Research Project

Background and Rationale

Australia is on the practice forefront of child inclusive family law mediation and counselling. Since mid-1990, developments in policy, research and practice have seen the emergence of a paradigm shift in this field. Previously, accepted practice with separating couples in severe conflict over the parenting of their children rarely sought the voices of children, relying instead on the views of parents and 'experts' to convey the needs and best interests of children in the dispute resolution process. Research in Australia (Strategic Partners, 1998; McIntosh, 2000) has substantially challenged this approach, with the successful pilot of a child inclusive model for separating families with contact and residence disputes. It is now timely to build on these conceptual beginnings and to provide a solid research foundation for the practice of child consultation in mediation.

The need for research

Recent research has produced little systematic information about what children think about mediation, how they may be affected through safe inclusion, and what outcomes for parents, children and the wider system can be attributed to this pathway through dispute resolution. In Australia, the inclusion of children in the dispute resolution process is increasing, but remains in its infancy. In the UK, children rarely come into contact with mediation and even when they meet with a Court Welfare Officer (now CAFCASS reporter) their contact is brief and it seems unmemorable.

Mediators and other professionals in Australia and the UK are increasingly concerned to involve children in safe, strategic ways. Family Court Counsellors in Australia and Guardians ad Litem in the UK have always talked to children in the context of litigated parental dispute, but arguably this has been in the context of an overarching welfare perspective, rather than a participatory perspective. Mediators and counsellors are beginning to experiment with new ways of talking with and including children but are facing a number of dilemmas. Some might adhere to a counselling model; others may want to act as a conduit to pass on children's views, while others may want children involved in joint sessions with parents. Yet others might feel that involving children is too dangerous, either for the children or for the practitioners who may then be caught in the crossfire between parents. In many ways dispute resolution professionals are now between a rock and a hard place. There is a strong desire to make family law processes more child centred, and yet no consensus over how to achieve this.

The Australian-based child inclusive model has generated much interest and enthusiasm in the UK, specifically with NCH (formerly National Children's Homes), the largest provider of family mediation in the UK. This shared interest between the countries has sparked ideas for a tandem research study into the processes and outcomes of child inclusive mediation. Currently, avenues for collaboration with NCH UK are being explored, with research leadership there coming from Professor Carol Smart.

The Study

Principal researchers
Dr. Jenn McIntosh (Family Transitions) is the principal researcher. Caroline Long is the manager of the project.

Service Provision
All mediation services for this project are provided by Relationships Australia, with participating sites in Melbourne, Adelaide and Canberra.

Funding
The research arm of the project is funded by a grant from the Australian Government Attorney-General's Department. The cost of additional service delivery required by the project is generously sponsored by Relationships Australia.

Aims
The project aims to explore comparative outcomes for separated families receiving two different forms of Family Law Mediation. The first group will receive 'mainstream child focused mediation (non child inclusive). The second group will receive the Children in Focus, Child Consultation model. Outcomes monitored include changes in parental alliance, conflict management, parent-child relationships, contact, child adjustment and children's perception of parental cooperation. Baseline data for parents and children will be collected, and examined against two subsequent time frames (3 and 12 months post mediation), in order to test hypotheses that treatment group 2 will demonstrate improved outcomes in each of these areas.

Preliminary findings

As of May 2006, the study is in the full swing of final data analyses. All interviews with the 150 families (parents and children) who participated in the study over the past two years are now complete. We have some very interesting findings on the kinds of progress families made in the two treatment groups, three months after mediation finished. That data is currently being written up, shortly to be joined by publications about the final 12-month progress results. Please watch this website for an update.

Some baseline results from the study were published in the Journal of Family Studies. (See article by Jenn McIntosh and Caroline Long 'Current Findings on Australian Children in Post-separation Divorce:   Outer Conflict, Inner Discord' Journal of Family Studies Vol 11, No. 1 April 2005 pp 99-109). A full text version of the paper can be found on the Journal's website www.latrobe.edu.au/jfs; or simply "google" Journal of Family Studies.

This paper sets out the descriptive baseline data on the first 111 Australian families participating in this study of the efficacy of child-focused and child-inclusive Family Law Mediation. The families come from the first of two treatment groups in the comparative study. The paper describes the nature of parents' conflict with each other, the strength of their parental alliance, and the psychological functioning of their children at the time of presentation to the mediation service. High mental health risk for the children in these families is evident, both from parents' and children's perspectives. The paper also includes the perceptions of 73 children about their parents' conflict and its impact upon them. Implications are discussed, underscoring the imperative of early intervention with separating families that includes screening of children's experience of conflict and their own needs for recovery.

Interestingly, the paper reflects on how children are coping with their parents' conflict (see page 105).

"..... Personal interviews with 73 children, ages 5 to 18, using multiple measures and methods of enquiry were revealing of the internal nature of discord experienced by this sample.

Ninety-one percent reported feeling sad in the face of their parents' conflict, 68% scared, and just over half (52%) angry. A third of these children reported feeling significantly caught in the middle of their parents' conflict, with the eldest child most likely to feel this way....

......there was a strong tendency for children to report a more troubled and less supportive relationship with their father, with perception of this greater emotional distance. In the shadow of what is known about the important relationship between low conflict and fathers' meaningful psychological involvement in children's lives.....these findings are of obvious concern.....".

Further, on page 106 the paper notes,

".....In terms of what they (i.e. the children) thought parents were arguing about, 50% of these children tended to see themselves at the heart of the dispute, that is, they felt that their parents' fight was about them. Interestingly, the older children in the sample were as likely as the younger children to adopt this attribution of self-blame, self-involvement, or both....

.....Extensive analyses of the children's interview data are now underway and future publications will explore in more depth the associations between aspects of parents' initial presentation, their gains in mediation, and their children's self-representations around separation-based conflict....".

If you would like to receive information on the study, please email cif@latrobe.edu.au