A scoping review of qualitative studies on the voice of the child in child custody disputes.pdf

Childhood
20(2) 260–282
© The Author(s) 2012
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0907568212454148
chd.sagepub.com
A scoping review of qualitative
studies about children
experiencing parental
separation
Rachel Birnbaum
King’s University College,Western University, Canada
Michael Saini
University of Toronto, Canada
Abstract
This article explores a scoping review of qualitative studies about children’s experiences and
feelings during times of parental separation. The purpose of the review was to explore children’s
feelings and attitudes about their parents’ separation and how their voices are heard during times
of parental separation. The scoping review examined 44 studies in 13 countries involving 1525
children. While the studies examine how and why children’s voices are important in the decision-
making process adults typically remain the gatekeepers of their voices. Children’s participation
in child custody decision-making must include them at all levels of practice, policy and research.
Keywords
Child custody disputes, children’s experiences and feelings
Introduction
Globally, there is a movement to engage children in the research process (Carroll-Lind
et al., 2006; Graham and Fitzgerald, 2010b); the political process (Quinn, 1999); to hear
their views regarding their sexuality, gender and health related matters (McCabe, 1996;
Mitchell et al., 2003); and their views and concerns related to parental separation (Smith
and Gollop, 2001; Smith et al., 2000). Since the Convention on the Rights of the Child
(Article 12 (1) (2)) that places a legal obligation on decision-makers to hear children
Corresponding author:
Rachel Birnbaum, King’s University College,Western University, Ontario, 266 Epworth Avenue, London, ON
N6A2M3, Canada.
Email: rbirnbau@uwo.ca
454148CHD20210.1177/0907568212454148ChildhoodBirnbaum and Saini
2012
Article

Birnbaum and Saini 261
during times of parental separation there has been a growing commitment to do so.
There has also been an accompanying theoretical shift in thinking about children from
a protectionist/nurturance model (Freeman, 1983) to a children’s rights/liberationist
model (Rodham, 1973). From a research perspective there has been an increasing num-
ber of studies that have explored children’s feelings and attitudes about the parental
separation, how to involve children in the decision-making process and what children
have say to professionals (child lawyers, mental health professionals and judges)
involved with them during their parents’ legal disputes about parenting arrangements
post-separation. The authors argue that irrespective of the theoretical shift and the
Convention on the Rights of the Child that guarantees children the right to express
themselves on matters that affect them, the reality is that the adults and professionals
involved in post-separation decision-making continue to act as gatekeepers for children,
in turn, rendering them silent.
The purpose of this scoping review was to examine what evidence exists in the litera-
ture about children’s views and experiences about their parents’ separation and divorce
and the different ways that they are being heard during times of parental separation. In
order to explore these questions a qualitative methodology was chosen for two reasons.
First, qualitative research provides a rich contextual design for exploring the views of
participants/children. Second, while there has been an increase in the number of qualita-
tive studies since 1990 on the ‘voice of the child’, much of the research spans different
audiences (i.e. parents, legal, mental health professionals), different theoretical perspec-
tives (i.e. sociology, social work, psychology, law, psychiatry) as well as variation in the
context given the different practice perspectives, legislative regimes and policy applica-
tions around the globe. Therefore, it was important to bring these studies together by
way of a scoping review to identify what children have been experiencing and feeling
as well exploring the barriers and/or challenges to children’s participation post-separation.
Such a review of qualitative studies that focused specifically on child custody disputes
had not been undertaken until now. Birnbaum and Saini (2012) have gone on to com-
plete a systematic review of the studies identified using this scoping review to further
synthesize and explore the challenges associated with children’s decision-making abili-
ties post-separation.
Objectives of the scoping review
Due to the disparate contexts of including children’s views and experiences in qualita-
tive studies in the context of separation and divorce, it was important to document the
existing qualitative evidence to inform the field about the ways children have been
included and explore the themes that emerge from the qualitative studies. The scoping
review aimed to identify the nature and extent of the qualitative evidence to address the
following questions: (1) How are children informed of the parental separation and do
they have any input into the decision-making process? (2) How are children’s voices
being heard to support their participation during parental disputes? And (3), what rec-
ommendations do children make to allow them to able to participate during parental
disputes post-separation?

262 Childhood 20(2)
Method
This scoping review followed the primary steps for conducting information retrieval
within the context of a systematic review (Dixon-Woods et al., 2005; Kahn et al., 2003;
Lavigne and Faier-Routman, 1993; Petticrew and Roberts, 2006). Like systematic
reviews, scoping reviews focus on a comprehensive and systematic method for searching
the literature and retrieving relevant studies. Unlike systematic reviews, quality assess-
ments of the methods used within the included studies are typically not conducted in
scoping reviews due to differing conceptions of what quality means across the studies
(Arskey and O’Malley, 2005; Sandelowski et al., 1997).
Methods for conducting the scoping review included: (1) searching for studies that
focused on child’s experiences post-separation and/or divorce; (2) completing data
extraction to explore emerging themes both within and across studies; and (3) collating,
summarizing and reporting the results.
The search for relevant studies
The information retrieval process for relevant studies was conducted in three stages (see
Figure 1). During the first stage, electronic databases and grey literature were searched
to identify studies of separation and divorce that included the child’s voice in separation
and divorce proceedings. During the second stage, full text articles were retrieved and
rescreened for relevance. The final stage of the information retrieval consisted of
completing data extraction of the included studies according to predetermined categories
for mapping the literature (see Table 1).
Potentially relevant studies
identified and screened for
retrieval (n = 2763)
Studies retrieved for more
detailed evaluation (n = 160)
Studies excluded with reason of not
being relevant to first screening
questions (n= 2603)
Potentially appropriate studies
to be included in the qualitative
synthesis (n = 44)
Studies excluded with reason of not
being relevant to second screening
questions (n = 116)
Studies included in the
qualitative synthesis (n = 44)
Studies excluded due to low quality
(n = 0)
Figure 1. Screening process for included studies.

Birnbaum
and
Saini
263
Table 1. List of included studies.
Author Location Study objectives Sample Sample recruitment Data collection Data analysis
Bagshaw
(2007)
South
Australia
To describe children’s
experiences and needs
when their parents were
separating.
N = 19 children
Males n = 9
Females n = 10
State-wide,
anonymous
phone-in with
children who
had experienced
separation and
divorce.
Advertised in local
press and radio.
Phone interviews
between 30
minutes and 1
hour.
Dominant comments were
coded.
Birnbaum
(2007)
Canada To elicit the views,
thoughts and opinions
of youths regarding the
resources and types of
information they need
about separation and/or
divorce.
N = 40 youths
Males n = 24
Females n = 16
Random sample
of youths for the
study based on the
specific criteria
developed by the
research team.
Focus groups. Thematic analysis.
Birnbaum,
Bala and Cyr
(2011)
Canada
and
United
States
To explore experiences
of children involved
with mental health
professionals, lawyers
and judges involved in
their parents’ parental
dispute.
N = 32
Males n = 16
Females n = 16
Between ages of
7 and 17 years
Sample was
obtained through
closed court file
reviews. Parents
and children mailed
a letter requesting
their participation.
Semi-structured
telephone
interview.
Thematic review of
interviews.
Bojuwoye and
Akpan (2009)
South
Africa
To describe the personal,
familial and environment
of children’s experiences
of parental divorce.
N = 10
Males n = 5
Females n = 5
Average age
was 14
A convenience
sample was
obtained from a
senior primary
school.The second
author had also
been a volunteer at
the school.
Interviews with
each child took
place in the
school for 20–30
minutes.
The interviews were audio-
recorded and transcribed
for understanding and
interpretation. Researchers
read the transcripts repeatedly
for recurring themes, patterns
or repetitive phrases, ideas, or
critical words.

264
Childhood
20(2)
Butler, Scanlon,
Robinson,
Douglas and
Murch (2002)
United
Kingdom
To explore children’s
views, feelings and
understanding of divorce,
their role and impact of
the separation process.
N = 104 children
Male n = 53
Female n = 51
Age range: 7–15
years
A random
representative
sample of divorced
families from
six courts in
south Wales and
southwest of
England.
Interviews were
done within
15 months of
separation.
Analytic categories reported
only.
Campbell
(2008)
Australia Explored feelings and
experiences in decision-
making post-separation.
N = 16
7–17 years of
age
Snowball
recruitment at
Family Service
Organizations and
word of mouth.
In-depth
interviews of 40
minutes to 1.5
hours.
Thematic analysis.
Cashmore
(2011)
Australia Explore children’s views
about their involvement
in post-separation
arrangements.
N = 47
6–18 years of
age
Children and
parents recruited
through family
lawyers who had
resolved their
dispute in last 12
months.
Interviews
and computer-
assisted
interviews.
Thematic analysis.
Cashmore
and Parkinson
(2008)
Australia To explore the
perceptions of children’s
participation in decision-
making after parental
separation.
N = 47 children
and youth (from
28 families)
Mean age = 12
years of age
Recruited by family
lawyers who had
been asked to
contact at least
15 former clients
who had resolved
disputes in the
previous 12 months.
Individual
interviews held
at two different
times (18–30
months apart).
Not reported.
(Continued)
Table 1. (Continued)

Birnbaum
and
Saini
265
Cashmore
and Parkinson
(2009)
Australia To explore children’s
participation in resolving
parenting disputes
from the perspective
of children, parents and
professionals.
N = 47
Age from 6–18
years
Recruitment
procedures were
not stated.
Children/youth
were interviewed
at Time 1 and
interviewed
between 18 and
35 months later.
Not reported.
Cashmore,
Parkinson and
Taylor (2009)
Australia To explore the impact of
overnight stays between
children and their
non-resident parent
on perceived closeness
and general quality of
relationship.
N = 34 children
from 22 families
took part in
interviews
Age range: 9–19
years
Mean age: 14
years
Subsample taken
from larger study.
Interviews. Not reported.
Clark (1999) United
States
To explore adolescents’
perspectives regarding
their adjustment 10
years after their parents’
divorce.
N = 18
adolescents
Male n = 9
Female n = 9
n = 2African
American (1 male
and 1 female)
Age range at
separation:1–11
years
Participants were
fourth grade
students who had
participated in
a school-based
psycho-educational
support group
for children
experiencing
parental divorce.
In-depth
interviews.
Qualitative – interpretive
interactionism methods to
give voice to adolescents
experiencing parental divorce.
Individual and cross-case
analysis.
Douglas,
Murch, Miles
and Scanlan
(2006)
United
Kingdom
perspectives about child
legal representation for
them during times of
separation and divorce.
N = 15 children
(8 boys and 7
girls)
Age range: 7–17
years
Recruited from
court records
drawn.
Used a semi-
structured
interview
schedule.
Analysis assisted by NVivo.

266
Childhood
20(2)
Fawcett (2000) Ireland To explore children’s
experiences of parental
divorce and what
supports are available to
them.
N = 37
childrenMale
n = 15
Female n = 22
Age range 12–18
years
Recruited through
a youth service
and community
members.
Standardized
interview
schedule.
Tape-recorded, transcribed
and summarized onto a
database.
Friedly (2009) United
States
To describe the
experiences of
adolescents with their
divorced parents’
parenting plans.
N = 4
Age range 14–16
years
Recruited through
court district using
purposive and
snowball sampling
focus group.
Audio-taped and
note taking.
Transcribed using a cross-
case analysis.
Gollop, Smith
and Taylor
(2000)
New
Zealand
Examined the extent to
which children and young
people were consulted
about post-separation
decision-making.
N = 107 children
Male n = 52
Female n = 55
Recruited from
family court
districts.
In person audio-
taped interviews.
Data transcribed and coded
by two coders.
Graham and
Fitzgerald
(2006)
Australia To explore perspectives
of children of their
participation in decision-
making related to
contact and residence
after their parents had
separated.
N = 8 children
whose parents
had separated
No further
demographic
information is
reported.
Recruitment and
sampling procedure
not reported.
Interviews – no
further detail
reported.
Not reported.
Graham,
Fitzgerald and
Phelps (2009)
participation in family
law decision-making.
N = 12 children
Male n = 6
Female n = 6
Age range: 7–18
years
Recruited through
outreach service.
Semi-structured,
individual,
face-to-face
interviews.
Interviews were audio-
recorded, transcribed and
coded thematically using
NVivo.
(Continued)

Birnbaum
and
Saini
267
Graham,
Shipway,
Fitzgerald and
Whelan (2007)
understandings of rights,
responsibilities and
citizenship.
N = 75 Children attending
schools who were
9–10 and 14–15.
Children were
identified by
school principals in
conjunction with
teachers.
8 focus groups. Data were cross-coded by
school and focus group.
Data were reviewed
independently by 4
researchers and final themes
reached by consensus.
Halpenny,
Greene and
Hogan (2008)
Ireland To understand children’s
strategies for coping
with parental separation
and sources of support
they find most helpful.
N = 60 children
Two groups aged
8–11 and 13–17
years
Recruited through
school and agencies
providing support
to children and
families.
Semi-structured
interviews.
Younger children
invited to draw
a picture of their
family and older
children – a
Family Links Map.
Not discussed.
Haugen (2010) Norway To explore the
experiences of children
living in a shared
residence arrangement.
N = 96 children Recruited from a
regional sample that
divorced in 1992 or
in 1995.
In-depth
interviews.
Two-step analysis of interviews:
(1)‘within-case’ approach and
open and axial coding and (2)
‘cross-case’ analysis.
Highet and
Jamieson
(2007)
Scotland To explore how family
changes affect the lives
of children and to
identify helpful formal
and informal supports.
N = 70 young
people
10–14 years of
age
Children selected
based on the
questionnaire
completed by
361 students in
their final year of
primary education
and their first two
years of secondary
education in five
schools.
Informal and
participative
interviews.
Also asked to
complete the
‘Important
People’ chart
and a ‘Lifeline’
diagram.
Not reported.

268
Childhood
20(2)
Hill, Lockyer,
Morton,
Batchelor and
Scott (2002)
Scotland To describe the role of
safeguarders appointed
to ‘safeguard’ the
interests of the child in
court proceedings.
N = 25 young
people
Only reported for
how families recruit
safeguards.
Individual
interviews
and group
discussions.
Not reported.
Hogan,
Halpenny and
Greene (2003)
Ireland To explore children’s
experiences of change
in family life post-
separation.
N = 30
Female n = 19
Male n = 11
Age range 2–10
years at time of
divorce
Subsample of
a larger study.
Recruited through
schools and
agencies dealing
with separation and
divorce.
Semi-structured
interviews and
family drawings.
Not reported.
Kaltenborn
(2001)
Germany To explore children’s
experiences and
preferences regarding
custody and residence.
N = 62 children
of separated and
divorced parents.
Subsample drawn
from a larger study.
A random selection
of 60 custody
reports.
Conducted
on paper, over
the phone
or in-person
interviews.
Interviews were analysed
with court files which were
subjected to documentary
analysis.
Maundeni
(2002)
Botswana To explore children’s
experiences and feelings
of divorce and the role
of the larger social
network of supports.
N = 25 Court records in
several different
cities.
Open and closed
ended questions
for 1–2.5 hours.
Not reported.
Menard (1998) Canada To explore the children’s
experiences of parental
divorce who lived in
either a shared parenting
arrangement or lived
solely with their fathers.
N = 4 Male n = 2
Female N = 2
Age range:
13–23 years
Purposive sampling. Semi-structured,
open-ended
interviews, field
notes.
3 interviews with
each participant.
Constant comparative
method.
(Continued)

Birnbaum
and
Saini
269
Menning
(2008)
United
States
To examine how
adolescents manage
negative aspects of their
relationships with their
separated parents.
N = 50
Male n = 25
Female n = 25
Ages 13–17
Recruited through
posters, newspaper
advertisements and
snowball sampling
of adolescents.
Ethnographic
interviews were
done by both a
male and female
interviewer.
Themes coded and
catalogued using Atlas.to 4.2.
Moné,
MacPhee,
Anderson and
Banning (2011)
United
States
To understand and
interpret internal
dynamics and family
relationships of divorced
parents who engage in
ongoing interparental
conflict and parental
alienation.
N = 3 families Sent over 400
letters and flyers
and attended
workshops to
recruit parents into
the study.
In-depth
narrative
interviews. Each
family member
was interviewed
separately on
two occasions.
Holistic analysis and polyvocal
analysis.
Morag, Rivkin
and Sorek
(2012)
Israel Exploring children’s
reactions to participating
in custody disputes.
N = 5
6–18 years of
age
From court cases. In-depth partially
structured
interviews.
Not stated.
Neale (2002) United
Kingdom
discourses regarding
having their voices heard
within their families and
beyond.
N = 117 young
people
No further
details were
given regarding
demographics
Secondary analysis
of interviews
conducted as part
of a programme
of research
on children’s
experiences post-
divorce.
In-depth,
conversational
interviews.
Not reported.

270
Childhood
20(2)
Neale and
Flowerdew
(2007)
United
Kingdom
To explore how young
people ‘work out’ their
relationships with their
parents across space and
time.
N = 60 young
people with
separated or
divorced parents.
Age range:
11–17 years
Residence:
One home:
n = 30
Two homes:
n = 30
Young people were
recruited through
their parents who
were recruited
through lawyers
and other family law
professionals and
advertisements.
Neale and
Smart (1998)
United
Kingdom
experiences in
reorganized families
and their perceptions
around their right to
participation.
Sample not
reported –
children living
in reorganized
families.
Recruitment
included leaflets
given to parents to
pass along to their
child(ren).
In-depth,
conversational
interviews, using
the model of the
‘adult’ child.
Not reported.
Neale,Wade
and Smart
(1998)
England To explore how children
experience family
divorce.
N = 32 children
of 18 families
Age range: 4–22
years
Length of time
since parental
separation: 1–11
years
Subsample drawn
from a previous
study.
Conversational
style of interview
accompanied by
written activities.
Not reported.
(Continued)

Birnbaum
and
Saini
271
Parkinson,
Cashmore and
Single (2007)
perspectives of children
on interviews with
judges.
N = 47 children
and youth
Age range: 6–18
Half of the
children and
youth had
experienced
contested
proceedings
(53%) and half
had not.
Participants were
recruited through
their family lawyer.
Participants had to
have resolved their
dispute within the
previous 12 months.
Parkinson,
Cashmore and
Single (2005)
perspectives of youth
regarding parenting and
financial arrangements
following their parents’
separation.
N = 60 youth
Age range:
12–19
Male n = 33
boys
Female n = 27
girls
Age range when
their parents
separated: 3–15
Participants were
a subsample drawn
from a larger study.
Interviews using
a computer-
assisted process.
Not reported.
Pruett and
Pruett (1999)
United
States
To explore how young
children perceive their
parents’ divorce, the
impact on their families,
and legal officials.
N = 22 children
from 18
families who
had divorced in
the previous 6
months.
Age range: 3–7
years of age
Recruitment and
sampling not
reported.
Semi-structured
play interviews.
Children were
asked to draw
their family and
then engage in
semi-structured
play with the
drawing.
Notes were analysed and
themes identified.

272
Childhood
20(2)
Reeves (2008) Canada To explore the
perspectives and
recommendations of
youth regarding their
participation in the
family justice system
when parents separate
or divorce.
N = 30 youth
Age range:
13–18 years
No further
details reported
Youth were
recruited via
advertisements in
local community
organizations.
Focus groups. Not reported.
Smith and
Gollop (2001)
New
Zealand
perspectives after family
separation.
N = 107 children
Male n =52
Female n = 55
Average age
was 13
Recruited through
family courts by
sending out letters
and advertisements
in community
newspapers.
Interviews. Interviews were audio-taped
and transcribed and coded
by two coders. Categories
used as a way to order and
systematize data.
Sopp (2003) United
States
To explore the
experiences of adults
who were raised in joint
custody arrangements
and the influence of
custody on their lives in
general.
N = 15 adults
who had spent
at least two
years living with
a joint custody
arrangement as
children
(under 18)
Snowball sampling
method.20
individuals
were invited to
participate and 15
agreed.
Open-ended
interviews.
Ranged from
20 minutes to 1
hour.
Content analysis.
(Continued)

Birnbaum
and
Saini
273
Sutton-Brown
(1998)
United
States
To explore the
perspectives of children
who have experienced
divorce.
N = 10 children
Age range of
children: 6–14
years
Parents had
been separated
between 6 and
18 months
or divorced
between 8
months and 6
years
All participants had
taken part in the
6-week psycho-
educational group.
The ‘Divorce
Story Cards’
(a thematic
projective
instrument).
Content analysis.
Sviggum
(2000)
Sweden To explore how children
recollect their parents’
separation and how
they adjust to new living
arrangements.
N = 15 children
Male n = 5
Female n =10
Age range 4–16
years
Parents had
been separated
3–5 years prior
to interview
Subsample of
818 parents who
divorced in the mid-
1990s and had one
child under the age
of 18 at the time of
the divorce.
In-depth
interviews.
Audio-taped. Followed Levin’s
method of building rapport
with the child.
Taylor (2001) United
States
perceptions of their
needs and their parents’
needs during times of
parental divorce.
N = 21 children
(age ranges from
5 to 20+ years
of age)
Recruited through
a previous study of
parents divorcing
on year prior.
Interviews. No information.

274
Childhood
20(2)
Valdez (2007) United
States
Children’s experiences
of their parents’ high
conflict divorce.
N = 12
12–16 years
old at time of
interview
Court mediation
site.
Interviews were
1 hour, in-depth.
Audio-taped interviews,
transcribed, analysed for
accuracy and themes, then
analysed again.
Wadsby and
Svedin (1994)
Sweden To explore and
understand how Swedish
children experience
their parents’ divorce,
their feelings about the
event, and compare and
contrast their responses
to those of their parents
2 years post-separation.
N = 63 children
Male n = 28
Female n = 35
Age range was
7–18 years
Parents had
to have been
separated for a
minimum of 2
years
Subsample of a
larger study where
parents filed for
and completed
their divorce during
1987–1988.
Interviews were
done by a female
child psychologist
in the child’s
home as well in
the office for 1
hour.
Comparisons between groups
were made. Qualitative data
were checked to assess
whether children’s opinions
changed over time.

Studies regarding children’s participation in and experience of the separation and
divorce process have been disseminated in a variety of journals for audiences related to
law, psychiatry, psychology, social work and mental health so multiple databases were
considered, including: PsycINFO, MEDLINE, ERIC, DARE, ASSIA, Social Work
Abstracts, Social SciencesAbstracts, Social ServiceAbstracts and DissertationAbstracts.
For maximum sensitivity and specificity of the information retrieval process, both sub-
ject headings and word texts were searched in a systematic process. Search term combi-
nations included: (divorce or divorced persons or marital separation or relationship
termination) and (child* or youth or teen* or adolescent*) and (view* or preference* or
decision or consequence* or participation).
Inclusion of studies
All study citations were screened based on the following inclusion criteria: (1) included
an abstract written in the English language; (2) used a qualitative methodology; (3)
described children’s experiences in the context of separation and/or divorce; and (4),
published within the last 20 years (1992–2012).
Results
Based on the comprehensive search of electronic databases, referencing checking and
peer consultation, the authors identified a total of 44 qualitative studies that met the
inclusion criteria. The qualitative studies included were located from 13 different coun-
tries and involved over 1525 children1 who were involved in custody and access disputes
across the globe. The studies included used a range of techniques for data collection such
as in-person interviews, telephone interviews and focus groups.2 The scoping review
identified children’s voices within the context of separation and divorce.
Learning that their parents were separating
Studies that explored children’s participation in the separation process found that the
majority of these children were surprised by their parents’decision to separate (Bagshaw,
2007; Birnbaum et al., 2011; Butler et al., 2002) and not informed prior to their parents’
separation and were unaware of the reasons for the break-up. When children were told,
the disclosure was memorable with many recalling detailed accounts of the experiences
(Campbell, 2008; Cashmore and Parkinson, 2008).
Children’s feelings about the divorce
Across studies, most children were sad about their parents’ separation (Bagshaw, 2007;
Campbell, 2008; Highet and Jamieson, 2007; Neale, 2002), including feelings of insecu-
rity, loyalty issues, guilt, self-blame and fear (Bagshaw, 2007). Only a minority of chil-
dren felt relieved about the separation, due mostly to parental conflict and violence
(Campbell, 2008) and it was found that children had difficulty putting together a

276 Childhood 20(2)
coherent story and making sense of the events of the separation. Highet and Jamieson
(2007) found that children were also impacted by additional changes due to the separa-
tion, including time spent with friends.
Children’s concerns about separation
Children were concerned about being caught in the middle of their parents’ dispute
(Bagshaw, 2007; Campbell, 2008; Sutton-Brown, 1998). Many children also spoke about
an absent or distant parent after the separation and the fear of losing contact with a parent
(Bagshaw, 2007). Many children also reported feeling responsible for their parents’
divorce at first (Taylor, 2001).
Adjustment to separation
Pruett and Pruett (1999) reported that children from high conflict families displayed
greater stress and anxiety, greater fears and a narrow view of their world and future as a
result of not being informed of the divorce process by their parents. Clark (1999) identi-
fied factors that contributed to positive adjustment following divorce, including: parents
continuing to meet the needs of their child throughout the divorce; parents not involving
the child in the conflict; and the child’s appraisal of the divorce and its aftermath being
positive. Kaltenborn (2001) found that the living arrangements post-separation also
impacted children’s sense of adjustment where a residential arrangement that reflected
the child’s relationships with parents and residential preferences had a positive influence
on the child’s welfare. When these arrangements did not reflect the child’s relationships
with both parents, children typically experienced more negative adjustment problems.
Children’s sources of support
Most children reported that professional support was inadequate during their parents’
separation (Fawcett, 2000; Highet and Jamieson, 2007). Many children expressed that
school and extra-curricular activities were positive experiences and resources during the
separation process and that many preferred to talk to their friends (Neale and Smart,
1998). However, Highet and Jamieson (2007) found that children differed about who
they wished to talk to about their parents’separation (i.e. their parents and/or profession-
als). They also found that many children took on the role of supporter during family
changes (sometimes of their siblings and often of their mother).
Children’s experiences of parenting plans
In Neale and Flowerdew’s (2007) study, children reported that shared residence arrange-
ments were often inflexible and challenging, but children felt the need to ensure fairness
between parents. Likewise, Parkinson et al. (2005) found that children reported that they
wanted the division of time between their parents to be equal and fair. Almost all partici-
pants indicated that it was very important that siblings live together following parental

separation. Sopp (2003) reported that children described being both happy and unhappy
with joint custody arrangements. The majority of the children indicated that they would
have changed the custody arrangements (to see more or less of one parent). Parkinson
et al. (2005) found that children who indicated that their parents argued a lot (or were in
conflict) were more likely to indicate that they were not permitted to see their non-
resident parent compared to those who reported no arguing (no conflict).
Children’s participation in decision-making
Studies also explored the perspectives of children involved in family law disputes regard-
ing their participation in decision-making about residence and contact arrangements with
their parents, including their views about joint custody, overnight visits and their rela-
tionships with both parents (Cashmore and Parkinson, 2008, 2009; Cashmore et al.,
2008; Graham et al., 2009; Graham et al., 2007; Graham & Fitzgerald 2010a; Haugen,
2010; Kaltenborn, 2001; Reeves, 2008). Parkinson et al. (2005) found that half of the
children indicated that they had ‘no say’ in where they would live following parental
separation. Those who had ‘some say’ were typically adolescents at the time of parental
separation. Those who indicated that their parents argued a lot also reported that they had
more say than those who did not report arguing between their parents. Neale and Smart’s
(1998) children indicated that while they would like a say as to which parent they would
like to live with, they did not want to have to make the choice entirely. Instead, they felt
that decisions should be made by consensus. In cases of violence or oppression, children
indicated that they should be able to make the decision on their own. Graham and
Fitzgerald (2006) found that children shared the perspective that the ideal situation would
be feeling acknowledged and listened to. However, in reality, children described waver-
ing between wanting to be involved and feeling hurt by the parental separation. While
children described wanting to be treated with respect and as capable of being involved in
the process, they also described feelings of vulnerability, change and loss.
The involvement of child representatives
Children’s experiences of professionals in helping to facilitate their views and prefer-
ences were also explored, including children’s views about their involvement in media-
tion, their experiences with legal representation and judicial interviews and the ways that
their views were brought into the family court context (Birnbaum et al., 2011; Douglas
et al., 2006; Hill et al., 2002). Birnbaum et al. (2011) and Cashmore and Parkinson
(2008) found that most children were supportive of having someone represent them in
court. Many children identified needing a trusted person (other than their parents) who
would support them throughout the court process. Several children were confused and
anxious about the court process and felt that the court would punish their parents or that
their parents would be sent to prison. In contrast, Campbell (2008) and Neale and Smart
(1998) found that children generally did not benefit from talking to professionals and
many felt that family issues were best kept within the family. Children in these examples
felt that professional support was more like intervention and discussions felt like

278 Childhood 20(2)
interrogations. In the court system, children described feeling disempowered and strug-
gled with the lack of confidentiality.
Judicial interviews
While not common across jurisdictions, Israel, Germany, New Zealand, United States
(varies by state) and to a lesser extent Canada have seen an increasing interest in judicial
interviews. Parkinson et al. (2007) found that a majority of children in child custody
disputes indicated that they should be able to speak with the judge in chambers if they
desired. Reasons for wanting to talk with the judge included: having their views heard by
the individual who is responsible for decision-making; better decision-making by the
judge; being able to share their views in private and in confidence; avoiding the judges’
possible misinterpretation of their wishes; and the importance of providing input and
being acknowledged (even if the judge ultimately made a decision that was not in agree-
ment with their suggestions). Reasons for not wanting to speak with the judge included:
feeling that it was inappropriate or unnecessary (typically expressed by children in
uncontested cases); preferring to deal with family matters within the family; and feeling
that it was scary or too formal. Birnbaum et al. (2011) also found that children wanted to
be heard regardless of whether their participation was through a lawyer, mental health
professional or a judicial interview. Children remembered the angst over their parents’
separation and not the family justice professional who interviewed them. Children who
did not have a judicial interview would have liked to have known they had the option to
talk to a judge irrespective of whether the decision was in their favour or not. Morag
et al. (2012) also found that children believed it was important for them to meet the per-
son (judge) who would be making decisions about them.
Suggestions for other children going through a separation
Across the studies, children provided a number of strategies and suggestions for helping
other children adjust to their parents’ separation or divorce. Bagshaw (2007) identified
that children expressed that children should be consulted and that they should have
someone they could talk with about their adjustment problems (e.g. parents, friends,
counsellor, a judge). Clark (1999) identified that children’s primary advice was that par-
ents should avoid bringing children into the middle of the conflict. Parkinson et al. (2005)
reported that children’s advice for other children was not to let their parents decide on
contact arrangements alone and that children should be included in decisions and they
should be provided the opportunity to share their views and feelings with their parents,
provided that did not compromise their relationship with their parents.
Advice to legal and mental health professionals
Bagshaw (2007), Birnbaum (2007), Birnbaum et al. (2011), Cashmore (2011), Highet
and Jamieson (2007) as well many other studies suggest to all professionals how impor-
tant it is to hear children’s views and that their views should not be dismissed due to their

age or lack of capacity to appreciate the difference between voice and not choice in
parenting decisions post-separation.
Lessons learned about children’s participation
One of the purposes of this scoping review was to bring together findings from across the
globe that examine children’s feelings, experiences and concerns that impact their lives
during their parents’ legal conflicts about parenting arrangements post-separation. What
becomes apparent is that irrespective of which country the study was conducted in or
what legislative regimes exist, the vast majority of these children want to be better
informed about the separation process. What also becomes apparent from these studies
is that hearing from children across the globe is highly dependent on what services exist
for children and whether and how parents and professionals allow their voices to be
heard. There are some children who want more participation in the decision-making
process and there are others who do not want to participate, and their voices should be
equally respected.
There are no easy answers about how, when, where and by whom children should be
heard and included during separation as each child is as unique as each of their stories in
these individual studies. However, the symmetry of findings across the globe speaks to
the need by practitioners, researchers and policy-makers to reflect on this body of social
science evidence and allow children time, space and voice to choose the manner of their
participation rather than being the gatekeepers of their participation. Focusing on chil-
dren’s strengths rather than their deficits and capacities will allow all children greater
participation.
Acknowledgements
Both authors gratefully acknowledge Radha MacCulloch, social work doctoral student at McGill
University, Montreal, Canada, for her research assistance.
Funding
Rachel Birnbaum gratefully acknowledges the financial support from the Social Sciences and
Humanities Research Council, Canada.
Notes
1. The studies conducted by Cashmore and Parkinson (2008) and Cashmore (2011) involved
the same 47 children and therefore were only counted once. The children’s ages ranged from
7 to 21 years of age. Neale and Smart (1998) did not include the number of children in their
sample.
2. See Birnbaum and Saini (2012), who map out key themes for including children from these
studies.
References
Arksey H and O’Malley L (2005) Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. Inter-
national Journal of Social Research 8: 19–32.

280 Childhood 20(2)
Bagshaw D (2007) Reshaping responses to children when parents are separating: Hearing chil-
dren’s voices in the transition. Australian Social Work 60: 450–465.
Birnbaum R (2007) Listening to youths about their needs and preferences for information relating
to separation and/or divorce. Department of Justice, Family, Children, and Youth Section,
Justice, Canada.
Birnbaum R and Saini M (2012) A qualitative synthesis of children’s participation in custody
disputes. Research on Social Work Practice 22: 400–409.
Birnbaum R, Bala N and Cyr F (2011) Children’s experiences with family justice professionals
and judges in Ontario and Ohio. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 25:
398–422.
Bojuwoye O and Akpan O (2009) Children’s reactions to divorce of parents. The Open Family
Studies Journal 2: 75–81.
Butler I, Scanlon L, Robinson M, Douglas G and Murch M (2002) Children’s involvement in their
parents’ divorce: Implications for practice. Children and Society 16: 89–102.
Campbell A (2008) The right to be heard: Australian children’s views about their involvement in
decision-making following parental separation. Child Care in Practice 14: 237–255.
Carroll-Lind J, Chapman JW, Gregory J and Maxwell G (2006) The key to the gatekeepers: Pas-
sive consent and other ethical issues surrounding the rights of children to speak on issues that
concern them. Child Abuse and Neglect 30: 979–989.
Cashmore J (2011) Children’s participation in family law decision making: Theoretical approaches
to understanding children’s views. Faculty of Law, Sydney Law School, Legal Studies
Research Paper, No.10/89.
Cashmore J and Parkinson P (2007) What responsibility do courts have to hear children’s voices?
International Journal of Children’s Rights 15: 43–60.
Cashmore J and Parkinson P (2008) Children’s and parents’ perceptions on children’s participation
in decision making after parental separation and divorce. Family Court Review 46: 91–104.
Cashmore J and Parkinson P (2009) Children’s participation in family law disputes: The views of
children, parents, lawyers and counsellors. Family Matters 82: 15–21.
Cashmore J, Parkinson P and Taylor A (2008) Overnight stays and children’s relationships with
resident and nonresident parents after divorce. Journal of Family Issues 29: 707–733.
Clark KA (1999) Adolescents talk about divorce. Dissertations abstract.
Dixon-Woods M, Agarwal S, Jones D, Young B and Sutton A (2005) Synthesizing qualitative and
quantitative evidence: A review of possible methods. Journal of Health Services Research and
Policy 10: 45–53.
Douglas G, Murch M, Miles C and Scanlan L (2006) Research into the operation of Rule 9.5 of
the Family Proceedings Rules 1991: Final report to the Department of Constitutional Affairs.
Cardiff Law School.
Fawcett MI (2000) The changing family in Northern Ireland: Young people and divorce. Youth
and Society 32: 81–106.
Freeman M (1983) The Rights and Wrongs of Children. London: Frances Pinter.
Friedly GM (2009) An exploratory study of adolescents’ experiences with their divorced par-
ents’ parenting plans. Dissertation Abstracts International. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses
(PQDT).UMI Dissertations Publishing.
Gollop M, Smith AB and Taylor NJ (2000) Children’s involvement in custody and access arrange-
ments after parental separation. Child and Family Law Quarterly 12: 383–399.
Graham A and Fitzgerald R (2006) Taking account of the ‘To and Fro’ of children’s experiences
in family law. Available at: www.ccyp.scu.edu.au.
Graham A and Fitzgerald R (2010a) Exploring the promises and possibilities for children’s partici-
pation in Family Relationship Centres. Family Matters 84: 53–60.

Graham A and Fitzgerald R (2010b) Children’s participation: Some possibilities and constraints in
the current Australian research environment. Journal of Sociology 46: 133–147.
Graham A, Fitzgerald R and Phelps R (2009) The changing landscape of family law: Exploring
the promises and possibilities for children’s participation in Australian Family Relationship
Centres. Lismore: Southern Cross University.
Graham A, Shipway B, Fitzgerald R and Whelan J (2007) Children and young people’s perspec-
tives on rights, responsibilities, and citizenship in Australia. Centre for Children and Young
People Papers.
Halpenny AM, Greene S and Hogan D (2008) Children’s perspectives on coping and support
following parental separation. Child Care in Practice 14: 311–325.
Haugen GMD (2010) Children’s perspectives on everyday experiences of shared residence: Time,
emotions and agency dilemmas. Children and Society 24: 112–122.
Highet G and Jamieson L (2007) Cool with change: Young people and family change (Final
Report). Scotland’s Families/Centre for Research on Families and Relationships.
Hill M, Lockyer A, Morton P, Batchelor S and Scott J (2002) The role of safeguarders in Scotland.
Scottish Executive No. 1.
Hogan DM, Halpenny AM and Greene S (2003) Change and continuity after parental separation:
Children’s experiences of family transitions in Ireland. Childhood 10: 163–180.
Kaltenborn KF (2001) Children’s and young people’s experiences in various residential arrange-
ments: A longitudinal study to evaluate criteria for custody and residence decision making.
British Journal of Social Work 31: 81–117.
Khan K, Kunz R, Kleijnen J and Antes G. (2003) Systematic Reviews to Support Evidence-Based
Medicine: How to Review and Apply Findings of Healthcare Research. London: Royal Soci-
ety of Medicine Press.
Lavigne JV and Faier-Routman J (1993) Correlates of psychological adjustment to pediatric physi-
cal disorders: A meta-analytic review and comparison with existing models. Developmental
and Behavioral Pediatrics 14: 117–123.
McCabe MA (1996) Involving children and adolescents in medical decision-making: Develop-
mental and clinical considerations. Journal of Paediatric Psychology 21: 505–516.
Maundeni T (2002) Seen but not heard? Focusing on the needs of children of divorced parents in
Gaborone and surrounding areas, Botswana. Childhood 9: 277–302.
Menard NN (1998) Divorce from the child’s perspective. Dissertation Abstracts. Available at:
mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/handle/1993/1465.
Menning CL (2008) ‘I’ve kept it that way on purpose’: Adolescents’ management of negative
parental relationship traits after divorce and separation. Journal of Contemporary Ethnogra-
phy 37: 586–618.
Mitchell M, Keppell M and Johnston L. (2003) An interactive multimedia approach to prepar-
ing children and their families for hospitalization. Interact, Integrate, Impact. In: Proceed-
ings of the 20th Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in
Tertiary Education (Ascilite), 7–10 December. Available at: www.asclite.org.au/conferences/
adelaide03/docs/pdf/343.pdf.
Moné JG, MacPhee D, Anderson S and Banning JH (2011) Family members’ narratives of
divorce and interparental conflict: Implications for parental alienation. Journal of Divorce and
Remarrriage 52: 642–667.
Morag T, Rivkin D and Sorek Y (2012) Child participation in the family courts: Lessons from the
Israeli pilot project. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 26: 1–30.
Neale B (2002) Dialogues with children: Children, divorce and citizenship. Childhood 9: 455–475.
Neale B and Flowerdew J (2007) New structures, new agency: The dynamics of child–parent rela-
tionships after divorce. International Journal of Child’s Rights 15: 25–42.

282 Childhood 20(2)
Neale B and Smart C (1998) Agents or dependents?: Struggling to listen to children in family law
and family research. Centre for Research on Family, Kinship and Childhood, Working Paper, 3.
Neale B, Wade A and Smart C (1998) ‘I just get on with it’: Children’s experiences of family life
following parental separation or divorce. Centre for Research on Family, Kinship and Child-
hood, Working Paper, 1.
Parkinson P, Cashmore J and Single J (2005) Adolescents’ views on the fairness of parenting and
financial arrangements after separation. Family Court Review 43: 429–444.
Parkinson P, Cashmore J and Single J (2007) Parents’ and children’s views on talking to judges in
parenting disputes in Australia. International Journal of Law 21: 84–107.
Petticrew M and Roberts H (2006) Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide.
Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Pruett KD and Pruett MK (1999) ‘Only God decides’: Young children’s perceptions of divorce and
the legal system. Journal of American Academy Child Adolescent Psychiatry 38: 1544–1550.
Quinn J (1999) Where needs meets opportunity: Youth development programs for early teens. The
Future of Children 9: 96–116.
Reeves C (2008) Youth included! Youth recommendations for children and youth participation
in British Columbia’s family justice system. The Social Planning and Research Council of
British Columbia.
Rodham H (1973) Children under the law. Harvard Educational Review 43(4): 487–514.
Sandelowski M, Docherty S and Emden C (1997) Qualitative meta-synthesis: Issues and
techniques. Research in Nursing and Health 20: 365–371.
Smith AB and Gollop MM (2001) What children think separating parents should know. New Zealand
Journal of Psychology 30: 23–31.
Smith AB, Gollop MM and Taylor N (2000) Children’s perspectives of their parent’s separation.
Child and Family Law Quarterly 12(4): 34–38.
Sopp KC (2003) Experiences of Adult Children Raised in Joint Custody. Long Beach, CA:
California State University Press.
Sutton-Brown J (1998) A qualitative study of children’s perspectives of their parents’ divorce.
Dissertation Abstracts International, Section B.
Sviggum G (2000) How children view their parents’ divorce. Family Matters 55: 62–67.
Taylor RJ (2001) Listening to the children: Children of divorce speak out about their parents.
Journal of Divorce and Remarriage 35: 147–154.
Valdez R (2007) America’s little warriors: Children of divorce, a phenomenological study of
children’s experiences of being safe during their parents’ high conflict divorce. ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses (PQDT).
Wadsby M and Svedin CG (1994). Parental divorce: From the children’s viewpoint. Nordic Journal
of Psychiatry 48: 107–116.

A scoping review of qualitative studies on the voice of the child in child custody disputes.pdf

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to A scoping review of qualitative studies on the voice of the child in child custody disputes.pdf

Similar to A scoping review of qualitative studies on the voice of the child in child custody disputes.pdf (20)

More from Luz Martinez

More from Luz Martinez (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

A scoping review of qualitative studies on the voice of the child in child custody disputes.pdf