Rapid review of the characteristics and outcomes of children involved in private family law proceedings due to parental separation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Private law childrens proceedings typically involve court disputes between parents who have separated and disagree about child arrangements, and are asking the court to make orders that determine where a child should live and with whom they should spend time. Children involved in private law, who potentially represent a vulnerable group, commonly receive less attention in policy than those in public law cases. The aim of this review was to shine a light on the wellbeing and other important characteristics or outcomes of children who are currently, or have been, involved in family law proceedings due to parental separation, to identify the support needs of these children who are often overlooked in policy. This rapid review is intended for policymakers who are responsible for policy concerning children and families as well as for family law professionals and families in private law childrens proceedings. The literature searches were conducted between June and August 2024. The included literature was published between 2001 and 2022. 22 studies reported in 25 documents were identified (8 published in academic journals and 17 in reports produced by organisations). Originated in England and Wales (n=13), Australia (n=7), Canada (n=1), New Zealand (n=1). Most studies aimed to describe the characteristics of children who are or have been involved in private family law proceedings, whilst only one compared the outcomes of such children to those in the general population. Almost all of the studies addressed mental health and emotional wellbeing. Written accounts of children, parents, and professionals described children as having anxiety, depression, anger, post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, and eating disorders, and experiencing self-harm and suicide attempts. In Wales, children with a history of involvement in private law proceedings had higher incidence of depression and anxiety than children in the general population. From the evidence, it was unclear whether the poor mental health was associated with parental separation, the court proceedings, court orders, or some other factors, but some participants attributed difficulties to unwanted court orders. Other key areas of evidence included engagement with mental health services, behaviour, development, social relationships, learning and education, and physical health. Cardiff Evidence Synthesis Collaborative were funded for this work by the Health and Care Research Wales Evidence Centre, itself funded by Health and Care Research Wales on behalf of Welsh Government.
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 | 0.006 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.021 | 0.020 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".