Child care and contact evaluations : psychologists' contributions to the problem-determined divorce process in South Africa

Abstract

Disputes concerning care and contact arrangements for the minor children of divorcing couples present special challenges for professionals in the legal and psychological professions. Care and contact (custody) disputes, which are complex undertakings, are a point of debate in the professional arena in South Africa. Clinical psychologists are often included in the professional cohort that assists the high court, as the upper guardian of minor children, in the decision making process regarding contested care arrangements of children. This field is further challenged by the lack of training programmes and practice guidelines, the intense adversarial nature of disputes and litigation processes, as well as the increase in board complaints levelled against psychologists at the Health Professions Council of South Africa. These challenges contribute to the reluctance of psychologists to become involved in care and contact matters. This study therefore aimed first to explore the current practices and contributions of clinical psychologists in care and contact disputes in South Africa, and second to evaluate the procedures used by clinical psychologists to inform their recommendations to the court. In such matters, clinical psychologists adhere to the best interest of the child (BIC) principle. The final aim of the study was to identify and propose guidelines for a model of better practice. The study was guided by a Constructivist Epistemology and a Social Constructionist paradigmatic framework. A qualitative research approach was employed. Data were collected through face- to-face interviews with clinical psychologists and advocates and were analysed using Thematic Network Analysis of Attride-Stirling. The findings, which indicated that that the practices of psychologists are plenteous, revealed significant shortfalls in current practices. In addition, the findings designated that creating a universal model for care and contact evaluations to fit with the legal professions’ empiricist tendency poses a paradigmatic dilemma and a practical challenge. A position of observer-dependence and a reflective position on the part of the psychologist is instead indicated.