Protection, manipulation or interference with relationships? Discourse analysis of New Zealand lawyers' talk about supervised access and partner violence

Abstract

Violence against women within the context of intimate relationships is a complex social problem in Aotearoa/New Zealand and internationally. Such abuse by men is particularly problematic because of its prevalence, and because of the extent and magnitude of deleterious effects on the health and psychological well-being of women and children. In New Zealand, the legal system is assumed to play an important role in protecting women and children from domestic violence. Through the Domestic Violence Act 1995 and the amended Guardianship Act 1968, persons who are physically, sexually or psychologically abusive to their children, or to their partner whilst children are present, may only be entitled to supervised access to these children. Although supervised access has been found to increase the safety of women and children, it remains a contentious issue. Because of the role that legal professionals have in the implementation of relevant legislation, the present research explored how lawyers make sense of supervised access in the context of domestic violence. Eighteen male and female lawyers were interviewed. Their interview transcripts were then subject to discourse analysis. This paper illustrates and discusses discourses used in relation to supervised access, including those that support protecting children from the harm of domestic violence through supervised access, and those that challenge the need for children's protection. Within the cluster of latter discourses, supervised access was not considered a means of balancing children's relationships with both parents with children's need for protection, or a way of enabling men to have a safe relationship with their children. Rather, it was constructed as violating men's rights to a relationship with their children, and children's right to a relationship with both parents. The prevalence of discourses opposing supervised access could affect the likelihood of women obtaining protection orders and supervised access conditions, and hence, women and children's safety. However, perpetuation of 'supportive' discourses could enhance women and children's well-being, and facilitate safe ongoing relationships between children and non-custodial parents.

‘Ordinary decent domestic violence’: A discursive analysis of family law judges’ interviews

“…This is in line with arguments made by Conner (2009), who identified that judges held a belief that women had a tendency to exaggerate DV. Furthermore, the positioning of mothers as alleging DV as a means to manipulate the system concurs with previous findings; Pond and Morgan (2008) found that some lawyers’ discourses questioned mothers’ integrity and their motivations in obtaining protection orders. However, it is in direct contrast with the known cost of DV to women and children in Irish society.…”

“…A few examples in this area do exist nonetheless. Pond and Morgan (2008) undertook a DA of interviews with lawyers, where they identified discourses which portrayed the need to protect children via supervised access. However, they also identified discourses which portrayed mothers who alleged DV as both obstructive and ‘misusing the system’ to their own gain.…”

‘It was him’: Representational strategies, identity, and legitimization in the Boston Marathon bombing trial narratives

“…These mechanisms allow lawyers to not only highlight, silence or contest aspects of the identity of characters in their narratives, but also to position them in relation to each other by portraying them as exercising (or lacking in) agency, power and control over another actor, thereby indicating responsibility (or lack thereof) for such acts. For example, Pond and Morgan (2008) find that defence lawyers use the ‘violent partner’ but ‘good father’ description to negotiate the identity of clients who have committed domestic violence but who are also seeking child custody. As a result, these men are portrayed as perfectly safe around children despite being violent towards their partners.…”

\"Tem alguém vendo\": Visitas monitoradas em varas de família sob a perspectiva de operadores do direito, psicólogas judiciárias e familiares

“…Para as pesquisadoras, esta realidade torna provável que mulheres vítimas de violência doméstica tornem-se apreensivas em utilizar o sistema legal na busca de proteção de seus filhos. Isso porque há a possibilidade de a manutenção do convívio paterno-filial ser privilegiada, em detrimento da segurança das crianças, por meio de procedimentos como a mudança prematura do contato supervisionado para sem supervisão (Pond & Morgan, 2008).…”

“…Por fim, as pesquisadoras alertam que, caso tais discursos se tornem abundantes nos círculos judiciais, isto poderá prejudicar o sucesso das medidas de proteção e dos pedidos por contato supervisionado. Comprometer-se-á, deste modo, a segurança de mulheres e crianças inseridas em um contexto de violência doméstica (Pond & Morgan, 2008). Na Austrália, Sheehan et al (2007) igualmente informam que mudanças na lei daquele país marcaram ".…”