Difference between revisions of "NaughtonODonnellGreenwoodMuldoon2015"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Catherine M. Naughton; Aisling T. O’Donnell; Ronni M. Greenwood; Orla T. Muldoon |Title=‘Ordinary decent domestic violence’: A dis...")
 
m
Line 3: Line 3:
 
|Author(s)=Catherine M. Naughton; Aisling T. O’Donnell; Ronni M. Greenwood; Orla T. Muldoon
 
|Author(s)=Catherine M. Naughton; Aisling T. O’Donnell; Ronni M. Greenwood; Orla T. Muldoon
 
|Title=‘Ordinary decent domestic violence’: A discursive analysis of family law judges’ interviews
 
|Title=‘Ordinary decent domestic violence’: A discursive analysis of family law judges’ interviews
|Tag(s)=Discursive Psychology;  
+
|Tag(s)=Discursive Psychology;
 
|Key=NaughtonO’DonnellGreenwoodMuldoon2015
 
|Key=NaughtonO’DonnellGreenwoodMuldoon2015
 
|Year=2015
 
|Year=2015
 +
|Language=English
 
|Journal=Discourse & Society
 
|Journal=Discourse & Society
 
|Volume=26
 
|Volume=26

Revision as of 12:50, 1 August 2018

NaughtonODonnellGreenwoodMuldoon2015
BibType ARTICLE
Key NaughtonO’DonnellGreenwoodMuldoon2015
Author(s) Catherine M. Naughton, Aisling T. O’Donnell, Ronni M. Greenwood, Orla T. Muldoon
Title ‘Ordinary decent domestic violence’: A discursive analysis of family law judges’ interviews
Editor(s)
Tag(s) Discursive Psychology
Publisher
Year 2015
Language English
City
Month
Journal Discourse & Society
Volume 26
Number 3
Pages 349 –365
URL Link
DOI 0.1177/0957926514564738
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

This study examined judges’ constructions of the ‘best interests of the child’ in child custody and access arraignments where there were allegations of domestic violence within the context of an interview. Using interviews with six Irish District Court judges, a micro-structural discourse analysis enabled the identification of socio-cultural discourses, scientific knowledge and judges’own values and beliefs biases about custody arraignments in cases of domestic violence. Judges’ discourses were shaped by an idealisation of the nuclear family unit which resulted in a pro-access philosophy (Theme 1). The knowledge that domestic violence had occurred challenged this ideology and, to rhetorically manage this dilemma, judges’ talk normalised or trivialised abusive parents’ behaviour, which rendered domestic violence irrelevant to child custody and access (Theme 2). Mothers who alleged domestic violence when they disputed contact between fathers and their children were pathologised through talk (Theme 3). It is recommended that systems be put in place, including judicial training, to facilitate judges in their decision-making process in this highly discretionary and complex area of the law

Notes