| Literature DB >> 33427578 |
Tommie Forslund1,2, Pehr Granqvist1, Marinus H van IJzendoorn3, Avi Sagi-Schwartz4, Danya Glaser5,6, Miriam Steele7, Mårten Hammarlund1, Carlo Schuengel8, Marian J Bakermans-Kranenburg8, Howard Steele7, Phillip R Shaver9, Ulrike Lux10, John Simmonds11, Deborah Jacobvitz12, Ashley M Groh13, Kristin Bernard14, Chantal Cyr15, Nancy L Hazen12, Sarah Foster16, Elia Psouni17, Philip A Cowan18, Carolyn Pape Cowan18, Anne Rifkin-Graboi19, David Wilkins20, Blaise Pierrehumbert21, George M Tarabulsy22, Rodrigo A Carcamo23, Zhengyan Wang24, Xi Liang24, Maria Kázmierczak25, Paulina Pawlicka25, Lilian Ayiro26, Tamara Chansa27, Francis Sichimba27, Haatembo Mooya27, Loyola McLean28, Manuela Verissimo29, Sonia Gojman-de-Millán30, Marlene M Moretti31, Fabien Bacro32, Mikko J Peltola33, Megan Galbally34,35,36, Kiyomi Kondo-Ikemura37, Kazuko Y Behrens38, Stephen Scott39, Andrés Fresno Rodriguez40, Rosario Spencer40, Germán Posada41, Rosalinda Cassibba42, Neus Barrantes-Vidal43,44,45, Jesus Palacios46, Lavinia Barone47, Sheri Madigan48,49, Karen Jones-Mason50, Sophie Reijman51, Femmie Juffer52, R Pasco Fearon53, Annie Bernier54, Dante Cicchetti55, Glenn I Roisman56, Jude Cassidy57, Heinz Kindler58, Peter Zimmermann59, Ruth Feldman60, Gottfried Spangler61, Charles H Zeanah62, Mary Dozier63, Jay Belsky64, Michael E Lamb65, Robbie Duschinsky66.
Abstract
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.Entities:
Keywords: Attachment theory; best interests of the child; child custody; child protection; consensus statement; family court
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33427578 DOI: 10.1080/14616734.2020.1840762
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Attach Hum Dev ISSN: 1461-6734