Christina Sadowski writes on her research for the Ballarat Family Relationship Centre. This is an article from the November edition of Nexus, the newsletter of the Australian Sociological Association.
“Shared care, post-separation: Adding children’s voices to the discussion”
Christina Sadowski
When I commenced my PhD at the University of Ballarat in February 2008, my broad mandate was to identify a research topic of significance and relevance to my funding agency, the Ballarat Family Relationship Centre (a consortium of Centacare Ballarat, Relationships Australia, and Child and Family Services). Family Relationship Centres are positioned as “one-stop-shops” to provide information, referral and specialized services to families at all stages of the family formation and separation continuum. My exploratory readings of relevant research literature about family separation highlighted the steady incremental increase of numbers of Australian children and children in all Western countries entering into “shared care” arrangements post-separation (generally seen to be an arrangement in which children spend at least 30% of their time, the equivalent of five nights per fortnight, with each parent). Although exact statistics are impossible to ascertain, it appears that between 7% and 12% of the nearly 1 million Australian children whose families have separated live in shared care, with Child Support Agency statistics highlighting a significant increase in all new cases reporting shared care (an increase from 9% of all new cases in June 2003 to 17% of all new cases in June 2008) (Smyth, 2009).
After developing an understanding of the complex socio-legal reasons for this shift, the recent federal Parliamentary inquiry process informing the Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Act 2006, and the contents and implications of this legislative reform, I wanted to find the answer to what I thought was a logical, simple and straightforward question, “What do children who are living in shared care themselves have to say about what it is really like for them to be children living in shared care?” My initial literature review provided me with a wealth of other valuable and informative information (for example, the profile of parents who have historically opted for shared care; comparison of well-being across different post-separation care arrangements; what mothers and fathers had to say about their experiences of shared care; community attitudes about shared care; impact of conflict on children living in a variety of post-separation care arrangements including shared care), but I struggled to find any Australian research which specifically asked children what it was actually like for them to live in shared care.
The reason I struggled, quite simply, is because no such research has been conducted. To date, only a limited number of studies have been published which specifically and directly ask children about their experiences in shared care, most notably two early American studies (Abarbanel, 1978; Steinman, 1981) and a more recent British studies (Smart, Neale & Wade 2001) directly and explicitly seek children’s subjective views about shared care. Undeniably, other studies have been conducted which directly involve children (most recently, the work of McIntosh and colleagues (see for example McIntosh & Chisholm, 2008; McIntosh, Wells et al 2008;), and the importance of these exemplary studies should not be underestimated. However, the voices of children remain largely silent. In an article reviewing recent Australian shared care literature, Smyth (2009) identifies that “[i]mproved understanding of different patterns of care requires information from a range of sources and approaches,” specifically identifying research which allows children’s experiences and views to be heard as an “imperative” component of new research (p. 54).
I moved out of positivist-dominated psychology literature and into sociology literature, where I quickly placed my concerns about the lack of children’s voices within the “new sociology of childhood” (Prout & James, 1997). This changing conceptualisation about children’s roles and rights has been enshrined in the United Nation Convention on the Rights of the Child. These ideological shifts have shaped the emergence of research which is “primarily concerned with portraying the ordinary experiences of children within the structures of their lives” (Cocks, 2006, p. 247).
After several months poring over literature about epistemologies, theoretical perspectives, methodologies and methods, I decided that phenomenology will provide me with the most appropriate methodology for exploring the lived experience of children in shared care. The aim of phenomenology is “to capture as closely as possible the way in which the phenomenon is experienced within the context in which the experience takes place” (Giorgi & Giorgi, 2003, p. 26). I will adopt the descriptive phenomenological approach developed by Amadeo Giorgi (1985). This approach will allow for children to speak directly about their experiences of shared care and interpretation using phenomenological analyses will allow me to determine the underlying structures of an experience which portray the essences of that experience (Moustakas, 1994).
As I refine my methodology and research methods, I have become aware of the enormous benefits having not only the guidance of my multi-disciplinary team of supervisors (my Principal Supervisor is a sociologist, and my three Associate Supervisors include a social worker, a clinical child psychologist, and a sociologist), but also of the management and clinical staff at the Ballarat Family Relationship Centre, whose specialties include family dispute resolution and child inclusive practice. The diverse backgrounds of the members of this “support team” has encouraged me to think broadly and consider different perspectives. The combination of academic expertise combined with practice expertise will help ensure that the project retains theoretical rigor and that the semi-structured interviews I will be conducting reflect current best practice in working with children. The research findings, and methodological insights I gain about applying phenomenology to children, will be of relevance to a wide cross section of fields, areas of practice, and also to parents and children who are experiencing family separation. This potential for wide distribution of the findings will contribute to the growing movement to elevate the voice of children, which has been historically silent.
References
Abarbanel, A. (1979). Shared parenting after separation and divorce: A study of joint custody. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 49(2), 320-329.
Cocks, A. J. (2006). The ethical maze: Finding an inclusive path towards gaining children's agreement to research participation. Childhood, 13(2), 247-266. doi:10.1177/0907568206062942
Giorgi, A. (1985) Phenomenology and psychological research. Pittsburgh, USA: Duquesne University Press.
Giorgi, A., & Giorgi, B. (2003). Phenomenology. In J. A. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (pp. 25-50). London: Sage Publications.
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
Prout, A., & James, A. (1997). A new paragigm for the sociology of childhood? provenance, promise and problems. In A. James, & A. Prout (Eds.), Constructing and reconstructing childhood (First ed., pp. 7-33). London: Falmer Press.
Smart, C., Neale, B., & Wade, A. (2001). The changing experience of childhood: Families and divorce. Cambridge: Polity Press.
McIntosh, J. & Chisholm, R. (2008). Cautionary notes on the shared care of children in conflicted parental separation. Journal of Family Studies, 14(1), 37. Retrieved 15th February 2009 from http://search.informit.com.au/fullText;dn=200806624;res=APAFT
McIntosh, J. E., Wells, Y. D., & Long, C. M. (2007). Child focused and child inclusive family law dispute resolution: One year findings from a prospective study of outcomes. Journal of Family Studies, 13(1), 8-25.
Smyth, B. (2009). A 5-year retrospective of post-separation shared care research in Australia. Journal of Family Studies, 15(1), 36-59.
Steinman, S. (1981). The experience of children in a joint-custody arrangement: A report of a study. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 31(3), 403-414.
No comments:
Post a Comment