SEPARATION FROM CHILDREN’S PERSPECTIVES:
RECENT RESEARCH AND SOME FOOD FOR
THOUGHT
Jan Pryor
Roy McKenzie Centre for the Study
of Families
Victoria University.
Presentation for the Auckland Family
Courts Association Conference, April
2006.
What does research tell us about the impact
of separation on children?
1. On average, children who experience parental
separation are at twice the risk of adverse outcomes.
These include:






Emotional and behavioural problems (distress, withdrawn behaviour, etc)
Poor educational outcomes
Aggressive and antisocial behaviour
Poor mental health and wellbeing in adolescence and adulthood
Early entrance into sexual activity, childbearing, partnership formation, own
separation
These findings show few age differences, no change across time
(cohort differences), and are similar across western countries.
However:


The majority of children do not suffer adverse
outcomes as a result of parental separation.
The risks for children living in stepfamilies are
similar to those in lone parent households, and
the risk of early transitions to adult behaviours
may be higher.
Separation is not the cause of poor
outcomes:

The risks remain when parents stay
together for the sake of the children.

Children show elevated levels of
behavioural and other problems before
separation.
Conflict and feeling caught between
parents (1)

•
•
A recent study by Amato and Afifi included adult
offspring of divorced, intact high-conflict and
intact low-conflict parents. They found that:
Feeling caught predicted lower levels of
wellbeing and poorer parent-child relationships
in adulthood (19 years plus)
Children in high-conflict intact families were
most likely to feel caught between parents
Conflict and feeling caught (2).
•
Offspring with divorced parents were no more
likely than those with continuously married, lowconflict parents to feel caught
•
Feelings of being caught faded in the decade
following divorce
Conflict and feeling caught (3)
The authors concluded that:
“…unlike children of divorce, children with parents
in conflicted marriages (who do not divorce)
may be unable to escape from their parents’
problems - even into adulthood.”
•
Reference: Amato, P. & Afifi, T. (2006) Feeling caught between
parents: adult children’s relations with parents and subjective
wellbeing. Journal of Marriage and the Family 68 222-235.
Divorcing Children: Children’s
experience of their parents’ divorce


A study by Butler, Scanlan, et al in the UK of 104
children aged 7 - 15 within a year of divorce.
Two groups were constructed based on three standard
measures (Achenbach, Harter, Kovacs). One was
considered to be coping well, the other to be coping not
very well.
Reference: Butler, L., Scanlan, L., Robinson, M., Douglas, F. and Murch, M.
(2003. London, Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Characteristics of children who
coped well with parental divorce (1)






More likely to be female
More likely to be older
More likely to have been told about divorce*
More likely to have received explanations
More likely to have been told early*
Less likely to have kept it secret*
Characteristics of children who
coped well with divorce (2)






More likely to have been consulted about living arrangements*
More likely to have sought support from others*
More likely to have received support from others*
Less likely to have received professional support*
More likely to have a best friend*
More likely to have talked to their best friend about the divorce*
What do children think about their experiences? A
recent study from Australia.




60 young people aged 12-19 interviewed.
Aged from 3 to 15 when parents separated.
Computer-assisted interviews.
Reference: Parkinson, P., Cashmore, J., Single,
J. 2005. Adolescents’ views on the fairness of
parenting and financial arrangements after
separation. Family Court Review 43 (3)429444.
How should time between parents be
divided?

Majority thought the division should be
half and half, equal, or ‘fair’.

‘They should be half and half so they both
get a chance to be involved with the kids’.
How important are sibling
relationships?

95% said it was important for siblings to
stay together after separation; 72% said it
was very important.
‘Parents do not really understand at those
times. When my parents split up, I
depended on my sister - you have
someone to talk to.’
How much say did the children have
about the arrangements?
Half said they had no say at all.
 The more say they had the more likely
they were to be happy with the
arrangements.

Control over contact
One quarter said they were never able to
see their nonresident parent when they
wanted to.
 50% said they didn’t have enough contact
with their nonresident parent.
 If parents had high levels of conflict, it
was less easy for them to see the nonresident parent.

What would they advise friends in the
same situation?

They would tell them not to let their
parents decide the contact arrangements,
and to let their parents know what they
were feeling and what they wanted.
Fairness between first and second
families

Young people were concerned that a
nonresident parent in a new family should
treat all children equally in terms of
availability and financial provision.
Consequences of different living
arrangements for children (Fabricious)


Young adults who had minimal contact with
non-resident fathers while growing up had high
levels of anger and low levels of closeness to
their fathers as adults
Those who had high levels of contact had high
levels of closeness and low levels of anger
Fabricious’s findings (2)


There was no relationship between levels of anger and
closeness to fathers, and to mothers - there was no
‘trade-off’ between parents
Those who had close contact with fathers had similar
levels of closeness and anger to mothers and fathers, in
contrast to a group in continuously married families
where young people described higher anger and lower
closeness to fathers than to mothers
Fabricious’s findings (3)


Parents who interfered with contact, or criticised the
other parent after separation, were the recipients of high
levels of anger and low levels of closeness from their
young adult children
Mothers were more likely to be seen to be interfering
and critical than were fathers
Summary of what we know about
children’s views about separation 1






All children are distressed at the time of separation, although some
are relieved as well
All children want to be given explanations about what is happening
and why
Most children want to maintain effective relationships with both
parents after separation
Children don’t always know how they feel, and may feel a mixture
of conflicting feelings
The majority of children say they want to express their feelings and
wishes about what is being decided
However, they rarely want to make a decision. They want input,
but not the responsibility of deciding
Summary of what we know about
children’s views about separation 2





Children are concerned with fairness and are often in a
loyalty bind between their own wishes and their desire
to be fair to parents
Children want support and advice from parents and
family members, and friends, but rarely from teachers
and counsellors
Children benefit measurably if they are consulted about
living arrangements
Children want their parents to behave civilly, and to
divorce ‘in a proper manner’
Children crave stability and predictability in their lives
Of particular importance:

The parents’ relationship after separation
is critical to children’s capacity to adapt
and adjust to changes. Parents who vent
anger and bitterness are robbing their
parents of emotional as well as tangible
assets.
Three views of childhood. 1.
The romantic child



The romantic view of childhood sees children
as innocent and to be protected, in order to
enjoy childhood unencumbered by adult
concerns.
The consideration of childhood as a separate
and distinct entity underlies the sociology of
childhood
It is also the basis for a welfarist position where
it is held that children should not be involved in
affairs that are properly those of adults
2. Children as competent miniadults


This perspective allows the attribution of
criminal responsibility to children as young as
ten years
In effect, the power held by children (legal,
economic, and emotional) grants de facto rights
similar to those of adults but usually not the
responsibilities
3. Child as undeveloped adult


This perspective sees the child as a ‘becoming’
adult, on a continuum of maturity. It denies a
separate status for childhood, but does not
allow for autonomy and responsibilities for
children.
This is the most common developmental model,
and in law often leads to arbitrary cut-off points
e.g. legal sexual activity at 16, voting at 18.
Gillick competence
An example of the ‘becoming adult’ perspective.
It argues that under the age of 16 a child is
presumed incompetent and is subject to the
Gillick test of competence:
“A competent child is one who achieves a
sufficient understanding and intelligence to
enable him or her to make a wise choice in his
or her own interests.”
A competent child should take responsibility for
his or herself.

Gillick competence cont.



Is based on understanding rather than age
In practice, it is very difficult to determine Gillick
competence
Many adults would not pass the competence
test, yet have rights not given to children in law.
Gillick competence cont.

Michael Freeman, and Brazier and
Bridges have suggested a test of
‘maximum autonomy’. This goes beyond
a cognitive analysis of understanding to
examine the extent to which a decision
furthers a child’s own goals and is
consistent with a child’s values.
Context for children who become
involved in the Court process





Will be experiencing high levels of parental
conflict
Are not experiencing a ‘civil’ separation
Will be in an atmosphere of uncertainty and
instability
Will be in an atmosphere of high emotional
tension
These are the children at highest risk for poor
outcomes
The interview context

Is one of high affect and uncertainty, at a time
when children may not know how they feel or
what they want, and when there is often
pressure from parents and others to have a
view or to take particular perspectives. They
may, too, not understand the interview context.
In contrast:



Children who participate in research interviews
are usually some time out from their parents’
separation
They have had time to reflect on their situation
and are probably in stable arrangements
Great care is taken by researchers in preparing
for and carrying out the interviews
Arguments for and against interviewing
children in the Family Court Context
Reasons for interviewing children:
1. Children have a legal right to be heard
(UNCROC, COCA).
2. Children want to have their views considered
3. We want to elicit their views and wishes
4. They benefit measurably from having input in
to decisions concerning them
Other important reasons for
interviewing children

It is a chance to give them information
about parental separation that they might
not otherwise get

It might provide dispassionate support
where parents are unable to do so
Disadvantages of interviewing children







Children may not want to be talked to
Their wishes may not reflect their needs or best
interests
They may not know what they want
Variable skills of those interviewing children
Risk of over-interviewing
Context of adversarial separation may make it
impossible for children to convey their real wishes and
needs
Interviewing is an ‘unnatural technology’; children’s
narratives are bound to be influenced by the
interviewer(s)
A suggestion


1.
2.
A child should be interviewed by only one, skilled
interviewer
There should be just two interviews:
To build rapport and to give the child the chance to
ask questions, and to give information about other
children’s views and what has worked for them (from
research)
To give the child the opportunity to voice his or her
views and feelings, having had time to think about the
information given in the first interview. Importantly, this
includes the option of not giving an opinion
Maximal autonomy?
Young children, and especially those in the context of contested
parental separation, are unlikely either to pass the Gillick test of
competence, or to be maximally autonomous in the sense of
knowing what would best further their own goals and be consistent
with their values.
By giving them information based on the voices of children in
research, we fulfill their need to know what is happening and what
other children might see as in their best interests.
We give them a framework for considering their own situation, and
time to think about it.
By asking them after they have had a chance to
consider that information in their own context,
we fulfill their need to be informed and
consulted and to have some input into
decisions made about them. In a sense we are
providing them with a broad value system within
which to consider their own situation and
possible wishes.
Tentative conclusions




Children have a right to express their wishes, and must be given an
opportunity to do so
They need and want information, both about what is happening to
them as individuals and what other children have concluded
(including the fact that no one solution works for everyone)
They are not, usually, in a situation where they can make rational or
wise decisions about their living arrangements
By giving them age-appropriate information and time to reflect on it,
we stand a better chance of both helping and supporting them, and
of their own wishes being soundly based