result in misapplications. The aim of this consensus statement is, therefore, to enhance understanding, counter misinformation, and steer family-court utilisation of attachment theory in a supportive, evidence-based direction, especially with regard to child protection and child custody decision-making. The article is divided into two parts. In the first, we address problems related to the use of attachment theory and research in family courts, and discuss reasons for these problems. To this end, we examine family court applications of attachment theory in the current context of the best-interest-of-the-child standard, discuss misunderstandings regarding attachment theory, and identify factors that have hindered accurate implementation. In the second part, we provide recommendations for the application of attachment theory and research. To this end, we set out three attachment principles: the child’s need for familiar, non-abusive caregivers; the value of continuity of good-enough care; and the benefits of networks of attachment relationships. We also discuss the suitability of assessments of attachment quality and caregiving behaviour to inform family court decision-making. We conclude that assessments of caregiver behaviour should take center stage. Although there is dissensus among us regarding the use of assessments of attachment quality to inform child custody and child-protection decisions, such assessments are currently most suitable for targeting and directing supportive interventions. Finally, we provide directions to guide future interdisciplinary research collaboration.

Attachment theory and research are drawn upon in many applied settings, including family courts, but misunderstandings are widespread and sometimes result in misapplications. The aim of this consensus statement is, therefore, to enhance understanding, counter misinformation, and steer family-court utilisation of attachment theory in a supportive, evidence-based direction, especially with regard to child protection and child custody decision-making. The article is divided into two parts. In the first, we address problems related to the use of attachment theory and research in family courts, and discuss reasons for these problems. To this end, we examine family court applications of attachment theory in the current context of the best-interest-of-the-child standard, discuss misunderstandings regarding attachment theory, and identify factors that have hindered accurate implementation. In the second part, we provide recommendations for the application of attachment theory and research. To this end, we set out three attachment principles: the child’s need for familiar, non-abusive caregivers; the value of continuity of good-enough care; and the benefits of networks of attachment relationships. We also discuss the suitability of assessments of attachment quality and caregiving behaviour to inform family court decision-making. We conclude that assessments of caregiver behaviour should take center stage. Although there is dissensus among us regarding the use of assessments of attachment quality to inform child custody and child-protection decisions, such assessments are currently most suitable for targeting and directing supportive interventions. Finally, we provide directions to guide future interdisciplinary research collaboration.

The ICES Workshop on ICES reference points (WKREF2) was tasked review the WKREF1 report and based on the outcome develop updated guidelines for the ICES reference points system and recommendations for ACOM consideration. The WKREF1 report has suggested 5 key recommendations to simplify and harmonise the ICES reference points framework representing a major change to the current guidelines. At WKREF2, we detailed discussions and four key concerns were raised about the proposed approach. The first related to the simplification of rules to define Blim. Around two thirds of category 1 stocks would end up as WKREF1 “Blim Type 2” where Blim would be set as a fraction of B0. The Allee effect or “depensation” maybe more important than previously thought and should be furthered explored for ICES stocks since it has important consequences for Blim. A number of challenges and issues around defining Blim using the current guidelines were documented. Some suggestions on improvement criteria were discussed including using classifiers to define spasmodic stocks and using change point algorithms to address non-stationary productivity regimes. However, further work is need to make these approaches operational and there was no consensus that the WKREF1 Blim types should replace the current guidelines. WKREF1 recommended that the FMSY proxy should be based on a biological proxies and should be less than the deterministic FMSY. It was pointed out that the stochastic FMSY estimated in EqSim for example, is lower than the deterministic FMSY and that the current guidelines ensure that the FMSY should not pose a more than 5% risk to Blim. A large amount of work described in WD 1 was carried out to develop an MSE framework to consistency and robustness test a candidate reference point system for North East Atlantic stocks. However, WKREF2 recommended tha

The ICES Workshop on ICES reference points (WKREF1) was tasked to provide a thorough review of the ICES reference points system as a basis to re-evaluate the process for estimating, updating and communicating reference points in the context of the ICES advice. As part of the preparation leading to WKREF1 a large database of the most recent assessment outputs for 78 Category 1 stocks were collated in the form `FLStock` objects, which formed the basis for several components of the presented analyses. The first part of the meeting involved a detailed overview of the history and basis of the ICES references points system, which was aligned with the results of an empirical review of the procedures and choices made to derive ICES reference points for category 1 stocks. The ICES procedures were then contrasted with those used in the USA, Canada, New Zealand and across tuna Regional Fishery Management Organizations. A limitation in terms of transparency of the ICES procedures is a lack of complete documentation of the settings used for deriving reference points using, e.g., the EQSIM software. In comparison to other international standards, the main differences identified include the absence of a target biomass reference point and inconsistent estimates of the limit biomass reference point Blim, which is estimated to be below 10% of the unfished biomass (B0) for a high proportion of analysed stocks (around 50%). In addition, an important difference is that direct estimates of FMSY are used in ICES (which can be unreliable), whereas elsewhere FMSY is often replaced by more conservative biological proxies, such as Fspr% and FB%. The second part focused on the robustness evaluation of the current ICES reference point system. Work presented included examples that demonstrate differences in reference point estimates between standard ICES procedures (EQSIM) and full Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) simulations, and a study th

Attachment theory and research are drawn upon in many applied settings, including family courts, but misunderstandings are widespread and sometimes result in misapplications. The aim of this consensus statement is, therefore, to enhance understanding, counter misinformation, and steer family-court utilisation of attachment theory in a supportive, evidence-based direction, especially with regard to child protection and child custody decision-making. This article is divided into two parts. In the first part, we address problems related to the use of attachment theory and research in family courts, and discuss reasons for these problems. To this end, we examine family court applications of attachment theory in the current context of the best-interest-of-the-child standard, discuss misunderstandings regarding attachment theory, and identify factors that have hindered accurate implementation. In the second part, we provide recommendations for the application of attachment theory and research. To this end, we set out three attachment principles: the child's need for familiar, non-abusive caregivers; the value of continuity of good-enough care; and the benefits of networks of attachment relationships. We also discuss the suitability of assessments of attachment quality and caregiving behaviour to inform family court decision-making. We conclude that assessments of caregiver behaviour should take center stage. Although there is dissensus among us regarding the use of assessments of attachment quality to inform child custody and child-protection decisions, such assessments are currently most suitable for targeting and directing supportive interventions. Finally, we provide directions to guide future interdisciplinary research collaboration., La teoría y la investigación sobre el apego se utilizan en muchos contextos aplicados, incluidos los juzgados de familia, pero hay malentendidos muy extendidos y que a veces dan lugar a aplicaciones erróneas. El objetivo de este documento de consenso es, por lo tanto, mejorar la comprensión, contrarrestar la desinformación y dirigir el uso de la teoría del apego por parte de los juzgados de familia en la dirección de un apoyo basado en la evidencia, especialmente en lo que respecta a la protección de niñas y niños y las decisiones sobre su custodia. El artículo se divide en dos partes. En la primera abordamos los problemas relacionados con el uso de la teoría y la investigación sobre apego en los juzgados de familia, analizando las causas de tales problemas. Para ello examinamos las aplicaciones de la teoría del apego en los juzgados de familia en el marco del concepto de interés superior de niños y niñas, analizamos los malentendidos relacionados con la teoría del apego e identificamos los factores que han obstaculizado su adecuada aplicación. En la segunda parte ofrecemos recomendaciones para la aplicación de la teoría y la investigación sobre apego. Para ello establecemos tres principios del apego: la necesidad de niñas y niños de cuidadoras y cuidadores habituales que no maltraten, el valor de la continuidad de cuidados de calidad suficientemente buena y los beneficios de las redes de relaciones de apego. También analizamos la idoneidad de las evaluaciones de los estilos de apego y del comportamiento de los cuidadores para fundamentar la toma de decisiones de los juzgados de familia. Llegamos a la conclusión de que las evaluaciones de quienes cuidan deberían ocupar un lugar central. Aunque no hay consenso entre nosotros sobre el uso de las evaluaciones del estilo de apego para fundamentar las decisiones sobre custodia y protección infantil, dichas evaluaciones son actualmente las más adecuadas para orientar y dirigir las intervenciones de apoyo. Por último, prop

Commission Decision of 25 February 2016 setting up a Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries, C(2016) 1084, OJ C 74, 26.2.2016, p. 4–10. The Commission may consult the group on any matter relating to marine and fisheries biology, fishing gear technology, fisheries economics, fisheries governance, ecosystem effects of fisheries, aquaculture or similar disciplines. This reportis from STECF Expert Working Group19-10: 2019stock assessments ofdemersal stocks in the western Mediterranean Seafrom the meeting in Arona Italy from 9thto 15rdSeptember 2019. A total of 19 fish stocks were evaluated. The EWG reports age based assessments and short term forecasts for 15 of the 19 stocks. Catch advice for the other four stocks was based on ICES category 3 evaluations of biomass indices. The content of the report gives the STECF terms of reference, the basis of the evaluationsand advice, summaries of state of stock and advised based on either the MSY approach for assessed stocks or the precautionary approachfor category 3 based advice. Thereport contains the full stock assessment reports for the 15 assessments, one full category3 evaluation and briefre-evaluations and validations of the 2018 results for the final three stocks for which two year’sadvice was given in 2018.The report also contains the STECF observations and conclusions on the assessment report. These conclusionscome from the STECF Plenary meeting November 2019

Commission Decision of 25 February 2016 setting up a Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries, C(2016) 1084, OJ C 74, 26.2.2016, p. 4-10. The Commission may consult the group on any matter relating to marine and fisheries biology, fishing gear technology, fisheries economics, fisheries governance, ecosystem effects of fisheries, aquaculture or similar disciplines. The Expert Working Group meeting of the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries EWG 16-17 was held from 19 Nov - 25 Nov 2016 in Ispra, Italy to assess the status of demersal and small pelagic stocks in the Mediterranean Sea against the proposed FMSY reference points.The he report was reviewed by the STECF plenary in March 2017

Pretty good yield (PGY) is a sustainable fish yield corresponding to obtaining no less than a specified large percentage of the maximum sustainable yield (MSY). We investigated 19 European fish stocks to test the hypothesis that the 95% PGY yield range is inherently precautionary with respect to impairing recruitment. An FMSY range was calculated for each stock as the range of fishing mortalities (F) that lead to an average catch of at least 95% of MSY in long-term simulations. Further, a precautionary reference point for each stock (FP.05) was defined as the F resulting in a 5% probability of the spawning-stock biomass falling below an agreed biomass limit below which recruitment is impaired (Blim) in long-term simulations. For the majority of the stocks analysed, the upper bound of the FMSY range exceeded the estimated FP.05. However, larger fish species had higher precautionary limits to fishing mortality, and species with larger asymptotic length were less likely to have FMSY ranges impairing recruitment. Our study shows that fishing at FMSY generally is precautionary with respect to impairing recruitment for highly exploited teleost species in northern European waters, whereas the upper part of the range providing 95% of MSY is not necessarily precautionary for small- and medium-sized teleosts.