父母疏离与儿童性虐待案件中的厌女文化争论

Q1 Social Sciences
M. S. Milchman
{"title":"父母疏离与儿童性虐待案件中的厌女文化争论","authors":"M. S. Milchman","doi":"10.1080/15379418.2017.1416722","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article argues that major advances in parental alienation (PA) theory, since its inception as the Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), have not consistently been applied in custody litigation practice, because they do not serve advocacy needs; whereas, the misogynistic cultural argument in PAS, when relied on implicitly but not stated explicitly, can win cases. It first discusses advances in modern PA theory that eliminate misogyny. It then reviews feminist advances (1960s to 1980s) to show the threat to patriarchal power, and the fathers’ rights backlash, to explain their demand for legal redress. The hypothesis that a misogynistic cultural framework undermines evidence-based reasoning in child custody cases is supported with studies associating misogynistic beliefs with irrational thinking in multiple scientific areas, including child custody; and documents that show misogyny is a serious concern in the U.S. legal system. The article concludes by stating the need for evidence of misogynistic bias in custody decisions.","PeriodicalId":45478,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Child Custody","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Misogynistic cultural argument in parental alienation versus child sexual abuse cases\",\"authors\":\"M. S. Milchman\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15379418.2017.1416722\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article argues that major advances in parental alienation (PA) theory, since its inception as the Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), have not consistently been applied in custody litigation practice, because they do not serve advocacy needs; whereas, the misogynistic cultural argument in PAS, when relied on implicitly but not stated explicitly, can win cases. It first discusses advances in modern PA theory that eliminate misogyny. It then reviews feminist advances (1960s to 1980s) to show the threat to patriarchal power, and the fathers’ rights backlash, to explain their demand for legal redress. The hypothesis that a misogynistic cultural framework undermines evidence-based reasoning in child custody cases is supported with studies associating misogynistic beliefs with irrational thinking in multiple scientific areas, including child custody; and documents that show misogyny is a serious concern in the U.S. legal system. The article concludes by stating the need for evidence of misogynistic bias in custody decisions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45478,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Child Custody\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"15\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Child Custody\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15379418.2017.1416722\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Child Custody","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15379418.2017.1416722","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

摘要

摘要本文认为,自父母疏离综合症(parent alienation Syndrome, PAS)诞生以来,父母疏离理论的主要进展并未在监护诉讼实践中得到一致应用,因为它们不符合倡导需求;然而,PAS中厌恶女性的文化论点,当隐含地依赖而不是明确地陈述时,可以赢得案件。它首先讨论了消除厌女症的现代PA理论的进展。然后回顾女权主义的发展(20世纪60年代至80年代),以显示对父权的威胁,以及父亲权利的反弹,以解释他们对法律赔偿的要求。厌女文化框架破坏了儿童监护案件中的循证推理,这一假设得到了多个科学领域(包括儿童监护)将厌女信仰与非理性思维联系起来的研究的支持;以及显示厌女症是美国法律体系中一个严重问题的文件。文章最后指出,需要证据证明在监护决定中存在歧视女性的偏见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Misogynistic cultural argument in parental alienation versus child sexual abuse cases
ABSTRACT This article argues that major advances in parental alienation (PA) theory, since its inception as the Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), have not consistently been applied in custody litigation practice, because they do not serve advocacy needs; whereas, the misogynistic cultural argument in PAS, when relied on implicitly but not stated explicitly, can win cases. It first discusses advances in modern PA theory that eliminate misogyny. It then reviews feminist advances (1960s to 1980s) to show the threat to patriarchal power, and the fathers’ rights backlash, to explain their demand for legal redress. The hypothesis that a misogynistic cultural framework undermines evidence-based reasoning in child custody cases is supported with studies associating misogynistic beliefs with irrational thinking in multiple scientific areas, including child custody; and documents that show misogyny is a serious concern in the U.S. legal system. The article concludes by stating the need for evidence of misogynistic bias in custody decisions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Child Custody
Journal of Child Custody FAMILY STUDIES-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Since the days of Solomon, child custody issues have demanded extraordinary wisdom and insight. The Journal of Child Custody gives you access to the ideas, opinions, and experiences of leading experts in the field and keeps you up-to-date with the latest developments in the field as well as discussions elucidating complex legal and psychological issues. While it will not shy away from controversial topics and ideas, the Journal of Child Custody is committed to publishing accurate, balanced, and scholarly articles as well as insightful reviews of relevant books and literature.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信