scholarly journals Psychological Perspectives on Joint Physical Custody

2021 ◽  
pp. 37-50
Author(s):  
Robert E. Emery
Keyword(s):  
Developmental Stage ◽  
Child Adjustment ◽  
Geographical Distance ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Psychological Issues ◽  
Research And Practice ◽  
Older Adolescents ◽  
Shared Time ◽  
Joint Physical Custody ◽  
Physical Custody

AbstractThis overview discusses key findings, questions, and controversies about joint physical custody (JPC) emphasizing psychological issues for research and practice. Children living in JPC are slightly better adjusted, on average, but it is not clear whether this is a consequence of the arrangement or due to nonrandom selection into it. Moreover, no consistent evidence links specific variations in JPC to better or worse child adjustment, including equal or some other pattern of shared time. Parental conflict/cooperation is the factor most firmly, if still somewhat tenuously, established as a moderator of JPC effects. Other important moderators include logistics (e.g., geographical distance between parents), developmental stage (very young children and older adolescents may fare less well), and personality (a factor only beginning to be explored). The clearest implication for policy and practice is that children will fare better if their parents cooperate in crafting a parenting plan designed to meet their individual needs.

scholarly journals Mental Health in Schoolchildren in Joint Physical Custody: A Longitudinal Study

Children ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 473
Author(s):  
Anders Hjern ◽  
Stine Kjaer Urhoj ◽  
Emma Fransson ◽  
Malin Bergström
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Living Arrangements ◽  
Nuclear Family ◽  
Parental Separation ◽  
Linear Regression Models ◽  
Maternal Report ◽  
Study Population ◽  
Joint Physical Custody ◽  
Physical Custody ◽  
Custody Arrangements

This study investigated mental health in schoolchildren in different living arrangements after parental separation. The study population included 31,519 children from the Danish National Birth Cohort, followed-up at age 11 in 2010–2014. Child mental health was measured with a maternal report of the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Associations between living arrangements and mental health were analyzed using logistic and linear regression models, taking into account early childhood indicators of the parents’ relations, income, education and psychiatric care. At age 11, children living in a nuclear family had the lowest rate of total SDQ score, 8.9%. Of the children who had experienced parental separation, children in joint physical custody had the lowest adjusted odds ratio (OR)1.25 (95%-CI 1.09–1.44), for a high SDQ score relative to children living in a nuclear family, with adjusted ORs of 1.63 (1.42–1.86) and OR 1.72 (1.52–1.95) for sole physical custody arrangements with and without a new partner. An analysis of change in SDQ scores between ages 7 and 11 in children showed a similar pattern. This study indicates that joint physical custody is associated with slightly more favorable mental health in schoolchildren after parental separation than sole physical custody arrangements.

scholarly journals Does Joint Physical Custody “Cause” Children’s Better Outcomes?

2018 ◽  
Vol 59 (5) ◽  
pp. 452-468 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanford L. Braver ◽  
Ashley M. Votruba
Keyword(s):  
Joint Physical Custody ◽  
Physical Custody

Beyond evidence-based policy and practice

2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 20-36
Author(s):  
Mike Fisher
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Practice Research ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Research And Practice ◽  
Social Work Research ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

This paper concerns the impact of social work research, particularly on practice and practitioners. It explores the politics of research and how this affects practice, the way that university-based research understands practice, and some recent developments in establishing practice research as an integral and permanent part of the research landscape. While focusing on implications for the UK, it draws on developments in research across Europe, North America and Australasia to explore how we can improve the relationship between research and practice.

Reconciling practice, research and reality of integrated care. Critical reflections on the state of a discipline

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 311-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
Axel Kaehne
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Health Care Policy ◽  
Practice Research ◽  
Integration Policy ◽  
Care Policy ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Research And Practice ◽  
Policy Practice

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to critically reflect on the practice, rhetoric and reality of integrating care. Echoing Le Grand's framework of motivation, agency and policy, it is argued that the stories the authors tell themselves why the authors embark on integration programmes differ from the reasons why managers commit to these programmes. This split between policy rhetoric and reality has implications for the way the authors investigate integration.Design/methodology/approachExamining current integration policy, practice and research, the paper adopts the critical framework articulated by Le Grand about the underlying assumptions of health care policy and practice.FindingsIt is argued that patient perspectives are speciously placed at the centre of integration policy but mask the existing organizational and managerial rationalities of integration. Making the patient the measure of all things integration would turn this agenda back on its feet.Originality/valueThe paper discusses the underlying assumptions of integration policy, practice and research. Increasing the awareness about the gap between what the authors do, why the authors do it and the stories the authors tell themselves about it injects a much needed amount of criticality into research and practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document