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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Anuario de Psicología Jurídica is the property of Colegio Oficial de Psicologos de Madrid and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

For some years now, concerns have been raised about whether the frequency and the arrangements for contact between infants and parents during proceedings are in the best interests of infants. Could these arrangements be better managed to safeguard the development of the infant while maintaining effective contact and supporting the possibility of reunion with the birth parents? A recent study by Kenrick (2009) has provided detailed accounts of the stressful and negative impact on infants of high levels of contact during care proceedings. Research from Australia has raised similar concerns (Humphreys and Kiraly, 2011). A multi-disciplinary working group, hosted by Coram, has been meeting to discuss these issues and in December 2010 the President of the Family Division's annual debate was titled 'Infant Contact: Keeping the Baby in Mind'. This article by Gillian Schofield and John Simmonds draws on that debate as well as out- lining the legal, research and practice contexts. The aim here is to explore this controversial area and to identify questions which need to be considered in planning infant contact, both in the pre-proceedings phase and throughout care proceedings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Attachment theory and therapy have established themselves as major constructs in foster care and adoption practice. The depth of the explanatory power of attachment theory and research have done much to both identify the source of developmental difficulties in adopted and fostered children, and of the significant changes that can be made when these children are placed with `autonomously' classified carers. However, the power of the concept has also led to a proliferation of ideas, particularly therapeutic models that can, in some cases, stray a long way from the core of what is effective, safe and ethical clinical practice. Holding therapy is one of these models. The British Association for Adoption and Fostering developed a position statement on this practice, setting it within a broader framework of assessment and intervention. But like the model, the development of the position statement became controversial in its development. The article charts some of the critical issues and identifies the very significant dilemmas for parents and carers caught up in the maelstrom of challenging behaviours and disturbing feelings. The conclusion turns to one of the key components of an attachment-based idea: The critical importance of finding the space to think and to feel what the child is communicating without resorting to dangerous retaliation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]