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.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1-52 |
| Number of pages | 52 |
| Journal | Attachment and Human Development |
| Volume | 24 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Early online date | 11 Jan 2021 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Feb 2022 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:This work was supported by grants from the Swedish Research Council (Grant 2017-03315) and the Swedish research Council for Health, Working Life, and Welfare (Grant 2017-01182) awarded to Pehr Granqvist and Tommie Forslund, and by a Medical Humanities Investigator Award from the Wellcome Trust (Grant WT103343MA) awarded to Robbie Duschinsky. We would like to express our gratitude to Katarina Alexius for a thorough review of the manuscript from the perspective of law and to Joshua Juvrud for language editing.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
Funding
Financiación. El trabajo ha recibido apoyo financiero del Swedish Research Council (Grant 2017-03315) y the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life, and Welfare (Grant 2017-01182) concedidos a Pehr Granqvist y Tommie Forslund, así como del Medical Humanities Investigator Award from the Wellcome Trust (Grant WT103343MA) concedido a Robbie Duschinsky.
| Funders | Funder number |
|---|---|
| Wellcome Trust | WT103343MA, 103343 |
| Forskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och Välfärd | 2017-01182 |
| Japan Society for the Promotion of Science | 19K03241 |
| Vetenskapsrådet | 2017-03315 |
Keywords
- Attachment theory
- best interests of the child
- child custody
- child protection
- consensus statement
- family court