Click here to download

The enduring link: extrajudicial agreements and feelings of loss for parents and their children
Journal Title: INTERAZIONI 
Author/s: Robert Emery 
Year:  2013 Issue: Language: Italian 
Pages:  16 Pg. 99-114 FullText PDF:  517 KB
DOI:  10.3280/INT2013-001008
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 

Starting from the ’80s, Robert Emery promoted a family mediation program carried out in a Court in the state of Virginia. The program aimed at evaluating the efficacy of family mediation compared to other adversarial dispute resolution methods; the underlying hypothesis was that mediation was capable of saving divorcing partners the pain of undergoing highly conflictual trials that would then inevitably lead to a further deterioration in their relationship, as well as prevent the wound of divorce from becoming even deeper. The article presents the results of a longitudinal research developed on the basis of this experience. The study proves to be a key point of reference in the international scenario for the investigation of the outcomes of family mediation as a method for dealing with divorcing/separating partners or partners who have already undergone the divorce/ separation process- and helping them reach shared agreements on child custody. The research sample involved 71 couples that appeared in front of a Court in order to solve their disagreements with regards to child custody; 35 of these couples were randomly assigned to mediation and asked to attend an 11 hours program, whereas the remaining 35 couples went to Court and preceded with an adversarial trial. All the families in the sample were followed for 12 years after the study. Results of the follow up carried out immediately after the divorce and the conclusion of the legal proceding did not show any difference between the two groups (families that were assigned to mediation and families that, instead, were involved in adversarial dispute resolution methods). However, 12 years later, significant differences were found between the two groups, in particular in terms of the frequency of contacts between the child and his/her non resident parent: parents who had attended the mediation program were much more likely to have both physical and telephonic contacts with their children. Moreover, non resident parents in the mediation group were more willing to share their children’s problems and take conjoint decisions with their former spouse. Finally, couples who attended mediation managed to solve their controversy and find and agreement in half of the time needed for couples in the adversarial group.
Keywords: Family mediation, divorce, Court, parental cooperation, alternate dispute resolution techniques.

  1. Beck C.J.A., Sales B.D. (2001). Family Mediation: Facts, Myths, and Future Prospects. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association
  2. Bickerdike A.J., Littlefield L. (2000). Divorce adjustment and mediation: Theoretically grounded process research. Mediation Quarterly, 18: 181-201.
  3. Emery R.E. (1982). Interparental conflict and the children of discord and divorce. Psychological Bulletin, 92: 310-330.
  4. Emery R.E. (1994). Renegotiating Family relationships: Divorce, child custody, and mediation. New York: Guilford.
  5. Emery R.E. (1999). Marriage, divorce, and children’s adjustment (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  6. Emery R.E. (2004). The truth about children and divorce: Dealing with the emotions so you and your children can thrive. New York: Viking/Penguin.
  7. Emery R.E., Forehand R. (1994). Parental divorce and children’s well-being: A focus on resilience. In Haggerty R.J., Sherrod L., Garmezy N., Rutter M. (Eds.), Risk and Resilience in Children (pp. 64-99). London: Cambridge University Press.
  8. Emery R.E., Laumann-Billings L., Waldron M., Sbarra D.A., Dillon P. (2001). Child custody mediation and litigation: Custody, contact, and co-parenting 12 years after initial dispute resolution. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 69: 323-332. DOI 10.1037/0022-006X.69.2.323.
  9. Emery R.E., Matthews S.G., Kitzmann K.M. (1994). Child custody mediation and litigation: Parents satisfaction and functioning a year after settlement. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62: 124-129.
  10. Emery R.E., Matthews S., Wyer M.M. (1991). Child custody mediation and litigation: Further evidence of the differing views of mothers and fathers. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59: 410-418. DOI 10.1037/0022006X.59.3.410.
  11. Emery R.E., Wyer M.M. (1987a). Divorce mediation. American Psychologist, 42: 472-480. DOI 10.1037/0003066X.42.5.472.
  12. Emery E.E., Wyer M.M. (1987b). Child custody mediation and litigation: An experimental evaluation of the experience of parents. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55: 179-186. DOI 10.1037/0022-006X.55.2.179.
  13. Grillo T. (1991). The mediation alternative: Process dangers for women. Yale Law Journal, 100: 1545-1610.
  14. Jones T.S., Bodtker A. (1999). Agreement, maintenance, satisfaction and relitigation in mediated and non-mediated custody cases: A research note. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 32: 17-31.
  15. Kelly J.B. (1991). Parent interaction after divorce: Comparison of mediated and adversarial divorce processes. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 9: 387-398.
  16. Kelly J.B. (1996). A decade of divorce mediation research: Some answers and questions. Family and Conciliation Courts Review, 34: 373-385.
  17. Kelly J.B., Duryee M.A. (1992). Women’s and men’s views of mediation in voluntary and mandatory mediation settings. Family and Conciliation Courts Review, 30: 34-49.
  18. Kelly J., Emery R.E. (2003). Children’s adjustment following divorce: Risk and resilience perspectives. Family Relations, 52: 352-362. DOI 10.1111/j.17413729.2003.00352.x.
  19. Kelly J.B., Gigy L. (1989). Divorce mediation: Characteristics of clients and outcomes.
  20. In Kressel K., Pruitt D.G. (Eds.), Mediation research (pp. 263-283). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  21. Kitzmann K.M., Emery R.E. (1993). Procedural justice and Parents’ satisfaction in a field study of child custody dispute resolution. Law and Human Behavior, 17: 553-567. DOI 10.1007/BF01045073.
  22. Kitzmann K.M., Emery R.E. (1994). Child and family coping one year following mediated and litigated child custody disputes. Journal of Family Psychology, 8: 150-159. DOI 10.1037/08933200.8.2.150.
  23. Laumann-Billings L., Emery R.E. (2000). Distress among young adults from divorced families. Journal of Family Psychology, 14: 671-687. DOI 10.1037/0893-3200.14.4.671.
  24. McIntosh J. (2000). Child-inclusive divorce mediation: Report on a qualitative research study. Mediation Quarterly, 18: 55-69. DOI 10.1002/crq.3890180106.
  25. Pryor J., Rodgers B. (2001). Children in changing families. Life after parents separate. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
  26. Seltzer J.A. (1991). Relationships between fathers and children who live apart: The father’s role after separation. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53: 79-101.
  27. U.S. Bureau of the Census (1992). Marriage, divorce, and remarriage in the 1990’s. Current Population Reports (pp. 23-180). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
  28. Wallerstein J.S. (2003). Children of divorce: A society in search of policy. In Mason M.A., Skolnick A., Sugarman S.D. (Eds.), All our families: New policies for a new century (pp. 66-95). New York: Oxford University Press.

Robert Emery, The enduring link: extrajudicial agreements and feelings of loss for parents and their children in "INTERAZIONI" 1/2013, pp. 99-114, DOI:10.3280/INT2013-001008


FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content