Custody and Access Issues with Children Whose Parents are Separated or Divorced
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article discusses the effects of family breakdown--and the resulting issues of custody and access--on children. It explores trends in child custody and access and issues surrounding those trends, particularly in terms of the benefits and limitations of joint custody. It then identifies the contextual problems of family breakups (including the relative poverty experienced by mother-led families, the unreliability of financial support from fathers, the complications for children which result from step-parent figures, including serial partners of their parents, the implications of interparental conflict, the need to fully address suspicions and/or allegations of abuse by one parent against another, and the problem of Parental Alienation Syndrome). Typical responses of children to family breakup are then considered, including feelings of loss, guilt, and responsibility, and a sense of divided loyalties--particularly in light of intense or violent parental conflict. And finally, recommendations are made to minimize the detrimental effects of family breakup on children: (a) allowing children choice and flexibility, (b) exploring the benefits of mediation for families, (c) promoting parental co-operation, and (d) encouraging an ongoing relationship with the nonresidential parent.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".