Commentary: Implicit cultural arguments affect the science of shared parenting

Abstract

Abstract This commentary suggests that research on shared parenting is moving along a trajectory for politically embedded science from Stage 1 oversimplified polemics to Stage 2 responsiveness to polarized debate, achieving complexity by acknowledging the merits of some of the issues raised by both sides. It suggests that despite this advance, cultural arguments that support the fathers’ rights agenda still creep into and subtly warp the science of shared parenting. It identifies three types of “creep”: (1) denying intrinsic ties between shared parenting research and the political and economic interests of its advocates; (2) interpreting scientific epistemology to support overgeneralizing empirical results and minimizing the importance of individual differences in children’s responses to shared parenting; and (3) using terms for theoretical constructs that contain implicit misogynistic connotations. These intrusions obfuscate the political and legal implications of the research.