|Appears in Collections:||Faculty of Social Sciences Journal Articles|
|Peer Review Status:||Refereed|
|Title:||Manipulation and Domestic Abuse in Contested Contact - Threats to Children's Participation Rights|
Tisdall, E Kay M
Callaghan, Jane E M
|Citation:||Morrison F, Tisdall EKM & Callaghan JEM (2020) Manipulation and Domestic Abuse in Contested Contact - Threats to Children's Participation Rights. Family Court Review.|
|Abstract:||The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child has catalysed numerous jurisdictions to introduce new legal provisions to support children’s participation rights when child contact is contested. Despite this, children’s participation is frequently limited in practice, especially in contexts where children are perceived as vulnerable to a parent’s manipulation, even if there are allegations of domestic abuse. While ‘resist and refusal dynamics’ have yet to become mainstream terms in Scottish family law, ‘manipulation’ has become a common concern in cases of contested contact. Drawing on a Scottish empirical study on contested child contact in circumstances of domestic abuse, we interrogate the implications that the concept of manipulation has for children’s participation rights. The study involved separate in-depth interviews with 18 children and their 16 mothers. Findings point to concerns about upholding children’s participation rights, particularly in cases where children were depicted as “influenced” or “manipulated.” Through our analysis, we disentangle the problems professionals have when concerns about child manipulation and domestic abuse intersect. We argue that, when combined, allegations of manipulation and domestic abuse present a significant and serious risk to children’s participation rights. We find the legal construction of the child’s views as separate from the parental dispute to have unintended and serious consequences for children’s participation rights. We offer ways in which law and practice may evolve to ensure children’s participation rights in these contexts are both implemented and upheld.|
|Rights:||This item has been embargoed for a period. During the embargo please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study.|
|Notes:||Output Status: Forthcoming|
|Morrison_first round edits FM11.2.pdf||Fulltext - Accepted Version||312.36 kB||Adobe PDF||Under Embargo until 2024-02-29 Request a copy|
Note: If any of the files in this item are currently embargoed, you can request a copy directly from the author by clicking the padlock icon above. However, this facility is dependent on the depositor still being contactable at their original email address.
This item is protected by original copyright
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact email@example.com providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.