ATTACHMENT THEORY AND RESEARCH: OVERVIEW WITH SUGGESTED APPLICATIONS TO CHILD CUSTODY
Identifieur interne : 000320 ( Main/Exploration ); précédent : 000319; suivant : 000321ATTACHMENT THEORY AND RESEARCH: OVERVIEW WITH SUGGESTED APPLICATIONS TO CHILD CUSTODY
Auteurs : Mary Main [États-Unis] ; Erik Hesse [États-Unis] ; Siegfried Hesse [États-Unis]Source :
- Family Court Review [ 1531-2445 ] ; 2011-07.
Descripteurs français
- Wicri :
- topic : Contrôle des connaissances, Divorce.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
Abstract
The term “attachment” is now in common usage and, as the readers of this Special Issue are aware, is referenced in a rapidly increasing variety of contexts involving child custody (McIntosh & Chisholm, 2008). The aim of this article is to provide judges, lawyers, mediators and mental health professionals involved in custody assessment with an overview of the history of the field of attachment and its principal measures, together with a clear description of what the term “attachment” does—and does not—mean to attachment researchers and theoreticians. Implications for normative separations that do not involve custody‐related assessment or the intervention of courts or mediators are also considered. With respect to contested custody cases, we consider the use of standardized attachment measures, and note that sufficient validation for most such measures in clinical contexts is still developing. We describe three measures taken from the research literature (the Strange Situation procedure, the Attachment Q‐sort and the Adult Attachment Interview), each subjected to meta‐analyses and widely regarded as “gold standard” methods in research. These three methods come closest at this point in time to meeting criteria for providing “scientific evidence” regarding an individual's current attachment status. Limitations on widespread use include the need for substantiating meta‐analyses on father‐child relationships, and further validation across a wider spread of children's ages. We are confident that these restrictions can be solved by new research. In the interim, we argue that increased familiarity with the above measures will assist custody evaluators both in standardizing their assessment procedures and their capacity to gain more from the observational data available to them. Such increased standardization and depth of observation should be highly beneficial to the courts. Related to our endorsement of use of attachment measures in family law matters, we address issues of training, and strongly encourage custody evaluators to attend trainings in the principal methods of the field, and insofar as possible, to become certified in their use. Overall, we endorse the position that attachment theory provides important perspectives not only on the emotional process of divorce itself, but as well on the decisions made for and about the children concerned. Thus, this paper argues that attachment, correctly understood, creates a critical foundation for all professionals working with separated families.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-1617.2011.01383.x
Affiliations:
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
- to stream Istex, to step Corpus: 001A06
- to stream Istex, to step Curation: 001A02
- to stream Istex, to step Checkpoint: 000145
- to stream Main, to step Merge: 000320
- to stream Main, to step Curation: 000320
Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">ATTACHMENT THEORY AND RESEARCH: OVERVIEW WITH SUGGESTED APPLICATIONS TO CHILD CUSTODY</title>
<author><name sortKey="Main, Mary" sort="Main, Mary" uniqKey="Main M" first="Mary" last="Main">Mary Main</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Hesse, Erik" sort="Hesse, Erik" uniqKey="Hesse E" first="Erik" last="Hesse">Erik Hesse</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Hesse, Siegfried" sort="Hesse, Siegfried" uniqKey="Hesse S" first="Siegfried" last="Hesse">Siegfried Hesse</name>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno>
<idno type="RBID">ISTEX:02E89A0058BE90B4B6A6019B779A3F08D4B81BC2</idno>
<date when="2011" year="2011">2011</date>
<idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1744-1617.2011.01383.x</idno>
<idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/02E89A0058BE90B4B6A6019B779A3F08D4B81BC2/fulltext/pdf</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001A06</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001A06</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Curation">001A02</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Checkpoint">000145</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Checkpoint">000145</idno>
<idno type="wicri:doubleKey">1531-2445:2011:Main M:attachment:theory:and</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Merge">000320</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Curation">000320</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Exploration">000320</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">ATTACHMENT THEORY AND RESEARCH: OVERVIEW WITH SUGGESTED APPLICATIONS TO CHILD CUSTODY</title>
<author><name sortKey="Main, Mary" sort="Main, Mary" uniqKey="Main M" first="Mary" last="Main">Mary Main</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="2"><country xml:lang="fr">États-Unis</country>
<placeName><region type="state">Maryland</region>
</placeName>
<wicri:cityArea>St. John's College, Annapolis</wicri:cityArea>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Hesse, Erik" sort="Hesse, Erik" uniqKey="Hesse E" first="Erik" last="Hesse">Erik Hesse</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="3"><country>États-Unis</country>
<placeName><settlement type="city">Berkeley (Californie)</settlement>
<region type="state">Californie</region>
</placeName>
<wicri:orgArea>University of California</wicri:orgArea>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Hesse, Siegfried" sort="Hesse, Siegfried" uniqKey="Hesse S" first="Siegfried" last="Hesse">Siegfried Hesse</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="2"><country>États-Unis</country>
<placeName><region type="state">Californie</region>
</placeName>
<wicri:cityArea>Berkeley</wicri:cityArea>
</affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<monogr></monogr>
<series><title level="j">Family Court Review</title>
<idno type="ISSN">1531-2445</idno>
<idno type="eISSN">1744-1617</idno>
<imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisher>
<pubPlace>Malden, USA</pubPlace>
<date type="published" when="2011-07">2011-07</date>
<biblScope unit="volume">49</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="issue">3</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" from="426">426</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" to="463">463</biblScope>
</imprint>
<idno type="ISSN">1531-2445</idno>
</series>
<idno type="istex">02E89A0058BE90B4B6A6019B779A3F08D4B81BC2</idno>
<idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1744-1617.2011.01383.x</idno>
<idno type="ArticleID">FCRE1383</idno>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
<seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">1531-2445</idno>
</seriesStmt>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Assessment</term>
<term>Attachment Theory</term>
<term>Children</term>
<term>Divorce</term>
<term>Family Law</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Wicri" type="topic" xml:lang="fr"><term>Contrôle des connaissances</term>
<term>Divorce</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
<langUsage><language ident="en">en</language>
</langUsage>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">The term “attachment” is now in common usage and, as the readers of this Special Issue are aware, is referenced in a rapidly increasing variety of contexts involving child custody (McIntosh & Chisholm, 2008). The aim of this article is to provide judges, lawyers, mediators and mental health professionals involved in custody assessment with an overview of the history of the field of attachment and its principal measures, together with a clear description of what the term “attachment” does—and does not—mean to attachment researchers and theoreticians. Implications for normative separations that do not involve custody‐related assessment or the intervention of courts or mediators are also considered. With respect to contested custody cases, we consider the use of standardized attachment measures, and note that sufficient validation for most such measures in clinical contexts is still developing. We describe three measures taken from the research literature (the Strange Situation procedure, the Attachment Q‐sort and the Adult Attachment Interview), each subjected to meta‐analyses and widely regarded as “gold standard” methods in research. These three methods come closest at this point in time to meeting criteria for providing “scientific evidence” regarding an individual's current attachment status. Limitations on widespread use include the need for substantiating meta‐analyses on father‐child relationships, and further validation across a wider spread of children's ages. We are confident that these restrictions can be solved by new research. In the interim, we argue that increased familiarity with the above measures will assist custody evaluators both in standardizing their assessment procedures and their capacity to gain more from the observational data available to them. Such increased standardization and depth of observation should be highly beneficial to the courts. Related to our endorsement of use of attachment measures in family law matters, we address issues of training, and strongly encourage custody evaluators to attend trainings in the principal methods of the field, and insofar as possible, to become certified in their use. Overall, we endorse the position that attachment theory provides important perspectives not only on the emotional process of divorce itself, but as well on the decisions made for and about the children concerned. Thus, this paper argues that attachment, correctly understood, creates a critical foundation for all professionals working with separated families.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<affiliations><list><country><li>États-Unis</li>
</country>
<region><li>Californie</li>
<li>Maryland</li>
</region>
<settlement><li>Berkeley (Californie)</li>
</settlement>
</list>
<tree><country name="États-Unis"><region name="Maryland"><name sortKey="Main, Mary" sort="Main, Mary" uniqKey="Main M" first="Mary" last="Main">Mary Main</name>
</region>
<name sortKey="Hesse, Erik" sort="Hesse, Erik" uniqKey="Hesse E" first="Erik" last="Hesse">Erik Hesse</name>
<name sortKey="Hesse, Siegfried" sort="Hesse, Siegfried" uniqKey="Hesse S" first="Siegfried" last="Hesse">Siegfried Hesse</name>
</country>
</tree>
</affiliations>
</record>
Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Psychologie/explor/TherFamFrancoV1/Data/Main/Exploration
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000320 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/biblio.hfd -nk 000320 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien |wiki= Wicri/Psychologie |area= TherFamFrancoV1 |flux= Main |étape= Exploration |type= RBID |clé= ISTEX:02E89A0058BE90B4B6A6019B779A3F08D4B81BC2 |texte= ATTACHMENT THEORY AND RESEARCH: OVERVIEW WITH SUGGESTED APPLICATIONS TO CHILD CUSTODY }}
This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.29. |