Microsoft Word - JS Thesis Absolute Final.docx

A psychosocial study exploring children’s experience of their parents’ divorce or separation.

J. F. Stone

A thesis submitted for the degree of Professional Doctorate in Child, Community and

Educational Psychology

Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust

University of Essex

May 2019

Abstract(

According to the Office of National Statistics (2018) an estimated 42% of marriages in England

and Wales now end in divorce, with half involving children under the age of 16. Despite growing

evidence of the impact of divorce and separation on children’s happiness, self-esteem and

behaviour there has been a paucity of research within the UK, which looks at children’s

experience of their parents’ divorce or separation. This psychosocial study aimed to explore the

experiences of children and young people whose parents have divorced or separated.

Four children and young people who had experienced the separation of their parents’ (three

males, one female) aged between 8 and 13 years old were interviewed twice about their

experience using two psychoanalytically informed, free associative methods; the Grid

Elaboration Method (GEM) and the Free-Association Narrative Interview (FANI). Data was

analysed using Thematic Analysis. A subsequent psychosocial layer of analysis was then

applied, using researcher field notes, to support an exploration of the dynamic, intersubjective

and unconscious processes present during the interviews. Five themes emerged from the data and

these are discussed alongside existing research and psychological theory. Unconscious processes

observed through the interview process are also explored. Implications for Educational

Psychologists (EPs), as well as schools and other professionals, when working with similar

populations of children and young people are considered. The studies limitations and thoughts

about future research are presented.

Acknowledgements(

This research would not have been possible without the children who agreed to take part. My

thanks goes to them and their parents who allowed me into their worlds to hear their stories. The

experiences you shared will have a lasting impact on me and I hope your voices will be heard

and your experiences better understood.

A big thank you to Cat for her enthusiasm and support for the study and for her support in

identifying two of the families who took part in the research. Without you identifying these

young people may not have been possible.

I would like to thank Rachael my research supervisor for her guidance and encouragement to

follow my heart and do the research I found most valuable.

A very special thank you to my Mum and Dad who have provided me with the opportunities to

achieve what I have, who always see the best in me, and have taught me the importance of

perseverance and hard work.

Finally, this thesis is dedicated to my husband to be, David, without you this would not have

been possible. Thank you for doing for me what I inspire to do for those that I work with;

containing my anxieties, giving me hope and inspiring me to be the best version of myself.

Table(of(Contents

Abstract(.................................................................................................................................(2!

Acknowledgements(................................................................................................................(3!

1.(Introduction(.......................................................................................................................(7!

1.1(The(National(Context(..................................................................................................................(7!

1.1.1!The!Prevalence!of!Divorce!and!Separation!in!the!UK!.................................................................!7!

1.2(The(Impact(and(Effects(of(Divorce(on(Children(............................................................................(8!

1.3(National(Policy(and(Legislation(for(Hearing(the(Voice(of(the(Child(.............................................(10!

1.4(Divorce(Research(and(Children’s(Views(.....................................................................................(11!

1.5(Educational(Psychology(and(Children(of(Divorce(.......................................................................(12!

1.6(Position(of(the(Researcher(........................................................................................................(14!

1.6.1!Psychoanalytic!Frameworks!in!EP!Practice!...............................................................................!16!

1.6.2!Terminology!..............................................................................................................................!17!

1.7(Chapter(Summary(.....................................................................................................................(17!

2.(Literature(Review(.............................................................................................................(19!

2.1(Chapter(Overview(.....................................................................................................................(19!

2.2(Search(Strategy(.........................................................................................................................(19!

2.2.1!Search!Terms!............................................................................................................................!20!

2.2.2!Inclusion!and!Exclusion!Criteria!................................................................................................!21!

2.2.3!Search!Returns!..........................................................................................................................!23!

2.2.4!Critical!appraisal!.......................................................................................................................!23!

2.3(Review(of(Literature(.................................................................................................................(23!

2.4(Researching(Children’s(Views(of(Divorce(and(Separation(..........................................................(24!

2.5(What(does(existing(research(say(about(children’s(experiences(of(divorce?(...............................(26!

2.5.1!Change!and!Transition!..............................................................................................................!26!

2.5.2!Children’s!Narratives!and!Positioning!.......................................................................................!35!

2.5.3!Decision!Making!and!Autonomy!...............................................................................................!36!

2.5.4!Support!and!Coping!..................................................................................................................!37!

2.5.5!Importance!of!Relationships!.....................................................................................................!41!

2.5.6!The!Role!of!School!....................................................................................................................!43!

2.5.7!Summary!of!Literature!Review!Question:!What!does!existing!research!tell!us!about!children’s!

experiences!of!divorce?!................................ .....................................................................................!46!

2.6(How(have(children’s(experiences(of(their(parents’(divorce(or(separation(in(the(UK(been(explored(

in(existin g (re s e a rc h ? (.......................................................................................................................(47!

2.6.1!Psychosocial!perspectives!.........................................................................................................!49!

2.7(Rationale(..................................................................................................................................(51!

3.(Methodology(....................................................................................................................( 53!

3.1(Chapter(Overview(.....................................................................................................................(53!

3.2(Research(Question(....................................................................................................................(53!

3.3(Research(Purpose(..................................................................................................................... (54!

3.3.1!Exploratory!...............................................................................................................................!54!

3.4(Research(Aim(............................................................................................................................(54!

3.5(Ontology(and(Epistemology(......................................................................................................(55!

3.5.1!Psychosocial!Ontology!..............................................................................................................!55!

3.5.2!Psychosocial!Epistemology!.......................................................................................................!56!

3.6(Methodology(............................................................................................................................(57!

3.6.1!Qualitative!Methodology!..........................................................................................................!57!

3.6.2!Psychosocial!Research!..............................................................................................................!58!

3.6.3!Psychoanalysis!in!Psychosocial!Research!..................................................................................!59!

3.6.4!Anxiety,!the!Defended!subject!and!Defended!Researcher!.......................................................!60!

3.7(Research(Design(.......................................................................................................................(63!

3.7.1!Participants!...............................................................................................................................!63!

3.7.2!Sampling!and!Recruitment!Procedures!....................................................................................!65!

3.7.3!Data!Collection!.........................................................................................................................!66!

3.7.4!The!GEM!...................................................................................................................................!67!

3.7.5!The!FANI!...................................................................................................................................!69!

3.7.6!Data!Capture!.............................................................................................................................!70!

3.8(Data(Analysis(............................................................................................................................(70!

3.8.1!Thematic!Analysis!.....................................................................................................................!72!

3.8.2!Psychosocial!Analysis!................................................................................................................!73!

3.9(Credibility(and(Trustworthiness(................................ ................................................................(74!

3.9.1!Sensitivity!to!Context!................................................................................................................!74!

3.9.2!Commitment!&!Rigour!..............................................................................................................!75!

3.9.3!Coherence!&!Transparency!......................................................................................................!76!

3.9.4!Impact!&!Importance!................................................................................................ ................!77!

3.9.5!Reflexivity!.................................................................................................................................!79!

3.10(Ethical(Considerations(............................................................................................................(80!

4.(Analysis(............................................................................................................................(84!

4.1(Chapter(Overview(................................ .....................................................................................(84!

4.2(Approach(to(Data(Collection(and(Analysis(.................................................................................(84!

4.3(Themes(.....................................................................................................................................(85!

4.4(Theme(1:(Response(to(Separation(.............................................................................................(89!

4.4.1!Past!&!Present!Feelings!............................................................................................................!89!

4.4.2!Processing!&!Understanding!....................................................................................................!91!

4.4.3!Re silie n ce!..................................................................................................................................!95!

4.4.4!Remembering!Experiences!.......................................................................................................!97!

4.5(Theme(2:(Relationship(Between(Parents(...................................................................................(98!

4.5.1!Feelings!.....................................................................................................................................!98!

4.5.2!Parental!Interaction!................................................................................................................!100!

4.6(Theme(3:(Contact(with(Out(of(House(Parent(...........................................................................(102!

4.6.1!Shared!Parenting!....................................................................................................................!102!

4.6.2!Contact!and!Communication!..................................................................................................!103!

4.6.3!Fragility!of!contact!..................................................................................................................!105!

4.7(Theme(4:(When(Parents(Re-partner(........................................................................................(107!

4.7.1!Parents’!New!Relationships!....................................................................................................!107!

4.7.2!Additional!Family!Members!....................................................................................................!108!

4.7.3!Children’s!Perspectives!on!Parents’!New!Partners!.................................................................!109!

4.7.4!Subsequent!Separations!.........................................................................................................!111!

4.8(Theme(5:(Change(and(Continuity(............................................................................................(112!

4.8.1.!Parents!Living!Separately!.......................................................................................................!112!

4.8.2!Negative!Changes!...................................................................................................................!115!

4.8.3!Positive!changes!.....................................................................................................................!116!

4.8.4!Continuity!...............................................................................................................................!117!

4.9(Psychosocial(Analysis(..............................................................................................................(119!

4.9.1.!Ben,!aged!8!............................................................................................................................!119!

4.9.2!James,!aged!13!................................................................ .......................................................!122!

4.9.3!Sienna,!aged!11!.......................................................................................................................!125!

4.9.4!King,!aged!10!..........................................................................................................................!128!

4.10(Chapter(Summary(.................................................................................................................(131!

5.(Discussion(......................................................................................................................(132!

5.1(Chapter(Overview(................................................................ ...................................................(132!

5.2(Summary(of(Findings(................................................................................................ ..............(132!

5.3(A(Process:(Children’s(Response(to(Parents’(Sepa ratio n(...........................................................(133!

5.4(Relationships,(Contact (an d (S h a re d (P a re n tin g(..........................................................................(137!

5.5(Resilience,(Autonomy(&(Dependence(.....................................................................................(139!

5.6(Relating(in(role:(Individual(Intersubjective(Dynamics.(.............................................................(142!

5.7(Implications(for(the(Educational(Psychology(Profession(..........................................................(143!

5.8(Strengths(and(Limitations(.......................................................................................................(148!

5.9(Dissemination(.........................................................................................................................(151!

5.10(Future(Research(....................................................................................................................(151!

5.11(Reflections(............................................................................................................................(152!

5.12(Summary(..............................................................................................................................(153!

5.13(Conclusions(..........................................................................................................................(155!

List of Tables

Table(1.(Inclusion(and(Exclusion(Criteria(.........................................................................................(22!

Table(2.(Participant(Inclusion(and(Exclusion(Criteria(......................................................................(64!

Table(3.(Participants.(.......................................................................................................................(65!

Table(4.(The(Relationship(between(Themes(&(Subthemes(............................................................(86!

List of Figures

Figure(1.(Thematic(map(for(the(theme:(‘Response(to(Separation’(................................................(89!

Figure(2.(Thematic(map(for(the(theme(‘Relationship(between(parents’(.......................................(98!

Figure(3.(Thematic(map(for(the(theme:(‘Contact(with(Out(of(House(Parent’(..............................(102!

Figure(4.(Thematic(map(for(the(theme:(‘When(Parents(Re-Partner’(...........................................(107!

Figure(5.(Thematic(map(for(the(theme:(‘Change(&(Continuity’(...................................................(112!

1.(Introduction((

1.1(The(National(Context(

Divorce and parental separation transcends race, ethnicity, religion, and socio-economic status

(Amato & Cheadle, 2008). It is a recognised life event for children across the globe and its

prevalence and nature has been studied in countries including the United States, Australia, and

Ireland. (Campbell, 2008; Halpenny, Greene, & Hogan, 2008; Hans & Fine, 2001). This study

focuses on the experience of children and young people who have experienced the divorce or

separation of their parents in the UK. When considering prevalence, policy frameworks, impact

and implications, the UK context is the primary field of study.

1.1.1(The(Prevalence(of(Divorce(and(Separation(in(the(UK(

An estimated 42% of marriages in England and Wales now end in divorce (Office of National

Statistics (ONS), 2018). Out of the over 11 million children in England, it is thought that 3

million will experience the separation of their parents during the course of their childhood

(Bailey, Thoburn, & Timms, 2011), meaning one in three will experience divorce before the age

of 16 (Maclean, 2004). There is no formal registration of cohabitation, or separation of

unmarried parents, therefore, we cannot be precise about the number of children who experience

the separation of their unmarried parents (Hawthorne, Jessop, Pryor, & Richards, 2003).

However, it is thought that the figure is probably not too dissimilar to those who experience

divorce, suggesting the number of children who experience divorce or separation is considerable.

1.2(The(Impact(and(Effects(of(Divorce(on(Children((

A growing volume of research has commented on the potential impact on children of living

through their parents’ separation. These highlight a complex range of emotional, economic,

educational and social problems which may be experienced by children before, during, and after

the breakdown of their parents’ relationship (Bailey et al., 2011). Data from the Mental Health of

Children and Young People Survey (2004) found a significant association between children

living with a divorced or separated lone parent and associated mental health needs. Children

were 75% more likely to experience a mental health disorder than children living with their

married parents (Green, McGinnity, Meltzer, Ford, & Goodman, 2005). Studies indicate that

there are immediate and long term effects for children who experience parental divorce with

growing evidence to suggest the impact of divorce and separation on children’s unhappiness, low

self-esteem and behaviour (Maclean, 2004). The stress of parental divorce can impact negatively

on the child’s academic and psychological development and they are more likely to have

emotional and behavioural challenges as well as increases in anxiety and depression (Huurre,

Junkkari, & Aro, 2006; Molepo, Sodi, Maunganidze, & Mudhovozi, 2012; O'Connor, Thorpe,

Dunn, & Golding, 1999; Pagani, Boulerice, Tremblay, & Vitaro, 1997).

Most children who experience the breakdown of their parents’ relationship go through a period

of unhappiness and many experience low self-esteem and loss of contact with family members

(Rodgers & Pryor, 1998). However, most do settle back into a normal pattern of development

(Rodgers & Pryor, 1998). Rodgers and Pryor (1998) and Hawthorne, et al., (2003) reviewed the

impact of divorce and separation on children. They found that these children have twice the

probability of experiencing poor outcomes compared with those in intact families, with the

possibility of these being observed years after separation, even in adulthood. The reviews

summarised that these children have higher probability of low family income, behavioural

problems, negative performance in school, depressive symptoms and substance misuse. Several

factors were found to contribute to these outcomes including family conflict, quality of

parenting, parental ability to recover from distress of separation, multiple changes in family

structure and the child’s ability to manage stress.

Parental separation can be a significant upheaval and catalyst of change in many children and

young people’s lives, with many experiencing diminished or no contact with one parent, reduced

parental availability, the management of two households and routines, and the possibility of

ongoing inter-parental conflict and anger (Halpenny et al., 2008). Research suggests that

children from separated families when compared with children who have experienced the death

of a parent experience greater risks of poorer educational attainment, lower socio-economic

status and poorer mental health. Although both share the impact of parental loss, bereaved

children are not as adversely affected across the same range of outcomes as children whose

parents have separated (Rodgers & Pryor, 1998). However, it is thought that most children grow

up and function within normal or average limits and it is only a minority who experience long

term adjustment problems (Fawcett, 2000). It is important here to acknowledge the heterogeneity

of divorce and separation. The variety of familial, contextual, psychological and social

circumstances surrounding individual experiences of divorce and separation contribute to its

many forms and, therefore, it is likely that experiences and impact will vary significantly

between families and individuals. This is something hoping to be addressed in this study, which

focuses on the individuality of experience. In order to know how to help to support children it is

important to understand their experiences. The following section explores the current picture

around hearing the voice of the child in relation to their experience.

1.3(National(Policy(and(Legislation(for(Hearing(the(Voice(of(the(Child((

There has been growing interest and legislation that reflects the importance of children and

young people sharing their views and participating in decisions about themselves. Article 12 of

the United Nations Convention on Rights of the Child, ratified by British government in 1991,

ensures that children have a right to express an opinion and have that opinion considered in any

matters affecting themselves. This has become an established tenet of many UK policies and

legislation (Bailey et al., 2011). In the UK, the main legislation covering arrangements for

children when their parents’ divorce or separate is the Children Act 1989, which has been

amended in relevant sections by the Adoption and Children Act 2002, the Children and Adoption

Act 2006, and the Children and Families Act 2014. These provide for residence and contact

orders relating to children to be made, to promote and safeguard the welfare of the child if there

are disputes about parental responsibility within post-separation arrangements (Bailey et al.,

2011).

Government initiatives (DCA & DfES, 2004; DfES, 2005) have proposed changes to divorce

legislation, with the aim to improve outcomes for children and make fundamental changes to the

way in which private law disputes are dealt with by the courts (Timms, Bailey, & Thoburn,

2007). In September 2018, the government put forward for consultation a reform of the legal

requirements for divorce, to shift the focus from blame, towards supporting adults to focus on

making better arrangements for their own futures and their children, with focus on improving

outcomes for children, by minimising conflict, and strengthening family responsibility (Ministry

of Justice, 2018).

Considering this legislation, research that focuses on children’s experience of their parents’

separation would arguably provide a more comprehensive understanding of what children think

and feel about this event. Previous research shows that children’s responses to family change are

diverse and varied, however, a focus on group related outcomes disguises the diversity and

individuality of each child’s experience and outcome (Hawthorne et al., 2003). What stands out

is that children have views and perspectives that they want heard and it is in their best interest to

be listened to, as decisions made have considerable impact on their lives (Hawthorne et al.,

2003). Weidberg (2017) references that if children are given a voice it can impact on educational

reform and lead to progress with policies and practice. Research that gathers children’s views

and allows them to be the experts in their own worlds not only provides a richness to data

gathered but can enhance professionals’ understanding of how a child experiences and makes

sense of an event, such as divorce.

1.4(Divorce(Research(and(Children’s(Views(

“Among the shouting there are voices that are not being heard: the children’s”

(Chen & George, 2005, p. 452)

The voice of the child can often be missed in the parental divorce process, however, given

children’s responses to divorce and separation are varied, research which considers the

perspectives of children can contribute to the establishment of appropriate support and

interventions (Hawthorne et al., 2003; Hogan & O’Reilly, 2007). Hawthorne et al., (2003)

suggest that services that are set up to support children and young people who are experiencing,

or have experienced divorce or separation, may be more effective, if those establishing them first

consult the children. Children’s views and experiences are slowly becoming acknowledged and

researchers have come to recognise the advantages of talking to children directly about their

experiences rather than relying on adult mediated accounts (Brand, Howcroft & Hoelson, 2017;

Hogan, Halpenny & Greene, 2003). Several studies contribute to the current understanding of

children’s experiences of parental divorce in different areas. Past research has explored

children’s views on their involvement in court proceedings (Timms et al., 2007), capturing the

views of children whose parents were married and seeking a divorce. Other research has sought

children’s views on the mechanisms through which they can best be supported in the context of

family transition (Halpenny et al., 2008; Hawthorne et al., 2003; Wade & Smart, 2002), their

perceptions of contact arrangements (Trinder, Beek, & Connolly, 2002) and relationships with

family members post-divorce (Abbey & Dallos, 2004; Bridges, Roe, Dunn, & O'Connor, 2007).

Campbell (2008) in his research about children’s views on decision making following parental

separation strongly advises that it is increasingly important to hear directly from children to

ensure we focus on their best interests and meet their needs.

1.5(Educational(Psychology(and(Children(of(Divorce(

Parental separation is most helpfully viewed as a process, which begins before divorce or

separation of parents, and continues throughout the person’s life. Children or young people

might require support or intervention at any stage in this process (Maclean, 2004; Rodgers &

Pryor, 1998). The development of intervention programmes and policies can be better informed

through understanding the experiences and perceptions of children regarding parental divorce

and should be of value to professionals such as psychologists, teachers and social workers

(Brand et al., 2017).

Current legislation (Special Educational Needs Code of Practice, 2015; Every Child Matters

(ECM), 2003) emphasises the importance of a family and person-centred system which works in

partnership with parents, and involves children in discussions and decisions about themselves, to

ensure best outcomes for children (DfES, 2003; DfE & DoH, 2015). EPs are well placed to help

support and promote positive outcomes for young people by focusing on their needs and well-

being. Mercieca and Mercieca (2014) posit that listening to young people is an integral part of

the role of the EP. Furthermore, EPs have the skills and opportunities to naturally elicit

children’s views and communicate with those around them to formulate a holistic and

psychologically informed understanding of their complex individual and social needs (Maclean,

2004; Weidberg, 2017; BPS, 2002) .

In recent years, there has been a growing focus on the mental health and wellbeing of children

and young people. A greater understanding of how children experience parental divorce or

separation can assist the provision of social, emotional support through the education system,

which, ECM (DfES, 2003) highlights, has a pivotal role in offering support to all children who

experience a variety of stressors throughout childhood. Research into the impact of divorce or

separation on children has highlighted both immediate and long term effects on children’s social

and emotional wellbeing, happiness and mental health, which is recognised as being directly

linked to their capacity to learn and academic standards (Ubha & Cahill, 2014). The recent

Government green paper ‘Transforming children and young people’s mental health provision’

(DoE & DoHS, 2017) promotes the importance of ‘a whole school approach that embeds the

promotion of wellbeing throughout the culture of the school and curriculum, as well as in staff

training and continuing professional development’. EPs work with the child, their family and

other adults who teach and care for them in their support of children with SEMH needs (BPS,

2002), and are well placed to take a holistic view of a child’s needs, considering the range of

different social and environmental contexts within which they operate (Billington, 2006). The

knowledge EPs bring of dynamic processes in relationships, the functioning of systems

(including the family system) and their understanding of theories of development can put them in

a crucial role in supporting others to understand the experiences of children who are in the

process of or have experienced their parents’ divorce or separation. Through the provision of

training or consultation, EPs can promote awareness and understanding of children’s experiences

and needs, and have the potential to improve outcomes and promote positive change for these

children and young people.

1.6(Position(of(the(Researcher(

(

This psychosocial research aims to explore children and young people’s experience of their

parents’ divorce or separation and hopes to illuminate and enable further understanding of their

experiences from a psychoanalytic perspective. A psychosocial stance allows both the

psychological and social to be considered together when interpreting data and conceptualizes

participants as both products of a shared social world and their unique psychic worlds (Gadd &

Jefferson, 2007). A psychosocial approach considers the interrelatedness of individual

psychological and social experiences of research participants and also allows me, the researcher,

to consciously consider my role, relation and presence throughout the research process, and its

impact on myself, the participants, the data produced and the conclusions drawn. I will now

address the four overarching influences that have led me to adopt a psychosocial stance and

address the research topic in this way.

My academic and working background in psychology, psychotherapy and socio-cultural

phenomena has influenced the lens through which I attempt to understand and gain insight into

an individual’s experience. This includes considering societal, cultural and psychological factors

on the impact of phenomena on individuals. My EP training, which has exposed me to

psychoanalytic and systems theories as frameworks for understanding phenomena, further

contributes to how I view and interpret the world and the application of psychology in my

practice. I believe through employing a psychosocial lens, I can gain an understanding of

unconscious processes that shape an individual’s narrative about an experience, and that

children’s narratives related to experiences of divorce or separation, are shaped by an interplay

of influences.

Two further influences have encouraged my interest in this research area. Firstly, my

experiences as a behaviour mentor in a pupil referral unit for children with social, emotional and

behavioural needs and as a Trainee EP exposed me to a number of children who have

experienced the divorce or separation of their parents. Each individual child presented a unique

story, with an individual response and individual social experience. This contributed to my

curiosity as to what impacted on these experiences and the children’s response to them. It is also

important to note my own individual experience of divorce. My parents are divorced and with

three siblings, our own experience and response to this event has been unique and individual,

sparking my own curiosity further about the individuality of our psychological and social

realities. Clarke & Hogget (2009) recognise the importance of a researcher acknowledging these

“inner dynamics” that may spark professional interest. Reflection and reflexivity are key tenets

of psychosocial research and allow researchers to reflect on their own subjective responses and

the unconscious intersubjective dynamics in field encounters (Hollway, 2015).

Psychosocial influences shape and construct a researcher’s world view as well as each

individual’s uniquely constructed narrative of their experience. This is true also for any

interpretation of the meanings behind an individual’s articulation of their experience.

Psychoanalysis provides a framework to help researchers make meaning throughout the research

process, with focus on the unconscious intersubjective communications between the researcher

and researched in that context, making the encounter a co-constructed reality (Hollway, 2015).

This interaction can be understood further using a psychosocial lens, and helps to consider what

the researcher attends to, how they attend to it and why, as well as what is communicated and

how, and how this is influenced through the context of the interview. Paying attention to these

phenomena can support the researcher to reflexively consider their role in this dynamic research

encounter (Hollway, 2015).

Smart (2006) found some children were unable to provide full accounts when asked about their

experience of divorce. This psychosocial research is of the premise that both the researcher and

researched may engage in unconscious defences against anxiety, motivating the positions they

take up and the accounts they portray (Hollway & Jefferson, 2013). Therefore, it is thought that

when speaking about their parents’ separation or divorce, children may have difficulty

expressing their experiences entirely through verbal accounts and their narratives may be

influenced by unconscious processes, impacting on how they articulate their experience.

Through paying attention to unconscious processes within the interview context, it may be

possible to gain a deeper understanding of both their conscious and unconscious communications

of their experience.

1.6.1(Psychoanalytic(Frameworks(in(EP(Practice(

In the context of this research, psychoanalysis focuses on the possible unconscious dynamics and

defences that can present themselves when speaking with children about their parents’ separation

or divorce. Psychoanalytic frameworks are one way EPs can inform their understanding of their

work with individuals and within groups or systems, however there is little research evidence to

suggest that EPs use psychoanalytic frameworks in their practice (Eloquin, 2016). EPs are

applied psychologists and the use of psychodynamic ideas elevate the central place of emotion in

human experience and the significance of development in how the “there and then” may play out

in the “here and now” (Kennedy, Keaney, Shaldon, & Canagaratnam, 2018). It allows for a more

reflective view of relational dynamics, encouraging awareness of inter-subjectivity and the

emotions that can pass between people. Knowledge and awareness of the presence of

transference and counter-transference in interactions can provide containment and support

avoidance of acting out what is being transferred. Noticing and paying attention to these

defensive manoeuvres, can allow them to be thought about and better understood in service of

the individuals and systems in which EPs work (Kennedy et al., 2018).

1.6.2(Terminology(

Separation and divorce, for the purposes of this research, have been interpreted to mean when

children’s biological parents no longer identify as being in a relationship with each other. The

study honors the heterogeneity of experience and, therefore, these terms will be used

interchangeably throughout this paper.

1.7(Chapter(Summary(

This research aims to explore the experiences of children and young people whose parents have

separated or divorced. The national picture of divorce and separation is hard to be determined

given the number of parents who choose to cohabit, rather than marry. However, it is thought

that the number of children who experience this event is significant. Divorce impacts on a range

of outcomes for children including their academic, psychological and socioeconomic

development. Outcomes for children continue to be a focus nationally regarding their mental

health and wellbeing and recently children’s views are considered important in understanding

their perceptions of specific life events. However, there is still little research that explores their

views in relation to divorce or separation of their parents. The role of the EP, with regards to

their involvement in eliciting children’s views and working with families and systems, has been

highlighted; ensuring this research poses relevance. The position of the researcher has also been

introduced. Having introduced the topic being studied, a critical literature review will now

situate the study in existing UK-based literature.

2.(Literature(Review(

2.1(Chapter(Overview(

This chapter describes the systematic and comprehensive approach taken to reviewing the range

and quality of the literature in relation to children and young people’s experience of their

parents’ divorce or separation. The aims were to:

• Establish what is already known and enhance understanding of children and young

people’s experiences of divorce by describing the findings of previous research.

• Critically appraise relevant research; and

• Justify the aims, rationale, and research questions of the present study.

The findings are synthesised and reported in relation to addressing two literature review

questions:

1) What does existing research tell us about children and young people’s experience of their

parents’ divorce or separation?

2) How have children’s experience of their parents’ divorce or separation in the UK been

explored in existing research?

2.2(Search(Strategy(

A search of databases PsycINFO, SocINDEX and PEP Archive was carried out on 21/04/2018. It

was felt that these databases were appropriate and useful for this psychosocial study, as they

contained reputable British psychological and educational journals; key psychoanalytic and

sociology journals and were felt to meet the focus of this study by transcending the split that

often exists between psychology and sociology in research.

A second search was carried out on 16/08/2018 using the same search terms to identify any

additional studies. At this point SocINDEX database had been discontinued and was unable to be

included in this search. No additional studies were found. Education Source database was

searched in addition to the above databases, to ensure all possible relevant literature was

included in the final review. No new returns resulted from this database search.

A manual search of the two reputable Educational Psychology journals in the UK – 1)

Educational and Child Psychology and 2) Educational Psychology in Practice was carried out on

02/08/2018 from available issues published between 1991-2018. No relevant studies were

acquired from this. This is an interesting discovery considering the number of children and

young people affected by the divorce or separation of their parents’ and the role of EPs in

working with these children and their families.

Finally, considering the limitations of databases and aiming to get as broad a scope of the

literature on divorce and separation as possible, a search of papers published by The Joseph

Rowntree Foundation was carried out. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation is a reputable research

organisation that focuses on social change.

2.2.1(Search(Terms(

Pilot searches were carried out using the above databases to refine search terms and to ensure the

most useful terms were used in the final search to capture relevant literature. The thesaurus

function was used to identify relevant terms. The following terms were used to identify

literature, Boolean operators “AND” and “OR” truncations were used as necessary:

Children, young people, teenager, adolescent, young adult, youth, school children

Divorce, children of divorce, marriage breakdown, marriage dissolution, marital

separation, children of divorced parents, relationship termination

Experience, views, voice, lived experience

The above databases were searched individually using the above search terms. To identify papers

related to relevant populations age was used as a limiter; Age: childhood (birth-12 years), school

age (6-12 years) and adolescence (13-17 years).

Initial searches identified that the subject term ‘parental separation’ resulted in hits associated

with parental attachment and parent-child separation so it was decided to remove this from the

final search, having checked subject terms with the database thesaurus.

2.2.2(Inclusion(and(Exclusion(Criteria(

Inclusion and exclusion criteria were established in advance of conducting the searches to ensure

that the research selected was relevant and appropriate to the study (Table 1).

Table(1.(Inclusion(and(Exclusion(Criteria(

Inclusion Exclusion

Language: published in English

Position papers, editorials, book reviews

Empirical papers

Papers with a focus on a specific population e.g.

SEN

Peer reviewed

Papers that focus on others views or experiences

e.g. parent, teachers.

Research conducted in the UK

Papers looking to measure or evaluate the

efficacy of interventions e.g. court interventions,

mediation services

Literature that focuses on children and young

people’s experiences and views of divorce

Papers that focus on children’s experience of the

court process specifically e.g. children’s

experience of mediation or intervention

Literature that focuses on children of school age

4-18

Papers with a focus on outcome, correlational or

mediating factors of the impacts of divorce

Literature where the focus is a subject other than

divorce or separation

Research published before January 1991

UK papers were selected for relevance to the UK education system, in which Educational

Psychologists conduct their training and work, also due to the population and national divorce

statistics that have been commented upon in relation to this research. Research published after

January 1991 were included as this is when Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on

Rights of the Child was ratified by British government.

2.2.3(Search(Returns(

An initial search using the subject term ‘children of divorce’ was conducted using the above

databases and applying the chosen limiters, resulting in 28 papers. 18 papers were eliminated

based on the titles and abstracts (see Appendix 1 for excluded articles) and 2 were duplicates. At

this stage 7 articles were included.

Combined searches carried out on 21/04/2018 and 16/08/2018 resulted in 108 hits after

eliminating studies from outside of the UK. 96 papers were eliminated from reading titles and

abstracts and applying them to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. A further 11 studies were

duplicates. One additional study was included from this search. Two papers were also returned

from The Joseph Rowntree Foundation search. These final 10 papers were then read in full and

checked for quality (Appendix 2).

2.2.4(Critical(appraisal(

Papers were screened for quality using Walsh and Downe’s (2006) appraisal tool for qualitative

research (Appendix 3 & 4) . This tool was selected for its suitability to appraising qualitative

research and its inclusion of reflexivity in the appraisal criteria, an important component of

psychosocial research.

2.3(Review(of(Literature(

There is a dearth of research within the UK which looks at children’s experiences of their

parents’ divorce or separation. There were also no identified articles in two key UK EP journals

that looked at children’s experiences of divorce. The systematic literature review highlighted

that there has been an increase in research over the past 15-20 years looking at children’s

perspectives around the topic of divorce, in many western countries. However, a large proportion

of this research focuses on the court process linked with divorce and evaluations of mediating

interventions. Of the papers returned, sociologists and social workers authored eight of the

papers. Only one was authored by a psychologist indicating most divorce literature appears to be

carried out within the area of sociology and social care. This is not unexpected considering the

nature of social change associated with divorce and its focus on the family. However, it is

surprising that the presence of psychologists, especially EPs, within this domain appears to be

slim, considering their assumed regular contact with families and children who have or are

experiencing divorce or separation. Five of the papers found were based on research undertaken

through the same research centre, which may impact on the way the subject is addressed in the

literature, and the range of ontological and epistemological positions adopted.

The literature review revealed that children, parents and professionals have all participated, to

varying degrees in research around divorce and separation. This research intends to focus on

children’s experiences of divorce or separation, therefore, only papers with this focus have been

included. The papers including both child and parental experiences have been included;

however, priority is given to the findings that focus on children’s experiences. The next section

will present the identified papers in line with the literature review questions.

2.4(Researching(Children’s(Views(of(Divorce(and(Separation(

Broadly speaking, the research reviewed here can be broken into two overarching themes;

change and transition, linked closely to contact arrangements; and support and coping. Linking

these themes together is the theme of relationships. Whilst some of the papers focused primarily

on one of these areas, others reported on both.

The reviewed literature demonstrates a number of examples which explore the views of children

and young people who have experienced divorce or separation and feel they are best placed to

further understand the diversity of their experience of this process (Davies, 2015; Dowling &

Gorell-Barnes, 1999; Fawcett, 2000; Flowerdew & Neale, 2003; Neale, 2002; Neale &

Flowerdew, 2007; Smart, 2006; Wade & Smart, 2002). Dowling & Gorell-Barnes (1999),

acknowledge that it can be difficult for children to be heard when parents decide to divorce or

separate. It is reasoned that through children talking about how they perceive and experience

divorce that it is possible to detect what positons children themselves actively adopt (Smart,

2006). Several of the reviewed papers come from a sociological perspective whereby child

participation is considered alongside perspectives of welfare and citizenship (Fawcett, 2000;

Neale, 2002; Neale & Flowerdew, 2007; Wade & Smart, 2002). Changes in sociological

perspectives of children has promoted children as social agents, who are capable of thinking for

themselves and who are considered young citizens in their own right, entitled to recognition,

respect and participation (Neale & Flowerdew, 2007; Wade & Smart, 2002). These papers

propose a view of moving beyond seeing children as in need of care and protection, as suggested

by welfare paradigms, and instead integrating welfare and citizenship balancing ‘care with

respect, and protection with participation’ (Neale & Flowerdew, 2007, p. 27). By incorporating

children’s voices into research they have the possibility to be transformed from ‘invisible objects

of research inquiry to active research subjects with legitimate voices of their own’ (Neale &

Flowerdew, 2007, p. 27).

(

2.5(What(does(existing(research(say(about(children’s(experiences(of(divorce?(

2.5.1(Change(and(Transition(

Five papers centered their research around the aspect of change that occurs for children and

young people who experience divorce. Change and transition is conceptualised in different ways

by the authors and considers aspects of shared parenting, contact arrangements, contextual

changes, time and pace of change and management of change.

Flowerdew & Neale (2003) contest the notion of ‘multiple transitions’, suggesting that literature

in this area is limited to changes associated with parental re-partnering twice or several times

over. They aim to refine the notion of ‘multiple transitions’ and provide new insights into the

way young people manage change, through exploring young people’s perceptions and

understandings of the impact of changes, the pace and nature of change and the different

contexts in which changes occur (Flowerdew & Neale, 2003). Sixty young people aged 11-17,

from the north of England, living in post-divorce families, were contacted 3-4 years after their

involvement in two linked projects. The sample was balanced in terms of age, gender and social

background and they recruited from a variety of routes to avoid an exclusively legal or

therapeutic sample. Authors organised their discussion into four themes: ‘getting used to’ family

change; the management, pace and cumulative nature of change; the quality of relationships; and

divorce as an ‘everyday’ challenge. However, the limited information on the design and analysis

involved in the study makes it difficult to determine the quality of the analysis and recruitment

methods. Encouragingly, the authors mention paying attention to ethics of conducting research

with children. Findings suggested that stepfamily life brought economic benefits and that largely

positive experiences were reported by the participants. The study recognises some of the

difficulties children face when adjusting to stepfamily life including, moving home, dealing with

new stepparents, adapting to family routines and finances, coping with stepsiblings, and learning

to ‘share’ parents and domestic spaces.

Other findings from children’s experiences highlight a sense of loss at the transition from a lone

parent family back to a two-parent family, which authors suggest is afforded less recognition in

the literature. Children appeared to manage change and transition more positively when only one

parent re-partnered at any one time and found it harder when the pace of change was accelerated

and multiple transitions occurred in a short space of time. Conclusions suggest that divorce is an

everyday problem for some children, however, others continue to be preoccupied and perplexed

by experiences, suggesting the individuality and specifics of experience and its impact on coping

with change. It was noted that the management, timing and pace of change emerged as a critical

factor in how young people cope (Flowerdew & Neale, 2003). This study helpfully highlights

children’s experiences and uses extensive interview quotes to present children’s voices in

relation to coping with change and transition. However, in a bid to ‘decenter divorce’ and

highlight other potential important challenges in the lives of young people it fails to fully

acknowledge the full breadth of young people’s experiences. The researchers do not mention any

influence from researcher involvement and acknowledgment of reflexivity is missing

considerably in this study.

Dowling & Gorell-Barnes’s (1999) project aimed to support children to find a way to describe

their experience of divorce. The authors set out to determine the protective conditions which

were likely to make it possible for children to cope with the transition of divorce and separation.

They interviewed 10 families and children aged 5-14 years attending family therapy. The study

takes the form of individual case studies and a comprehensive description of data gathering is

provided, however, there is no discussion of how the data was managed or analysed. The study

does not select a homogenous sample, respecting the individuality of experience. However, it is

not clear how the researchers decided upon these 10 families other than they were referred for

family therapy. Surprisingly, given the therapeutic sample there is no mention of reflexivity from

the researchers. Children’s experiences involved changes to contact with the out of house parent

and contextual changes including moving to a new house, school, sharing a room, and adapting

to stepfamily life. A key narrative, was children having to manage and mediate relationships

with and between parents, often having to negotiate transition from one parent to another amid

quarrelling and discord. Children at times found themselves in ‘loyalty binds’, wanting to

maintain positive relationships with both parents and unsure or unable to share that they are

enjoying their time with the other parent. Dowling & Gorell-Barnes (1999) suggest that some

children do not have a coherent story of the marital breakup, leading to confusion and anger.

There were also reported developmental and gender differences; younger children may become

clingy and fear the other parent leaving, whereas older children may express their anxieties

through acting out or failing at school. Girls were more likely to suggest that parents should talk

to their children about what is going on whereas boys felt the children should just grin and bear

it. The paper concludes by highlighting the different clinical considerations that arise from

children who experience divorce and goals for a specific model in working with families going

through divorce. Due to the clinical nature, the generalisation to non-clinical samples is tentative.

Unlike Morrison (2015) and Trinder et al. (2002), where parents were also involved in the study,

Dowling & Gorrell-Barnes (1999) have chosen only to report on the children’s experience,

prioritising their subjective experiences.

Fawcett (2000) found findings consistent with above regarding the changes and transition that

children experience. Fawcett (2000) reported on the individual, unique and complex shifting

process, affecting children’s lives, which usually began before parents separated and continued

months and years after the marriage breakdown. This included emotional reactions; upset and

distress (anger, sadness, confusion and relief) and widespread practical and social changes such

as, house moves, school moves, living with different people, extra responsibilities and less

money. Fawcett interpreted a sense of both resilience and lingering sadness present for children

after the separation.

2.5.1.1%Shared%Parenting%

Children’s experience of shared parenting and contact arrangements were explored by four of the

studies (Davies, 2015; Morrison, 2015; Neale & Flowerdew, 2007; Trinder et al., 2002). The

studies present changes children face with regards to contact with their parents and associated

contextual changes, which may take several forms depending on the relationship between

parents.

Davies (2015) used a case study to present three siblings (aged 8-10) experiencing post-divorce

shared parenting arrangements. She explored whether the term ‘shared care families’ may better

conceptualise ‘shared parenting’ as it enables understanding of resources and different

individuals necessary to support ‘shared parenting’ arrangements. Children’s accounts were

generated from a school-based field study investigating their constructions and experiences of

family and close relationships, over 18 months. The study involved participant observation,

children’s drawings, family books, visits to children’s homes and two sets of paired interviews.

The family of children were recruited to take part based on their successful and consensual

shared parenting arrangements and their relatively well resourced financial circumstances. The

sample strategy for the original field study is not described and the reasons for selecting a

relatively well financially resourced family over the other shared parenting children is not

explained. The study provided a thorough description of its abductive approach to analysis and

how themes were derived. Themes generated were developed alongside existing themes from

research in family life and parenting, and combined with themes that emerged from the data.

Themes were ‘sibling relationships in shared family arrangements’; shared parenting: ‘fairness

for parents’; reciprocity of care; and equal share and equal care. Davies (2015) interpreted that

attributes of successful shared parenting arrangements were underpinned by shared cooperative

relationships and were socially and materially well resourced. The need for space was

emotionally important for children and this was highlighted as a difficulty to obtain when

families re-partner and introduce step- and half-siblings, limiting children’s opportunities for

peace, quiet and private space. Children’s views portrayed a principle of fairness and spending

equal time with both parents. Although, the children attached value to sharing equal time, it was

implicit in the children’s words that it was more important for parents. Additional factors were

parents living close enough to each other so children could attend the same school and the

involvement of grandparents and kin in the care of the children. Davies (2015) recommends that

shared parenting should be re-conceptualised as ‘Shared Care’. This is considered with

recognition to lower income families who are not materially or socially well-resourced. The

financial burden of shared care is noted and considered as reasons why fewer lower income

families go into consensual shared care arrangements. This study helpfully highlights some of

the factors which support shared parenting through the eyes of children. It applies this to socio-

economic status and places an argument for reconceptualisation of terminology to support those

without the means to adopt a parenting arrangement of this kind. However, the study could have

included the lower income families as means to demonstrate what works for them and therefore

the assumptions made regarding how this arrangement wouldn’t work for lower income families

is difficult to give much weight to.

Morrison (2015) focused on children’s and mothers’ experiences of contact when there has been

a history of domestic abuse. Morrison (2015) used participative research activities with 18

children aged 8-14, which included a ‘storyboard’, a pictorial vignette, and a ‘My Story’ activity

which encouraged children to map their experiences of contact onto paper. Sixteen mothers who

had experienced domestic abuse in Scotland were also interviewed and recruited from domestic

abuse support services in the voluntary and statutory sectors. The study reported that continued

abuse of women and children following parental separation was linked to contact arrangements.

Children’s contact with non-resident fathers often took place amongst an absence of parental

communication and cooperation. These left children responsible for navigating the complex and

charged dynamic of their parents’ relationship. Children reported finding their fathers reactions

to their mothers a fraught and frightening experience. They reported being in positions where

they were unable to speak about their mothers or they were used as messengers, having to pass

on information about changes to future contact arrangements or their mothers lives. Children

were often pulled into an adult role, mediating and negotiating between parents, and the quality

of relationship between parents affected the children’s contact arrangements. The study uses

previous research to support findings and provides clear details of the sample and research

design, which are suitable for the aims and purpose of the study. It also acknowledges the

difficulties of the research interview for children and employs visual prompts and activities to

make the interviews more engaging, with a view to diluting its intensity. However, despite aims

to include views of the children alongside their mothers, it focuses predominantly on stories and

events from the mothers’ accounts, demonstrating a dominance of the adult narrative over the

child’s narratives. This is acknowledged in other divorce literature, where adult views tend to

take precedence (Brand et al., 2017). The study highlights, like Flowerdew & Neale (2003), that

the quality of the relationship between parents is an important factor with regards to impact on

the child. This study also adds an alternative argument to the view that contact with both parents

may mediate the negative impacts of parental separation, acknowledging the ongoing relational

consequences of domestic abuse when considering children’s contact arrangements.

Trinder et al., (2002), looked at contact arrangements from the perspective of parents and

children. They aimed to examine how adults and children negotiate and experience contact, and

what makes contact work and not work. The authors, although not explicitly, allude to their

ontology by wanting to identify how each family member experienced the same arrangement and

were not intent on illuminating a ‘true’ account. Trinder et al., (2002) interviewed 140

individuals from 61 families, 57 of which were children. The sample aimed to include both

‘contested’ and ‘uncontested’ contact where half of the families recruited were private ordered

contact arrangements and the other half had a varying degree of involvement form lawyers and

courts. Like other studies in this review the sample included a predominantly white sample, with

an underrepresentation of different ethnicities and ethnic-minorities. Quality and quantity of

contact varied tremendously, with nine different types of contact arrangements being identified,

grouped into three themes; Consensual committed families were committed to regular contact

with low conflict; Faltering families had irregular or ceased contact; and Conflicted families had

disputes about the amount and form of contact.

Trinder et al,. (2002) found that contact places significant demands on both adults and children.

Problems identified by children were parental conflict, relationships with step parents,

establishing meaningful relationships with the contact parent and not being consulted about

contact. The authors show consideration of ethical issues, seeking informed consent, addressing

issues of confidentiality and employing a specialist interviewer to conduct the interviews with

children. However, like Morrison (2015), where adult perspectives have been sought alongside

children, adult voices and perspectives appear to dominate, meaning that children’s voices are

not fully heard in the study. The study helpfully addresses practical implications for families and

court services, highlighting the need for a wider range of services (e.g. therapeutic), to be

developed, as well as practical and realistic strategies for managing contact.

Neale and Flowerdew (2007) conducted a long-term study of children’s lives after divorce by

interviewing children at two points in time. The study focused on what it meant for children to

sustain a shared parenting arrangement over a period of time. The focus was on the mechanics

and structure of relationships as well as the quality of them. Neale and Flowerdew (2007) wanted

to move beyond the snapshot approach, to discern how children’s lives were unfolding and to

determine the amount and nature of changes. The study used the same cohort of participants that

were used in Flowerdew & Neale’s (2003) study, following up 60 participants aged 11-17 from

an original study. A new sample of children were also included, who were living in shared

residence arrangements. It is difficult to determine the process by which this study selected its

participants as the sampling strategy is not made clear. The final analysis focuses on 4

participants and again it is not alluded to how this decision was made. Therefore, despite the in-

depth representation of children’s experience it could be questioned why this sample size was

selected. The study takes on a sociological perspective and views children as young citizens who

are entitled to respect and participation. Children were divided between those based in one home

with their residential parent, with varying levels of contact with their non-residential parent and

those living across two homes, i.e. being shared between their parents. The authors wished to

chart what has come to be seen as a relatively conventional arrangement with a more novel and

experimental arrangement that necessitates packing up and moving back and forth every few

days. The study acknowledges that some children may not view themselves as having one home

even though they would be categorized that way for this study and therefore re-categorizes

children in a way that may not fit their subjective experience. This aim appears to be

disconnected with the views of the study where the authors see children through the lens of their

citizenship, recognising their need for recognition, respect and participation and respecting their

experiences and agency. Neale & Flowerdew (2007) reported that shared arrangements were

sometimes found to be inflexible and challenging for young people, where young people were

sometimes under emotional pressure to maintain high levels of contact and keep things fair for

their parents. This could lead to the children finding it difficult to exercise their autonomy or

choice. It was discussed that shared residence could work well when it was based on consensus

and good quality relationships and where the needs of the children were a priority and the

arrangement was viewed flexibly. Children in ‘one home’ arrangements demonstrated that

relationships with the out of home parent were sustained when the relationship was valued and

enriching for the young people. When the relationship was challenging contact was likely to

diminish. The study concludes from the four case studies that it is the importance of the

relationship not the mechanics of the relationship that matter when it comes to sustaining contact

in separated families. Good contact is not based on quantity but on good quality relationships.

Inter-parental conflict was found to impact young people’s lives in Fawcett’s (2000) study,

before and after separation. Few adults were able to establish cooperative parenting and contact

was found to not always reflect a quality relationship, as reported by the other studies in this

review (Trinder et al., 2002; Flowerdew & Neale, 2003; Neale & Flowerdew, 2007; Morrison,

2015).

Overall, these studies present the perspectives of children experiencing shared parenting

arrangements and comment that children experience several changes both with their contact with

parents and contextually when their parents separate or divorce. Several different post-divorce or

separation configurations may form, however, it is the general view that it is the quality of the

relationships that matter to children and enable a more fluid transition, than the quantity of

contact.

2.5.2(Children’s(Narratives(and(Positioning(

Smart (2006) explores children’s narratives of post-divorce family life to show how children

position themselves in relation to family change, their abilities to be reflexive and the extent they

can generalise from their experience to broader ethical evaluations of family life. The study

recruited 60 participants from an earlier study and appears to use the same cohort of participants

as Neale and Flowerdew (2007) and Flowerdew and Neale (2003). This suggests that the breadth

of experience portrayed in this review is limited and participant views may have been influenced

through their involvement in other studies. All participants were ethnically white and lived in the

north of England and the experience of children from different cultures and background is

missed. The reflexivity of participants is acknowledged by the author who shares that this level

of reflexivity may not have occurred on its own and may have impacted the participants’

positioning and presentation of their narratives. This study also notes the role of the researcher in

the co-production of narratives, acknowledging how the use of questions and vignettes would

have encouraged the children to produce accounts. This mention of reflexivity is brief and the

nature of the study suggests further reflexivity from the researcher could be warranted, including

how the study impacts on the researcher. The study grouped the stories according to the different

structures families took post-divorce and their emotional content. Detail is given of how these

organising principles are arrived at, however, not much else is provided about the methodology.

It was found that children’s stories of post-divorce family life included stories of coping,

surviving and personal growth, through to stories of blame, victimisation, loneliness,

unspeakable pain, confusion and withdrawal. The author suggests that the narratives chosen are

part of constructing a past which helps to shape the kind of person they believe themselves to be.

Smart (2006) highlights that these narratives are multilayered, revealing ambivalence and

contradictions. The study also describes how some participants with unhappy accounts were

unable to provide full accounts and had difficulty explaining or elaborating on events, whereas

children who gave contented accounts were able to stand back from their ‘experience of divorce

and position themselves as survivors’. Furthermore, the study found that many of the children

had well developed ethical dispositions on how parents should treat each other, and how they

should behave towards their children indicating they were generalising from their own

experience and connecting their accounts into potentially socially relevant ethical dispositions.

The study is one of a few pieces of research that attempts to capture children’s stories around

their parents’ divorce and speaks to the complexity of their multi-layered accounts, however the

lack of information regarding the methodology and participants makes it difficult to draw valid

conclusions from this research.

2.5.3(Decision(Making(and(Autonomy(

One paper addresses children’s agency within their families and how they influence and actively

contribute to family life (Neale, 2002). Neale (2002) in her study on children’s experiences,

agency and reflections on support, carried out in-depth interviews with a sample of 117 young

people, living in a variety of post-divorce/separation arrangements. This included focusing on

children’s participation and choice within their families and their reflections on different sources

of support or advocacy. This sample also appears similar to that used in other studies presented

in this review (Flowerdew & Neale, 2003; Neale & Flowerdew, 2007; Smart, 2006), however,

due to limited information on the sample and methodology, it is difficult to be certain about the

nature of the participants and draw conclusions on the quality of this research. The young people

in the study regarded meaningful conversation as a crucial ingredient of family life. Being part of

a ‘proper family meant being able to talk to others and be listened to, trust and be trusted and be

treated as a person in one’s own right’. Similarly, to Dowling & Gorrell-Barnes (1999),

Morrison (2015), and Neale and Flowerdew (2007), children wanted their parents to manage

their relationships in ways that did not implicate them or force them to take sides. Relationship

quality was deemed, by some, to be supported by open communication and shared

understanding. Older children in the study attached more importance to their autonomy when it

came to decisions about their personal lives. However, where decisions affected other family

members, such as contact and residence, young people valued a more democratic process of

decision making. Unfortunately, the study doesn’t demonstrate any sensitivity towards ethical

concerns within the recruitment or management of the study. However, the core considerations

of the study highlight consideration of equality and children’s rights and welfare when it comes

to participating in family law, and promoting children’s voices rather than marginalising them.

2.5.4(Support(and(Coping(

Four of the studies reviewed, consider children’s experiences of formal and informal support

they received during the divorce process, what they found to be the most useful, and coping

strategies that they employed. Coping strategies included remaining informed, maintaining

contact with parents and opportunities to express their emotions.

Wade & Smart (2002), explored children’s, aged 4-10, preferred means of support. They used a

combination of focus groups and individual interviews and considered the complexity and

variety of experience, which is apparent in the way the data is collected. Children from four

schools, from a variety of social backgrounds were included in the study. Focus groups included

children with separated parents and those who had not experienced separation or divorce.

Children who had experienced separation or divorce were then interviewed separately. Although

the study considers the variation of family structure by not limiting to ‘divorced’ parents and

including those who are ‘separated’, it is unclear why children who had not experienced this

family transition were included in focus groups. It is possible that their inclusion in the group

may have influenced what the children of divorce or separation may have spoken about.

Findings indicate that there are many similarities in what children find helpful when parents

separate. Children wish to maintain as much normality as possible but value having someone

whom they can trust and confide in. Children are discriminating in the help they accept, with

family members and friends being children’s most accessible sources of support when parents

are not available to help. Children’s acceptance of support is based highly on the trustworthiness,

empathy, kindness and cheerfulness of their informal confident, and similar qualities are valued

when children encounter outside agencies. Despite rich description of the data collected and the

inferences drawn there is no description of data analysis methods. However, there is evidence of

time spent drawing similarities and differences together. Interview methods included the use of

drawings and example vignettes of typical dilemmas, to help children move away from their own

experiences. This may have served as a protective factor against some of the more difficult

experiences, but equally may mean that the in-depth experiences of the children may have been

missed. The paper provides rich detail on the areas of divorce, including coping and support,

relevant through the children's eyes and increases understanding of children's perspectives

around this phenomenon, demonstrating the importance of understanding children’s perspectives

and using this to develop interventions and policies. This is one of two qualitative studies which

mentions the role of the researcher and demonstrates some reflexivity about the subjectivity of

interpretation of the data. However, this is not alluded to in the presentation of findings. Ethical

complexities around children who want to participate but are not given consent from their

parents is also addressed.

Fawcett (2000) explored 37 young people’s, aged 12-18, experiences of the divorce process and

help provided by family, friends and professionals. The sample were recruited from a

counselling service, youth leaders, teachers and church groups in Northern Ireland. Although the

sample reflected many characteristics of the population from which it was drawn, like other

studies in the review, it had no participants from ethnic minority backgrounds. Fawcett (2000)

describes some of the methodology and approach to analysis and it is clear how coding systems

were arrived at. There appeared to be both an inductive and deductive approach to analysis, with

some categories emerging directly from the data and others being led by concepts apparent in the

literature. The study does not acknowledge the influence of prior interests of the researcher or

previous literature in the analysis of the data and how this may contribute to the themes derived.

The study presented some of its findings using a case study for one of the participants, other

extracts used were not clear about which participant they were from. Although findings were

supported well by other literature, individual participant experience is lost through being

grouped into themes. Findings from children express that the separation process was a lengthy

one, frequently underpinned by narratives of acrimony and violence. Extended family and peers

were found to be important sources of support; however, there was little evidence of productive

alliances with siblings. Those who had received specialist counselling services were positive

about their experience, however, experiences of other services including school and social

workers were more mixed. Aspects of what was helpful from siblings and extended family

members was being reassured, being given advice, emotional support, talking and being

comforted. Loyalty to parents reportedly prevented some young people from seeking support

outside the family, however a large proportion of the participants reported talking to friends as a

means of support. Age, gender, social attitudes towards speaking about divorce outside the

family, and shifts in extended family networks, were all found to be factors that influenced the

availability of social support from siblings, relatives and friends. Children identified a range of

problems they were experiencing including emotional, behavioural, family and school related

difficulties, however they were not aware of any support available for them. If children were to

talk to someone outside of the family, they needed someone helpful, who would listen,

understand and keep things confidential. The key factor in whether the young person made use

of the help offered was the quality of the relationship. The study also concluded with what young

people need following separation, which included opportunities to talk about the separation and

express their feelings and opinions, and reassurance that their experiences and feelings are

normal. They also needed the right not to be caught in the middle of parental conflict and more

information about available services and support, as well as the right to choose and say no to

outside agencies. Young people made suggestions for practice, which were in line with others

identified in previous research, emphasising the need for a service ethos that is non-stigmatising

and gives young people respect and choice.

Several clinical considerations were identified by Dowling & Gorell-Barnes (1999) which

stipulate what children need to cope with their parent’s divorce. They summarised children need

a coherent story, help to find an explanation of what happened, contact with both parents, clarity

about their contact arrangements and to be free of guilt about spending and enjoying their time

with each parent, and opportunity and support to express difficult feelings.

Neale (2002) also report on children’s preferred sources of support, adding further to our

understanding of what children need and want after the breakdown of their parents’ relationship.

Children preferred to keep family problems within the family or use informal sources of support

such as kin or friends and peer support schemes. Professional involvement, where the child has

been referred without choice, were seen as interventions rather than support and therapeutic and

legal services were seen as less than complementary. Neale (2002) argued that what is right for

one child is not necessarily right for another and services should consider their different

circumstances, rather than adopting a blanket welfare approach.

Overall these studies demonstrated that when seeking support around their parents’ divorce or

separation children want someone they can trust and confide in. This predominantly appears to

come from friends and extended family, with other sources of formal support being less likely

due to loyalty to parents and uncertainty about taking this outside the family. If children were to

talk to someone outside of the family, they needed someone helpful, who would listen,

understand and keep things confidential. Ultimately it is the relationships with these people that

establishes the likeliness children will turn to them for support and whether they are capable of

being non-judgmental and able to respond with empathy and kindness.

2.5.5(Importance(of(Relationships(

Most of the young people reported on the quality and importance of relationships with their

parents and between their parents. Children and young people reported more positive

experiences when conflict between their parents was kept to a minimum. Contact between

children and their parents was influenced by the quality of the relationship, e.g. good lines of

communication, rather than the amount of time spent in contact. A key indicator of a child

engaging in both formal and informal support was also influenced by the quality of the

relationship between the child and the other individual.

Flowerdew & Neale (2003) reported that the quality of relationships, including good lines of

communication and non-conflictual relationships between parents, led children to have more

resources to cope with change. However, high levels of conflict both pre-and post-divorce posed

challenges for children’s abilities to cope with change. Similarly, Morrison (2015) highlighted

how acrimonious relationships between parents and absence of communication, left children to

navigate the emotionally charged dynamics of their parents’ relationships.

Like Flowerdew and Neale (2003), Trinder et al., (2003) found that it is the quality of

relationships over the amount of contact that was important in making contact work. Quality and

quantity of contact were determined by a range of factors, with high quality contact requiring

ongoing dedicated efforts to make it work, not just the absence of major problems between

parents. Neale and Flowerdew (2007) also conclude that it is the importance of the relationship

not the mechanics of the relationship that matter when it comes to sustaining contact in separated

families. They summarised that good contact is not based on quantity but on good quality

relationships.

Neale (2002) identified that relationship quality was deemed to be supported by open

communication and shared understanding. This was extended beyond the parent-parent and

parent-child relationship by Fawcett (2000) to include the relationships with those who are

offering support, for example, siblings, extended family, friends and professionals. They found

that children needed someone helpful, who would listen, understand and keep things

confidential. The key factor in whether the young person made use of the help offered was the

quality of the relationship.

Overall, the studies that reported on the importance of relationships for children going through

the process of divorce focused on relationships between parents, relationship between parent and

child and relationship between child and support giver. The quality of the relationship between a

child and their parent impacted on the amount and sustainability of contact they had after

divorce. Where there were good lines of communication and shared understanding, the quality

and quantity of contact remained high. When relationships between parents were acrimonious

and testing, this influenced the children’s ability to cope with post-divorce challenges and

transitions, and they sometimes found themselves as mediators between parents. Furthermore,

relationships with siblings, extended family, friends or professionals were found to be supportive

based on the quality of the relationship and the level in which children found that person helpful

and understanding.

2.5.6(The(Role(of(School(

Only two of the studies in the review reported about the role, impact or importance of school for

children when experiencing the divorce or separation of their parents (Dowling & Gorrell-

Barnes, 1999; Fawcett, 2000). Fawcett (2000) reports verbatim interview extracts of a boy

plagued by thoughts, who found it difficult to concentrate and regulate his attention in school.

All the young people interviewed in this study reported school related difficulties. However,

there was no evidence of specialist school-based interventions targeting young people affected

by divorce, even though 70% of the sample indicated that separation had a negative impact on

their school work and behaviour. Young people had mixed views of support offered from school

staff, with 52% reporting negative engagement and views of mistrust and insensitive or punitive

responses. Those who reported teacher support in a positive light reported that the teachers were

liked and respected and they offered support with problems they experienced with class work.

Dowling & Gorell-Barnes (1999) refer to one child in their case studies who was referred for

difficulties adjusting to school and conclude with how her relationship with school improved

post therapy. They also report that school can be a safe place which provides a continuity at time

of change. They share that it is important for school staff to remain connected with both parents.

However, like Fawcett (2000) they found that students found it difficult to confide in teachers, in

relation to their parents’ separation. Teachers can be helpful in normalising the situation but they

depend on information being shared with them about issues that impact on the children’s daily

lives e.g. contact arrangements.

Cox and Desforges (1987) suggested that in order to teach children effectively, attention must be

paid to what is happening in their lives outside of school. They postulate that schools are in a

unique position to help children when their parents separate. They propose a range of specific

strategies schools and teachers can employ to support children when their parents separate.

These include developing a policy, sensitive consideration of the school organisation, keeping

records, counselling, involving both parents, providing practical help and providing relevant

reading material.

Cox and Desforges (1987) suggest that developing a school policy for divorce sensitises the

school to the importance of divorce and legitimises this as an area of activity for them. They

suggest staff need to acquaint themselves with the school policy for dealing with separation or

divorce and know what is expected of them. Parents should be informed at the outset of contact

that the school would like to be informed if the child experiences major disruption to their home

life, including parental separation. It is suggested that schools consider their organisation in

order to ensure it does not add to pupils’ distress, for example, providing children with

opportunities to build supportive, trusting relationships with teachers and peers, through

minimising the amount of transitions within a school day. Teachers are also advised to use their

pastoral capacity to provide children with extra care and support during these times. The range

of family compositions are also considered and it is suggested that schools make attempts to

meet the needs of both parents, who may be available at different times. Schools are advised to

consider their practices and procedures for record keeping and they should ensure that all

relevant facts about a pupil’s family life are recorded and updated as necessary, for example, the

names and addresses of both parents, step-parents and access and custody arrangements. Cox

and Desforges (1987) also suggest that teachers require basic counselling skills which they can

use to support parents and children who are experiencing divorce or separation. This includes

providing space for the child to share, employing active listening skills and being non-

judgemental. Cox and Desforges (1987) suggest teachers should also receive personal group or

individual support in these cases and that Educational Psychologists can provide a supportive

and consultative role at these times. Both parents should be given opportunities to remain

involved in the development and education of their children. Schools can support this by

continuing to involve the absent parent and making parental involvement easier, for example, by

inviting both parents to parents’ evenings and sending letters, reports and other information to

both parents. Finally, schools can provide practical help to children and parents going through

divorce or separation. School staff may be in a position where they can make considerations for

the child whose parents are experiencing their own distress by offering some extra attention and

reassurance or ensuring that spare equipment for timetabled and extracurricular activities is

available for children whose homes may be in physical or mental turmoil. Additionally,

providing a space for children to leave overnight bags or to do homework in a calm environment

so they can continue to achieve in their school work, can support children who have to move

between their parent’s homes. Schools are also advised to ensure they have access to reading

material that features families who are separated or divorced in order to demonstrate their

acceptance of this family arrangement and provide opportunities for discussion and further

understanding (Cox & Desforges, 1987).

2.5.7(Summary(of(Literature(Review(Question:(What(does(existing(research(tell(us(about(

children’s(experiences(of(divorce?(

The review of existing literature demonstrated that children’s experiences of divorce are varied

and individual, with some children demonstrating resilience and coping, and other children

reporting lingering sadness, continual preoccupation and stories of blame, victimisation and

extreme pain. Some of the difficulties reported by children included emotional, behavioural and

school related problems. Other studies found children to report predominantly positive

experiences including economic benefits.

Children experienced several changes as a consequence of divorce including practical and social

changes e.g. moving to a new house, introduction of step families and changes to contact with

their parents, however, coping with these changes appeared to be impacted upon by the pace,

timing and management of these changes.

The quality of relationships was found to be the most reported factor by children that minimised

upset and supported contact relationships, both between parents and parent and child. Children

sometimes found themselves having to manage and mediate relationships between parents and in

fear of upsetting one parent over another. The quality of relationships and amount of contact was

found to vary significantly across families, however it worked better when children remained the

priority, and it was supported by open communication and shared understanding.

Children were happy to adopt control over decision making regarding their personal lives,

however, with decisions which affected the family, children preferred a more diplomatic process

of decision making. Children found friends and extended family were the most accessible forms

of support and they valued someone they could trust and confide in. Children tended to rely on

external sources of support less, however a key factor determining whether young people made

use of the external support was the relationship. To cope, children needed opportunities to talk

about the separation and express their feelings, support to normalise what they were

experiencing and the right to not be caught in the middle of parental conflict. As well as the right

to know about and choose whether they wanted involvement from outside agencies.

School was found to provide some continuity in a time of change; however, children did not use

or did not value support that was offered by teachers, despite many children reporting school

related difficulties as a consequence of divorce. This was also an under reported area in the

research. Educational psychologists are well placed to support schools with helping children who

are going through divorce or separation as well as working with parents and children who may

be experiencing difficulties in this area.

2.6(How(have(children’s(experiences(of(their(parents’(divorce(or(separation(in(the(UK(

been(explored(in(existing(research?(

To situate this current research in the existing body of research, I will now explore how

children’s experiences of divorce have been gathered in previous research. I will draw on the

methodologies used and focus on any evidence of reflexivity or reference to psychosocial

processes e.g. the acknowledgment of unconscious dynamics.

The UK studies identified in this review were all qualitative designs and they all incorporated

interviews of some kind into their approach to gathering data. However, the quality of the

reporting of these methods varied, with some studies only partially describing their approach to

sampling, data collection and analysis. Several of the studies recruited legal or clinical samples,

which is something the present study wishes to broaden by recruiting from parent and child

interest through schools.

A thorough search of the UK literature only identified 10 UK studies exploring children’s

experiences of divorce. None of these studies were carried out by Educational Psychologists,

highlighting a dearth of practitioner research in this area. Subsequently, four of the studies

identified utilised the same sample of children for their research. This questions the diversity of

experience that is presented and suggests the need for further research utilising different children

and young people. Only one study (Smart, 2006) appears to elicit children’s narratives not using

preconceived agendas and questions, however this was difficult to determine due to the lack of

information provided regarding the methodology. There was limited reflexivity expressed by the

researchers in these studies with a brief mention of co-production of narratives and researcher

influence on the interpretation of themes. This situates the present research well within the

existing research to address unconscious processes present in the subjects of the research and in

the researcher, when exploring children’s experiences of divorce.

Participants ranged from 4-22 years, with many papers focusing on the older, adolescent age

range, although a significant proportion also interview primary age children. However, due to the

numbers of participants involved in each study, in depth emotional experience of these children

tends to be missed. All studies recruited predominantly white British participants, one paper

included one family of Asian heritage and one from Chinese heritage, two reported including

families from a range of cultures, ethnicities and religions and another include 3 non-white

families alongside 52 white families. Three did not mention the ethnicities of their participants.

This suggests that the experiences of children from different ethnicities and cultures are

underrepresented in this body of research and suggests further research with this group of

children is warranted. The views of this group of children are equally valid and necessary in

order to inform our understanding of their experiences of this event.

Interestingly, the papers reviewed here focused predominantly on the procedural events

associated with divorce. There appeared to be a limited focus on the emotional aspects of divorce

or why children chose to talk about what they did. This present study hopes to address this by

moving beyond the conscious reported experience by focusing as well on the unconscious,

individual and social processes involved in the way children talk about and respond to their

experience.

It is important to note that even by reviewing the literature involving children’s experience we

risk marginalising their voices further by reporting on the findings of adult researchers, who

interpret their voices with their own lens, influenced by both conscious and unconscious

processes, which in turn influence their selection and presentation of participant voices.

This study hopes to address this by acknowledging the role of the researcher and unconscious

dynamics that influence the interview dynamic. Through applying a psychoanalytic lens to the

data, it will aim to present findings with consideration of what has been attended to and why.

2.6.1(Psychosocial(perspectives(

The aim of this section is to explore evidence of psychosocial processes, within the identified

literature, as defined by Hollway & Jefferson (2013). This perspective argues that research

subject’s inner worlds cannot be fully understood without knowledge of their experiences in the

world and whose experiences in the world cannot be fully understood without knowledge of the

way their inner worlds allow them to experience the outer world (Hollway & Jefferson, 2013).

Both subjects and researchers are seen as defended and influenced by prior experiences, which

influence the subject’s motivations and beliefs as well as the researcher’s choice of method,

questions and approach to analysis.

Only two studies in this review included reference to researcher reflexivity, referring to the role

of the researcher in eliciting narratives (Smart, 2006) and in their interpretation of the data

(Wade & Smart, 2002). No studies directly analyse or refer to unconscious processes, however

attention to the language of some of the studies indicate that some researchers may be aware of

unconscious processes surrounding children’s narratives of divorce. For example, Dowling &

Gorell-Barnes (1999), give consideration that time alone with children does not mean they will

share everything, ‘seeing children on their own does not mean that this context sets them free to

speak about the most worrying aspects of their life’ p. 43, assuming that inner processes may

influence the motivations of children in these contexts. Dowling and Gorrell (1999) also make

allusions to children adopting Klein’s (1975) depressive and paranoid-schizoid positions, as

defined in her Object Relations theory, in their abilities to hold onto good parts of their fathers or

view their mothers as all good and their fathers as all bad, suggesting that unconscious defences

may be present in children’s narratives of divorce.

Smart (2006) suggests narratives chosen are part of building a past which helps to shape the kind

of person participants believe themselves to be and Neale and Flowerdew (2007) comment that

children’s pasts and projected futures play a significant part in shaping their lives in the here and

now. Here the authors appear to be acknowledging the individual’s biographies and their

investments in divorce discourses i.e. their individual ‘desires and anxieties, probably not

conscious or intentional, which motivate the specific positions they take up and the selection of

accounts through which they portray themselves’ (Hollway & Jefferson, 2013, p.14).

Smart (2006) further alludes to unconscious dynamics by referring to the narratives as

multilayered, revealing ambivalence and contradictions. She also describes how some

participants with unhappy accounts were unable to provide full accounts and had difficulty

explaining or elaborating on events, whereas those who provided contented accounts were able

to stand back from their experience. Smart (2006) appears to allude to the possibility of a

defended subject whereby participants are unable to put themselves in an objective position and

how anxieties are defended against, through avoiding reflection on experience, protecting the

internal self.

Recognition of psychosocial processes or unconscious dynamics are not explicitly alluded to in

any of the reviewed literature. However, some of the language used in three of the papers

suggests that children’s presentation of their experiences is not a simple, conscious process.

Employing a psychosocial critique, it can be suggested that individual and social factors can

affect and influence the way individuals (children, professionals, researchers) talk about and

respond to divorce and separation. The research currently available has not appeared to allow for

a full exploration of these processes and paves the way for the present study.

(

2.7(Rationale((

EPs are well positioned to engage in practitioner research into experiences of divorce and

separation drawing on their familiarity with both research design and evidence informed

practice. Further research in this area is likely to be relevant and useful, due to the prevalence of

divorce and number of children who are likely to experience the breakdown of their parent’s

relationships, suggesting many EPs will be engaged in casework where divorce or separation has

occurred, either directly or indirectly influenced by divorce or separation.

The literature review also shows that children’s experiences of divorce are multi-faceted and

diverse, however the current research has not allowed for a full exploration of the individual

psychological and social factors that affect the way children talk about their experiences of

divorce. This current study intends to use a psychosocial methodology to explore children’s

experience of their parents’ divorce or separation that acknowledges the interaction of social and

psychological processes affecting how participants respond. It will explore the conscious and

unconscious processes which may influence what participants say, how the researcher responds

and the relational dynamics inherent in the interview process. It aims to adopt an approach that

honors what children choose to talk about and follows their narratives around divorce, rather

than imposing a conscious predetermined agenda on the data that is elicited.

(

3.(Methodology(

(

3.1(Chapter(Overview(

This chapter starts with defining the research question, aims and purpose before outlining the

ontological and epistemological position of this psychosocial research. The research design and

methods are described, detailing the procedures used to recruit participants and methods of data

collection. The method of data analysis is presented followed by a discussion of trustworthiness,

reliability and ethical considerations.

3.2(Research(Question(

This study aims to address the following questions:

• How do children experience their parents’ divorce or separation?

• What can be understood about participants experience of divorce or separation from a

psychosocial perspective?

(

The research questions for this study have been kept broad to allow for an exploration of what

children choose to talk about in interviews using free associative methods and with the intention

of trying to understand children’s experiences ‘through their own meaning frame’ (Hollway and

Jefferson, 2013). A more specific question may have contributed to shaping what children talk

about or induced me to apply my own biases or assumptions about experiences of divorce or

separation.

(

3.3(Research(Purpose(

3.3.1(Exploratory(

This study has an exploratory purpose. As discussed in Chapter 2, at present there is a dearth of

research that privileges child voice, from a psychological perspective, on the topic of divorce or

separation. The purpose of this research was to explore in depth what children and young people

talk about in relation to their parents’ divorce or separation. The exploratory purpose is

appropriate for this research as I do not hold any specific hypotheses about what themes or

narratives may emerge. The hypothesis rests on the belief that there are psychosocial processes

related to children and young people’s experience of divorce or separation that can be

illuminated through the research process.

3.4(Research(Aim(

This research aims to contribute to the research around divorce in a way that considers the

child’s social and individual history by focusing on their experience, from a psychosocial

perspective. This research aims to build on previous research into children’s experiences of

divorce by enhancing understanding of children’s subjective experience through the research

process, with a view that knowledge and insight generated by the study may then inform EP

practice and intervention as well as other professionals supporting these children and families. It

is hoped that increased awareness and understanding could be used by EPs in their approach to

working with children or young people who have experienced the separation of their parents,

through informing their assessment, formulation and hypothesis generation.

3.5(Ontology(and(Epistemology((

How a researcher views the status of truth and knowledge in the real world determines their

ontological position. Epistemology is how the researcher plans to find out about that world. A

researcher’s ontological and epistemological positions are linked, where acknowledgement of a

view about the nature of reality ultimately influences views on how that nature of reality can be

known (Moore, 2005). Application of theoretical lenses can also allow the information to be

viewed according to a theory or framework (Creswell, 2009).

3.5.1(Psychosocial(Ontology(

This research is based on a psychosocial ontology. The postmodern psychosocial perspective

poses a radical challenge to the positivist idea of scientific knowledge which views true reality as

perceivable and independent of the observer. A psychosocial ontology is considerate of a

reflective process and a co-created social reality that is in relatedness to other agents (Clarke &

Hoggett, 2009). This is suggestive of both an individual psychic and social reality, which are

interdependent and as such have an influence on the other, shaping an individual’s psychological

and social reality. This interactive and intersubjective process is unique to each individual and

their social and cultural context. Therefore, espousing a reality that is a unique product of an

individual psychological and social world and shared social world.

Furthermore, this ontological stance pays particular attention to the role of the researcher and

their influence on both the generation of research data and construction of the research

environment and the interpretations of data (Clarke & Hoggett, 2009). This research takes into

consideration my own unique psychic reality, social reality, and embodiment of these and how

these influence the different stages of the research process including the research topic, the

research encounter with participants, what I attend to or miss, and the interpretations and

analysis of the data.

3.5.2(Psychosocial(Epistemology(

Psychosocial ontology lends itself to a psychosocial epistemology, which is applied in this

research. This epistemology enhances and extends the dimension of knowledge production with

a focus on the projective dynamics of the researcher-researched relationship with the intent to

provide a deeper understanding of a phenomenon (Clarke & Hoggett, 2009). Psychosocial

research adopts the assumption that, through interacting with participants and empathically

listening to their expression of experience, an increased understanding can be achieved (Clarke

& Hoggett, 2009). Hollway (2015) acknowledges the unison between methodology and

epistemology of the psychosocial approach. When a researcher chooses to learn or ‘know’ about

a participant’s experience, they come to ‘know’ through their interaction/relation with the

participant in their own world, which provides the means through which meaning is made

(Hollway, 2015). Psychoanalysis is the theoretical basis which aids the psychosocial approach,

complementing understanding of a participant’s experience through attention on the affect or

emotion in uncognised knowing.

This form of ‘knowing’ provides an important means through which to make sense of data

elicited and signals the importance of the role of the dynamic unconscious, which Bion

postulates as knowledge in its earliest form. In the earliest form of communication between

mother and infant, the mother is able to contain her infants indigestible emotional experience,

process it and return it to the infant in a digestible form. These non-lexical and pre-symbolic

forms of communication, thought to continue beyond the mother-infant dyad, inform researcher

knowing and require awareness and deciphering of our affective and embodied responses.

The psychosocial epistemological stance taken in this research goes beyond a view of a

cognitive, conscious and rational process of meaning production, requiring attention to non-

lexical and embodied forms of communication. Psychosocial approaches provide a model for

noticing and thinking about the dynamic research encounter and the impact of the researcher on

the participants and the participants on the researcher, and how this influences the data that is

produced. Given divorce is a social phenomenon, with different cultural influences, through

which children experience significant changes and transitions, this affect based way of knowing

is a suitable means to exploring and obtaining insight into the lived experiences of divorce from

the child’s perspective. Furthermore, EP practice relates to gaining a holistic understanding of

how something comes to be so, focusing on both individual and systemic strengths and barriers,

which is in line with the individual/psychological and social/cultural emphasis in psychosocial

research.

3.6(Methodology(

3.6.1(Qualitative(Methodology(

This research aims to gain rich, detailed information about children’s experience of their parents’

separation. Qualitative methods which allow participants to make sense of their lives through

their own words can provide in-depth insight into complex psychological and interpersonal

processes (Creswell, 2009). Qualitative approaches are suitable for an exploratory approach,

employing methods which can capture lived experiences of research participants (Creswell,

2009; Povee & Roberts, 2014).

The existing studies in chapter 2, which explore children’s experience of divorce in the UK have

also applied qualitative designs. However, these were the only retrievable studies that focused on

children’s experience of divorce in the UK, suggesting the scarcity of research in this area.

Furthermore, the studies presented were limited in their diversity of recruitment procedures and

some were lacking in quality, rigour and focus. These studies focused predominantly on

procedural aspects of divorce and many did not capture the affect or emotional experience of the

participants through key events or experiences. Therefore, employing a qualitative methodology

which utilises psychoanalytic methods presents possibilities for exploring processes that include

both the inner and outer worlds of the participant and the contribution of unconscious feelings,

desires and affects (Watts & Stenner, 2012). Qualitative methodology is therefore appropriate for

my purpose to explore in depth what participants talk about when asked about their experience

of their parents’ divorce or separation, including individual, relational, and social aspects of their

stories. I will now describe the suitability of the psychosocial method used for data collection.

3.6.2(Psychosocial(Research(

The emergent field of psychosocial research is becoming more established and acknowledged as

a viable approach within social sciences and has marked a change in social science research.

Previously, there was a shared assumption that there existed an objective separation between

observer and observed (Clarke & Hoggett, 2009). Hollway (2015) proposed that the

psychosocial approach attempts to overcome the split between the “individual” and “society” by

utilising psychoanalytic theory and thinking to address both what is accessible through

discourses and those residing in unthought modes, that which is unconscious, preconscious and

embodied. Clarke & Hoggett (2009) argue that the psychosocial approach towards social

research can be viewed as a cluster of methodologies which position the subject(s) of study in a

particular way, namely ‘considering the unconscious communications, dynamics and defences

that exist in the research environment’ (Clarke & Hoggett, 2009, p 2-3).

Psychosocial approaches are informed by psychoanalytic theory. I believe that by employing a

psychosocial approach to understanding children’s experience of divorce, rich, in-depth data

may be gained which offers the possibility for illuminating some of the dynamic interplay

between the inner world of the participant and their social world resulting in further

understanding of how that participant’s external world is represented and internalised.

Psychosocial research aims to attend to the interpretations of subjectivity expressed both

consciously and unconsciously in the interview process, analysis and interpretation of data.

Hollway & Jefferson (2000) suggest that research subjectivity should be used as a vehicle for

data capture, whereby self-reflection on methods, practice, emotional involvement, and the

affective relations between the researcher and the researched can provide further information on

the dynamic interplay, within a co-constructed research environment.

3.6.3(Psychoanalysis(in(Psychosocial(Research(

Psychoanalysis is the body of theory that complements understanding of the subjective

experiences of both the researcher and participant in psychosocial research (Hollway &

Jefferson, 2013) and provides a framework for attending to the unconscious communications that

permeate interactions (Klein, 1957). Psychoanalytic theory in psychosocial research informs our

understanding of the context of research interactions and emphasises the importance of the

unconscious communications that are negotiated within the research encounter. These

unconscious communications ‘affect empathy and report… [and] therefore play a role in the

materials that subjects reveal and researchers grasp’ (Hunt, 1989, p. 27).

Hollway and Jefferson (2013) employ the view that psychoanalytic epistemology, using

subjectivity as an instrument of knowing, goes beyond the conscious analytic knowing seen in

other qualitative approaches. I too adopt this view that ideas and techniques from psychoanalytic

theory, including the likes of unconscious defences, free association, transference and

countertransference and projective identification are applicable to relational interactions beyond

those seen in a clinical setting. Drawing on knowledge of my own subjectivity throughout the

research process I am able to use this to gain a sense of my participants’ narratives. I have

ensured important ethical and trustworthiness issues have been considered as a result. This

includes additional psychoanalytically informed supervision, a reflective research diary and field

notes, and peer checking during data analysis.

3.6.4(Anxiety,(the(Defended(subject(and(Defended(Researcher(

Anxiety is viewed as being inherent in the human condition. When threats are made to the self,

defences against anxiety are employed influencing people’s actions, lives and relations. This

operates largely at an unconscious level and is a key element considered by psychoanalytic

schools of thought (Hollway & Jefferson, 2013). This argument postulates that conflict, suffering

and threats to the self, create anxiety. Hollway and Jefferson (2013) consider the ‘defended

subject’ who is motivated by unconscious investments and defences against anxiety and invests

in certain discourses over others to provide protection against anxiety and support identity. The

‘defended subject’ bridges the psychic and social domain, with personal identity emerging

between a constant interplay between the environment and the inner world of the subject.

Through using subjectivity as a way for knowing I hope to access not only the spoken accounts

of children but also those residing in unthought modes; those that are unconscious, preconscious

and embodied (Hollway, 2015).

Klein also dismissed the idea of the self as a single unit, separated from the external world. She

suggested defended subjects are forged through unconscious defenses against anxiety, which are

intersubjective and come into play between people (Hollway & Jefferson, 2013). Klein (1975)

emphasized the role of anxiety in early infant life and its impact upon later development and

relating. Klein’s Object Relations Theory refers to how an infant experiences polarised emotions

of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ in relation to its mother who has the capacity to both fulfil and frustrate in

times of hunger. Defensively, to protect the good from the bad, they are kept mentally separate.

This splitting of objects is termed the ‘paranoid-schizoid position’ which we can all adopt in

times of threat to the self, permitting us to believe in a good object, uncontaminated by ‘bad’

threats, which have been split off from the object and located elsewhere. Klein also emphasised

the splitting of the ego where bad parts of the self are split off and projected outside of the self,

located elsewhere in another person or object (Hollway & Jefferson, 2013). The position a

person adopts is context and content specific and sometimes an individual is able to adopt the

depressive position, where acknowledgement that good and bad can be contained in the same

object. When there are external or internal threats to the self this can be a hard position to sustain

and the ‘good’ needs to be preserved even at the cost of reality resulting in the ‘bad’ being split

off (Hollway & Jefferson, 2013).

I wish to explore the reality of a dynamic unconscious, at play within and between the defended

subject and defended researcher, that can be used as data. Children are exposed to several

changes during and after parental separation, which, impact on them in different ways, and

suggests children may engage in defences against anxiety to protect themselves from the threats

of anxiety experienced as a result of their parents’ divorce. The mind can unconsciously create

defences in the context of anxiety provoking experiences. This research aims to consider how

these children’s social worlds interact with their psychological internal world and how these

impact on their narratives and the stories they tell.

The psychosocial approach also considers acknowledgment of the ‘defended researcher’ who

brings with them their own history, biography and unconscious investments and how this might

interact with that of the ‘defended subject’. There is a dynamic unconscious at play between

‘defended subject’ and ‘defended researcher’ which suggests that subjects are ‘constituted

relationally and engage continuously in processes of identification, projection and introjection’

(Hollway and Jefferson, 2013). This encourages open sensitivity and reflection from the

researcher on their subjectivity about the impact of their role in the process, and as Hollway and

Jefferson (2013) suggest, provides valuable and usable data.

A psychosocial approach employs psychoanalytic theory as a framework in which to make sense

of unconscious communications and interpret emotional data. Further to anxious defences of

‘splitting’ other affective ways of knowing can be experienced through the dynamic relational

processes of the transference-countertransference (Clarke & Hoggett, 2009). Freud termed

transference as the repetition of an earlier experience transferred onto a new person.

Countertransference refers to the therapist’s responses to these transferences as well as their own

transferring of emotionally significant relationships on to the patient (Hollway & Jefferson,

2013).

3.7(Research(Design(

3.7.1(Participants(

A purposive sample of 4 children, who had experienced the divorce or separation of their

parents, were recruited from three schools. Due to the depth of analysis required for psychosocial

research, small sample sizes are common. This research, acknowledging the heterogeneity of

experience from a psychological and social perspective, was not limiting in its selection of

participants. Inclusion and exclusion criteria for participants are presented in Table 2. Table 3.

shows the studies participants.

Table(2.(Participant(Inclusion(and(Exclusion(Criteria(

Inclusion Criteria

Exclusion Criteria

Rationale

Aged 7-14 years.

Children older than 14,

younger than 7.

For a breadth of experience two key

stages were selected. A broader age

range was not selected due to pragmatic

considerations of the study. Children

younger than 7 were not considered due

to the level of detail and language skills

required for the interviews.

Parents have been

divorced/separated 6

months or more.

Divorced or separated less

than 6 months.

Due to sensitivity of the subject children

will have had some time to understand

and adapt to any changes.

Children not

accessing other

support services or

involved in court

proceedings related to

the

divorce/separation.

Children accessing

services for support in

relation to the

divorce/separation or

involved in court

proceedings for the

divorce.

To avoid adding to emotional distress.

Children aged 5 or

over at time of

divorce/separation.

Children under the age of

5 at time of

divorce/separation.

This was chosen so children and young

people were likely to retain some

memories of the event. It’s also

compulsory school age where school

staff and EPs are more likely to become

involved for individual needs related to

the family context.

Parents identify as

being no longer in a

relationship. Formal

divorce not a

requirement.

Parents identify as

currently being in a

relationship.

To identify children whose parents are

currently separated and not limit to only

those who have formally divorced.

Table(3.(Participants.((

Participant

Gender

Age

School

Male

Mainstream Primary

Male

Pupil Referral Unit.

Female

Mainstream Secondary

Male

Mainstream Secondary.

3.7.2(Sampling(and(Recruitment(Procedures(

Participants were sought from within the local authority (LA) where I was a Trainee Educational

Psychologist. Participants were children who had experienced their parents’ separation or

divorce. Initially, one primary and one secondary school were approached from my allocation.

Conversations with colleagues highlighted that there were likely to be potential participants for

the study, however, initial scoping letters asking for expressions of interest sent to parents,

resulted in only one return. This was subsequently misplaced by the school. After several follow

up calls no participants could be identified.

In a second wave of recruitment, EPs in my service, were asked to identify schools for the

research. An additional seven schools were put forward and the head teacher and SENDCo were

contacted to seek permission to conduct research in the school, after introductions from the

school EP. They were fully informed of the purpose of the research and the demands that would

be made of the school, parents and children who agreed to participate. In five of the schools the

head teachers, despite agreement from the SENDCo’s, were unwilling to accommodate the

research, expressing concerns about the topic and the vulnerability of their families. Two further

schools, one mainstream primary and a school for children with social, emotional and

behavioural needs were keen to help me recruit participants, expressing invested interest in the

topic. Scoping letters were sent to all key stage 2 children in these two schools. Due to

timeframe restraints, the SENDCo of the primary school and a family support worker within the

specialist provision, also followed up with phone calls to families they felt might meet the

criteria and might be willing to take part. Parents who expressed interest were then contacted by

myself, consideration was given to potential power imbalance and it was reiterated to parents the

voluntary nature of participation.

The parents, who expressed interest in their children taking part, were offered a meeting with me

to go through the information sheet and ask any questions. They were then able to take this away

to read through in full, to ensure they were giving fully informed consent for their children’s

participation. Once parental consent was received, I met with children to go through the

information sheet. They were given this to take away and invited to speak with their parents and

anyone they wished about taking part. A few days later they met with the SENDCo to sign the

assent form, if they were happy to agree. This approach, allowing children to make their decision

with a known and trusted member of staff, was to ensure that children were fully informed

before consent and that they did not experience any pressure to agree. Four participants were

identified by this process. Two children were identified by their mother, a member of staff in one

of the schools; therefore, she completed the assent forms with her own children.

3.7.3(Data(Collection(

(

Children were interviewed twice, 1-4 weeks between each interview. This was to provide an

opportunity to build rapport with the children and to follow up any narratives elicited in the Grid

Elaboration Method (GEM) interview. Two participants were interviewed at the school they

attended and two were interviewed in their family home. There was no specified length of

interview. Interviews ended when children felt they had no more to say and all avenues of

possible stories had been explored.

Participant’s parents were also given the opportunity to meet with me to discuss their perception

of events and provide contextual information. This was not a formal interview and was not

included in the data analysis. This was to gather background information about the nature of the

parents’ separation or divorce as the free associative nature of the interviews with the children

did not specify what stories or experiences would be shared or require children to recall

contextual information. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed.

Production of knowledge is grossly influenced by the methods taken to generate data.

Psychosocial research offers a methodological framework for which an exploration of

participant’s experience can be achieved without the reliance on the protocol of questions

(Hollway, 2015, p.43). Two free association psychosocial methods of data collection were used

in the present study, the GEM (Joffe & Elsey, 2014) and the Free Association Narrative

Interview (FANI) (Hollway & Jefferson, 2013). These methods were chosen to provide

participants the opportunity to share their narratives in an accessible way, whilst also eliciting in-

depth data. These approaches can be differentiated from other qualitative approaches and will be

explored further below.

(

3.7.4(The(GEM(

The GEM is a free associative method for eliciting how people think and feel about social and

personal issues (Joffe & Elsey, 2014). It rests on the principle, like other methods influenced by

psychoanalytic theory, that aspects of our thoughts, feelings and behaviour may be primary

‘emotionally laden nonconscious processes’ (Joffe & Elsey, 2014, p.173). Free association

techniques invite data to come from participants and honor their narratives whilst considering

them as meaning-making and defended (Hollway and Jefferson, 2013). The GEM interview

aimed to ease participants into the interviewing process as well as provide participants with

choices in how they might depict their experience. This is an appropriate method for the age

range of participants and allows for differences in development, eliciting initial responses in a

less demanding way. The GEM involved presenting participants with a “grid containing four

empty boxes” and asking, “tell me, write or draw the first four things that come into your head”

when you think of your parents’ divorce or separation (Joffe and Elsey, 2014). Participants were

asked to keep to one association per box. See Appendix 5 for completed and anonymised GEM

grids. It was hoped, as Joffe and Elsey (2014) explain, that material subjectively relevant to

participants experience of divorce would be elicited and is directly related to the ‘emotional

underpinning’ of their unique experiences (Hollway, 2015, p.44). Once participants had

completed the grid, they were asked to elaborate further, using open questions, on the first four

things that came to their mind, following their order. This started with ‘can you tell me more

about this?’ to elicit these elaborations. Summarising, paraphrasing and reflecting, using the

participants own words were used to encourage further detail until participants indicated that

they had no more to add about their association (Hollway & Jefferson, 2013; Joffe & Elsey,

2014). This aimed to empower participants and facilitate exploration of participants’ subjective

experiences that were personally meaningful.

Detailed reflexive field notes and a research diary were kept to reflect on first impressions and

unconscious dynamics experienced in each interview. I recorded my feelings about the interview

and reflections on pertinent and salient points. I tried to be aware and conscious of any emotional

response I had in the interview and those present during my reflections. I reflected on why I

followed up with one aspect of the child’s narrative and not another and why I asked a particular

question. This enabled me to reflect on my impact on the data produced. This approach is based

upon Hollway and Jefferson’s understanding of ‘emotional experience’ and ‘researcher

subjectivity’ as an ‘instrument of psychoanalytically informed knowing’ (Hollway, 2011, p. 95).

3.7.5(The(FANI(

A second interview used the FANI method (Hollway and Jefferson, 2013), designed to elicit

participant’s narratives by using their ordering and phrasing in follow up questions. The FANI

method is based on the idea of free association integrated with a narrative emphasis (Hollway &

Jefferson, 2013). This involves focusing on eliciting stories and actual events. The FANI used

open ended questions related to associations that emerged in the GEM. GEM transcripts were

read between interviews to draw out associations that had been made. Questions aimed to

explore themes, elicit further narratives and explore areas that may have been avoided.

Participants were reminded of some extracts from the GEM interview and asked to elaborate

further about the story using such questions as ‘tell me more about this’ or ‘can you tell me about

a time when that happened’ or ‘what did you do/think/feel when that happened?’. The interviews

ensured stories told were finished and uninterrupted and identified themes were returned to in

order of appearance, going with respondents meaning frames, even if not directly relevant to the

research question (Hollway & Jefferson, 2013). The intention of the second interview was that it

was assumed a rapport would have been established with participants, enabling them to share

more freely and openly their experiences.

This method assumes both the researcher and researched as defended, engaging

intersubjectively, defending against their anxieties, which may be seen in the form of

avoidances, contradictions and inconsistencies (Hollway & Jefferson, 2013). Therefore, reflexive

field notes were made, consistent with the GEM, and were shared and explored in supervision.

(

3.7.6(Data(Capture((

Interviews were held either at the children’s schools or homes wherever they felt most

comfortable. Interviews were recorded using a voice capture Dictaphone. The completed

interviews were then transcribed by myself in an attempt to familiarise and immerse myself in

the data. The typed transcripts were then read. The GEM interview was transcribed and read

before the FANI interview to identify pertinent psychological and social experiences that could

be further explored in the FANI interview.

3.8(Data(Analysis(

A two-stage approach to data analysis was adopted for the present study. To complement the

psychosocial method of data collection and the ontological and epistemological positioning of

this study, a data analysis method that enabled the researcher to transcend what is consciously

accessible and considered the dynamic, unconscious and intersubjective experience of the

participant and the researcher, during the interviews, around the investigation of a social

phenomenon, was needed.

Therefore, data was analysed using thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) as it is compatible

with psychosocial methods, small data sets and applicable across a range of theoretical

frameworks (Joffe and Elsey, 2014). Thematic Analysis not only allows for pertinent themes of

participants’ experience to be explored at a semantic level but also enables the researcher apply a

latent interpretation; that is to go beyond what is consciously accessible to the participant

through attending to the unconscious, dynamic and intersubjective processes during the

interviews. Thematic Analysis was deemed the most appropriate method to allow an exploration

of the participants’ experience at both a conscious and unconscious level. Other methods of

analysis, such as Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA), were decided not to offer the

same level of exploration. For example, participant samples in IPA are usually considered

homogenous and it is acknowledged that interpretations are bounded by participants’ abilities to

articulate their thoughts and experiences adequately (Brocki & Wearden, 2006; Harper &

Thompson, 2011). This study considers the experience of divorce as heterogeneous, with

children experiencing the divorce or separation of their parents in a multitude of ways.

Furthermore, this study honors the possibility that children may not articulate their thoughts and

experiences adequately and that a further in depth understanding of experience can be gathered

through attention to the non-lexical, embodied and unconscious dynamics present within the

research encounter. This can be gathered through a further psychosocial latent level of analysis.

Hollway and Jefferson (2013) emphasise the importance of understanding a person’s whole;

their gestalt. A person’s whole is merely more than just a sum of its parts and consideration of

unconscious dynamics, a person’s anxieties and attempts to defend them, give rise to the key of a

person’s gestalt. Therefore, a second theoretically driven layer of analysis was applied to the

data using a psychosocial lens to gain a sense of what pervaded an individual’s transcript and

maintain a holistic analysis of participant’s subjective experience of their parents’ divorce or

separation. Further description of these approaches will now be explored.

3.8.1(Thematic(Analysis(

Thematic analysis was the method chosen for analysing the data set. This was an inductive

approach to analysis at the semantic level. Its epistemologically free and theoretically flexible

position makes it an appropriate approach for use with the qualitative data produced in

psychosocial methods (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Thematic analysis allows for a systematic and

transparent analysis which enables the identification and analysis of the most prevalent patterns

of meaning in the dataset (Joffe, 2012). Psychosocial approaches seek to attend to the gestalt of

participants. Thematic analysis complements this by enabling an understanding of the individual

narrative of each participant. Furthermore, Braun & Clarke (2006) acknowledge the active

influence of the researcher in the identification of themes and patterns. This supports the

ontological and epistemological approach in this research whereby my own subjectivity can be

used as a tool in the data analysis phases and consideration of psychosocial influences that

impact upon me both consciously and unconsciously, shaping the identification, selection and

naming of codes and themes.

The analysis process was carried out by Braun & Clarke’s (2006) proposed stages:

• Recorded interviews were transcribed with the aim to immerse and familiarise myself in

the data. This involved repeated listening and reading of audio recordings and transcripts.

• Notes were made of patterns of meaning in the data and ideas around how participants

made sense of their experiences including assumptions and points of interest. Reflexive

field notes were kept throughout the process, regarding my emotional and psychological

experience.

• Secondly the program MAX-QDA version 12.0 was used to support thematic analysis of

interview transcripts. This involved drawing out inductive codes from the raw data set.

This required further reading and re-reading of the transcripts to ensure the raw transcript

drove the interpretations made.

• Emerging codes were then grouped into subthemes and themes through an interative

process of cross code-checking. The research question helped to determine the relevance

of themes. The frequency of themes was considered, however, was not deterministic of

whether a theme was included or not.

3.8.2(Psychosocial(Analysis(

Thematic analysis pays attention to the emergence of themes and the individual narratives of

participants. However, the inherent purpose of thematic analysis, to separate into themes, doesn’t

honor Hollway and Jefferson’s (2013) advocacy of gaining a holistic sense of the psychosocial

influence on participants’ experiences, which is proposed in this research. Just thematically

coding themes has the potential to lose meaningful data and lose sight of a participant’s

individual story. This can be preserved by a further latent and interpretive theoretically driven

layer of analysis.

Stage two of the analysis applied a psychosocial lens to make sense of an individual’s experience

by thinking about the interrelatedness of the psychological and the social. This employed

interpretations based on theories around unconscious processes and defended subjects. In line

with the theoretical starting point and ontological and epistemological positioning of the

researcher, it ‘intends to construe both researcher and researched as anxious, defended subjects,

whose mental boundaries are porous where unconscious material is concerned’ (Hollway and

Jefferson, 2013, p. 42). A psychoanalytically informed analysis was applied to the data to allow

for an in-depth exploration of the affect generated by dynamic, intersubjective and unconscious

processes present during the interview process. This included reflecting on the initial research

encounter and how I was emotionally affected by it to gain a sense of the participants’ anxieties,

defences and ways of relating.

3.9(Credibility(and(Trustworthiness(

Hollway And Jefferson (2013) propose that trustworthiness of qualitative research depends

greatly upon its credibility. They suggest credibility refers to the extent that analysis of the data

reflects what the participants had to say. This contrasts with quantitative and mixed method

designs which seek to obtain objectivity or generalisability. Like Hollway & Jefferson (2013)

and Yardley’s (2008) principles of validity of qualitative research I sought to demonstrate

robustness and credibility in order to achieve trustworthiness. Hollway & Jefferson (2013)

acknowledge researcher subjectivity and transparency in the process of data interpretation to

ensure interpretations are robust and supported by evidence. Likewise, it is hoped in this research

that by acknowledging the use of researcher subjectivity at each stage of the research process it

will support the overall transparency and credibility of the analysis. How credibility and

trustworthiness have been addressed will now be outlined in line with Yardley’s (2008)

principles.

3.9.1(Sensitivity(to(Context(

Sensitivity to context was approached through a systematic approach to an exploration of

relevant, empirical literature around divorce and separation. The decision to only include

research that focused on children’s perspectives was guided by an aim to honour the unique

contexts of children amid a predominantly adult focused phenomenon. Furthermore, choosing to

situate this search to only include research from the UK was to recognise the unique social

context surrounding participants.

Careful thought was given to the circumstances and context in which I would meet with

participants to ensure sensitivity to their circumstances and socio-cultural context. Interviews

took place in the participant’s school or home, an environment in which they were familiar and

felt comfortable and safe in. I also wanted to ensure they felt comfortable meeting with me and

were able to engage and access the two interviews.

The design of the research hoped to remain sensitive to the needs of the participants, through

employing open ended questions which actively encouraged free association and aimed to avoid

imposing researcher bias through closed or leading questions. This intended to allow participants

to speak about what was most pertinent to them in relation to their experiences and not be led by

researcher assumptions and bias. The use of prompting and active listening hoped to encourage

participants to explore their narratives in greater depth. Furthermore, the use of the GEM

alongside the FANI was chosen to be sensitive to how participants wished to express their views

and make it accessible for them.

Through the second theoretically driven layer of analysis I hoped to pay attention to what

participants emphasised in their narratives including contradictions and inconsistences that were

present. Sensitivity to the data was demonstrated by considering the relevant psychosocial

contexts of participants’ experiences.

3.9.2(Commitment(&(Rigour(

This principle was attended to through the planning and systematic approach to data collection

and analysis, outlined earlier in this chapter. Guidelines and principles for the GEM and FANI,

were consulted thoroughly when planning for interviews, including the use and avoidance of

particular types of questions, for example, ‘avoiding why questions’ (Hollway & Jefferson,

2013). Analysis and interpretation of the data was undertaken with consideration of the research

question and in a way, that honored and preserved the richness and complexity of what

participants shared.

Data was collected and analysed in ways that endeavored to provide new insights into what is

known about children’s experiences of their parents’ divorce or separation, given the dearth of

identified psychological research into children’s experiences of divorce and separation and that

psychosocial methods are also relatively new to EP research. The dual layer of analysis allowed

both the individual and sociocultural contexts to be considered and interpreted using

psychological theory. Both semantic and latent analyses were triangulated with peers and

researcher supervisors to protect against ‘wild analysis’ (Elliott, Ryan, & Hollway, 2012) and

ensure a systematic and rigorous approach to the research.

3.9.3(Coherence(&(Transparency(

Coherence and transparency has been considered at each stage of the research process by

applying and considering the psychosocial approach at each stage. This includes consideration of

psychosocial literature in the systematic review, employing appropriate and suitable methods of

data collection for the participants and the research question. Methods of analysis suited to

psychosocial approaches were also considered at this stage.

Reflexivity is central to the psychosocial approach and essential if researcher subjectivity is to be

used as an instrument of knowing (Hollway & Jefferson, 2013). Therefore, I sought reflexivity in

considering my influence and contribution in the research encounter, namely my impact on

participants and their impact on me as well as my contribution to the co-constructed narratives

during data collection and analysis. My acknowledgment of both defended subject and

researcher, meant that I was mindful throughout the process that the way we act and respond is

not always at a conscious level. Therefore, considerations of my affective responses, from the

decisions to carry out research in this area to how this might influence and impact on the

research encounter, were points of reflection throughout the process. Therefore, I kept a

reflective research diary and field notes after each interview and added to these as I experienced

thoughts and emotions. My responses to participants and the data were used to track its influence

on my interpretations. Alongside research supervision I also engaged in regular additional

individual and group supervision to focus on the emotional and psychological experiences of the

research encounter and the interview material during the analysis stage. Alongside reflexivity

this supported a triangulation of my interpretations to prevent against wild analysis (Elliott et al.,

2012).

(

3.9.4(Impact(&(Importance(

The prevalence of separation in children under sixteen highlights a need to further our

understanding of these individuals’ experiences. This psychosocial research does not seek to be

generalisable as it considers individuals unique narratives developed both before and during the

research encounter and acknowledges the uniqueness of the interaction between researcher and

subject on a given day, in a given context. Willig’s (2001) view is endorsed that once experience

has been identified through qualitative research, it is considered as existing in society, suggesting

the relevance of findings without the need for generalisability. Furthermore, Bell (2001) suggests

that if by publication of findings, boundaries of existing knowledge are extended, then it

demonstrates validity of the research. By drawing upon the cultural and social relationships

relevant to this phenomenon and context it was hoped that the importance of the findings from

this research could be demonstrated. I collected contextual data through speaking with

participant’s parents in order that the psychosocial interpretations I made were in consideration

of each participant’s unique context and narrative.

I hoped through the richness of the data gathered that some of the findings would have

transferable value. Lincoln & Guba (1985) refer to transferability as whether findings can be

applied to other contexts. Therefore, I hoped that findings may be considered relevant and

valuable in similar contexts. For example, most education settings in the UK have children who

have experienced the divorce or separation of their parents in some way and most EPs come

across children of divorced parents in their work at some point. I therefore hoped to provide

theoretically relevant findings that can be of use to the EP profession in their theoretical

understanding of how children experience and make sense of the divorce or separation of their

parents.

Insights that arise directly from participants’ experience of their parents’ divorce or separation

may have practical implications, especially considering the current climate that empahsises the

importance of listening to young people and gaining their views on matters that affect

themselves.

Through illuminating voices within this population, the epistemological and methodological

approach to the research might allow for the development of fresh and innovative ways to

integrate psychological and social theories to support understanding of psychosocial processes

present in the experience of divorce or separation. Furthermore, it is worth considering the

potential value for multidisciplinary professionals working with children and young people

experiencing divorce or separation and the consideration they could give to the psychosocial

processes around the narratives of these young people when in engagement with them and how

these insights may inform hypothesis generation and intervention design.

3.9.5(Reflexivity(

Reflexivity is an important aspect of psychosocial research and is used increasingly to

understand ‘data that [is] embodied, unspoken or unavailable to consciousness’ (Clarke &

Hoggett, 2009; Elliott et al., 2012, p. 1). Having had prior experience both personally and

professionally of children experiencing divorce or separation, it was imperative in this research

that I engaged in a number of tasks which supported reflexivity and reflection on subjective and

unconscious responses.

I kept reflective field and supervision notes throughout the research process to reflect on my

thinking and emotional responses to different parts of the research process, including, reading

the literature, meeting with participants and during analysis of the data. Elliot et al., (2012)

report the use of field notes to engage with researcher subjectivity, enhance the productive use of

reflexivity and to address emotional work of the research. It is also possible that reflective notes

act as a vehicle for reflection on the co-constructed accounts and our own insights and blind

spots (Elliott, 2011; Hollway, 2015). These enabled me to reflect on my subjective responses to

the data and influenced what I learnt about participants, including how I impacted on the

participants and vice versa.

I also engaged in supervision throughout the entirety of the process which provided a space to

explore my thinking and emotional responses to the material. Through acknowledging my

position as a defended researcher, I am aware that I cannot be entirely objective, despite attempts

to minimise contamination of the research data and reported findings. However, this awareness

can help mitigate this by serving to highlight what emotional data belongs to me and what is that

of the participants. To aid in this process further I sought additional psychoanalytically informed

individual and group supervision. This was provided both prior to data collection, following the

first interviews and prior to the second and during data analysis stages. Methods of this

supervision involved the psychoanalytic skill of maintaining a curious and reflective stance and

allowing oneself to be affected by the material. This supervision provided a means through

which I could engage with my own subjectivity and enhance reflexivity, which enabled a way of

understanding data that are unavailable to consciousness. Furthermore, psychoanalytically

informed group supervision with other psychosocial field researchers allowed the unconscious

dynamics of the interview encounter to be explored from perspectives other than my own.

3.10(Ethical(Considerations(

There are important ethical considerations for this piece of research due to the potential

vulnerabilities of my participants and the personal experiences I intended to explore. These were

considered alongside the ethical principles outlined by the British Psychological Society (2018)

and Health & Care Professions Council (2016). The care for the subject throughout the process

of psychosocial research is the primary ethical challenge from the research design to analysis and

interpretation of data. Ethical approval was obtained from the Tavistock and Portman NHS

Foundation Trusts Research Ethics Committee (Appendix 6) and from the LA ethics committee

(Appendix 7). Permission was also sought from the SENDCos and head teachers of the schools

in which I wished to carry out my interviews.

Parents of the participants and participants themselves were clearly informed about what the

interviews would entail and what was required of them if they agreed to take part and were

provided with information sheets and consent/assent forms (Appendix 8 & 9). Scoping letters

(Appendix 10) were sent to parents to determine expressions of interest. Parents were offered to

meet with me before they consented to any involvement, to ask any questions regarding the

research. It was intended that during this meeting, the purpose of the research would be shared

and the method of obtaining the data made clear. One of the parents felt a conversation over the

phone was sufficient to obtain this information, another parent did not wish to meet with me but

met with the school SENDCo to discuss her child’s involvement. Once consent was provided by

parents, I met with the children to go through the information sheet and clearly explained

requirements of their involvement. To ensure children were happy to take part and had time to

consider their involvement, and withdraw if they wished, they completed their assent forms with

a trusted member of staff. Information sheets and consent forms were designed to be accessible

and clearly outline the study and what would be required from participants. The information

sheets also explained how data would be recorded, handled and kept securely. I also explained

when meeting with participants and in the information sheet how I sought to protect their

identity by the use of pseudonyms. This was explained in an accessible way to all participants. I

expressed clearly to participants that their involvement in the research was entirely voluntary,

making clear their right to withdraw at any given time, without reason, was clearly outlined in

the information sheets and in person, and how their involvement or withdrawal would come with

no consequences.

Signposting to contact details of support agencies for both parents and children was also

provided within initial letters to all parents, regardless of involvement in the research, in case the

topic highlighted need for further access to support.

When meeting with the children prior to interviews taking place, I explained clearly the

parameters of confidentiality. Participants were made aware that what they chose to share would

remain confidential, unless I had concerns that either themselves or others were at risk, at which

point I might need to break confidentiality and share that information with relevant, appropriate

people. I was clear that if this were to be the case, I would inform them of my intentions and

involve them in decisions wherever possible.

Acknowledging the potential impact that involvement in the research might have on children’s

emotional wellbeing, I allocated time after each interview to debrief participants, to contain any

anxieties or distress, which may have been evoked by the process. Further opportunities to talk

with me were also offered if considered helpful. A key member of staff (or parent) within the

setting, who was familiar to the child, was also identified before commencing, who had the role

of supporting the child if any anxieties or distress arose after I left. Both schools, in which the

research was conducted, had an Emotional Literacy support assistant (ELSA) employed by the

school, whom children could access should they wish to, even after the research had ended, to

discuss or work through any worries or concerns. Participants were made aware that this person

was available should they want to see them. During the interview itself, I established with the

child a signal word or object they could use to indicate if the interview became too distressing,

giving them the option to stop if they wanted to.

It was also recognised that for the parents, the participation of their child in this research may

cause some distress. When a parent expressed an interest in their child participating in the

research, they were offered an opportunity to meet with me prior to any possible consent to

involvement, to discuss the study and offer the opportunity to ask any questions or talk about any

concerns.

As part of the ethical consideration for this research I was mindful of my own emotional

wellbeing and safety. I followed the LA procedure for ensuring others were informed about

where I would be and when. I was also mindful of my own emotional responses to the

participants’ stories. It was important to recognise that I may also have found some of the things

the participants discussed difficult or painful. One way of managing this was to ensure I had time

at the end of each interview to make detailed field notes around the experiences of the

interviews, which functioned as a self-debrief.

4.(Analysis(

4.1(Chapter(Overview(

This chapter provides an overview of the themes identified, across participants, through a

thematic analysis using MAXQDA software. Each theme is presented using a thematic map

(MAXMaps) to illustrate the relationship between themes, their subthemes and codes. Themes

and subthemes are described in depth, supported by extracts from the participants’ accounts. The

full analysis has been provided electronically in Appendix 11. Appendix 12 contains a

participant transcript (see USB for other participant transcripts).

Finally, each participant’s story is presented in the form of a pen portrait. This

psychoanalytically informed psychosocial layer of analysis aims to provide a holistic analysis of

each participant’s narrative. In this section data elicited in the transference and counter

transference will be attended to using reflexive field notes to further understand the data

gathered.

4.2(Approach(to(Data(Collection(and(Analysis(

The psychosocial method of this research meant that a great deal of data was amassed through

the interviews and process of analysis. The nature of free associative methods of data collection

meant that participants chose to speak about their experiences in different ways and prompted

individual and unique responses in myself, the researcher, to support elicitation of their

experiences. This meant that some of the raw data was not directly related to the first research

question. Therefore, I chose to handle the data in the following manner; firstly, by coding

transcripts in line with the first research question, and collating data extracts into themes directly

related to participants experience of their parents’ separation. Secondly, data was subjected to a

latent theoretically driven analysis to gain a sense of what pervaded each participant’s interview

and transcript. The FANI and GEM methods provided a mechanism through which to consider

not only the semantic content of the research data, but also what might underlie it, in the

transference and counter transference of the interview context.

I have acknowledged throughout the integrated role of the researcher within the research and I

have attempted to integrate my interpretations and emotional experiences into the analysis. One

way I achieved this was by noting down my emotional experiences in response to the data and

participants at the point of transcription, reading of transcripts, coding and analysis. I used the

memo function in MAXQDA to incorporate some of these notes into the data set when coding. It

should be acknowledged how the researcher plays an active role in identifying patterns and

themes that emerge (Braun & Clarke, 2006).

4.3(Themes((

When describing their experience related to their parents’ divorce or separation, participants’

responses can be grouped into five overarching themes, highlighted through the thematic

analysis. Table 2 provides an overview of the relationship between themes and subthemes.

It should be noted that Sienna, James and King’s narratives dominate because of the length of

their interviews and the rich detail the children were able to articulate. However, throughout I

was mindful of giving equitable voice to Ben, which I hope will be portrayed throughout

chapters 4 and 5.

Table(4.(The(Relationship(between(Themes(&(Subthemes(

Theme

Subtheme

Response to Separation

Past & Present Feelings

Processing & Understanding

Resilience

Remembering Experiences

Relationship between Parents

Feelings

Parental Interaction

Contact with Out of House Parent

Shared Parenting

Contact & Communication

Fragility of Contact

When Parents’ Re-partner

Additional family members

Subsequent Separations

Children’s perspectives on parents’ new

partners

Parent’s New Relationships

Change and Continuity

Parents Living Separately

Negative Changes

Positive Changes

Continuity

Theme 1: Response to Separation

This theme encapsulates participant’s reflections on their response to their parents’ separation,

including their attempts to process and understand their parents’ relationship and grapple with

the feelings and levels of uncertainty associated with this. This also included remaining positive

and weighing up the significance of the separation on their lives, mitigating against the changes

and disruption of the separation and illuminating resilience.

Theme 2: Relationship Between Parents

This theme is about the relationship and interaction between the children’s biological parents,

both past and present, and both participant’s and parents’ feelings about the separation and the

changes that occurred.

Theme 3: Contact with Out of House Parent

This theme captures children’s current or future contact arrangements with their out of house

parent. It includes when and how they might see the out of house parent and what they do

together. It also includes how they remain in contact with the out of house parent, the

consequences and anxiety linked to the possibility of no contact and sharing contact time

between each parent.

Theme 4: When Parents Re-partner

This theme encompasses participant’s reflections on their parents re-partnering within new

relationships and the associated families or change that comes with this. It also included

participant’s response to their parents’ new relationships and their own relationships with the

new partners.

Theme 5: Change & Continuity

This theme captures the changes, both positive and negative, associated with the separation of

parents including moving home and when parents live separately. This includes contact with

extended family, differences in parenting approaches and having two homes. It also includes

expressions of things that have remained the same and what children would like to continue after

changes have occurred.

4.4(Theme(1:(Response(to(Separation(

Figure(1.(Thematic(map(for(the(theme:(‘Response(to(Separation’(

4.4.1(Past(&(Present(Feelings(

Participants reflected on the different feelings they experienced in relation to learning about their

parents’ separation and their initial reaction when their parents told them they were separating:

“Sort of shocked…out the blue urm, I was like why? like I didn’t understand like why I

think.” (James, 231-234)

“Like oh so you’re gonna get a new boyfriend, you’re gonna get a new house…it’s a bit

much in one go” (Sienna, line 125)

There was a sense that the pace and exposure to significant changes helped Sienna come to terms

with her parents’ separation more easily:

“Urm, my mum and dad were together…and then they said well like that they don’t love

each other anymore…but nothing big is gonna change and stuff…but then urm, like, I

think it was years later even maybe, urm my mum told us one by one like, that she had a

new partner…Urm, but that was fine for me because it’s kind of like it wasn’t like…that

big of a deal because we don’t actually know that much about it or who he really is and

stuff” (Sienna, line 649-658)

Participants also acknowledged how their feelings about the separation have changed and

developed over time:

“Urm when it first happened, when she first told me, I said I was okay but like I was a bit

unsure about what was gonna happen in the situation of the home…but then she talked to

me a bit more about it and now I’m okay” (Sienna, line 117-127)

“Umm most of the time I feel sad but I don’t feel angry anymore” (King, 110)

For some of the participants it was apparent that they had mixed feelings regarding their parents’

separation and associated changes, such as one parent moving home or going out socialising

more often. There was a sense of a continual processing of these feelings as they were being

expressed resulting in contradictions and re-evaluating how they felt as they spoke:

Jordan: How do you feel that’s going to be when things things move on?

Sienna: That’s gonna be a bit um like annoying…because now that I’m older…and I’ve

got my own phone and I live closer to the school like I can go out with my friends

later…and stuff, er as long as it’s in the area anyway, urm so that’s gonna be okay I

guess, because if my mums not here to like go out with me anywhere, I still now have that

like independence to do it myself (Sienna, line 704-710)

“I don’t know because you might feel a bit sadder that you’re not with the other one…or

something but if its half half its fine…” (Sienna, line 952-954)

“I don’t urm mind it like she can go out whatever, but sometimes it’s like annoying”

(James, line 54)

Sienna felt that some of her feelings were a result of expectations that she should feel negatively

about the fact her parents aren’t together:

“Just maybe in your mind you might just think oh is it okay?…like you might contradict

yourself…like trying to actually put bad thoughts in your mind, in a way (Sienna, line

636-640)

King expressed a mixture of feelings; anger and sadness, which were expressed through his own

word, “sangry”, anxiety and blame at the time of his father leaving the family home and because

of the impact it had on his mother:

“I felt angry because urm, I feel angry because when my dad left I thought I couldn’t see

him again and then I thought it was all his fault.” (King, 112)

James expressed how his feelings about his parents’ decision to separate were linked to how his

parents felt and what was important to them:

“I mean if they don’t wanna be with each other then I’m fine with it” (James, line 723)

4.4.2(Processing(&(Understanding((

Throughout, participants gave a strong sense that they had to process and manage a whole range

of changes associated with their parents’ separation. For James and Sienna, whose parents still

lived together, it was felt that this was an occurrence that required further understanding and

working out:

“Like really small things like…my friend comes over on Thursdays (voice wavering), to

watch a TV show that we both really like, so now I’m thinking in the long run, different

homes, urm different like, how far away from school it is, so just small things that my

friend might not be able to come over, like like just by walking… (Sienna, Lines 535-539)

“and er like I g..don’t go, dr-drive to school anymore but like when I did like my

drav..my dad drives my little brother,…but say we’re at my dad’s house…and the car is

at my mum’s house… then how’s that gonna work ?(James, Lines 595-601)

For James, there was a possibility that he might have to give up some of his hobbies once his

parents lived separately and a shared parenting arrangement was established:

“if we’re here Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and stuff, then we can do Kung Fu, but

Friday, Saturday, Sunday and stuff then we can’t do archery. I think if we’re gonna give

up one of them we we we’d give up Kung Fu and then do archery but I don’t think we’re

gonna (James, Lines 463-467)

Sienna, appeared to battle with some anxiety about how her parents’ separation would impact on

her and what kind of person she might become. She appeared to place significant weighting on

the outcomes of ‘others’ as a means of processing events and understanding the possible impact:

“because urm what I see in the movies, it helps me process it more, watching kids, maybe

famous kids [laughs] going through the same thing” (Sienna, Line 447)

“like it’s like it was a joke in a movie but loads of criminals they’re saying that like

they’re parents like split up and it was like really traumatising for them and then that’s

like one of the reasons why they put out their anger into like crimes” (Sienna, Line 529)

There were elements in Sienna’s narrative that suggested she was battling with conflicting

feelings of resistance to her mother re-partnering and attempts to understand and be accepting of

it. There was a sense that she was trying to refute her negative feelings by likening her situation

to her mother’s partner’s daughter:

“because in like for example movies, when they..your parents have a new partner, you’re

like really mean to them or like push them away but I think but because they have a

family, and they’re going through the same thing it’s like if their child thought my mum

was really bad just because she’s with the dad” (Sienna, line 367)

She drew further upon comparisons with others and what they were like, which in some way

offered her a sense of reassurance:

“oh, my friend Olivia…from my old school…her parents lived in different houses…but I

don’t think it really changed her that much…she was always one of the happiest girls I

knew so I think that didn’t make me put any bad thoughts on the situation…yeah and

she’s really nice and stuff so I know like it’s not gonna change us as a person” (Sienna,

lines 936-946)

As the interview progressed Sienna asked me about my interest in the topic which served as

further evidence that she might turn out okay:

“So, its saying like even if you get a bit sad sometimes it’s not gonna make a major like

make you change into a person that maybe is more depressed or a bit sadder because

now including you, people’s whose parents are separated are like really nice and stuff”

(Sienna, Line 960)

She expressed a sense of feeling lucky, helping her to process her situation:

“but I’m saying like that’s not exactly realistic but seeing that loads of people all over the

world have the same situation as me, (voice wavering) but also worse, so it kind of gets

me through that a bit better” (Sienna, Line 531-533)

Participants also reflected on talking about their parents’ separation with them and others and

how they felt about it:

“urm you don’t really tell people um”(Ben, Line 545)

“yeah and every time like she [mum] brings it up she asks if she needs to talk to us or if

we have any questions so it’s okay” (Sienna, Line 131)

The process of thinking about the separation was for some of the participants a contributor to

making them more upset and something they avoided to protect themselves:

Jordan:...what do you think that’s about, not want..wanting to think about it?

James: urm just the thought like not being urm together and stuff

(James, line 171-172)

“yeah but I think why I got upset is because I mostly do the thinking less than talking”

(Sienna, line 551)

Sienna also reflected on how talking about her parents’ separation through the interview process,

even though at times was difficult, had helped her to feel better. It seemed that she was able to

process and evaluate her own personal circumstances more clearly through having a space to

reflect:

“whereas like more maybe talking about it maybe make me more understanding of the

situation” (Sienna, line 371)

“I think talking about this has helped me a lot…because like I said, the little down stuff

but when I’m talking more about the positives and like… it makes me more like feel a bit

better…and like be like oh these little things aren’t as important but you can still talk to

them about people..to people” (Sienna, line 573-579)

The interview process also seemed to serve James’s understanding of the reason why his father

no longer came on family holidays to visit his mother’s family:

Jordan: …and is that changed since they have separated …?

James: I guess that might have actually! I just kind of realised. Maybe that’s why?

[laughs] cos he has..hasn’t gone there for like years (James, line 272-273)

There was a sense of a dawning realisation of what the separation might hold:

“so, my mum said that when she leaves I’m gonna get my own room…so, I’m really

happy about that but then I realised that she’s not going to be here all the time which is

gonna be bit different” (Sienna, line 23-25)

but also, how it might not be all that different:

“I think, I think they got separated and they didn’t I like I didn’t even notice…

and that happened like before Christmas and we already had I think..a Christmas or two.

I only noticed like I only..I only found out about it in like a year ago, from what I can

remember, so I don’t r..remember anything different” (James, line 40-42)

For King, there was also a wish to know more about his parents’ separation as represented by his

associations in the GEM interview:

King: urm I don’t know what the next one is that’s why it’s a question

Jordan: so, it says why did they split up…

King: I don’t know don’t know why (King, line 192-194)

4.4.3(Resilience((

Although participants described feelings of anxiety or being worried, to varying extents, some

also described a positive and resilient mind-set when it came to their parents’ separation:

“urm I was saying because urm although I’m gonna have to move around a bit, but

that’s like something not so big in my life when I think of everything else” (Sienna, line

195)

“urm just because, like just like realising there’s more things in the world to worry about

and that like there little things but at the same time it’s actually can be a really good

change as well” (Sienna, line 622)

“Makes you feel a bit negative about it… but at the same time like they weren’t together

for like a whole year before I was actually was aware of it so…” (James, line 190)

There was an understanding that ultimately the separation was in fact for the best for parents and

children and meant they were treated better:

“so, I think like in the long run it’s a lot better for us as well that they’re not gonna be

together because if they’re really aggressive and arguing it could affect how they like

they also talk to us and stuff” (Sienna, line 325)

For King, the frequency of his father being late meant that he had become accustomed to it

which seemed to mitigate against any potentially harmful feelings:

Jordan: …do you wanna tell me more about how you feel when he’s late?

King: I’m used to it now so I don’t really care

(King, line 439-440)

His ability to overcome certain rules in order to provide comfort to his mother when she was sad,

enabled them both to feel better:

“urm I was in my room, cos I know not to go into the room when my mum’s sad or angry.

But sometimes it’s okay cause I give her a hug when she’s sad and when she’s angry.”

(King, line 140)

Sienna outlined strategies, practical and emotional, to help her manage the changes and anxieties

associated with her parents’ separation:

“but it’s okay because my mum says for Christmas I can get a planner…because you get

them in school…to help you with homework remembering so urm I wanted one for the

new year so I can remember where everything is and stuff” (Sienna, line 183-187)

“and then I think that was fine because they were still like, they looked like a couple so in

um my imagination oh everything’s fine they just said that” (Sienna, line 275)

Participants referenced a life separate from their parents and with age appeared to come a

growing independence and sense of autonomy which served as a helpful protective factor against

any impending change:

“yeah, but now like were getting older so don’t always like..like when we like used to go

to like urm out, like I don’t know where, now we just don’t really, cos none of us are

bothered” (James, line 307-309)

“because like now that I’m in high school we’ve got homework every day or you want to

see your friends or you wanna just watch TV before bed or something it’s like it takes up

so much of your time you don’t really think about the bad stuff really” (Sienna, line 976-

978)

4.4.4(Remembering(Experiences(

For some of the participants there was difficulty accessing multiple experiences or providing

narratives due to factors such as the length of time or the ongoing processing of events. It is

possible that this suggests an unconscious defence against the more painful feelings and

experiences which will be explored further in the second layer of analysis.

“I think and then we started talking about something and then she like said that they’re

not together or something, it was like a conversation that led to it I guess…don’t really

remember, it was like ages ago” (James, line 667-669)

Jordan: and have there been an-any other times where they’ve had arguments like that?

King: yeah but I can’t re-really remember. (King, line 470-471)

Jordan: Not sure? Do you wanna try and think of one..the first thing that comes to your

mind?

Ben: There’s nothing (Ben, line 36-37)

4.5(Theme(2:(Relationship(Between(Parents((

Figure(2.(Thematic(map(for(the(theme(‘Relationship(between(parents’(

4.5.1(Feelings(

Participants reflected on theirs and their parents’ feelings and responses when speaking about

their parents’ relationship. Participants expressed how parents’ interactions with each other had

left their parents feeling sad and annoyed:

“and then she got really mad urm and just said urm she said that’s it urm you can’t see

him until he’s urm older because err you’re too er irresponsible and he said you’re

always late she said you’re always late and then the time before that urm he urm made

my mum really really sad and said urm you don’t do anything for King the only..the..the

only thing you use your money on is for urm drugs and alcohol and and stuff” (King, line

122)

“yeah, it’s a bit better because they argue on just like silly things, like not important…but

I think it makes them a bit annoyed, ya know” (Sienna, line 233-235)

This also impacted on how the participants’ felt:

Jordan: … what’s that like when they argue how do you feel?

King: scared

(King, line 482-483)

Participants expressed their own feelings about the change in their parents’ relationship and there

was a sense from Sienna’s narrative that her feelings were linked to her parents’ consideration of

her and her siblings throughout the separation:

“but the fact that they’re doing that all for us and making it so much easier for us, like

makes me more understanding of the situation and that I shouldn’t like um like push it

away as much” (Sienna, line 423)

There was a sense of participants being reluctant to share their true feelings or having

reservations about doing so, as it may have certain implications, such as parents deciding to put

their child’s needs before their own:

“because like I said they put us first…so it might make them think twice about it, which I

don’t want” (Sienna, line 559-561)

“yeah, I went urm..not that I’d prefer them to be together sort of thing if they’re, ya

know clearly they don’t want to, but urm change urm not really as good, like you don’t

want it” (James, line 185)

“no, I try not to yawn when I’m talking about my parents cos my eyes water and it’s not

because I’m sad, and then the people think I’m sad by talking about it…and that’s why I

keep rubbing my eyes” (King, line 222-224)

Sienna found some comfort in the fact that, for her, the formal separation, where a parent leaves

the family home, was some way off:

100

“so, there’s no need to be scared like when it actually happens cos my mums not sure

when she will actually get a house” (Sienna, line 624)

King found comfort in wondering about what life might be like if his parents were still together:

King: because if they was together…then we’d be doing different stuff on days that he’s

free… urm urm something like if it was a really cringey relationship something like going

to [names park] onto the boats…

Jordan: and how would you feel if you got to do that

King: I would feel really happy

(King, line 791-80)

Ben expressed feelings of indifference about his parents’ separation:

“ I really don’t mind…um that they’re not together”

(Ben, line 438-443)

4.5.2(Parental(Interaction(

Participants reflected on the interaction between their parents before and after they separated and

pondered the reasons why they may have decided to separate:

“but I think they just like drifted apart and only stayed together for us” (Sienna, line 335)

“er I mean I think it’s probably cos you know they do a lot of stuff differently. Like she

likes to go out and then he likes to stay in, erm she likes to go on holiday he likes to stay

here, stuff like that” (James, line 727-731)

“it was probably because of the ch-kids he had” (King, line 288)

For Sienna and James their parents’ separation was first noted when their parents began to sleep

separately:

101

“urm so my parents used to sleep in the same bed…and then now my dad, like he had

this, we call it the office…urm but then we made a bed in there for him…so now that’s

like his area and my mum has the room downstairs” (Sienna, line 245-251)

Sienna expressed that the departure of one parent from the family home indicated a positive and

beneficial change in their interactions:

“so, I think it’s a bit better that they’re moving out and having separate rooms and stuff,

because it kind of has a bit of boundaries…so it’s gonna be less arguing and yeah”

(Sienna, line 299-301)

For others, even though there had been some improvement in relationship between parents, there

were still signs of acrimony:

“that next question, why is my daddy so mean to my mummy? because urm they always

get into arguments cause he’s late or he didn’t pick up the phone or its just they just get

in arguments a lot of the time. But it’s gotten better now, now they barely have a

argument but sometimes they might just have urm urm an aggressive debate but it

doesn’t turn into a argument” (King, line 198)

(

102

4.6(Theme(3:(Contact(with(Out(of(House(Parent(((

Figure(3.(Thematic(map(for(the(theme:(‘Contact(with(Out(of(House(Parent’(

4.6.1(Shared(Parenting(

For the participants who were yet to enter into a shared parenting arrangement, Sienna and

James, there was some consideration and wondering about how contact time might be shared:

“I-I think it’s..it’s going to be like half half…so I come here half the week and then

then…” (James, line 130-132)

There had been discussions with parents about how the time might be shared once their mother

moved into a new home:

103

“but also, like it’s a bit weird because, you’re with them for five days and the other one

for five days and then the weekends switch over…so you have most of the time with one

of them and then the other person will have the weekend and then it switches” (Sienna,

line 439-443)

It felt important to Sienna that the amount of time spent with each parent was equal and that it

was fair for both children and parents:

“because like the parents for example if one’s richer, or has a better house, they get

more like time with the children but I find that really unfair for the other other parent

and for the child…and so, I think that it’s good that it’s going to be split in half so I’m

gonna see one for a certain amount of time and the next one for the same amount of

time” (Sienna, line 449-453)

James reflected on possibly wanting to do more activities with his parents once time together

became more limited:

“maybe if like we don’t like see her for like half a week and then we go and like let’s go

out, something like that” (James, line 316-317)

James considered how activities he did with his dad might be impacted upon if he was to spend

half the week with dad and the other half with mum:

“if we’re here Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and stuff, then we can do kung Fu… but

Friday, Saturday, Sunday and stuff then we can’t do archery. I think if we’re gonna give

up one of them we we we’d give up kung Fu and then do archery but I don’t think we’re

gonna” (James, line 463-467)

4.6.2(Contact(and(Communication(

For the other participants, there were elements of flexibility and inconsistency in their contact

with their out of house parent. Ben generally saw his father on the weekends, although this did

not seem consistent:

104

“I see dad on the weekends, sometimes, some weekends” (Ben, line 40)

King’s time with his father was sometimes shorter or spent differently than expected as he was

regularly late to collect him:

“we were supposed to go ice skating…and we couldn’t because he came late…but we

went to my my nn..other gran his his mum” (King, line 430-432)

Participants saw having contact with the out of house parent as a positive event and something

they would look forward to and potentially attempt to set up to see them more regularly:

“or we would have to get a new one[car], but that’s not as likely because it costs a lot so

we will probably have to like…like but that’s also quite a good thing though because you

get to visit the other one more often…like even if it’s just like oh yeah can we use the car

or oh yeah I forgot my school books here…so it’s like just to see them again its quite

nice” (Sienna, line 830-834)

Jordan: …tell me about the times when you stay at your dad’s house?

Ben: it’s fun..a brother though [fiddling with toy microphone] our brother that’s come

over [fiddling with toy microphone]

(Ben, line 45-46)

There was a hope that contact schedules would be somewhat flexible to suit the participants

practical and emotional needs:

“it will probably be flexible…so like, not like er so at..if it’s like our time at our mum’s

house…maybe...and we have like the kung fu…and our dad was like, pick us up from

there, take us there and drop us back off.” (James, line 533-539)

105

no, I’d like it to be flexible…like if I’m here…and I’m annoyed like at my dad or

whatever…then maybe I can like just go to her house…or something.” (James, line 849-

857)

James and Sienna managed to remain in contact with their mother when she went away on

weekends with her new partner or went out for the evening:

“but now I’ve got a phone, every time that she goes away like we call each other so it’s

alright” (Sienna, line 676)

4.6.3(Fragility(of(contact(

King gave an overwhelmingly painful recollection of his relationship and contact with his father

and how this made him question the longevity of their relationship especially how that might

look in the future when he is grown up:

“probably in a pub somewhere…he always does it he just says he’s doing work…and and

that he’ll like this week we were supposed to do stuff on my birthday again because we

didn’t do much on Saturday…we didn’t even do anything urm yeah and he didn’t come

round…this week at all”

(King, line 845-853)

“ er I just think he should try harder”

(King, line 857)

“ not just because of he won’t be able to take me to the pub that’s sounds a little bit

bad…he won’t be around to ask me if he wants to go see a football match with

me…or…or meet my my girlfriend or my boyfriend whichever I-I choose”

(King, line 912-916)

Jordan: what makes you think dad won’t be there?

King: because he lets me down a lot

(King, line 923-924)

106

The lack of a consistent father figure for King meant he felt he would miss out on opportunities

to bond with his father when he’s older. King used the gender ratio in his family as explanations

for how his interests have developed as a result of not having a father around:

“one of the bad things…it’s not really bad but urm my mum I because I’m not around my

dad a lot…there isn’t really like a man there so and I have lots of girl cousins… and not

not girlfriends girlfriends but friends that are girls… because I grew up around girls

most of my family are girls…er he’s not there to when I’m older he might not be there to

say urm do you wanna go round to the pub to have a drink or something…cos I’ll be

doing something else because he won’t be there with me”

(King, line 892-906)

107

4.7(Theme(4:(When(Parents(Re-partner((

Figure(4.(Thematic(map(for(the(theme:(‘When(Parents(Re-Partner’(

4.7.1(Parents’(New(Relationships(

Three out of the four participant’s associations were about parents’ new partners and

relationships. For some this was relatively new and there were some uncertainties about what it

might be like welcoming a new parental figure and for others this was an experience they had a

few times:

108

“I met nice people with some of the r-relationships my mum was in” (King, line 51)

“erm to be honest I don’t mind that much erm because like my mum I think she’s already

seeing someone …but urm he’s never round or anything so she goes out on weekends to

see him” (Sienna, line 65-67)

“errr like my mum goes out erm with like er I guess a boyfriend, I don’t know, like a

friend out for like weekends and stuff. That’s kinda different” (James, line 48-50)

Sienna compared ‘others’ responses in movies against her mother’s partner’s family situation

which enabled her to feel this might be okay:

“because in like for example movies, when they..your parents have a new partner, you’re

like really mean to them or like push them away but I think but because they have a

family, and they’re going through the same thing it’s like if their child thought my mum

was really bad just because she’s with the dad” (Sienna, line 367)

4.7.2(Additional(Family(Members(

In talking about their parents’ separation participants spoke about meeting and having

contact with step and half siblings. There was a sense that relationships were sometimes

difficult to establish with these family members due to the amount they saw each other:

“noo, yeah when he picks me up to do stuff with me…I might see a brother, one of my

brothers called [names brother] …he’s really fun…urm I haven’t..we haven’t seen each

other in ages so we don’t really know what to talk about so I just brought up the subject

about fortnight” (King, line 309-315)

“urm I haven’t even met all of them so…”

(King, line 815)

Jordan: … so how often do you get to see them?

Ben: urm…not very lot now

(Ben, line 194-195)

109

James expressed more resistance at the thought of a new family and additional family members

and thought it was unlikely to happen, despite being aware that his mother had a new partner

who also had a child:

“er not that like a new like family sort of thing cos I don’t really see that happening”

(James, line 351)

4.7.3(Children’s(Perspectives(on(Parents’(New(Partners(

Participants discussed their perspectives on parents’ new relationships. For James, it was okay

that his mother was engaging in a new relationship because she shared her time equally between

him and her children:

“I mean I don’t mind cos she can have friends but urm I mean it’s not like er like she

spends like more time with him that us, so its balanced I guess” (James, line 895-897)

There were some expressions of mixed feelings about parents re-partnering:

“I don’t urm mind it like she can go out whatever, but sometimes it’s like annoying”

(James, line 54)

“but the fact that they’re doing that all for us and making it so much easier for us, like

makes me more understanding of the situation and that I shouldn’t like um like push it

away as much” (Sienna, line 423)

Sienna spoke about developing a relationship with parents’ new partners and how anxieties

around this might be mitigated by trust in their parent to select someone who they will like and

who will like them:

110

“which is gonna be a bit weird if they do because, yeah they’re like a stranger in a

way…because like you kind of have to get used to them…and then that’s gonna be a bit

like…weird because you don’t know anything about them but your parents like them so

you still like this when you..if it makes them happy it feels better for you. (Sienna, line 47-

51)

“so, like that will be okay as well so if I lived with them I’ll know they are a good person

at least” (Sienna, line 1038)

Knowing they had a similar situation was comfort and reassurance for Sienna and made it

possible that he might understand how a child might feel:

“and the fact he already had a child, like I said last week, it’s like kind of the same

situation we have…so like he can’t be like that bad or anything” (Sienna, line 1042-

1044)

There was a reluctance from some to want to meet parent’s new partners and there was a sense

that delaying the introduction of them into their lives provided them with a greater sense of

security and protected them from acknowledging the impending change:

“but urm he’s never round or anything, so she goes out on weekends to see him …which

is fine because like we don’t like interact with him, like we don’t know much about him,

which is fine I guess” (Sienna, line 67-69)

“er she said like do you do you wanna like, I’ve I’ve met him before like like before they

were partners and she said oh do you wanna like meet him and like go out and stuff, I

was like I don’t really care…no, it might be kinda awkward, cos like, oh you’re with my

mum now” (James, line 371-373)

“I mean er urm I don’t have any plans to like actually go and see them” (James, line

875)

As well as minimising the chance of developing a relationship with their mother’s partner, James

and Sienna similarly expressed their opinions on how they thought it was unlikely that their

mother’s relationship would develop quickly. My interpretation was that the new relationship

111

might be easier to accept once they were older and they had developed more independence from

their parents:

“not really because I’m not sure if they’re ever even gonna move into together and if they

do I think we’ll be like a lot older anyways…and then they only see each other a few

nights a week anyways so even if they are really close and they see each other a lot I

think it’s gonna be quite a few years before they do that” (Sienna, line 1012-1020)

“yeah, I mean I-I-I don’t think I’ll meet any of them in the near future or in general urm,

just I think they’re like in Birmingham or something like that” (James, line 395)

King reflected on one of his mother’s past relationships:

“there’s a man called [names mother’s ex-boyfriend] …urm he had er we stayed there

for quite a while he was a really really nice man.” (King, line 237-240)

4.7.4(Subsequent(Separations(

King spoke about the experience of his mother separating from subsequent relationships. His age

was a factor in what he was told about reasons for them separating. One of these seemed a

significant relationship for King, and one he spoke about at different times during the interview.

There was a sense that not only did King’s mother’s relationship end but King’s relationship

with them did too, indicated by the personal pronoun used:

“I met nice people with some of the r-relationships my mum was in but then I had to

finish for some reason, but I couldn’t get told because urm, she said it was adult business

…and…and I’m a child. (King, line 51)

However, King on other occasions was informed about the reasons for the ending of a

relationship:

112

“he he he had lots of expensive things but my mum figured out that was because he was

selling drugs and stuff so she ended that relationship quickly” (King, line 657)

4.8(Theme(5:(Change(and(Continuity((

Figure(5.(Thematic(map(for(the(theme:(‘Change(&(Continuity’(

4.8.1.(Parents(Living(Separately(

Unsurprisingly, participants gave a strong sense that they had to deal with and manage a number

of changes associated with their parents’ separation. One parent moving out of the shared home

was a particularly significant change for participants. For James and Sienna, who currently still

lived at home with both parents, this change brought several uncertainties and anxieties as well

as something to look forward to:

113

“about like getting a new room and redecorating because I like that, but it’s a bit weird

not having one of them near you all the time” (Sienna, line 33-35)

For Sienna, her parent’s living separately seemed like a necessary step to ensure that her and her

parents were happy. Sienna’s optimism was reliant upon her parent’s happiness and this helped

to reassure her of any anxiety she had about them moving out:

“urrm well I don’t know because it’s like I said before like, if it makes them happier,

which kind of makes me more positive about it, because if like they were staying together

and they didn’t progress over time, like separated, and they stayed together on the same

path… and it made them a bit more like impatient or a bit upset about it…I think in the

long run that would make us more unhappy…because it affects our home life more than

them moving apart…them more arguing in the house” (Sienna, line 289-297)

King expressed how his father leaving the family home suggested the possibility of an abrupt

and permanent end:

“I felt angry because urm I feel angry because when my dad left I thought I couldn’t see him

again and then I thought it was all his fault.” (King, line 112)

Participants wondered about practicalities of their parents living separately and how current

arrangements might be managed:

“and now we only have one and technically it’s my dad’s car, but we..he taught he taught our

mum to drive it…but if they’re not together where is our car gonna be?” (James, line 587-589)

“to watch a TV show that we both really like so now I’m thinking in the long run, different

homes, urm different like, how far away from school it is, so just small things that my friend

might not be able to come over, like like just by walking” (Sienna, line 539)

An inherent part of parents living in different houses was the aspect of having to move between

two homes, packing and moving belongings. James and Sienna wondered about the possibility of

this and how they might manage it:

114

“so, I’m really happy about that [having own room] but then I realised that she’s not

going to be here all the time which is gonna be bit different…and then always having to

go back and forth…gonna be a bit…” (Sienna, line 25-29)

“I can’t go back and get all my stuff for the next day say if I forget my homework so

that’s…gonna be a bit of a change to like be more prioritised with all my stuff” (Sienna,

line 177)

James: cos I have to, see I’ll..I like..I like I’ll have my console here or something like that

and…then I’ll go there and I’ll have to bring it or just leave it…it’s gonna be annoying.

(James, line 134-140)

There was a sense of a dawning realisation that once their parents moved home one of them

wouldn’t always be available when they needed them.

“yeah cos I have to stay home with like my other siblings, three and just my dad and

sometimes when they’re like annoying me and like my dad won’t help then my mums not

there.” (James, line 56-64)

“yeah, I think first it’s gonna be really weird because like not seeing one of them all the

time…like say if you wanted one in a situation, like even something simple for like

homework…that the other one may not be able to understand as much it’s gonna be

really weird like just calling them” (Sienna, line 339-343)

There was a hope, that wherever their mother moved to, it would be in close range so they could

easily see her in times of need:

“that it’s good that she’s in a close range…so if somethings gone wrong at home or

something happened I can go to my mum for help” (Sienna, line 465-467)

“like if I’m here and I’m annoyed like at my dad or whatever then maybe I can like just

go to her house or something” (James, line 851-857)

Parents living separately also brought differences in parenting and adapting to individual

parent’s rules:

115

“she did say that like in her house it’s not er like less like electrics and technologies cos

she doesn’t like any of it” (James, line 319)

“so, if I’m at my dad’s house half the week I’ll [clears throat] I’ll probably be eating like

oven food or like half the week I’ll be eating my mum’s food” (James, line 553-555)

4.8.2(Negative(Changes(

Overall participants tried to remain positive about changes associated with their parents’

separation, however laced between these positive narratives were expressions of the emotional

and practical challenges that came with their parents choosing to separate and the powerful

emotional turmoil that participants seemed to battle with:

“gonna be like really weird for me not seeing the other one all the time (voice wavering)

and that’s gonna be a bit harder” (Sienna, line 495-497)

“yeah, I went urm..not that I’d prefer them to be together sort of thing if they’re, ya know

clearly, they don’t want to… but urm change urm not really as good, like you don’t want

it” (James, line 185)

“yeah because now that I thought of, whilst we’re talking like when I get upset I’m

thinking of all the down stuff” (Sienna, line 563)

There was also an underlying tone of losing out on an established family routine when it came to

living apart:

“er like we watch films with our dad…more than with our mum… so like later we’re

gonna watch one and I don’t think, maybe my mum will watch it I don’t know, but like

maybe like if we’re at her house then we will watch less with him” (James, line 689-693)

116

Participants also reflected on the practical challenges of living in two homes and how it would

impact not only on themselves but also their parents and siblings:

“there’s one aspect that will probably kind of annoying cos I have to, see I’ll..I like..I like

I’ll have my console here or something like that and then I’ll go there and I’ll have to

bring it or just leave it” (James, line 132-136)

“or if we’re at..if were at like if were at our mum’s house and we wanna go out and then

we can’t cos we don’t have a car” (James, line 607-609)

“so, like I think it will be a bigger dist..even though it’s quite a small thing to walk to

school, it would be a bit weirder cos you have to wake up earlier and he might have to go

to breakfast club, which I know he hates” (Sienna, line 866)

4.8.3(Positive(changes(

Participants expressed feelings of excitement and positivity over changes that had occurred or

were yet to take place:

“so, my mum said that when she leaves I’m gonna get my own room, so, I’m really happy

about that” (Sienna, line 23-25)

“because she’s in a better mood and stuff and the other day we went to ikea to help a

friend with some new stuff…and it was quite fun to look around to see if we wanted

anything for a new house” (Sienna, line 95-97)

“it’s..like it’s a change but like I..I think it will be kind of fun like a new house, like new

place and stuff… cos it’s, it’s a long…process I guess, but I-I’m excited for it” (James,

line 114-126)

The fact that parents were also excited for the change and it benefitted them made it a more

positive experience:

“cos she’s excited, so it’s quite good” (Sienna, line 111)

117

Having a more balanced view of the positives and negatives enabled Sienna to maintain a more

positive outlook on her parents’ separation:

“because like I said the little down stuff but when I’m talking more about the positives

and like and it makes me more like feel a bit better” (Sienna, line 575-577)

King reported changes in his parents’ interaction with each other to be a positive development:

“but it’s gotten better now, now they barely have a argument but sometimes they might

just have urm urm an aggressive debate but it doesn’t turn into a argument” (King, line

198)

4.8.4(Continuity(

In opposition to the prospective changes, participants also spoke about how some things

remained the same, so much so that nothing had changed or they hadn’t noticed that their parents

had separated:

Jordan: what’s different?

Ben: urrm nothing really.

(Ben, line 446-447)

“surprised I didn’t notice, but urm other than that I don’t think like like there was

any…like er cos they still do like the same stuff together like urm, packing like my lunch”

(James, line 198)

Sienna shared how her relationship with her siblings hadn’t been impacted upon by her parents’

separation:

118

“I think everything’s’ the same cos it’s kind of always been like that like you have them

moments when it’s really fun and you have loads of laughs, and then there’s times when

you absolutely hate them and stuff, but I think it’s’ always just up and down” (Sienna,

line 772)

There was also a wish for some established practices to remain the same. James was concerned

how he would eat at his dads so wanted his mother to provide food for both households:

“yeah, I mean, I think it’ll probably like my mum could like make extra food and then

we’d just freeze it and then take it to dads” (James, line 573)

James and Sienna were yet to know what life might be like once their parents lived separately

and there was a wish for times like Christmas to remain as it currently was:

“I think she said that like Christmas stuff, even if she does move, it’ll still be, like, here”

(James, line 34)

“urm like one Christmas, cos then it would just be like annoying…I can’t like having to

go from house to house on one day”

(James, line 156)

For King, sadly what had remained the same was his father’s continual lateness to collect him,

leading him to expect it:

King: I’m used to it now so I don’t really care

Jordan: and has that always been the same him sort of being late to come and get you

KING: ummhmm

(King, line 440-442)

Touchingly, Sienna chose to focus on the present and enjoy the time she still had living as a

family, postponing her worries for her mother moved out:

119

“so, when the time comes then we can worry if..if you need but for the time being just like

enjoy the time we have with our whole family together” (Sienna, line 626)

The participant data emerging through thematic analysis has been presented. The following

section presents psychoanalytically informed analysis drawing upon data gathered through the

transference, counter transference and reflexive notes.

(

4.9(Psychosocial(Analysis((

4.9.1.(Ben,(aged(8(

I struggled to gather a sense of Ben’s past experiences prior to and after meeting with him, and

whilst Ben’s mother consented to his participation in the interviews, she chose not to meet with

me. For a long time after the interviews took place, I felt real concern that Ben’s participation in

this research would not be represented fully as a result of his reluctance to share during the

interview process and his mother’s reluctance to meet with me. It struck me that for all involved,

including Ben, his experience seemed difficult to make sense of. After following up with Ben’s

mum and school regarding her consent for Ben to take part, she expressed that I could use a

recent EP report to help contextualise Ben’s experience.

Ben’s parents separated when he was five and his parents reported his behaviour deteriorated at

home and school after the separation. Ben has difficulties focusing his attention and regulating

his emotional responses. His parents have an acrimonious relationship. Ben’s mother feels that

his behaviour is affected by his relationship with his father and missing him. He is reported to

not talk about how he feels but will sometimes burst into tears. Ben has a younger brother who

lives with him and his mother. He also has two older siblings whom he sees at his grandmother’s

120

house. He visits his father at his maternal grandmother’s house and stays over the weekends. He

also has telephone contact with his father although his father is not consistent in his contact.

Reflecting on my experience of Ben I am surprised by the difference in the description of his

difficult behaviour and emotional responses and the relatively calm and softly spoken boy I met

with. I noted that I was also surprised by the difference I noticed in Ben when meeting with him

to gain his assent and when we met for the interview. I was shocked at how the chatty engaging

little boy seemed to have disappeared when we met to discuss his parents’ separation. Despite

Ben apparently wanting to take part, he was reluctant to share his experiences and appeared to

find the interview process a challenge. He chose a toy microphone as his safe object and fiddled

with this throughout the interview, eventually breaking it from repeatedly dropping it on the

table. I wondered about Ben expressing his anger and frustration through his play with the toy

microphone.

Ben shared very little about his experience of his parents’ separation. He told me he saw his dad

on some weekends and that he found it fun to spend time with him and his brothers. The events

he shared were somewhat unclear and I noted in my reflections how I spoke a lot in an attempt to

elicit a narrative from Ben. I wondered if I was experiencing the anxiety of being a novice

researcher, aware of needing something I could work with. In the transference, I experienced

unbearable anxiety and intense psychic pain, which felt like a projection of loneliness and

hostility. I likened it to the feeling of concrete in my chest, stuck for words and grappling to

make sense of Ben’s experience. When I tried to find out more about his parents’ separation, Ben

would close down giving brief one word answers and would turn to fiddling with the toy

microphone more ferociously. I was struck by listening back to the audio tape by how much I

spoke and how desperate my enquires seemed. I noticed how I almost completely avoided open

121

questions and avoided feelings talk, instead asking direct and closed questions that Ben might

find easier to respond to. The feelings of shame, embarrassment and hostility communicated in

the transference I found to be unbearable, which can be seen by my stuttering and struggling for

words.

From listening to the recording, reading the transcript and my reflexive field notes it is evident

that Ben became more engaged when asked problem free questions such as what he did for fun

and talking about his siblings. It seemed thinking about his parents’ separation was so difficult

for Ben he projected all his unbearable feelings into me. The internal turmoil I felt of loss and

rejection were so intense that I burst into tears when I left the school. I was struck by how similar

my emotional reaction seemed to Ben’s mother’s description of him.

Ben demonstrated how projected feelings of loss and rejection were almost impossible to stay in

touch with, evidenced by his verbal expressions whilst playing with the microphone “make an

earthquake” and “push it through the wall”. I wondered whether these were metaphors for how

Ben was feeling, surrounded by destruction and disaster and the physical act of pushing the pain

away from him. Interestingly an earthquake was similar to how I was responding in the

countertransference, lost, broken and struggling to stay on my feet. I attempt to share with Ben

how it might be difficult for him to talk about his experience. However, in reality, what I

communicate is “this is difficult”, for me and him.

I wondered about the presence of an internal object who could help Ben to think about and digest

his experiences providing him with some order and understanding. As the interview came to a

close, Ben expressed sadness at this being the last time we meet. As difficult as it was to contain

122

the projected feelings I wondered about my ability to sit with the communications of hostility

and attack, and the possible, however small, containment this may have provided Ben.

(

4.9.2(James,(aged(13(

James’s parents separated a year before the interview took place. James is Sienna’s older brother

and is the second oldest of four children. He is one of three boys. James generally keeps to

himself at home and likes to play on his computer. He feels he is easily irritated by his younger

siblings and that he and his siblings are not treated equitably by their father. When James’s

parents separated, they began sleeping in separate bedrooms but did not move homes. His

mother informed each of the children separately. This is still the current arrangement. 5 years

prior to this, James’s parents split for the first time, his mother reported that James had a strong

reaction to this news and was very emotional for a long time. Shortly after this, his parents tried

to work at their relationship, getting back together until their final split last year. James’s mother

is now looking for a new home but has yet to find one. She is in a new relationship, which the

children are aware of.

I interviewed James at his home. James was described as private and distant and his mother

reported being surprised when he volunteered to take part in the research like his sister.

Therefore, it surprised me how easy he was to talk with and how open he was to taking part in

the research.

James, spoke more about the anticipated change of his parents’ separation than the past. James’s

first association to his parents’ separation was the possibility of having two houses and two of

everything when his mother moves out. I sensed an air of anxiety about the impending future and

123

the number of uncertainties that were around. James shared that “Christmas stuff, even if she

does move, it’ll still be like here”. There was a sense that a considerable level of anxiety was

being communicated in the transference and I wondered about James’s ability to stay with the

painful feelings of uncertainty, reassuring himself through the fact that things have and will

remain the same “I think they got separated and they didn’t, I like didn’t even notice”.

James shared many practical changes that may arise from his parents living separately, for

example, moving his belongings back and forth, attending hobbies, and different parenting

approaches. I was surprised by how calm he appeared with little to no visible affect as he spoke

about what sounded like considerable upheaval clouded in uncertainty. I noticed a lump in my

throat as he was speaking of these possible changes and was finding it hard to focus as though I

was clouded by fog. When reading and listening to the transcript, I wondered on reflection about

the painfulness and confusion I experienced in the transference and how this might reflect how

he was feeling about the uncertainty and cloudiness of his future.

James shared that when his mother goes out with her new partner that this is sometimes

“annoying” as her presence is beneficial to sorting out disputes between him and his siblings. It

felt as though James’s choice of affect did not match the unconscious communications in the

room, which were of loss and anxiety. I wondered about how his projection of loss, a seemingly

defensive manoeuvre, supported him to process some of the more difficult feelings towards his

parents’ separation and the unavailability of his mother.

When thinking about his mother moving into a new house James spoke about the excitement of a

new home and change. This is later contradicted when James speaks about his feelings towards

his parents not being together and his negative feelings towards it, “change urm not really as

124

good, like you don’t want it”. It seemed that by focusing on the positives of the move James was

able to protect himself from the more difficult feelings associated with his parents’ separation.

When revisiting the interview during transcription I was struck by how James mainly speaks

about the practicalities that the separation affects and noticed a tendency for him to follow an

expression of more difficult feelings with a positive remark or reflection on how things have not

been that different. I was also reminded of his avoidance of eye contact and scraping a pencil on

the desk during this time. I noticed that I too appeared to follow this positive frame and reflected

back his feelings of remaining positive, avoiding his expression of “negative” feelings. I

wondered about how the feelings of loss and uncertainty I experienced in the transference

possibly led me to respond in the countertransference by avoiding the negative feelings too. I

found myself wanting to make James feel comfortable and reassure him that things were okay.

Again, this seemingly defensive strategy appeared to enable James to take up more of a

depressive position with regard to his experience, being able to maintain an idea of both the good

and bad in what he was experiencing.

James expressed conflicting wishes of wanting to develop his independence and autonomy and a

wish to revert to reinstating the close bond with his parents that comes with being a younger

child. He reflected on how he would like to spend more time doing activities with his mum again

after she moves and possibly go on holiday with his dad. I experienced overwhelming feelings of

loss as James spoke about his changing relationships with his parents. I was struck by how this

resonated with my own experience of losing out on time with parents and a drive to make up for

potentially lost time.

When James spoke about his mother moving out or the possibility of meeting her new boyfriend

these were positioned as things that were not going to happen “in the near future”. The fact that

125

her boyfriend also lived in another city was further confirmation for James that these changes

were unlikely to come into effect anytime soon. I wondered about the safety and comfort that

was provided by splitting off these eventualities into the future and taking comfort in the good of

the now, which remains safe and relatively unchanged. I felt that by taking up this position

James was able to prepare himself for the more practical elements associated with his parents’

separation, leaving the anxiety of possibly losing his mother firmly in the future.

4.9.3(Sienna,(aged(11(

Sienna’s parents separated a year before the interview took place. Sienna is James’s younger

sister and is the second youngest of four children and the only girl. Her parent’s separated when

she was 9 years old, just over a year before the interview. Her parents currently live in the same

house but sleep in separate bedrooms, there is an intention that her mother will eventually move

into her own home. She was informed by her mother of her parents’ separation. Her mother

reported that she appears to have responded okay but says she doesn’t speak about the separation

with her. Sienna was initially the only child in her family to be put forward for the research by

her mother. Sienna is described by her mother as confident and outspoken and she felt she would

have a lot to say. Her mother shared that Sienna has not previously been given an opportunity to

talk about her experience or feelings around the separation.

Sienna arrived at the room on her own. She had just returned from an after-school club and

appeared in good spirits. She was articulate, polite and seemingly mature for her age. Sienna’s

first association to her parents’ separation was ‘living in two houses’. She began by speaking

about the mixed feelings this brought, whereby she would have her own room once her mother

moves out but this would also mean that her mother wouldn’t be there. Sienna regularly

126

oscillated in the interview between a positive gain and then a subsequent loss when speaking

about her mother leaving the family home. She moved onto speaking about her parents re-

partnering and the possibility of that person living with them. I felt considerable physical and

psychic pain during the transference and noticed the immediate return of these feelings when

listening to the interviews. From the first few minutes of listening to her narrative I was

transported back to the small room with this conscientious girl, putting extreme effort into being

okay. Sienna was seemingly reassured by the fact that these changes would make her parents

happier, which was her main priority. I felt unbearable pain and sadness in the transference and a

propensity to project my own personal experience into the interview space. I recognised, when

revisiting the transcripts and audio recording, that the sadness experienced, was partly my own

response in my experience of the countertransference. Sienna resonated with me personally, in

terms of her age and gender, and her need to ensure her parents happiness was all too familiar. I

responded to her projections of painful feelings by following her narrative of feeling okay and

missing her expression that this is ‘gonna be a bit weird’ for her. I felt a sense of protectiveness

that I needed her to feel ‘okay’.

Sienna speaks about managing aspects of her parents’ separation, such as moving back and forth

and her mother not being there by focusing on finding ways to be organised through the use of a

diary and being excited about decorating her new room. Sienna’s narrative appeared to convey

that she has been able to adopt an adaptive defence, in the form of sublimation by channeling her

energies into decorating her room and finding ways to support her new living arrangement. She

is able to show consideration and support of her parents’ situation and their wish to live

separately, putting their feelings above her own. She seems to be able to adopt a more depressive

position of acknowledging both the good and bad, demonstrating a more realistic perception of

the external world.

127

Sienna would at times move into a position where she spoke only about the positives of the

separation describing her parents’ separation as ‘completely fine’. As Sienna spoke I felt extreme

feelings of sadness and fear in the transference which did not appear to match Sienna’s positive

façade. It appeared, however, that Sienna’s true feelings seemed to peep at the surface, her voice

wavering and tears forming in her eyes. There was a heaviness in the room and I felt the

immense pressure that she was putting on herself to feel okay. As Sienna began to acknowledge

both the ups and downs of the situation and moved back into considering both the positives and

negatives she was brought to tears. The intense feelings I felt in the transference seemed to

dissipate as Sienna adopted an ability to be in touch with the external world and adopt a more

depressive position. Her acknowledgment that “I kinda want to have a new room and like stuff

but it’s gonna be like really weird for me not seeing the other one all the time” and being able to

mourn her loss enabled her to remain in touch with an external reality, supported by the use of

containing and reliable maternal and paternal figures shown in her description of her parents

“whereas our parents are like really understanding and like make sure we’re first”. I recognised

my own role in the interview process through reflective supervision. My ability to remain

curious and stay with the painful feelings was made more possible when Sienna was able to

acknowledge these feelings herself. I realised there was a need for me to engage in this

reciprocal dance of moving to and away from acknowledging the painful feelings to support her

‘working through’ them.

Whilst there was evidence that Sienna was able to make use of containing and dependable

objects and remain in touch with an external reality, there was still a sense of splitting others into

good or bad. Sienna often referred to people who had experienced divorce as ‘criminals’ or ‘bad

people’ who she had seen in movies who put “their anger into crimes”. Sienna split off all her

128

bad feelings into these ‘others’ and reassured herself that her situation was better so she would

be okay. Splitting the world into a binary state may have enabled Sienna to preserve the ‘good’

object in her mind.

Sienna moved to asking me about whether my parents had separated and I found myself stunned

and curious about what I may have been projecting into the interview space. Her evaluation of

me as “a really nice person and that didn’t affect you as like a bad person” seemed to develop

her capacity and tolerance to engage with the possibility of a complete person embodying the

good and bad together.

Sienna further engages in adaptive defence mechanisms through her focus on her developing

autonomy and independence. Her ability to remain in contact with the out of house parent

through her new phone and her age indicating she is growing up and spending less time with her

parents is a helpful distraction for Sienna to avoid some of the ‘little things’ that make her feel

‘down’. Focusing on the time she has in the present with her family, and placing the change and

anxiety in the future, she is reassured that by the time any further change occurs she will be older

and therefore less likely to be affected by it “I’m not sure if they’re ever going to move into

together and if they do I think we’ll be a lot older anyways, cos I’m nearly 12”.

4.9.4(King,(aged(10(

King is an amicable and friendly boy who currently attends a specialist provision. King’s parents

separated when he was 5 years old and his contact with his father is not as consistent as his

mother or King would like. The current contact arrangements are once a fortnight on a Saturday

morning. King was easy to engage with and was excited to choose his own pseudonym when

129

meeting to explain about the research. King reports becoming angry in his primary school and

that’s why he now attends a different school. He spends one afternoon a week at his old school.

His mother reported that King’s behaviour deteriorated after going to live with his father for 5

weeks a few years back. King has a diagnosis of ADHD. King’s mother has also suffered from

her own mental health needs and substance abuse which she acknowledges she has put behind

her. She shared that her relationship with King’s father was unconventional and there is a history

of domestic violence. King has fourteen siblings, 6 of these are younger than King and some

were born whilst King’s parents were still together. King is his mother’s only child. King has

not met some of his siblings and others he has a close relationship with. He has one sister, of a

similar age, who was born when King’s parents were still together, who he sees regularly. King

often expresses the wish that his parents would get back together.

King was shown to the interview by his teacher. He had a youthful, friendly face and an air of

innocence about him. I was instantly brought back to my days as a behaviour specialist in a PRU

and reminded of the number of young unsuspecting children I worked with, finding it difficult to

imagine the behaviour that would have led him to this provision. King completed his GEM using

both drawings and writing and I felt an intense feeling of sadness in the transference as he shared

his wonderings “why is my daddy so mean to my mummy” and his feelings “sad plus angry

equals sangry”. These feelings of sadness were noticeably absent in King. I noticed in myself

that I wanted to take these feelings away from him, help him in some way to overcome them.

Listening back to the audio recording I noticed how loss pervaded King’s narrative, describing

how he thought he would never see his father again, the ending of his mother’s subsequent

relationships and the moving of his dog to live with his nan. My reflexive field notes depict the

sadness that engulfed me in the countertransference, an emotion predominantly absent in King.

130

King spoke about his mother’s sadness in relation to their separation and through this identified

his own feelings of sadness and anger. King’s approach shifted and he appeared to be more

solemn and thoughtful about what he had shared. I noticed that after an expression of something

that was potentially painful, King would move to engaging in problem free talk about a game or

something that interested him. This moving away appeared to enable King to navigate the

potentially painful anxieties and emotions stimulated by the interview.

King spoke about his contact with his father and being let down by him. I was overcome with

feelings of rejection and fear in the transference. His narrative suggested ambivalence about his

paternal figure, someone that he wanted around but knew would not be. He demonstrated a

capacity to be angry at his paternal object and his projection of rejection and fear appeared to

enable King to express his anger about his father’s efforts to see him and aggression towards his

mother. King acknowledged that he knew his “mum will always be there”, despite her own

vulnerabilities and past health struggles, suggesting a capacity to hold on to a realistic perception

of her as available and containing. There was sense however that King was at times splitting his

mother and father into all good and all bad and I wondered if at present it is difficult for King to

face any negative feelings about his mother (maternal object). Splitting his parents this way may

enable him to preserve the good object so that he can develop the capacity to engage with

external word in a more integrated way.

King’s father let him down on a regular basis and King shared that he “doesn’t really care” and

that he was “used to it”. I wondered about how this suggested a defence against feelings that

may pose threat to his internal world. Later King seems to be able to acknowledge the painful

feelings this stirs up for him and admits he would like his father “to try harder”. He seems to be

able to acknowledge and consider that his paternal figure is not ‘good enough’ (Winnicott,

131

1964), and mourn the father he wanted to have. He seems to get in touch with an external reality

where even though his father may not be around he finds comfort in the consistency of his

mother.

4.10(Chapter(Summary((

This chapter presented an analysis of data amassed through interviews held with participants at

both a semantic and interpretive level. The analysis showed five themes emerged through the

thematic analysis. Further psychosocial analysis found each participant’s narratives to have

distinct emphases from each other. Chapter 5 will now explore these areas in further detail.

(

132

5.(Discussion(

5.1(Chapter(Overview(

This closing chapter starts by providing a summary of the findings and discusses these in terms

of literature identified in chapter 2, wider literature and psychological theory. The implications

of this research and its findings for the practice of EPs are discussed, including what the

application of psychoanalytic ideas might offer the profession. Strengths and limitations of the

study are then considered, including implications for future research. The chapter concludes with

reflections of my experience of the research process.

5.2(Summary(of(Findings(

This research sought to answer two research questions:

• How do children experience their parents’ divorce or separation?

• What can be understood about participants’ experience of divorce or separation from a

psychosocial perspective?

Five themes emerged through a thematic analysis of participants’ responses. Analysis revealed

that children spoke about their emotional response to their parents’ separation both now and at

the time of learning about the separation. They made attempts to make sense of and process the

event by thinking it through and talking about it, including within the interview process.

Children engaged in resilient mind-sets in their attempt to manage both their emotional response

and the practical changes that come with parents’ separation. Their reflections suggested that it

was potentially difficult to remember some of their experiences and provide narratives. The

133

analysis highlighted aspects of when children’s parents re-partner into new relationships. This

included uncertainty about welcoming new partners into their lives and their relationships with

new additional family members as well as the experience of subsequent parental separations. The

children reflected on the changes they had experienced or were yet to experience, including the

positive and negative aspects of change and more specifically the significant event of parents

living separately. Encompassed within this was the reflection on what had remained the same

and what children wished would continue after separation. The analysis of interview data

showed that children spoke about the relationship between their parents and both theirs and their

parents’ feelings linked to this interaction. Narratives showed children spoke about their parents’

interactions both before and after the separation. The children’s reflections on their current and

proposed contact arrangements with their out of house parent, illuminated their views on

engaging in shared parenting arrangements and their present and prospective contact and

communication with them. It also included the painful recollections of how contact with parents

may not live up to expectations, highlighting its fragility for some.

5.3(A(Process:(Children’s(Response(to(Parents’(Separation(

Divorce and separation is now thought of as ongoing process that is played out in a complex

variety of ways, with differential effects for those involved (Rodgers & Pryor, 1998). It is no

longer seen as a ‘one off event’ which forever defines those involved (Neale & Flowerdew,

2007). The children in this study engaged in emotional and cognitive processing when trying to

comprehend their parents’ separation. This is generally consistent with what is known about

young people’s experiences of divorce (Fawcett, 2000). Children’s accounts in this study showed

this complex shifting process was unique for each individual, and the interview space was used

consciously and unconsciously by all, in different ways, to work through and make sense of a

range of aspects associated with their parents’ separating. Other research in the area has also

134

shown that children’s responses to their parents’ separation are mixed, reflecting the variety and

complexity of their circumstances (Hogan et al., 2003) .

The children in this study demonstrated a continual processing of their feelings towards their

parents’ separation, both positive and negative, appearing to oscillate between sadness and loss,

and excitement and acceptance. As described in chapter 4, Sienna, James and King at times

oscillate between different states of mind when speaking about their feelings and response to

their parents’ separation, demonstrating possible defences against anxiety. This idea of ever-

shifting mental states is considered by both Klein and Bion in an account of growth and

development (Waddell, 2002). Both Klein and Bion suggest there are lifelong fluctuations

between two states of mind, described by Klein as paranoid-schizoid and depressive positions.

The depressive position, which demonstrates the capacity to manage anxiety and introject both

the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’ and adopt a somewhat balanced relationship to the other is sometimes

countered by the need to protect the self and adopt the more primitive position termed “paranoid-

schizoid”. This state of mind is adopted in the face of pain and emotional distress and

characterised by a focus on self-perseveration at all costs (Waddell, 2002). Sienna, James and

King in this study appeared to move back and forth between these states of mind, adopting

adaptive defence strategies, enabling them to comprehend and process a more balanced reality.

James did this by splitting off and projecting feelings of loss and uncertainty, enabling him to

process positive and negative feelings he held towards his mother moving home. Sienna,

similarly engaged in adaptive defence mechanisms, by splitting off her bad feelings into

‘criminals’ and ‘movie characters’ to support her integration and tolerance of the ‘good and bad

together’ in a person who had experienced the separation of their parents. Similarly, King drew

upon a good internal object, which supported him to grieve for the loss of a consistent father

figure, allowing him to acknowledge his true feelings towards him.

135

Divorce and separation is considered an experience of ‘loss’ in a child’s life. Dowling & Gorell-

Barnes (1999) suggest that only if children are allowed to mourn the ‘loss of the complete

family’ can they begin to come to terms with the new situation and begin to adapt to it. A sense

of loss was communicated by all the children in the study, including what I picked up through

unconscious communications during the interview process. King mourned the loss of a father

figure, and Sienna and James mourned the possible loss of their life as they now knew it and the

future loss of their mother from the family home. Although Ben had more difficulty expressing

his experience he too alluded to the loss of sibling relationships and a regularity of contact with

his father. Other research in the area reported that children experience both an economic and

relational loss when their parents’ separate (Smart, 2006). Freud described the slow and painful

work of mourning which involves internal struggles between polarised impulses, of attempts to

accept a loss and to deny it. This can be seen and described by the fluctuations in James and

Sienna’s narratives, between depressive and paranoid-schizoid positions, in denying painful

feelings of their parents’ separation, and accepting both positive elements (e.g. having a new

home) and negative elements (e.g. not having mum around all the time). Bowlby (1980) in his

application of attachment theory to loss and bereavement described grief as a normal adaptive

response when a loss has occurred. He observed that a child whose grief reaction has become

prolonged may present in denial and have the inability to ‘give sorrow words’. This may explain

Ben’s difficulty in expressing his experience of his parents’ separation and the intense affect

communicated through his splitting and projection of feelings of loss and rejection. Waddell

(2002) describes a lack of visible affect and movement as possible defences against pain, which

may serve to describe Ben’s intense focus on the toy microphone and its subsequent destruction.

Smart (2006) also reported participants, who like Ben, were unable or unwilling to provide full

accounts of their family relationships and suggested that their fragmented stories may still be too

136

immediate and raw for them to stand back and reflect upon them. Winnicott (1996) suggests a

child has a natural tendency to recover from loss if a supportive and holding environment is

present, that acknowledges their grief and painful feelings and provides them with time to

recover. Sienna, James and King all appear to be able to hold in mind an ‘internal good object’

which helps lessen the intensity of anxiety associated with their loss.

Participants’ explored the uncertainty of their situations in how their day to day life might

transpire and how their parents’ separation might impact upon them in the future, in a personal

and relational sense. Sienna and James explored how living across two homes might impact on

their social and school lives and Sienna at times was fixated on the impact separation might have

on her as a person. King spoke more about his relationship, or lack thereof, with his father, and

how that might impact on him in the future. The papers reviewed in chapter 2 did not report any

findings that suggested participants grappled with future uncertainty when thinking about their

parents’ separation. However, findings from two studies in Ireland reported that children’s

narratives demonstrated they had the ability to reflect upon and review their expectations for the

future (Halpenny et al., 2008) and that they had mixed expectations about how their family

would develop (Hogan et al., 2003). These findings resonate with some of the findings of this

study. Bion (1962) suggested that the desire to know and acquire knowledge, along with love

and hate, is the most important element in the growth and development of personality. Parental

divorce and separation thrusts children into a position where they have little to no knowledge

and control. This is evidenced by the children’s wonderings about reasons for their parents’

separation and the form their lives will take in the future. The children exert efforts to gain some

control and manage the anxiety associated with not knowing through seeking knowledge through

alternative means, such as Sienna’s attempts to understand through watching movies of children

who have experienced divorce or through others that she knows of. King similarly imagines his

137

life in the future in attempt to ‘know’ about what the future might hold. These efforts to gain

some control provided children with some reassurance, mitigating their experiences of

helplessness and somewhat relieving their unmanageable feelings (Burgo, 2012).

(

5.4(Relationships,(Contact(and(Shared(Parenting(

Children spoke about their contact and relationships with their parents, either currently or

anticipated. They reflected on their current and proposed contact arrangements and explored

their views on engaging in shared parenting arrangements. The children who were yet to engage

in a shared parenting arrangement tried to understand how the parenting arrangement might be

worked out and expressed they wanted a fair and equitable arrangement that was flexible to their

needs. However, the two participants already in a shared parenting arrangement shared

experiences of how contact with their out of house parent has been inconsistent and not as

regular as they would have liked. Studies reviewed in chapter 2 identified good contact for

children was based on a good quality relationship and not its quantity, and that children often

experienced diminished contact when relationships with their out of house parent was poor

(Neale & Flowerdew, 2007). This finding appears to align with King and Ben’s narratives and

suggest that the inconsistency in their relationship with their fathers has contributed to the

amount they see them and the affect that was communicated through unconscious intersubjective

dynamics. Furthering this finding, although yet to engage in a shared parenting arrangement,

James and Sienna’s good quality relationships with their parents, which featured heavily in their

narratives, suggest that they may experience a more consistent shared parenting arrangement, for

which plans are already underway. Hogan et al., (2003) found evidence that children generally

had high levels of contact with non-resident parents, regulated arrangements and children had

clear expectation of these. This was not found for two of the participants in this study, and James

and Sienna, despite describing how they thought contact would be distributed, reported high

138

levels of uncertainty and anxiety about how this would be in practice. Similar to other findings in

the literature, Sienna grappled with ensuring that contact was fair, more so for parents than

herself (Neale & Flowerdew, 2007). Flexibility and workable arrangements were desired by

children in Halpenny et al. (2008) study, particularly in the context of children getting older and

adapting to their own needs and interests. This was a wish expressed by both Sienna and James

in this study. Data collected through unconscious dynamics suggested that the participants

managed their contact with their parents through employing unconscious defensive strategies.

King, Sienna and James, however, were not in complete denial of their pain and oscillated

between dis-integration and re-integration of their pain and anxiety. These responses suggest that

they were engaging in adaptive defence mechanisms, indicative of suppression. Through

suppression, the impact and reality of a situation are accepted, and in some ways minimised

(Vaillant, 2000). For Ben, it seemed that his defence mechanisms and adoption of the paranoid-

schizoid position served to protect his internal self from threats of anxiety, which at this point in

time, were possibly too raw and painful to face. Bion (1962) saw the fragmentation and splitting

of paranoid positions as a necessary aspect of human experience and associated this inner

turbulence, experienced by the participants, as intrinsic to emotional growth.

Divorce and separation brings with it the possibility of new relationships and the introduction of

new family members. In talking about their experience of their parents’ separation children

explored parents establishing new love relationships. James and Sienna explored the relevant

uncertainty and anxieties around their mother’s new relationship and King spoke about the

experience of loss associated with subsequent parental separations. Freud’s oedipal complex may

explain some of the hostile feelings and anxieties present when a parent embarks on a new

relationship. The oedipal situation brings into focus that the child does not have all of his mother

all of the time, and there is another adult who has claim to her, who are in a relationship

139

independent of him, stirring up hostile feelings and phantasies (Youell, 2006). Youell (2006)

suggests that separation, loss and change although painful are essential experiences that are

linked to growth, development and internal strength. The beginnings and endings an individual

goes through in infancy and early childhood, prepares for later losses and transitions. However,

every ending (e.g. parent leaving home), involves a loss of some kind and every beginning (e.g.

parent embarking on a new relationship) carries with it the anxiety of facing the unknown,

stirring up affectual memories about other losses and earlier fearful beginnings (Youell, 2006).

For some of the participants’ safety was found in placing the possibility of this change in the

future and denying any immediacy of developing their own relationship with their mother’s new

partner. Vaillant, (2000) describes the defence anticipation as one’s capacity to bear the affective

response to an unbearable future, reflecting the capacity to perceive future danger affectively as

well as cognitively, and to master future conflict in small steps, regulating the children’s

perceptions of internal and external realities that they are powerless to change. James and

Sienna’s descriptions of staying in touch with their mother via phone and Sienna’s comfort in

now having her own personal mobile, is interesting in relation to the management of separation

and transition linked to divorce and separation. It is possible that contact via phone enables the

children to be in touch with their ‘secure base’ at any time and possibly serves to erase the

experience of being separate, denying or eradicating anxiety associated with separation (Youell,

2006).

5.5(Resilience,(Autonomy(&(Dependence((

The children’s narratives highlighted resilience and ability to cope with changes associated with

their parents’ separation. This included maintaining a positive mindset about future changes and

evaluating the importance of these in comparison to other areas of their life. For King, it was

about being able to offer support and comfort to his mother and for Sienna it also included

140

adopting practical strategies, such as a planner, to help her with the future transition between two

homes. Flowerdew and Neale (2003) identified that an important factor in helping children with

these transitions is the pace at which changes are managed. They suggest that Gidden’s (1992)

concept of ‘psychological travelling time’ is useful in understanding this for children of divorce,

that is the length of time it takes to accept and come to terms with a major life transition. He

suggests that travelling implies a destination, which is always one place, and we cannot be in two

places at once. Therefore, coming to terms with each major life change is likely to require

‘psychological travelling time’ or a period of emotional recovery. It may be that the resilience

and ability to cope displayed by James and Sienna may have been supported by the relative time

that they have been given to process and come to terms with changes and transitions associated

with their parents’ separation.

Children spoke about growing up and developing independence and autonomy and this appeared

to serve as a protective factor against the prospect of not seeing one of their parents regularly.

The children’s growing independence meant that they no longer needed to rely on their parents

as much as they do now and were able to manage their contact with their parents more

autonomously, for example, visiting one parent should they wish to or remaining in contact via

phone. This appeared more apparent in James and Sienna’s narratives who were at the early

stages of adolescence. It may be the growing independence that comes with adolescence was a

supportive factor in these children coping with their parents’ separation and something that Ben

and King were yet to draw upon in their more dependent latency phase.

The children in this study also appeared to navigate their parents’ separation, associated change

and feelings independently, without support or expression of their feelings to others. There was a

sense that divorce and separation was something that you didn’t speak about with others both

141

inside and outside the family. This finding is similar to the finding by Smart (2002) where

children reported that they were without adult support as they navigated their own problems.

However, this is in contrast to Hogan et al., (2003) and Fawcett (2000) who found that children

were more likely to confide and accept support from those inside the family than seek support

outside of the family. Therefore, it is interesting the benefits Sienna reported experiencing,

having been given the opportunity to speak about and reflect on her parents’ separation, “I think

talking about this has helped me a lot, because like I said the little down stuff but when I’m

talking more about the positives and like it makes me more like feel a bit better”. For her, an

opportunity to speak about both the positives and negatives of her parents’ separation was

“important” and “helpful”. Bion’s (1961) Container-Contained model may go some way in

describing what Sienna references here regarding the benefit she felt speaking about her

experiences. Bion’s model describes a process of communication whereby one entity holds,

manages, comprehends and influences another. Containment and holding environments may

offer a reduction of the terror that can be brought about major transitions, such as divorce

(Salzberger-Wittenberg, Henry, & Osborne, 1983).

The children also expressed wishes to revert to earlier levels of dependency including the

prospect of spending more quality time with parents, something they did less of since they were

older. Winnicott (1965) suggested that upon entering a new context and new set of relationships,

as one is exposed to through separation or divorce, thrusts us back into positions of dependency.

This may be helpfully explained by Bowlby’s attachment theory and the idea of a secure base of

which we can return even as we develop through life. Youell (2006) suggests that this pattern of

returning to our secure base, initially developed in early infancy, does not change as one moves

through childhood and towards adulthood, however, it becomes an increasingly internal

phenomenon. When an individual has experiences of containment and well manged separations,

142

these are internalised and introjected providing the individual with a good internal object and

secure, flexible inner world that can be relied upon in times of distress and anxiety. Here the

children’s narratives suggest they are drawing upon internal representations of their good

internal objects as ways in which to manage the fear and anxiety evoked in thinking about their

parents’ separation. This enables them to move towards a more depressive position, through the

experience of an external observing and containing mind, allowing the different parts of the self

to remain in touch with one another (Waddell, 2002).

5.6(Relating(in(role:(Individual(Intersubjective(Dynamics.((

‘Role is dynamic: it is never a fixed pattern of response or behaviour’ (Reed, 2000, p.4)

A significant finding of this research comes from my experience in engaging with each

participant. As described in chapter 4, different feelings were elicited through the unconscious

intersubjective dynamics, through the transference and countertransference, which affect the

research relationship. Hollway and Jefferson (2013) illustrate the idea that data is a co-

production of the interview pair and suggest that the concepts of recognition and containment are

useful in supporting understanding of what it is in the research (or other) relationship that helps

trust to develop. The subject is understood as being dynamically produced in the intersubjective

relationship and that the person who is produced in the interview is new but also recognisable

(Ogden, 1994). This is data that I relied on within this study but I also propose has benefits

beyond the researcher role, and is useful and relevant for the EP role.

Contextual factors like legislative influences and systemic and psychodynamic processes of

expectation and personal drivers, consciously and unconsciously, impact upon EPs taking up

their espoused role. The level of influence each of these have is dependent upon the EPs ability

143

to reflect on their practice and understand influences on their role with differing individuals in

different systems. Psychodynamic theories are related to individual, unconscious processes

(Waddell, 2002) and include the functions and processes that a person brings to their role.

Different encounters within different systems can impact and obstruct effective, efficient and

meaningful engagement (Eloquin, 2016). Acknowledging the influence of intersubjective

dynamics, underlying psychodynamic processes and systemic pressures that influence our role

when working with children and young people and associated others, through reflective practice,

can serve to support a greater more holistic understanding of a child’s world and experience

within it.

5.7(Implications(for(the(Educational(Psychology(Profession(

It would now seem timely to consider the implications this research has for the EP profession

and consider the place of psychoanalytic thinking in terms of how this may be applied, and what

this might offer when working with or supporting children who have experienced the breakdown

of their parents’ relationship.

This research has highlighted that psychosocial methods enable us to know and learn through

both conscious and unconscious modes, and that a holistic understanding of a child’s experience

can be gained through attention to not just what is communicated at a conscious verbal level but

also what is communicated via affect at an unconscious level (Hollway & Jefferson, 2013).

Psychoanalytic thinking therefore has a place in EP practice and can as Pellegrini (2010)

suggests enrich the quality of reflection. The knowledge gained from this research can inform

how EPs think about children’s range of experiences and anxieties when parents separate.

Pellegrini (2010) demonstrates how EPs can benefit from an awareness of their own feelings in

social interactions, by engaging in reflective practice, guided by psychoanalytic thinking, to help

144

them better understand and make sense of their own and others emotional responses. EPs also

have a crucial role in helping and supporting others to understand emotionally complex and

confusing situations (Pellegrini, 2010).

There is increasing evidence of the application of psychoanalytic ideas to EP practice. This

includes psychoanalytically informed supervision for school staff (Hulusi & Maggs, 2015) and

systems psychodynamic frameworks to support organisational level work in schools (Eloquin,

2016). It is nationally recognised that mental health needs for children and young people are

increasing and poor mental health has an adverse impact on learning and achievement. Within

this there is growing recognition of the role of teachers and schools in supporting the mental

health needs of its pupils (DfE &DoHSC, 2017; DfE, 2018; House of Commons, 2018).

However, Hulusi and Maggs (2015) reflect that unlike other professions who work with children

and young people ‘teachers are not routinely provided with a safe space…to reflect on the

experiences and emotions they are left with in their day-to-day work’. Given the prevalence of

divorce in the UK, it is likely that teachers will have children or young people in their class who

are processing the loss and possible trauma of their parents’ separation. EPs have the skills and

psychological understanding to support other professionals who work with children who have

experienced divorce or separation (HCPC, 2015, BPS, 2002) and are well placed to offer a

reflective space, through supervision, to staff working with children and young people. Hulusi &

Maggs (2015) assert that psychoanalytically informed supervision has the potential to contain

teachers’ emotional responses to their work and help them to make sense of their ‘apparently

irrational experiences’ and enable them to provide better containment to their pupils, and support

effective engagement in learning. Supervision can provide a space in which staff can reflect on

their relationship between themselves and another and support the professional and emotional

dilemmas that work can evoke.

145

This research not only highlighted the role psychoanalytic concepts have in supervision of

school staff but also reinforced the centrality of supervision in EP practice. Psychoanalytically

informed supervision played a significant role in how I came to understand the participants in

my study, my own emotional responses and the intersubjective space between me and

participants. Supervision provides a platform from which learning takes place, and incorporation

of ideas from psychoanalytic thinking can expand EPs knowledge of potential defences against

anxiety that may be being employed within and beyond the supervisory space.

Youell (2006) considers the relevant importance and significance of beginnings and endings in

relation to the context of schools and the learning relationship. She suggests that events in the

family, such as divorce, may leave parents and children susceptible to extreme anxiety at times

of change. She highlights the significance of change and transitions, for all of us, suggesting it is

important for teachers to understand, notice and support those children for whom change is a

major area of difficulty. EPs have a crucial role in sharing psychological knowledge and theory

about the significance of these life events through consultation, training and supervision.

The Mental Health Green Paper released by the government in 2017 identified that 50% of

mental health needs start before a child turns 15. Children who have experienced the separation

or divorce of their parents are known to be at particularly high risk of poor mental health

outcomes both in the long and short term. The House of Commons (2017) propose that teachers

should receive mental health training and continuing professional development to ensure they are

properly equipped to recognise the early signs of mental health problems in their pupils and have

the confidence to signpost or refer to the right support. EPs have an important role in proactively

raising awareness amongst schools of the risk factors present in this population and working

146

preventively with schools through the provision of training to meet the needs of children and

young people experiencing their parents’ separation or divorce.

Several of the SENDCos I approached about my research reported that they would be unable to

host this within their schools. Further conversations with some revealed that they felt unequipped

to potentially handle the emotional ramifications of bridging this conversation with parents and

children. Although anecdotal, this suggests that school staff are potentially defended against the

anxieties conversations of this kind stirs up. EPs are well placed at the interface between home

and school and can provide support to the school to develop their own capacity to support a child

or young person’s needs. Given the potential impact these experiences can have on a child’s

wellbeing, EPs have a role in promoting these conversations within schools and providing

support through raising awareness and providing supervision and training or direct work where

this is indicated.

It is important for EPs to consider how they might raise this conversation with schools and the

members of staff with which they work. As with other vulnerable populations in schools, such as

Looked After Children, EPs might be curious about whether there are any children or young

people who have experienced or who are currently experiencing their parents’ separation and

raise this with SENDCos during termly planning meetings. EPs have knowledge of the

importance of children’s emotional wellbeing and social, emotional and mental health needs and

can highlight the potential impact divorce or separation can have on a child or young person’s

needs in these areas. EPs should remain open and curious to any possible defences against the

topic and consider the possible reasons for this and the potential anxieties raised by divorce or

separation and reflect on the potential for staffs own unprocessed losses and trauma in their

autobiographies. Training, consultation and supervision for teachers and other members of the

147

school team can support school staff to understand how unconscious defences against painful

feelings of anxiety may be adopted when working with this population of children and young

people. It is important to consider that the ‘best conditions’ in which to hold these conversations

with schools may be after EPs have been able to establish a rapport with the schools and develop

trusting relationships, whereby these topics of sensitivity can be discussed, openly, curiously and

honestly. EPs themselves may also find it difficult to address this topic and it may be helpful for

those to bring this to their own supervision to unpick the anxieties that may underpin these

feelings.

Through psychoeducation and highlighting the role of the school, it may be possible for EPs to

support schools with the more practical elements of supporting pupils experiencing divorce or

separation, even when there appear to be potential barriers or resistance. It may be helpful to

highlight to schools how they might offer continuity and familiarity for children during times of

change and transition as well as a safe and neutral place where children’s development and

welfare is paramount (Cox & Desforges, 1987). EPs can support schools to think about their

organisational structure and systemic processes in order to develop school policies and

procedures for children who are experiencing their parents’ separation or divorce. For example,

considering the practical adaptations highlighted by Cox & Desforges (1987), such as, record

keeping, contact and access information, consideration of communication and contact with both

parents and sensitivity of the different family structures within the school curriculum and

resources, which is particularly relevant with regard to the new statutory guidance on

Relationship, Sex and Health education (2019).

Other recent Government agendas have promoted the importance of the child’s voice in matters

concerning themselves (DfE & DoH, 2015). Fawcett (2000) highlights that most support services

148

in the UK for divorce or separation have primarily been adult focused and child centered

services are typically not prioritised unless for excesses of behaviour. Hawthorne et al., (2003)

argue that despite growing focus on children’s views and their right to be involved in decisions

and matters concerning themselves, in practice few support services manage to successfully

incorporate these ideas in current provision. They suggest that of importance are the needs to

facilitate communication between children and parents and children’s networks for support

including school and community links. EPs are at the interface of the school and family systems,

and have the necessary skills to facilitate or encourage discussions with children and young

people about their views and experiences and advocate for their views to be heard in

consultations with schools and parents. Surprisingly, there were no other examples identified in

two leading UK EP journals of research into children’s experiences of divorce. Findings suggest

that talking about their experience was beneficial for some participants and highlights that EPs

can have a role in gathering children’s views and perspectives about this significant life event.

5.8(Strengths(and(Limitations(

The psychosocial approach to this research allowed for an exploration at a conscious spoken

level and unconscious level, of what children associated with when asked about their experience

of their parents’ divorce or separation. Allowing for an exploration of interrelated individual and

social dynamics in children’s experience. Although, the study has not set out to suggest that the

experiences of these children are typical or generalisable to all children of divorce or separation,

a limitation might be that the findings of this study cannot be said to be true of the experiences of

other children and young people who have experienced their parents’ divorce or separation. It is

hoped, however, that the aim to give voice to this population of children and attempts to

understand their experience of divorce or separation has been somewhat met. It is, however,

important to consider that children’s experiences are not considered to be homogenous,

149

suggesting the need for bespoke intervention and support. This study may provide some useful

practice implications for EPs.

For me, a considerable strength in the study lies in its reflexivity and the use of psychoanalytic

thinking to support making sense of the vast amount of affectual data amassed through the

interviews. Combining this with children’s narratives, psychosocial methods allowed for a richer

and deeper approach to understanding these children’s experience. I initially intended to explore

further my research role and the impact of my own psychosocial experiences on the co-

constructed interviews, however, pragmatic timeframes meant that participant data was

prioritised and I was not able to explore this in as much depth as originally, I would have liked.

Using both the GEM and FANI methods prioritised the children’s free associations and allowed

for dominant narratives to emerge. Having two interviews also enabled participants to become

familiar with the interview process and it is hoped, feel more comfortable. Prior research into

divorce and the findings from this research suggest that divorce is better viewed as a process and

not a one off occurrence or event (Rodgers & Pryor, 1998). Therefore, had there been the

opportunity to conduct interviews over a longer time period, this may have enriched the data

with respect to the relationships between myself and participants and their changing experiences.

The FANI approach encourages the use of questions that help secure participant’s narratives in

actual, specific events. For some of the participants in the study, recalling specific events was a

challenge. This may be linked to their age and ability to provide structured reflective accounts.

Hogan et al. (2003) report the use of semi-structured interviews to allow children to create a

narrative about their experiences of parental separation and its meaning for them. It may be that

150

children in this study may have been better supported by more structured questions to aid their

accounts.

The process of gaining access to children who had experienced their parents’ divorce or

separation was both complex and protracted and this has been something that has been reported

by other studies (Fawcett, 2000; Hogan et al., 2003). Attempts to recruit participants was

hindered by access at a school and parental level. Initially many schools were reluctant to

participate and those that agreed, no expressions of interest were returned by parents. One parent

also decided to withdraw her child from their study after providing her consent, as she feared

that revisiting her feelings about the divorce may hinder her progress. Fawcett (1998) points out

this may be a reflection of the complexity of relationships within separating and divorcing

families. My experience would suggest that this complexity is not only felt by the families but

also the schools in which these children attend. As pointed out above EPs have a role in

facilitating these discussions with parents and teachers to ensure that children’s perspectives and

needs do not become overlooked during stressful and anxiety provoking transitions such as

divorce. A further limitation of this study is that the children who did participate were eventually

identified by family support workers and pastoral workers in the schools who knew the families

well. This means that the children who took part were known to have experienced this event.

This would suggest that the study does not include those families who may have been harder to

reach or who have not shared their family circumstances with professionals.

Divorce and parental separation is said to transcend race, ethnicity, religion and socio-economic

status (Amato & Cheadle, 2008). However, none of the participants recruited from this study

were from the dominant culture in the LA in which the research was carried out, despite mine

and my colleagues’ knowledge of families within this culture who had experienced divorce or

151

separation. Furthermore, no data was collected on the socio-economic status of my participants

despite this being identified as a risk factor of poor outcomes for children of divorce. Both

elements may have provided further interesting context for my findings.

5.9(Dissemination(

Through discussion with participants and their parents it was agreed I would contact them at the

end of my research journey and offer them the opportunity to discuss findings over the phone or

face-face, depending on their preference. Findings that will be shared with participants will

include a summary of the themes, and is planned for summer 2019.

The research will also be presented through a team meeting to the team of EPs working in the

LA as part of service development. This is planned for Summer 2019. In publishing the findings,

it is hoped that the wider EP profession can benefit from the insight that has been gained.

5.10(Future(Research(

National statistics indicate half of the divorces in England and Wales involve children under the

age of 16 (ONS, 2018). However, there are no current identified means which collects the

number of children who experience the separation of their unmarried parents. Given the

prevalence of divorce and separation of parents in the UK it was therefore surprising how few

children were identified in this research as having experienced their parents’ separation. One

area for future research could be a careful audit of children’s family circumstances in local

authorities to obtain more accurate statistics in terms of how many co-habiting parents separate.

Given the limited number of children identified, future research which seeks to explore the

experiences of other children and young people who have experienced their parents’ separation,

152

from different cultures and ethnicities or who may be difficult to reach, would be welcome in

terms of adding to the EP knowledge base. This may include children who reside in lone-parent

families or were under the age of 5 when their parents separated.

The free associative approach to data collection may be beneficial in future research and given

the general agreement that divorce is a process, it may be useful to explore children’s

experiences of divorce or separation longitudinally, to develop a deeper understanding of

children’s experiences of this process and event.

Future research could also explore this event with others who work closely with these children.

For example exploring school professional’s experiences of working with children who have

experienced the separation of their parents and how they feel about their ability to understand

and support their needs.

5.11(Reflections(

My research journey has been an incredibly challenging, emotional and illuminative experience.

When I embarked on choosing a topic for my doctoral research I toyed with topics that had little

relevance to my own subjective experience. I battled to find a topic that I felt warranted further

exploration and one in which I was not connected to personally. My discovery of psychosocial

research methods and the limited identified research of children’s experiences of divorce from a

psychological perspective ignited my desire to learn more about these children’s experiences and

ensure their voices were heard. A psychosocial methodology enabled me to acknowledge my

influence on the research and meant I could remain open and honest about the role and influence

of the researcher in the production of data. My experience of psychoanalytically informed

supervision was invaluable in helping me to consider the relational and intersubjective dynamics

153

of the interview process. Psychosocial ontology and epistemology has allowed me to explore a

topic in a way that fits with my practice and what I draw upon in my attempts to come to know

about a child or young person’s experience. They enabled me to think about the influence of the

individual, time and context on what was experienced in each interview, especially when

meeting with Ben who said so little but communicated so much through unconscious

intersubjective dynamics.

Employing a psychoanalytic lens supported my curiosity about participants experiences and

allowed me to transcend children’s spoken narratives and think about how their perceptions and

interactions with the social world were influenced by their psychological world as well as

considering my own influence and responses to this. My final reflection is that my first

experience as a novice researcher leaves me with a hope that I will continue to be curious and

interested in understanding the psychosocial experiences of this population of children and

young people, as well as others, and feel that a consideration of both one’s internal and external

world best equips me to do this.

5.12(Summary(

This study explored children and young people’s experience of their parents’ divorce or

separation aiming to further understand their subjective experiences using a psychosocial

methodology and application of a psychoanalytic lens. It is hoped that the insight gained from

this research will inform EP practice through highlighting this population of young people to the

profession and supporting their hypothesis generation in casework with similar populations.

Four children, aged 8-13 were recruited to the study from an inner London authority. All had

experienced their parents’ separation at or after the age of 5. All participants’ parents were

154

separated and none had undergone the legal process of divorce. Two free associative interview

methods, the GEM and FANI, were used to interview participants on two separate occasions.

This allowed children to speak freely about what mattered to them in consideration of their

parents’ separation, including a range of anxieties, hopes and concerns. The analysis involved

two stages; an inductive thematic analysis identified five main themes; Response to separation,

Relationship between parents, Contact with out of house parent, When parents’ re-partner, and

Change and continuity. A second interpretative layer of analysis made sense of participants’

narratives as a whole, through applying a psychoanalytic lens. The psychosocial ontology and

epistemology was integral to the research and allowed for consideration of unconscious

dynamics and account for my role as researcher and the possibilities of defended subject and

defended researcher. Reflexivity and psychosocial supervision informed data collection and

analysis phases and supported the employment of psychoanalytic concepts to address

intersubjective unconscious dynamics.

The discussion explored these themes in relation to existing and wider literature and

psychological theory. Children’s narratives were multi-dimensional and an exploration of

unconscious dynamics provided a greater depth from which to understand their experience. A

major strength of this study is the prioritisation of children’s associations and the reflexivity

allowing for an in-depth exploration of experience. The research may serve as useful to EPs in

their supervisory roles and highlights the benefit of psychoanalytic concepts in enriching

thinking and reflection in EP practice. It also highlights the importance of these frameworks in

EP work with school staff and similar populations of children. The significance of facilitating

conversations around divorce and separation and advocating the voice of the child has been

suggested. Recommendations for future research are for similar studies to be carried out with

other children of divorce or separation from a psychological perspective, possibly with those

155

who are harder to reach or from different cultures and ethnicities. Gathering school staff’s views

about working with and supporting children who have experienced their parents’ divorce or

separation would also be insightful.

5.13(Conclusions(

This research demonstrates that children’s experience of their parents’ separation is diverse and

unique, impacting on both their emotional and physical states. Findings suggest that although

there were some similarities in what children chose to talk about, their experience of divorce was

communicated differently through what was attended to and picked up on through the

intersubjective dynamics present within the research encounter. This research demonstrates that

through attending to unconscious dynamics and non-lexical, embodied and unconscious

communications a more in depth understanding of a young person’s experience of divorce can be

gathered. My own role and reflections on the research encounters also highlight that these

dynamics are unique to the context and to the individuals involved and suggest that data elicited

is co-constructed and unique to those situations and contexts. This highlights the benefit of

applying psychodynamic theories and frameworks to EP practice and how attention to these

affectual communications in encounters with children and young people who have experienced

their parents’ divorce or separation, can support EPs understanding of a child or young persons’

experience.

Separation and divorce brings with it the experience of separation, loss, and change and as

Youell suggests, however minor, “every ending…involves a loss of some kind [and] every

beginning… carries with it the anxiety of facing the unknown” (2006, p. 71). Perhaps this is

something which should be held in mind as children face the end of their parents’ relationships

and embark on a new beginning.

156

157

References

Abbey, C., & Dallos, R. (2004). The experience of the impact of divorce on sibling relationships:

A qualitative study. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 9(2), 241-259.

Amato, P. R., & Cheadle, J. E. (2008). Parental divorce, marital conflict and children's behavior

problems: A comparison of adopted and biological children. Social Forces, 86(3), 1139-

1161.

Bailey, S., Thoburn, J., & Timms, J. (2011). Your shout too! Children's views of the

arrangements made and services provided when courts adjudicate in private law disputes.

Journal of Social Welfare & Family Law, 33(2), 123-138.

doi:10.1080/09649069.2011.617070

Bell, D. (2001). Who is killing what or whom? Some notes on the internal phenomenology of

suicide. Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy, 15(1), 21-37.

Billington, T. (2006). Working with children: Assessment, representation and intervention: Sage.

Bion, W. R. (1961). Experiences in Groups and Other Papers: London. In: Tavistock

Publications.

Bion, W. R. (1962). A theory of thinking. Parent-infant psychodynamics: wild things, mirrors

and ghosts, 74-82.

Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and Loss: Volume III: Loss, Sadness and Depression. London:

Hogarth press.

Brand, C., Howcroft, G., & Hoelson, C. N. (2017). The voice of the child in parental divorce:

implications for clinical practice and mental health practitioners. Journal of Child &

Adolescent Mental Health, 29(2), 169-178.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in

psychology, 3(2), 77-101.

158

Bridges, L. J., Roe, A. E. C., Dunn, J., & O'Connor, T. G. (2007). Children's perspectives on

their relationships with grandparents following parental separation: A longitudinal study.

Social Development, 16(3), 539-554.

Brocki, J. M., & Wearden, A. J. (2006). A critical evaluation of the use of interpretative

phenomenological analysis (IPA) in health psychology. Psychology and health, 21(1),

87-108.

Burgo, J. (2012). Why do I do that?: Psychological defense mechanisms and the hidden ways

they shape our lives: New Rise Press.

Campbell, A. (2008). The right to be heard: Australian children's views about their involvement

in decision-making following parental separation. Child Care in Practice, 14(3), 237-

255. doi:10.1080/13575270802042496

Chen, J.-D., & George, R. A. (2005). Cultivating resilience in children from divorced families.

The Family Journal, 13(4), 452-455.

Clarke, S., & Hoggett, P. (2009). Researching beneath the surface : psycho-social research

methods in practice: London, Karnac Books, 2009.

Cox, K. M., & Desforges, M. (2017). Divorce and the School. Routledge.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches: Los Angeles ; London : SAGE.

Davies, H. (2015). Shared Parenting or Shared Care? Learning from Children's Experiences of a

Post-Divorce Shared Care Arrangement. Children & Society, 29(1), 1-14.

doi:10.1111/chso.12013

Department for Constitutional Affairs & Department for Education and Skills. (2004).

Parental separation: Children’s needs and parent’s responsibilities. London: HMSO.

Department for Education. (2018). Mental health and behaviour in schools. London: HMSO.

159

Department for Education. (2019). Relationships Education, Relationships and Sex Education

(RSE) and Health Education. London: HMSO.

Department for Education & Department of Health. (2015). Special educational need and

disability code of practice: 0 to 25 years. Statutory guidance for organisations which

work with and support children and young people who have special educational needs

and disabilities. London: Author.

Department for Education & Department of Health and Social Care (2017). Transforming

children and young people’s mental health provision: a green paper. London: HMSO.

Department for Education and Schools. (2003). Every Child Matters: Change for Children

Agenda. Retrieved from

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/272064/5860.pdf

Department for Education and Skills. (2005). Children’s needs and parental responsibilities:

Next steps London: HMSO.

Dowling, E., & Gorell-Barnes, G. (1999). Children of divorcing families: A clinical perspective.

Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 4(1), 39-50.

doi:10.1177/1359104599004001004

Elliott, H. (2011). Interviewing mothers: reflections on closeness and reflexivity in research

encounters. Studies in the Maternal, 3(1).

Elliott, H., Ryan, J., & Hollway, W. (2012). Research encounters, reflexivity and supervision.

International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 15(5), 433-444.

Eloquin, X. (2016). Systems-psychodynamics in schools: A framework for EPs undertaking

organisational consultancy. Educational Psychology in Practice, 32(2), 163-179.

doi:10.1080/02667363.2016.1139545

Fawcett, M. (1998). What hurts? What helps?: A study of needs and services for young people

whose parents separate and divorce. In: Belfast: RelateTeen.

160

Fawcett, M. I. (2000). The changing family in Northern Ireland: Young people and divorce.

Youth & Society, 32(1), 81-106. doi:10.1177/0044118X00032001005

Flowerdew, J., & Neale, B. (2003). Trying to stay apace: Children with multiple challenges in

their post-divorce family lives. Childhood: A Global Journal of Child Research, 10(2),

147-161. doi:10.1177/0907568203010002003

Gadd, D., & Jefferson, T. (2007). Psychosocial criminology: Sage.

Giddens, A. (1992). The transformation of intimacy: Sexuality, love and eroticism in modern

societies: John Wiley & Sons.

Green, H., McGinnity, Á., Meltzer, H., Ford, T., & Goodman, R. (2005). Mental health of

children and young people in Great Britain, 2004: Palgrave Macmillan Basingstoke.

Halpenny, A. M., Greene, S., & Hogan, D. (2008). Children's perspectives on coping and support

following parental separation. Child Care in Practice, 14(3), 311-325.

doi:10.1080/13575270802041720

Hans, J. D., & Fine, M. A. (2001). Children of divorce: Experiences of children whose parents

attended a divorce education program. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 36(1-2), 1-26.

Harper, D, & Thompson, A. R. (2011). Qualitative research methods in mental health and

psychotherapy : a guide for students and practitioners. Chichester, West Sussex: John

Wiley & Sons.

Hawthorne, J., Jessop, J., Pryor, J., & Richards, M. (2003). Supporting children through family

change: A review of interventions and services for children of divorcing and separating

parents: York Publishing York.

Health & Care Professions Council. (2015). Standards of Proficiency – Practitioner

Psychologists. London: Author.

161

Hogan, D. M., Halpenny, A. M., & Greene, S. (2003). Change and continuity after parental

separation: Children's experiences of family transitions in Ireland. Childhood, 10(2), 163-

180.

Hogan, F., & O'Reilly, M. (2007). Listening with children: research, policy and practice.

In Vision into Practice: Proceedings CECDE International Conference 2007. Retrieved

from:

https://repository.wit.ie/545/1/Listening_with_children_Research,_Policy_and_Practice.p

Hollway, W. (2011). Psycho-social writing from data. Journal of Psycho-social Studies, 4(5), 1-

Hollway, W. (2015). Knowing mothers: Researching maternal identity change: Springer.

Hollway, W., & Jefferson, T. (2000). Doing Qualitative Research Differently : Free Association,

Narrative and the Interview Method. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Hollway, W., & Jefferson, T. (2013). Doing qualitative research differently: A psychosocial

approach: Sage.

House of Commons Education and Health Committees. (2017). Children and young people’s

mental health – the role of education. London: House of Commons.

House of Commons Education and Health Committees. (2018). Mental health and wellbeing in

schools. London: House of Commons.

Hulusi, H., & Maggs, P. (2015). Containing the containers: Work discussion group supervision

for teachers - a psychodynamic approach: British Psychological Society.

Hunt, J. C. (1989). Psychoanalytic aspects of fieldwork: London Sage 1989.

Huurre, T., Junkkari, H., & Aro, H. (2006). Long-term Psychosocial effects of parental divorce:

A follow-up study from adolescence to adulthood. European Archives of Psychiatry and

Clinical Neuroscience, 256(4), 256-263. doi:10.1007/s00406-006-0641-y

162

Joffe, H. (2012). Thematic analysis. Qualitative research methods in mental health and

psychotherapy: A guide for students and practitioners, 1, 210-223.

Joffe, H., & Elsey, J. W. B. (2014). Free association in psychology and the grid elaboration

method. Review of General Psychology, 18(3), 173-185.

Kennedy, E.-K., Keaney, C., Shaldon, C., & Canagaratnam, M. (2018). A relational model of

supervision for applied psychology practice: professional growth through relating and

reflecting. Educational Psychology in Practice, 34(3), 282-299.

Klein, M. (1957). Envy and gratitude; a study of unconscious sources. Oxford: Basic Books.

Klein, M. (1975). Envy and Gratitude and Other Works 1946–1963: Edited By: M. Masud R.

Khan.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry: Newbury Park Sage Publications

1985.

Maclean, M. (2004). Together and apart: children and parents experiencing separation and

divorce. London: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

Mercieca, D., & Mercieca, D. P. (2014). EPs becoming ignorant: Questioning the assumption of

listening and empowerment in young children. Educational and Child Psychology, 31(1),

22-31.

Ministry of Justice, 2018. Reducing family conflict: Reform of the legal requirements for

divorce. London: Ministry of Justice available from: https://consult.justice.gov.uk/digital-

communications/reform-of-the-legal-requirements-for-

divorce/supporting_documents/reducingfamilyconflictconsultation.pdf

Molepo, L. S., Sodi, T., Maunganidze, L., & Mudhovozi, P. (2012). Behavioural and emotional

development in children of divorce. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 22(2), 251-254.

Moore, J. (2005). Recognising and questioning the epistemological basis of educational

psychology practice. Educational Psychology in Practice, 21(2), 103-116.

163

Morrison, F. (2015). 'All Over Now?' The Ongoing Relational Consequences of Domestic Abuse

through Children's Contact Arrangements. Child Abuse Review, 24(4), 274-284.

doi:10.1002/car.2409

Neale, B. (2002). Dialogues with children: Children, divorce and citizenship. Childhood: A

Global Journal of Child Research, 9(4), 455-475. doi:10.1177/0907568202009004006

Neale, B., & Flowerdew, J. (2007). New structures, new agency: The dynamics of child-parent

relationships after divorce. The International Journal of Children's Rights, 15(1), 25-42.

O'Connor, T. G., Thorpe, K., Dunn, J., & Golding, J. (1999). Parental divorce and adjustment in

adulthood: Findings from a community sample. Journal of Child Psychology and

Psychiatry, 40(5), 777-789. doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00493

Office of National Statistics. (2018). Divorces in England and Wales: 2017. Retrieved from

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/divor

ce/bulletins/divorcesinenglandandwales/2017

Ogden, T. (1994). Subjects of analysis: Routledge.

Pagani, L., Boulerice, B., Tremblay, R. E., & Vitaro, F. (1997). Behavioural development in

children of divorce and remarriage. Child Psychology & Psychiatry & Allied Disciplines,

38(7), 769-781. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1997.tb01595.x

Pellegrini, D. W. (2010). Splitting and projection: drawing on psychodynamics in educational

psychology practice. Educational Psychology in Practice, 26(3), 251-260.

doi:10.1080/02667363.2010.495209

Povee, K., & Roberts, L. D. (2014). Qualitative research in psychology: Attitudes of psychology

students and academic staff. Australian Journal of Psychology, 66(1), 28.

Reed, B. (2000). An Exploration of Role. London: The Grubb Institute.

Rodgers, B., & Pryor, J. (1998). Divorce and separation: The outcomes for children: Joseph

Rowntree Foundation York.

164

Salzberger-Wittenberg, I., Henry, G., & Osborne, E. L. (1983). The emotional experience of

learning and teaching: London Routledge & Kegan Paul 1983.

Smart, C. (2006). Children's narratives of post-divorce family life: From individual experience to

an ethical disposition. The Sociological Review, 54(1), 155-170. doi:10.1111/j.1467-

954X.2006.00606.x

The British Psychological Society. (2002). Division of Educational and Child Psychology.

Professional Practice Guidelines. Leicester: BPS.

The British Psychological Society. (2018). Code of ethics and conduct. Leicester: BPS.

Timms, J. E., Bailey, S., & Thoburn, J. (2007). Your shout too! A survey of the views of

children and young people involved in court proceedings when their parents divorce or

separate.

Trinder, L., Beek, M., & Connolly, J. (2002). Making contact: How parents and children

negotiate and experience contact after divorce: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

Ubha, N., & Cahill, S. (2014). Building secure attachments for primary school children: a mixed

methods study. Educational Psychology in Practice, 30(3), 272-292.

United Nations (UN) (1989). Convention on the rights of the child. New York, NY: UN.

Vaillant, G. E. (2000). Adaptive mental mechanisms: Their role in a positive psychology.

American psychologist, 55(1), 89.

Waddell, M. (2002). Inside Lives : Psychoanalysis and the Growth of the Personality (Vol. Rev.

ed). London: Routledge.

Wade, A., & Smart, C. (2002). Facing Family Change: Children's Circumstances, Strategies

and Resources: York Publishing Services for Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

Wade, A., & Smart, C. (2002). Facing family change: Children's circumstances, strategies and

resources: York Pub. Services for Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

165

Walsh, D., & Downe, S. (2006). Appraising the quality of qualitative research. Midwifery, 22(2),

108-119.

Watts, S., & Stenner, P. (2012). Doing Q methodological research: Theory, method &

interpretation: Sage.

Weidberg, F. (2017). Giving children of imprisoned parents a voice. Educational Psychology in

Practice, 33(4), 371-386.

Willig, C. (2001). Qualitative research in psychology: A practical guide to theory and method.

Buckingham: OUP.

Winnicott, D. W. (1964). The Child, the Family, and the Outside World. Harmondsworth:

Penguin.

Winnicott, D. W. (1965). The maturational process and the facilitating environment.

London: Hogarth Press.

Winnicott, D. W. (1996). Thinking about children. London: Routledge.

Yardley, L. (2008). Demonstrating validity in qualitative psychology. Qualitative psychology: A

practical guide to research methods, 2, 235-251.

Youell, B. (2006). The learning relationship. Psychoanalytic thinking in education: Karnac.

166

Appendices

Appendix 1 – Excluded Papers and reasons for exclusion – UK Only

A large number of papers were returned that were from overseas. This table serves to

demonstrate which papers from the UK were excluded and does not list all papers returned in the

search (non-UK).

Paper

Reason for exclusion

Williams, M. S. (2004). Review of Schools & family

change: School-based support for children

experiencing divorce and separation. British Journal Of

Guidance & Counselling, 32(1), 126-127.

Book Review

McConnell, R. A., & Sim, A. J. (2000). Evaluating an

innovative counselling service for children of

divorce. British Journal Of Guidance &

Counselling, 28(1), 75-86.

Intervention evaluation

Barnes, G. G. (1999). Divorce transitions: Identifying

risk and promoting resilience for children and their

parental relationships. Journal Of Marital And Family

Therapy, 25(4), 425-441.

Outcome and impact study

McConnell, R. A., & Sim, A. J. (1999). Adjustment to

parental divorce: An examination of the differences

between counselled and non-counselled

children. British Journal Of Guidance &

Counselling, 27(2), 245-257.

Intervention Evaluation

Tasker, F. L., & Richards, M. M. (1994). Adolescents'

attitudes toward marriage and marital prospects after

parental divorce: A review. Journal Of Adolescent

Research, 9(3), 340-362.

Outcome study

Das, C. (2009). Recognising Ecological Contexts of

Diverse Ethnic Groups: Experiences of British-Indian

Adult Children of Divorce. International Journal Of

Diversity In Organisations, Communities &

Nations, 9(5), 83.

Adult children’s views

Trinder, L. (2008). Maternal gate closing and gate

opening in post divorce families. Journal Of Family

Issues, 29(10), 1298-1324.

Other’s views.

Greg, M., Isabel, W., Jane, L., Sarah, P., & Ray, S.

(2008). Beyond Assessment: Social Work Intervention

in Family Court Enquiries. The British Journal Of

Social Work, (3), 431.

Other’s views

167

More over-50s getting divorced. (2008). Working with

Older People: Community Care Policy &

Practice, 12(1), 7.

Others views

George, R. H. (2007). Practitioners' approaches to child

welfare after parental separation: an Anglo-French

comparison. Child & Family Law Quarterly, 19(3),

337.

Others views.

Jean, C. (2004). Good to talk? Conversations with

children after divorce. Family Matters, (69), 100.

Book review

Smart, C. (2003). Towards an understanding of family

change: Gender conflict and children's

citizenship. Australian Journal Of Family Law, 17(1),

20.

Position paper.

Bhrolcháin, M. N., Chappell, R., Diamond, I., &

Jameson, C. (2000). Parental Divorce and Outcomes

for Children: Evidence and Interpretation. European

Sociological Review, 16(1), 67.

Outcome study

King, M. (1999). 'Being Sensible': Images and

Practices of the New Family Lawyers. Journal Of

Social Policy, 28(2), 249-273.

Others views.

Editorial.

Editorial

Introduction.

Editorial

Mayes, G. M., Wilson, G. B., MacDonald, R. R., &

Gillies, J. B. (2003). Evaluation of an Information

Programme for Divorced or Separated Parents. Child &

Family Law Quarterly, 15(1), 85.

Evaluation of intervention.

Martindale, S. E., & Lacey, R. E. (2017). Parental

separation in childhood and adult smoking in the 1958

British birth cohort. European Journal Of Public

Health, 27(4), 723-728.

Correlational study

Astrup, A., Pedersen, C. B., Mok, P. L., Carr, M. J., &

Webb, R. T. (2017). Self-harm risk between

adolescence and midlife in people who experienced

separation from one or both parents during

childhood. Journal Of Affective Disorders, 208582-

589.

Outcome study

Stansfeld, S. A., Clark, C., Smuk, M., Power, C.,

Davidson, T., & Rodgers, B. (2017). Childhood

adversity and midlife suicidal ideation. Psychological

Medicine, 47(2), 327-340.

Correlation study

168

Hertzmann, L., Target, M., Hewison, D., Casey, P.,

Fearon, P., & Lassri, D. (2016). Mentalization-based

therapy for parents in entrenched conflict: A random

allocation feasibility study. Psychotherapy, 53(4), 388-

401.

Evaluation of intervention.

Lasgaard, M., Armour, C., Bramsen, R. H., &

Goossens, L. (2016). Major life events as predictors of

loneliness in adolescence. Journal Of Child And

Family Studies, 25(2), 631-637.

Correlation study

Philip, G. (2014). Review of Family troubles?

Exploring changes and challenges in the family lives of

children and young people. Child & Family Social

Work, 19(4), 511-512.

Book review

Kanji, S., & Schober, P. (2014). Are couples with

young children more likely to split up when the mother

is the main or an equal earner?. Sociology, 48(1), 38-

58.

Outcome study

DeJong, M., & Davies, H. (2013). Contact refusal by

children following acrimonious separation: Therapeutic

approaches with children and parents. Clinical Child

Psychology And Psychiatry, 18(2), 185-198.

Evaluation of intervention

Theobald, D., Farrington, D. P., & Piquero, A. R.

(2013). Childhood broken homes and adult violence:

An analysis of moderators and mediators. Journal Of

Criminal Justice, 41(1), 44-52.

Mediation Study

Lee, W. E., Kwok, C. T., Hunter, E. M., Richards, M.,

& David, A. S. (2012). Prevalence and childhood

antecedents of depersonalization syndrome in a UK

birth cohort. Social Psychiatry And Psychiatric

Epidemiology, 47(2), 253-261.

Other focus.

Pitcher, D. (2011). What Maisie Knew: A child's

experience of divorce. Journal Of Divorce &

Remarriage, 52(7), 519-528.

Position paper

Weir, K. (2011). High-conflict contact disputes:

Evidence of the extreme unreliability of some

children's ascertainable wishes and feelings. Family

Court Review, 49(4), 788-800.

Others views.

Ronald, A., Pennell, C. E., & Whitehouse, A. O.

(2011). Prenatal maternal stress associated with ADHD

Other focus.

169

and autistic traits in early childhood. Frontiers In

Psychology, 1

Hatton, C., Emerson, E., Graham, H., Blacher, J., &

Llewellyn, G. (2010). Changes in family composition

and marital status in families with a young child with

cognitive delay. Journal Of Applied Research In

Intellectual Disabilities, 23(1), 14-26.

Correlational study

Skew, A., Evans, A., & Gray, E. (2009). Repartnering

in the United Kingdom and Australia. Journal Of

Comparative Family Studies, 40(4), 563-585.

Others views

Timms, J. E., Bailey, S., & Thoburn, J. (2008).

Children's views of decisions made by the court: Policy

and practice issues arising from the Your Shout Too!

survey. Child Care In Practice, 14(3), 257-274.

Position paper

Bridges, L. J., Roe, A. C., Dunn, J., & O'Connor, T. G.

(2007). Children's perspectives on their relationships

with grandparents following parental separation: A

longitudinal study. Social Development, 16(3), 539-

554.

Other focus.

Lokugamage, A. U., Hotopf, M., Hardy, R., Mishra,

G., Butterworth, S., Wadsworth, M. J., & Kuh, D.

(2006). Breast cancer in relation to childhood parental

divorce and early adult psychiatric disorder in a British

birth cohort. Psychological Medicine, 36(9), 1307-

1312.

Correlational study

Fawcett, M. (2006). Review of Divorcing children:

Children's experience of their parent's divorce. Child

Care In Practice, 12(1), 73-74.

Book review

Smith, P. K. (2005). Grandparents &

grandchildren. The Psychologist, 18(11),

Other focus

Clarke, L., O'Brien, M., Day, R. D., Godwin, H.,

Connolly, J., Hemmings, J., & Van Leeson, T. (2005).

Fathering behind bars in English prisons: Imprisoned

fathers' identity and contact with their

children. Fathering: A Journal Of Theory, Research,

And Practice About Men As Fathers, 3(3), 221-241.

Other focus.

Pahl, R., & Pevalin, D. J. (2005). Between family and

friends: A longitudinal study of friendship

choice. British Journal Of Sociology, 56(3), 433-450.

Other focus

170

Dunn, J., O'Connor, T. G., & Cheng, H. (2005).

Children's Responses to Conflict Between their

Different Parents: Mothers, Stepfathers, Nonresident

Fathers, and Nonresident Stepmothers. Journal Of

Clinical Child And Adolescent Psychology, 34(2), 223-

234.

Other focus.

Smart, C. (2004). Equal shares: Rights for fathers or

recognition for children?. Critical Social Policy, 24(4),

484-503.

Position paper

Buchanan, A. (2004). Review of Divorcing Children:

Children's Experience of Their Parents' Divorce. Child

& Family Social Work, 9(3), 317-318.

Book review

Dunn, J. (2004). Understanding children's family

worlds: Family transitions and children's

outcome. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 50(3), 224-235.

Position paper

Abbey, C., & Dallos, R. (2004). The Experience of the

Impact of Divorce on Sibling Relationships: A

Qualitative Study. Clinical Child Psychology And

Psychiatry, 9(2), 241-259.

Adult children

Clarke, L., & Jensen, A. (2004). Children's Risk of

Parental Break-up Norway and England/Wales

Compared. Acta Sociologica, 47(1), 51-69.

Comparison study/Others views.

Grainger, S. (2004). Family background and female

sexual behavior: A test of the father-absence theory in

Merseyside. Human Nature, 15(2), 133-145.

Correlational study

Best, R. (2003). Review of Mental Health Handbook

for Schools. British Journal Of Guidance &

Counselling, 31(4), 447-448.

Book review

O'Connor, T. G., Caspi, A., DeFries, J. C., & Plomin,

R. (2003). Genotype-environment interaction in

children's adjustment to parental separation. Journal Of

Child Psychology And Psychiatry, 44(6), 849-856.

Other Focus

Steele, H. (2002). State of the art: Attachment

theory. The Psychologist, 15(10), 518-522.

Other Focus

Lussier, G., Deater-Deckard, K., Dunn, J., & Davies, L.

(2002). Support across two generations: Children's

closeness to grandparents following parental divorce

and remarriage. Journal Of Family Psychology, 16(3),

363-376.

Other focus

171

Smart, C. (2002). From Children's Shoes to Children's

Voices. Family Court Review, 40(3), 307-319.

Positioning paper

Joseph, S., Mynard, H., & Mayall, M. (2000). Life-

events and post-traumatic stress in a sample of English

adolescents. Journal Of Community & Applied Social

Psychology, 10(6), 475-482.

Correlational study

Dunn, J., Davies, L. C., O'Connor, T. G., & Sturgess,

W. (2000). Parents' and partners' life course and family

experiences: Links with parent–child relationships in

different family settings. Journal Of Child Psychology

And Psychiatry, 41(8), 955-968.

Other focus

O'Connor, T. G., Caspi, A., DeFries, J. C., & Plomin,

R. (2000). Are associations between parental divorce

and children's adjustment genetically mediated? An

adoption study. Developmental Psychology, 36(4), 429-

437.

Correlation/mediation study

O'Connor, T. G., Thorpe, K., Dunn, J., & Golding, J.

(1999). Parental divorce and adjustment in adulthood:

Findings from a community sample. Journal Of Child

Psychology And Psychiatry, 40(5), 777-789.

Outcome/impact study

James, A. L., & James, A. (1999). Pump up the

volume: Listening to children in separation and

divorce. Childhood: A Global Journal Of Child

Research, 6(2), 189-206.

Position paper

Tasker, F. (1999). Children in lesbian-led families: A

review. Clinical Child Psychology And

Psychiatry, 4(2), 153-166.

Not childrens views

Walton, L., Oliver, C., & Griffin, C. (1999). Divorce

mediation: The impact of mediation on the

psychological well-being of children and

parents. Journal Of Community & Applied Social

Psychology, 9(1), 35-46.

Evaluation of intervention

Sheerin, D. (1998). Dyads and triads of abuse,

bereavement and separation: A survey in children

attending a child and family centre. Irish Journal Of

Psychological Medicine, 15(4), 131-134.

Correlation/outcome study

172

Kier, C., & Lewis, C. (1998). Preschool sibling

interaction in separated and married families: Are

same-sex pairs or older sisters more sociable?. Journal

Of Child Psychology And Psychiatry, 39(2), 191-201.

Not child views

Humphreys, C. (1997). Child sexual abuse allegations

in the context of divorce: Issues for mothers. British

Journal Of Social Work, 27(4), 529-544.

Position paper

Riches, G., & Dawson, P. (1996). Making stories and

taking stories: Methodological reflections on

researching grief and marital tension following the

death of a child. British Journal Of Guidance &

Counselling, 24(3), 357-365.

Others views

Chase-Lansdale, P. L., Cherlin, A. J., & Kiernan, K. K.

(1995). The long-term effects of parental divorce on

the mental health of young adults: A developmental

perspective. Child Development, 66(6), 1614-1634.

Impact/outcome study

Tasker, F. L., & Richards, M. M. (1994). Adolescents'

attitudes toward marriage and marital prospects after

parental divorce: A review. Journal Of Adolescent

Research, 9(3), 340-362.

Impact/outcome study

Walker, J. (1993). Co-operative parenting post-divorce:

Possibility or pipedream?. Journal Of Family

Therapy, 15(3), 273-292.

Position paper

Goodyer, I. M. (1993). Recent stressful life events:

Their long term effects. European Child & Adolescent

Psychiatry, 2(1), 1-9.

Impact/outcome study

Garwood, F. (1992). Conciliation: A forum for

children's views?. Children & Society, 6(4), 353-363.

Others views

Kruk, E. (1992). Child custody determination: An

analysis of the litigation model, legal practices, and

men's experiences in the process. The Journal Of Men's

Studies, 1(2), 163-185.

Others views

Sharp, S., & Thompson, D. (1992). Sources of stress: A

contrast between pupil perspective and pastoral

teachers' perceptions. School Psychology

International, 13(3), 229-242.

Other focus

173

Tasker, F. L. (1992). Anti-marriage attitudes and

motivations to marry amongst adolescents with

divorced parents. Journal Of Divorce &

Remarriage, 18(3-4), 105-119.

Outcome study

Simpson, B. (1991). The Children Act 1989 and the

voice of the child in family conciliation. Family &

Conciliation Courts Review, 29(4), 385-397.

Position paper

Goodyer, I. M., & Altham, P. M. (1991). Lifetime exit

events and recent social and family adversities in

anxious and depressed school-age children and

adolescents: I. Journal Of Affective Disorders, 21(4),

219-228.

Correlational study

Eiser, C. (1991). Psychological effects of chronic

disease. Annual Progress In Child Psychiatry & Child

Development, 434-450.

Other focus.

Honess, T. M., & Charman, E. E. (1998). Adolescent

adjustment, social systems and parental

separation. European Journal Of Psychology Of

Education, 13(4), 557-567.

Other focus.

Timms, J. (2003). The Silent Majority--The Position of

Children Involved in the Divorce and Separation of

their Parents. Child care in practice, 9(2), 162-174.

Position paper

Halpenny, A. M., Greene, S., & Hogan, D. (2008).

Children's perspectives on coping and support

following parental separation. Child Care In

Practice, 14(3), 311-325.

Not UK

Hogan, D. M., Halpenny, A. M., & Greene, S. (2003).

Change and continuity after parental separation:

Children's experiences of family transitions in

Ireland. Childhood: A Global Journal Of Child

Research, 10(2), 163-180.

Not UK

Holt, S. (2015). Post-separation Fathering and

Domestic Abuse: Challenges and Contradictions. Child

Abuse Review, 24(3), 210-222.

Not childrens views

174

Appendix 2 – Included Articles and reasons for inclusion

Paper

Reason for inclusion

Hogan, D. M., Halpenny, A. M., & Greene, S. (2003).

Change and continuity after parental separation:

Children's experiences of family transitions in

Ireland. Childhood: A Global Journal Of Child

Research, 10(2), 163-180.

Children’s views UK

Dowling, E., & Gorell-Barnes, G. (1999). Children of

divorcing families: A clinical perspective. Clinical

Child Psychology And Psychiatry, 4(1), 39-50.

Children’s views UK

Smart, C. (2006). Children's narratives of post-divorce

family life: From individual experience to an ethical

disposition. The Sociological Review, 54(1), 155-170.

Children’s views UK

Neale, B., & Flowerdew, J. (2007). New Structures,

New Agency: The Dynamics of Child-Parent

Relationships after Divorce. International Journal Of

Children's Rights, 15(1), 25-42

Children’s views UK

Davies, H. (2015). Shared Parenting or Shared Care?

Learning from Children's Experiences of a Post-

Divorce Shared Care Arrangement. Children &

Society, 29(1), 1-14.

Children’s views UK

Morrison, F. (2015). 'All Over Now?' The Ongoing

Relational Consequences of Domestic Abuse through

Children's Contact Arrangements. Child Abuse

Review, 24(4), 274-284.

Children’s views UK

Neale, B. (2002). Dialogues with children: Children,

divorce and citizenship. Childhood: A Global Journal

Of Child Research, 9(4), 455-475.

Children’s views UK

Flowerdew, J., & Neale, B. (2003). Trying to stay

apace: Children with multiple challenges in their post-

divorce family lives. Childhood: A Global Journal Of

Child Research, 10(2), 147-161.

doi:10.1177/0907568203010002003

Children’s views UK

Trinder, L., Beek, M., & Connolly, J. (2002). Making

contact: How parents and children negotiate

and experience contact after divorce: Joseph

Rowntree Foundation.

Children’s views UK

Wade, A., & Smart, C. (2002). Facing family change:

Children's circumstances, strategies and

Children’s views UK

175

resources: York Pub. Services for Joseph

Rowntree Foundation.

176

Appendix 3. Walsh & Downe’s (2006) Original Appraisal Tool for Qualitative Research

177

178

Appendix 4. A critique of each paper included in the literature review

179

Paper 1: Dowling & Gorell-Barnes (1999) Children of Divorcing Families: A Clinical

Perspective

Yes/No/Unclear

Comments

Design & Methodology

- Qualitative

- 10 family case studies/ semi-structured

interviews

- approach to data collection described

- Specific method/ design of the study is not

made clear or why it is most appropriate for

the present study.

- A broad number of issues explored in order

to illuminate the difference and complexity

of the individual’s experiences in detail.

Sample & Sampling

strategy

- Clinical sample carried out by family

therapists in their work with families.

- 10 families involved in this project.

Children aged 5-14.

There is no description of how these families

were selected to take part in the study

The study does not appear to choose a

homogenous sample and therefor a rich

description of experience is obtained from

the participants.

World view

& Theoretical positions

The study does not disclose its

epistemological or ontological grounding.

Scope & Purpose

- finding a way for children to describe their

experience of divorce in the process and

aftermath.

- The study states that it is concerned with

eliciting and establishing the protective

factors and conditions which are likely to

make it possible for children to cope with

this particular life transition.

Approach to Analysis

The analytic approach undertaken in the

research is not mentioned. The data appears

to be organised into themes and specific

areas such as gender differences and

developmental differences.

180

Interpretation

There is clear triangulation of interviews

with children accompanied by interviews

with parents and professional understanding

of the context and situation.

There is a consideration that time alone with

children does not mean they will share

everything.

Key Findings/

Conclusions

- Some children have to negotiate transition

from one parent to another amid quarrelling

and discord.

- Some children do not have a coherent story

of the marital breakup leading to confusion

and anger.

-children wish to remain in a positive

relationship with both parents and can find

themselves at times in loyalty binds with

new partners or enjoying time with both

parents and sharing that with the other.

Changes in the children’s context. Some

children experience moving house, school,

and another adult. sharing a room, space

size, different routes to school by different

modes.

What do children need? a coherent story.

They need to be helped to find an

explanation of what has happened.

Expression of feelings – children need

support to express difficult feelings.

It highlights the different clinical

considerations that arise from children who

experience divorce e.g. changes in the

pattern of relationships, loyalty binds, and

changes in children’s context and contact

with parents, school, and developmental

differences.

Reflexivity

There is brief mention that the relationship

of the researcher to the participants is

through a clinical therapeutic relationship,

however this is not explicitly stated. This

does not extend any further and the influence

of the researcher is not discussed in other

stages of the research process either through

self-awareness, effects on researcher or how

problems or complications were dealt with.

181

Ethical dimensions

No mention of ethical committee approval,

mention of written consent from families,

this is not explicitly extended to consent

from children where this is the main focus of

this paper. Similar approach is taken with all

participants, no mention of ethical dilemmas.

mention that some details have been changed

to respect anonymity.

Relevance &

transferability

There are some links to the analysis linking

up with the Exeter family study through

similar findings. Findings from all families

are summarised into what children need in

divorce. Conclusions are supported through

present study findings but limited referral

back to prior studies, although this is deemed

a relatively new area of research. Increases

understanding.

Significant for practice of professionals by

providing a model/framework in which to

include children’s views and work with

families.

182

Paper 2: Neale (2002) Dialogues with children: Children, divorce and citizenship

Yes/No/Unclear

Comments

Design & Methodology

-Qualitative

- in depth, conversational

interviews.

No other information on data

collection.

Exploratory.

No other information regarding the

design or methodology. Rationale

for qualitative is because children’s

views have rarely been considered

in family law.

Some information about

methodology is reported in the

findings.

Sample & Sampling

strategy

117 young people living under a

variety of post-divorce/separation

arrangements.

No other information of the sample

other that age brackets next to

quotes.

World view

& Theoretical positions

The study does not disclose its

epistemological or ontological

grounding.

Scope & Purpose

There is a clear statement and

purpose of the research to highlight

the impact on the welfare principle

on children’s ability to have their

views heard in family law. It links

policy and practice to the issues

around the exploration of

children’s discourses about being

listened to. This is then linked to

current debates about children’s

participation in family proceedings

and reviewed in light of the

children’s evidence. The study

states three clear aims with an

exploratory intent.

183

1 - to understand more about the

day to day lives of these young

people, to explore their experiences

as children, rather than assessing

long-term adjustments or

outcomes. We sought to explore

'what matters' to children as a

necessary precursor to

understanding 'what works' (or

doesn’t work) for them in their

families.

2- We wanted to explore young

people’s agency within their

families by focusing on how they

influence and actively contribute to

family life (rather than focus on

how their families impact upon

them.

3- To bring children’s voices

centrally into policy debates around

post-divorce family life and to

explore, from the perspective of

children what it means to 'ascertain

the wishes and feelings of the child.

Approach to Analysis

The analytic approach undertaken

in the research is not mentioned.

The data appears to be organised

into themes.

The use of quotes is appropriate for

the method. No discussion of how

data was managed or organised.

No other information regarding

analysis.

Interpretation

Researcher uses data to highlight

the differing experiences of what

children valued and their opinions

related to their social context.

There is well used interview quotes

in discussion of findings and how

this has led to interpretive

conclusions.

Key Findings/ Conclusions

Young people regarded meaningful

conversation as a crucial ingredient

of family life.

Being part of a ‘proper family

meant being able to talk to others

and be listened to, trust and be

184

trusted and be treated as a person in

one’s own right.

Children wanted their parents to

manage their relationships in ways

that did not implicate them or force

them to take sides.

They valued being part of a

network of supportive relationships

including both parents and could be

extended to include new partners.

Some children enjoyed good

quality relationships with family

members, based on open

communications and shared

understanding. Others did not enjoy

relationships with one or both

parents.

Keeping family problems within

the family or using informal

sources of support, kin or friends

and peer support schemes.

Argues that what is right for one

child is not necessarily right for

another and should take into

account their diverse

circumstances. Rather than a

blanket welfare approach.

Reflexivity

There is no demonstration of

researcher reflexivity.

Ethical dimensions

There is no demonstration of

sensitivity to ethical concerns

within the recruitment or

management of the study.

However, the core considerations

of the study highlight considerable

consideration of equality and

children’s rights and welfare when

it comes to participating family

law. Giving children a voice in an

otherwise adult dominated world,

linking the contradictions of policy

to its effect on marginalising

children’s voices rather than

promoting them.

185

Relevance & transferability

Analysis is well woven in with the

argument of welfare policy and

what this means for family law and

policy. Provides new insights in

how approaches to children’s

welfare should be manged.

Significance for current policy and

practice outlined. And value for

participants.

Aims of study appear to have been

met.

Paper 3: Flowerdew & Neale (2003) Trying to stay Apace: Children with multiple

challenges in their post-divorce family lives.

Yes/No/Unclear

Comments

Design & Methodology

Follow up study from two linked

projects.

No information regarding method

or design of the study or how data

was collected.

Clearly qualitative due to extracts

from interviews used but no

rationale other than a reference to

hearing from children rather than

adults.

Sample & Sampling

strategy

60 young people living in post-

divorce families contacted after 3-4

years after pilot study. From the

north of England aged between 11-

17 years. Balanced in terms of age,

gender and social background.

Original selection criteria are not

mentioned nor is original study

referred back to for this

information. No justification given

for why these 60 were contacted

out of the original 117.

World view

& Theoretical positions

Ecological, growth life

perspectives. sociological studies

of childhood. Focusing on

children’s agency in negotiating

their childhoods and point to the

186

diversity and particularity of

children’s experiences of post-

divorce family life.

An understanding of divorce not as

a discrete event signalling the

rupture and breakdown of family

life, but as a process, through

which many relationships change

yet endure. taking account of

cumulative life experiences

Scope & Purpose

Purpose: re-examine and refine the

notion of ‘multiple transitions’.

Seeks to provide new insights into

the way that young people manage

change, focusing on the pace and

nature of change and the different

contexts in which change occurs.

Aims to shed light on the

significance of parental divorce in

relation to other pressing concerns

in the lives of young people. A

focus on what children find

significant with regard to change

and transition.

How children felt supported

through change by parents and

others.

Approach to Analysis

The analytic approach undertaken

in the research is not mentioned.

The data appears to be organised

into themes but not mentioned how

these themes were arrived at.

Subjective meaning frames of

participants are presented in

verbatim quotes.

The use of quotes is appropriate for

the method. No discussion of how

data was managed or organised.

No other information regarding

analysis.

Interpretation

Thorough use of verbatim

interview quotes to support themes.

187

use of competing experiences to

come to an understanding of post-

divorce family life.

A tendency to favour the positives

within the story and appears to lose

sight of some of the difficulties

attached to the narratives.

Divorce appears to be defined as a

singular occurrence rather than a

process bringing with it linked

events.

Key Findings/ Conclusions

Stepfamily life bringing economic

benefits. Focus on enhanced quality

of life rather than on period of

economic hardship. Some

sweeping assumptions –

interpreting that no financial

hardship was experienced if not

directly referenced in individual

stories. Does not address the

unsaid.

Some children have difficulties

adapting to stepfamily life, moving

home, dealing with new

stepparents, negotiating ground

rules, share parents and domestic

spaces, stepsiblings.

Sense of loss at the transition from

lone parent back to two parent

family.

Harder when the pace of change is

accelerated of multiple transitions

occur in a short space of time.

The quality of relationships, good

lines of communication and

harmonious or non-conflictual

relationships between parents led

children to have more resources to

cope with change and children

were able to integrate a range of

challenges and transitions into their

biographies. High levels of conflict

188

both pre-and post-divorce pose

challenges for children abilities to

cope with change.

Some children were still

preoccupied and perplexed by

experiences directly related to

divorce, separation and re-

partnering. others had worked

through the transitions and become

accustomed to changes. the

management, timing, and pace of

change emerged as a critical factor

in how young people cope.

There is a useful conclusion that

the specifics of experience matter

and a move away from

stereotypical assumptions.

Reflexivity

There is no demonstration of

researcher reflexivity.

Ethical dimensions

Reference to paying attention to

ethics of conducting research.

Mentions informed choice about

taking part and guaranteeing their

confidentiality.

Relevance & transferability

There is regular referral back to

other theories and research linking

findings or challenging findings.

Discusses how other social and

contextual factors may take more

precedence than divorce.

Some of the conclusions drawn are

supported by evidence others seem

to be finely linked to and

interpretations feel sweeping.

Offers an alternative perspective on

divorce as a negative phenomenon.

189

Paper 4: Smart (2006) Children’s narratives of post-divorce family life: from individual

experience to an ethical disposition

Yes/No/Unclear

Comments

Design & Methodology

Interviews focus on narrative

accounts and positioning of

children in narratives.

No explicit mention of specific

methods.

Sample & Sampling

strategy

60 children and young people

Lived post-divorce family life for

at least 5 years up to 12/15 years.

Recruited from two previous

studies – on children’s experiences

of shared residence after divorce

and how parents negotiate over

residence and contact.

Subsets of original 117 – all

children have been interviewed

twice with 4-year gap.

All were ethnically white from

north of England in urban settings.

Range of residence and contact

with non-resident parent (all

fathers) – ceased contact to moving

between two homes regularly.

Range of parents still in conflict,

some had abated and others relative

harmony.

World view

& Theoretical positions

Narrative understanding of

interpreting past events and part of

the structuring of future events.

The role of the interview

socialising children’s experiences –

recognising they are part of a group

not alone in their experience.

190

Scope & Purpose

Explore how children and young

people construct narrative accounts

of post-divorce family life.

Rather than seeking to describe

children’s experiences as simple

factual accounts, the focus is on

how children position themselves

in their narratives and the way they

construct their past experiences.

Nature of the narratives given.

1 – Identify types of accounts that

children offer and relate to how

reflexive children are – distance

between their lives and their

parents.

2- Extent children can generalise

from context to broader ethical

evaluations.

Approach to Analysis

Grouping along two conceptual

axis – organising principle

‘imposed’ grouping according to

different shape or structure that

families took after divorce.

emotional content: emotional

contentment and ongoing

emotional turmoil/distress.

A clear description how these two

axis came about and what they

entail.

Actual method of analysis is not

alluded to or how it was managed.

Use of quotes to portray subjective

experience.

Interpretation

Acknowledgement that although

the interview produced accounts

that told their stories as if they were

finished it was acknowledged by

the author that further changes may

happen and it should not be

assumed that things will remain the

same.

191

There is a good use of the context

to support the findings and

contextualise interpretations made.

Can follow the links between the

social context and the children’s

reports and the researcher’s

interpretation.

Key Findings/ Conclusions

Argued that these narratives are

multi layered, revealing

ambivalence and contradictions.

Whether individual accounts give

rise to an ethical disposition where

children’s experiences inform a

broader social ethos on how to

divorce in the proper manner.

Grouped themes:

1 – uncomplicated structures and

contented accounts

not expected. periods of

uncertainty, changes in living

standards and context, some

strained atmospheres between

parents but a process of settling

down. something that happened in

the past and is now settling down. –

gradual improvement – a sense of

wellbeing, trust and contentment.

2- complicated structures and

contented accounts

quality of relationships

mention of unhappy times but not

linked to the structure of family.

Lots of people around who were

positive resources. some future

changes linked with some anxiety.

3 – uncomplicated structures and

unhappy accounts

Blame narratives that are rehearsed

and refreshed by extended family.

– contradictory and ambivalent

accounts.

Differences for siblings as well.

192

One able to distance oneself from

emotional turbulence and another

engaged in a struggle against

mother’s interpretation of events.

4- Complicated structures and

unhappy accounts.

Blame narratives – parents

responsible for making life hard

Divorce as significant being

superseded by other major events.

Feelings of isolation and loneliness

Some children unable to provide

full accounts difficulty explaining

or elaborating on events ‘not

bothered’ evidence of the

psychosocial element – painful raw

experiences are too difficult to

stand back and reflect on.

Contented accounts were able to

stand back from the epiphanal

experience of divorce to depict it as

hard but able to position

themselves as survivors whose

lives are contented even happy with

the outcome.

Important to consider only the use

of one or two narratives to back up

claims from 60 children.

There is limited dwelling on

specific experiences or

stories/events. more divorce and

current situations in general.

Reflexivity

Role of the interviewer

acknowledged in the co-production

of narratives – questions and

vignettes encouraging accounts.

May also have encouraged a degree

of reflexiveness for the children

which may not have occurred

otherwise.

Influence of researcher

acknowledged and how this impact

of narratives produced. Not how

193

this affects the researcher, just the

researched.

Ethical dimensions

There appears to be a commitment

to the integrity of the participants

and true reflection of their accounts

is given. Interpretation matches

their subjective experience.

Relevance & transferability

Some other studies are used to back

up accounts and findings.

Discusses how children’s stories

may inform social dispositions.

Interpretation is plausible and

makes sense.

Feels predominantly unbiased and

hears the accounts as they are

presented.

Paper 5: Neale and Flowerdew (2007) New Structures, New agency: The dynamics of

child-parent relationships after divorce.

Yes/No/Unclear

Comments

Design & Methodology

Long term study of children’s lives

after divorce.

A prospective qualitative

longitudinal design – insights into

experience and motivation and

hence causality, illuminating not

only the destinations that people

reach, but the varied routes they

take along the way and why and

how these journeys are undertaken.

In real time as events unfold.

Interviews in two points in time.

Uses knowledge of wider family

from interviews with parents in

earlier study.

Sample & Sampling

strategy

117 children from two linked

studies. parents recruited from

solicitors, family law professionals,

parent support groups, advertising

in local media.

194

60 young children followed up and

re-interviewed.

No description of why the 4

participants are chosen for this

study from the 60 follow up.

World view

& Theoretical positions

Sociological perspective – children

as young citizens who are entitled

to respect and participation.

A move from a focus on children

becoming to children being.

Scope & Purpose

Intention to move beyond a

snapshot approach to discern how

their lives were unfolding, how

much change their might have

been, the nature of these changes

and what the varied processes

might mean for the young people.

Looks at mechanics and structure

of the relationships and the quality

of them.

Approach to Analysis

Not mentioned – only that

participants were divided by their

residence and shared arrangement

status. This was how information

and interview quotes were

organised.

Interpretation

Verbatim accounts and contextual

date used to support the narratives

of the young people and how these

supported conclusions.

Key Findings/ Conclusions

Shared arrangements

- Shared arrangements found

to be inflexible and

challenging.

- keeping things fair for

parents. careful not to upset

them.

- emotional pressure to

maintain high levels of

contact

- inability to exercise

autonomy and choice.

- a concern for fairness for

each parent.

- loyalty binds

195

Exercising one’s agency is

dependent on experience and levels

of support

Concludes the importance of the

quality of the relationship not the

mechanics of it meaning one

participant was able to lay claim to

his life in contrast to others with a

set structural pattern.

Good contact is not based on

quantity but a good quality

relationship. Poor contact is not

diminished contact but poor

quality.

Reflexivity

No reflexivity of the researcher is

mentioned however there is

reflexiveness of the children’s

accounts in their interviews from

different time frames.

Ethical dimensions

Fairness to children of divorce and

equity is referenced through

wanting an ordinary sample rather

than clinical, therapeutic or legal.

Relevance & transferability

Findings are linked back to the

studies aims and context. Gives us

new understanding about contact

arrangements and compares

changes over time in a qualitative

manor highlighting changing

narratives or growing agency in

young people and citizens.

Paper 6: Morrison (2015) ‘All Over Now?’ The ongoing relational consequences of

domestic abuse through children’s contact arrangements.

Yes/No/Unclear

Comments

Design & Methodology

Qualitative study as topic

concerned with sensitive and

complex issues that changed and

evolved over time.

In depth interviews with children

and resident mothers.

Rationale given for qualitative

design and why chosen.

196

Triangulation of data sources and

appropriate to capture diversity of

experience.

Sample & Sampling

strategy

18 children 8-14

8 boys 10 girls

Purposive sampling strategy

16 mothers who had experienced

domestic abuse in Scotland.

Recruited from domestic abuse

support services in the voluntary

and stator sectors.

World view

& Theoretical positions

Not alluded to.

Scope & Purpose

Focuses on children’s and mothers

experiences of contact when there

is domestic abuse.

Approach to Analysis

Interviews were transcribed and

recorded, with an inductive analytic

strategy. Interview transcripts were

coded and analysed thematically.

see Morrison 2014 for a fuller

discussion about methodology and

analytical strategy.

Approach made explicit and

appropriate for method. no

description of how coding systems

evolved. limited amount of

subjective experience portrayed.

Interpretation

The study focuses more

predominantly on mother verbatim

accounts and there is limited

expression of the child’s view. It

does link how the relationship

between parent’s impacts on the

child but due to the nature of

domestic abuse the primary focus

in on continued abuse to mothers

and children’s actual experiences

are lost or retold through the

parent’s words. this is not in line

with the aim or exploring both

mothers and children perspectives

of contact.

197

Key Findings/ Conclusions

Continued abuse of women and

children following parental

separation that was linked to

contact arrangements. Children’s

contact with non-resident fathers

often took place amongst an

absence of parental communication

and cooperation. Left children

responsible for navigating the

complex and charged dynamic of

their parent’s relationships.

Children being de facto messengers

passing on information about

changes to future contact

arrangements or as information

givers about mothers lives

Reflexivity

None mentioned

Ethical dimensions

Reference to attention paid to

ethical; issues, informed consent,

risk and child protection,

confidentiality, distress and

damages. Ethical approval

mentioned.

Thorough mention of ethical issues

Relevance & transferability

Study looks at limitations –

including small sample

Acknowledges where sample were

recruited and that some of the

population may have been missed.

Consultations are supported by

evidence but focus on children and

mothers are limited with adult

voices dominating. Highlights the

controversy over contact being

better for children but

acknowledges domestic abuse as

part of this.

More directive and biased study.

198

Paper 7: Davies (2015) Shared Parenting or Shared Care? Learning from Children’s

Experiences of a post-Divorce shared care arrangement

Yes/No/Unclear

Comments

Design & Methodology

Accounts were generated from a

school-based field study

investigating constructions and

experiences of girls and boys of

family and close relationships over

18 months.

Study involved participant

observation, children’s drawings,

family books, visits to children’s

homes and two sets of paired

interviews.

Case study of shared care.

Method and design apparent and

why appropriate. Use of only one

case study so although well suited

to research design and aims –

provides little cross reference of

other families. lots of data sources.

Sample & Sampling

strategy

Accounts from 3 children siblings.

Reasons for selection chosen initial

sample not described as to how

selected. No justification as to why

the family with better resources

was chosen over the shared

parenting arrangements of the other

families referenced.

World view

& Theoretical positions

Focus on effects of successful

shared parenting.

Scope & Purpose

In depth examination of three

children’s accounts of their

consensual shared parenting

arrangement. It explores whether

shared care families maybe a better

conceptualisation that shared

parenting for understanding: the

resources necessary to support

these arrangements, who is key to

these arrangements and who is

carrying out this care.

199

Important for parents considering

self-organised shared

arrangements, policy makers and

implementation of legislations.

Approach to Analysis

Analysis was driven from

questioning how this complex

family had created a seemingly

successful and sustained shared

parenting arrangement.

Themes developed through

abductive research strategy; themes

generated were informed by and

developed alongside existing

themes from research n family life

and shared parenting, and

combined with themes that

emerged from and were grounded

in the date to advance knowledge

in this area of shared parenting.

Approach is explicit and appears

appropriate for method. reference

to how themes were chosen and

how data fitted into these.

Interpretation

Context of family arrangements

given clearly with siblings and

house composition described.

Findings are linked with dominant

discourses and assumptions around

shared parenting.

Key Findings/ Conclusions

Attributes of successful shared

parenting arrangements.

Shared cooperative relationships

and were socially and materially

well resourced.

Need for space was emotionally

important – new children born and

partnering and the introduction of

sibling’s limit children’s

opportunities for peace, quiet and

private space.

Breakdown of relationships

between parents and children

200

affects not only them but the

extended new family e.g. step

siblings.

Reconceptualising is considered in

regard to political and policy –

suggesting that shared parenting

assumes a triadic relationship

where the needs and resources of

the parents and their biological

children are isolated form other

family and kin. Shared care

families more fitting of who is

involved. child care undertaken by

a number of individuals and highly

gendered.

Reference to socioeconomic status

and the financial burden of shared

care with the need for two homes –

partnering allows for combined

resources. Fewer lower income

families going into consensual

shared care arrangements.

Reflexivity

Not really mentioned.

Ethical dimensions

Consideration of case study

approach and confidentiality and

anonymity. Reference to informed

consent and its ongoing negotiating

thought the research and different

activates. Reference to ethical

considerations in another paper.

Relevance & transferability

In depth discussion, around how

findings link to policy and its

conceptualisation. Linking to how

changes need to be considered for

lower socially and materially

resourced families. Impacting their

choice for consensual self-care and

considerations needed for the

actual development and

maintenance of child care within

shared parenting.

Uses a well resourced family to

highlight what works and what is

important could go further by using

other case studies to demonstrate

the difference in the care. Doesn’t

201

demonstrate the difficulties for low

income with evidence.

Paper 8: Fawcett (2000) The Changing family in northern Ireland young people and

divorce

Yes/No/Unclear

Comments

Design & Methodology

Qualitative

Exploratory

Semi-structured interview

Standardised interview scheduled

were developed using a mix of

closed and open ended questions.

Took part between 1995-1996

Detail on design and method given

and data collection methods

suitable . No discussion of

ontology or epistemology.

Collected parent and professional

views but only reported on children

which met with the papers aim of

giving children a voice.

Sample & Sampling

strategy

37 YP aged 12-18, northern

Ireland/and their parents who had

separated or divorced in the last 5

years.

22 girls and 15 boys living in

Belfast and its environs.

Reflected many characteristics of

the population from which it was

drawn.

Clearest information on selection

and sample may have missed those

whose situation had not been

shared with external adults.

World view

& Theoretical positions

Not stated

Scope & Purpose

Explores young people’s

experiences of the divorce process

and the help provided by family,

friends and professionals.

202

Sought to explore and map key

features of young people’s family

relationships and social networks

during the divorce process. it also

examined their experiences of help

and support provided by teachers,

counsellors and other

professional’s.

Aims

to explore the separation/divorce

process primarily from a young

person’s perspective.

To examine their experiences of

help and support within the family,

the school and the community.

to ascertain the views of young

people who had used counselling

To gather information from parents

and professionals on the needs of

young people.

Explicit purpose given and this is

referred back both with existing

knowledge and theory.

Approach to Analysis

Each interview was recorded,

transcribed and then summarized

onto a database.

The cross case analysis that

followed was organized around six

topic areas consistent with the

original aims of the project. The

analysis of each topic area involved

a search for Significant patterns or

themes. Some categories emerged

directly from the data.

At other times “sensitising

concepts” from the literature

provided a sense of direction in

which to look. Reference to another

paper for full methodology.

Clear description of analysis and a

reference to obtaining full

descriptions appropriate for the

203

findings. Description of how

coding systems were arrived at,

although indicators these were led

by prior interests and not what

emerged from the data.

Interpretation

Use of a case study to give context

to one of the participants however

other than that only small extracts

from verbatim interviews were

used to support themes. These were

supported well with other literature

and findings but a closer insight to

the induvial participants and their

experiences and how this could be

interpreted rather than an overall

fitting to a theme may have been

warranted. Individual experience

was acknowledged but experiences

were predominantly grouped losing

sight of some of the individuality in

the stories.

Key Findings/ Conclusions

Separation process was a lengthy

one, frequently underpinned by a

narrative of acrimony and violence.

extended family and peers were

important sources of support.

little evidence of productive

alliances with siblings.

Findings consistent with what is

already known.

children had no information of

support available for them

Problems identified were

emotional, behavioural, family and

school related difficulties.

Children reported the need to talk

to someone outside the family,

someone helpful, who would listen

and understand and keep things

confidential. relationship factor.

The key factor in whether the

young person made use of the help

204

offered was the quality of the

relationship.

The right not to be caught in the

middle of parental conflict.

more information and better

advertising about available services

and support

Reflexivity

Not referred to

Ethical dimensions

Mentions changing of details to

respect anonymity.

Brief reference to ethics but not in

detail.

Relevance & transferability

A thorough analysis which is

intervened with existing theory and

findings. And clear limitation and

weaknesses defined however this

draws upon a larger sample size

which arguably would lose sight of

the individuality of experience

even more.

Results are supported by verbatim

extracts included in the conclusions

drawn these are brief sentences and

unclear who they come from. could

be one participant or many.

Acknowledges the importance of

school and the impact. missed in

other studies. thoroughly meets its

aims and purpose.

Paper 9: Smart and Wade (2002) Facing Family change, children’s circumstances,

strategies and resources

Yes/No/Unclear

Comments

Design & Methodology

4 stages

explored views of all children in

year 2 (6-7) and year 5 (9-10) of

the 4 schools irrespective of family

circumstance. Focus group what

they would think it would be like to

live through parent separation.

second stage individual interviews

with some experience of divorce.

205

Only study to define divorce or

separation.

rationale is given for qualitative

research and child perspective. No

discussion of grounding but can be

assume a more relativist approach

was taken. Setting is appropriate

chosen through schools where a

range of children could be

contacted. Data collection methods

were appropriate using focus

groups and individual interviews. A

broad depth of data collection to

address all aspects of the research

and allow for the complexity not

refining children's answers too

much.

Sample & Sampling

strategy

5-10 years justification of being

under represented. Yorkshire. from

4 schools.

Reflect difference in class, religion,

ethic mix and urban rural location.

Sub sample of 8 children who had

been referred for professional help

or legal services.

Reviewed support schemes.

description of why the four schools

were selected and how the children

were recruited. Some description

of the selection procedure using opt

out consent. Contacted parents in

the years of interest. Due to lack of

research with this age group.

Thickness of description

adequately covered with the

different demographics of the

schools and age groups.

World view

& Theoretical positions

Not stated

206

Scope & Purpose

Clear aims and rationale of

listening to children's views on

parental separation and to discover

their preferred means of support

during times of family change.

Clear link to rationale and policy

behind listening to children's voice.

Contribution to developments of

child voice. more detail of previous

literature would benefit scope of

the research.

Looked at children’s perceptions of

family transitions and whether they

wanted or received any help and

looked at informal and formal

support

Approach to Analysis

There is description of how data is

collected but not how it is analysed.

So despite rich description of the

data collected and inferences drawn

from that there is no description of

analytic method. There is clear

evidence of the subjective

experience of participants. Yhe

conversational style of the

interviews allows for a breadth of

alternate experience which is

discussed in the findings with

different children finding different

things helpful for coping and

support. and differences in

experience.

Note given to the themes coming

from the children’s worldview even

if not directly linked to what they

were looking for.

A use of case studies to reflect the

differencing relationships and

importance of those to the children.

grounded in context.

Interpretation

There is extensive description of

field notes used in the different

aspects of the study. And how this

had led to interpretation and

conclusions. There is evidence of

207

time spent drawing similarities and

differences together and

explanations for experience.

Despite no specific means of

analysis the paper provides rich

detail on the areas of divorce,

coping and support relevant

through the children's eyes.

Note given to the children’s views

and honesty around their individual

experience despite creating a

cognitive map with which to gain

some understanding of experiences.

Some of the evidence used to

support experiences of divorce

come (e.g. emotional coping from

the focus groups which it is noted

that not all the children in these

groups have experienced divorce

and therefore it is hard to be sure if

these are actual experiences or

responses to the case vignettes.)

Key Findings/ Conclusions

Children who benefit from close

supportive relationships with both

parents described themselves as

happy.

Children who felt the commitment

of one parent had diminished –

expressed distress – no longer

mattered.

Despite differences in lifestyles and

experiences there were similarities

between children’s attitudes

towards coping and support.

Children didn’t seem to see

teachers as main confidents or

people to talk to however it is the

personal qualities of the adult

concerned which children value.

Reflexivity

there is a very small part of the

study which indicates the

researchers influence of the

interpretation of the research. Due

to the selection of schools and rich

208

interpretation this could be taken

further but it is evidenced as an

influence

Consideration given to their role

there is some reference to the

withholding of information from

children because of shame or

dishonourable.

Ethical dimensions

This study demonstrates the most

ethical consideration, it not only

attempts to draw a culturally

diverse sample from different

schools. They indicated the

differences of using an opt in or opt

out consent between the policies

requirements of two schools. Some

children wanted to take part but

parents’ consent meant that they

couldn't. one child even forging a

parent’s signature to take part but

couldn't so space limits are

discussed about ethical

considerations but evidence of

thought given to the complexity of

it.

Relevance & transferability

Paper 10: Trinder, Beek & Connolly (2002) Making contact: How parents and children

negotiate and experience contact after divorce.

Yes/No/Unclear

Comments

Design & Methodology

Sample & Sampling

strategy

Half with private ordered contact

arrangements and had varying

degree of involvement with

lawyers and courts.

140 individuals 61 families.

Breadth of experience across

different perspectives and different

forms of contact.

Lack of minority participants.

World view

& Theoretical positions

Some allusion to world view by not

wanting to illuminate the true

account but instead identify how

209

each family member experiences

the same arrangements.

Scope & Purpose

The study aimed to examine how

adults and children negotiate

contact, how contact is experienced

and what issues shape contact.

What makes contact work and not

work for children and parents.

Approach to Analysis

Grounded theory – software

package

Interpretation

Key Findings/ Conclusions

Quality and quantity of contact

varies tremendously. 9 different

types of contact arrangement were

identified.

Reflexivity

Not stated

Ethical dimensions

Informed consent and

confidentiality addressed and

speciality interviewer for children.

Further reference to ethics with

anonymity and language.

Relevance & transferability

Important to acknowledge that

where children and adult

perspectives are sought, adult

voices tend to dominate over the

children.

210

Appendix 5. Anonymised GEM grids

A. James

211

B. Sienna

212

C. Ben

213

D. King

214

Appendix 6. Confirmation of Ethical approval from the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust

Research Ethics Committee

215

Appendix 7. Confirmation of Ethical approval from Tower Hamlets local authority

research committee

216

Appendix 8. Information sheet provided to participants & parents of participants

A. Participant Information sheet

Participant information sheet

Information Sheet

Project title

Children and Young People’s experiences of divorce or separation

Who is doing the research?

My name is Jordan Stone and I am training to be an Educational

Psychologist at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust.

I am doing this research as part of my course.

Would you like to take part in research?

I would like to ask if you would like to take part in my research.

You will need to read the information carefully to decide if you would like to

take part or not.

This information will help you understand what it is about and what I am

asking you to do.

What is the research and who can take part?

I want to find out about children’s experiences of their

parent’s divorce or separation. I am looking for children

whose parents have divorced or separated or who are in the

process of divorcing or separating, this includes if one of your

parents lives in a different house to you or if they live in the

same house.

217

I am interested in hearing about your experiences and talking with you

about them.

What are the possible benefits of taking part?

There is not much research about children’s experiences of their parents’

divorce and what they think and feel about it.

What you say is important because my research is all about

children and young people’s experiences.

Do I have to take part?

No.

You do not have to; it is up to you to decide. You are free to stop doing the

research at any time, without any consequences.

If I want to take part will I automatically be selected for the research?

No.

Because I want to be able to gather detailed

information about children and young people’s

experience, I can only select a small number of

children to take part (4-6).

This means that if you want to take part, your parents will have to send

back the parent consent form and your assent form, which tells me you

have read the information and wish to take part.

I will select participants on a first come first serve basis and I am interested

in talking with children and young people of different ages.

Who has given permission for this research?

Your school has given me permission and The Tavistock and Portman

NHS Foundation Trust (where I am training) have given me permission

too.

What will happen to me if I take part?

You will be invited to come and meet me at your school.

218

When we meet, I will explain what we will do and we

will talk for a short time (no longer than 1 hour)

about your experiences of your parent’s divorce or

separation.

About a week after we first meet, we will meet

again to think a bit more (no longer than an hour).

I would like to make audio recordings of our meetings to help me

remember and think about things that were said during them. The

recordings will be stored using password protected software. You can ask

for the recordings to be stopped or deleted at any time and they will be

deleted once I have typed them up. 

What will happen to the findings from the research?

I will write it up as part of my course. I will share some findings with y our

school and the Tower Hamlets Educational Psychology

Service where I am on placement so they hear about children

and young people’s experiences. I might also share the

findings with other professionals working with young people.

I want to tell you about what I write up if you would like. We

can decide how you would like to know about the findings such

as me explaining them to you in person or me sending them to you.

What will happen if I don’t want to carry on with this research?

You can change your mind at any time and stop taking part if you

want to, without any consequences. Any research data collected

before you stop might be used, unless you ask for it to be

destroyed. If it has already been anonymised then I will not be

able to remove your data and it will not be traceable to anyone,

including me.

What will happen if I get upset?

You will be given a safe word or object which will let me

know if you are upset and want the interview to stop. You will

be able to go to….[named member of staff] if you are

worried or upset at any time during or after the interview has finished. If you

219

wish to talk to me after the interview, you can tell [named person] and they

can let me know.

Will my information be kept confidential?

Yes.

I will follow the law (Global Data Protection Regulation, 2018), so all

information about you will be confidential and stored properly. Your name

will be changed to a pseudonym (made up name) to protect your identity.

The data will be kept for a minimum of 5 years. 

Are there times when my information cannot be kept confidential?

If you tell me something that makes me worry about your safety or

someone else then I might have to share that with others to keep you or

someone else safe. I would always aim to talk with you first.

Because I am meeting with 4-6 young people, there is a chance you might

recognise some of the things you said. To protect your identity, your name

will be a pseudonym (a made-up name) so that others are less able to

recognise you and what you said. 

For more information and contact details

If you have any questions or concerns about any aspect of the

research, including the researcher please contact me:

Jordan Stone

Email:



jstone@tavi-port.nhs.uk

Telephone: 077958393662

If you have any concerns about the research then you can contact Simon

Carrington who works for the Tavistock and Portman research department.

His contact details are:

220

Simon Carrington, Head of Academic Governance and Quality

Assurance

academicquality@tavi-port.nhs.uk

B. Parent Information sheet

Parent Information Sheet

Research Title

Children and Young People’s experiences of their parent’s divorce or separation.

Who is doing the research?

My name is Jordan Stone and I am training to be an Educational Psychologist at the Tavistock

and the Portman NHS Trust. I am doing this research as part of my course.



Would your child like to take part in research?

I would like to invite your child to take part in my research study. Before you decide whether

you would like to give permission for your child to take part, I will explain what the research

would involve. Please take time to read the information carefully. If you feel that you would be

happy for your child to take part, you will be invited in to meet with me to hear more about the

research and ask any questions you may have. You can then decide whether or not you wish for

your child to take part.

What is the aim of the research and who can take part?



I want to find out about children and young people’s experiences of their parents’ divorce or

separation. I am looking for children or young people whose parents have divorced or separated

this includes if one parent lives in a different house to your child or if they live in the same

house. I am interested in meeting with your child to gather their experiences of this event. Your

child must be aged between 7-14 and aged 5 or over when you and your partner separated.



What are the possible benefits of taking part?

There is not much research about children and young people’s experience of their parents

divorce and what they think and feel about it. Your child’s opinions and thoughts are really

important for my research because it is all about young people’s experiences. Your child will be

given the opportunity to express their thoughts and feelings in a safe and supportive

environment. This research hopes to be able to support children and young people like your child

in the future by enhancing the knowledge of professionals, like myself, of children’s experiences

221

and inform future research aiming to develop support for children related to what children talk

about. 



Who has given permission for this research?

The training institution that I am studying at is called the Tavistock and Portman NHS

Foundation Trust and they have given me ethical approval to do the research. Your child’s

school has also given me permission to carry out the research.



Does my child have to take part?

No.

Your child does not have to take part, and it is up to you both to decide. Your child would be

free to withdraw (stop taking part in the research) at any time, without giving a reason. 



If your child wants to take part will they automatically be selected for the research?

No.

Because I want to be able to gather detailed information about children and young peoples

experience, I can only select a small number of people to take part (4-6). This means that if your

child wants to take part and you are happy for them to do so, you will have to send back the

expression of interest form which tells me you have read the information and are interested in

your child to take part. You will then be invited in to attend a parent meeting with myself to hear

more about the research process and ask any questions you may have. You will then be asked to

complete a parent consent form and a brief questionnaire which will determine if your child is

eligible for the research. Your child will also be asked to complete an assent form and be given

the opportunity to meet with me to ask any questions. If we receive more than 6 children who

wish to participate, participants will be chosen in order of expression of interest and I am

interested in talking with children and young people of different ages.

I will also invite you to meet with me to talk to ask you some questions about the background of

your separation in relation to your child. There is a separate information sheet and consent form

for this.

Can one or more of my children take part?

Yes.

As all children’s experiences are considered unique to them, siblings are allowed to take part.

However, they will be interviewed separately. You would have to provide consent for your

children who you wish to take part and they will have to provide their assent too.



What will happen to my child if they take part?

They will be invited to come and meet me at their school to learn more about the research, sign

an assent form and have the opportunity to ask questions. On the first day of the research, I will

explain what we will do and we will talk for a short time (no longer than an hour) about their

first thoughts about their experiences of their parent’s divorce or separation. About a week after

222

we first meet, we will meet again to think a bit more (no longer than an hour) about their first

thoughts and if they have had any thoughts since. I would like to make audio recordings of our

meetings to help me remember and think about things that were said during them. The

recordings will be stored anonymously, using password protected software. Your child can ask

for the recordings to be stopped or deleted at any time. The recordings will be deleted once I

have typed them up.

What will happen if my child becomes upset about anything discussed during the research?

If your child becomes upset about anything during our interview they will have a safe word or

object, which we will agree before we start, that they can use to end the interview. There will

also be a member of staff…..[named person], who your child will have access to during and after

the interviews if they feel upset or worried at any time. I will also stay on site immediately after

the interviews to be available for your child if they wish to talk. I am also easily contactable by

the school, if your child wishes to talk to me at any time after the interviews have finished.

What will happen to the findings from the research?

The findings will be typed up and will make up my thesis which will be part of my Educational

Psychology qualification. I may share some of the findings anonymously with the school and

Tower Hamlets local authority Educational Psychology Service, so that they find out about what

children and young people’s experiences are and there might be times where I share the findings

with other professionals working with young people. I would like to tell you about the findings

of the research if you would like. We can talk about the ways in which you would like to know

about the findings such as me explaining them to you in person or me sending them to you.

What will happen if my child doesn’t want to carry on with this research?

Your child can change their mind at any time and if they want to stop, they can at any time

without explaining why, without any consequences. Your child will be given a safe word or

object before starting the interview which they can use if they wish for the interview to stop. Any

research data collected before their withdrawal may still be used, unless you or they request that

it is destroyed. If it has reached the point that it has been anonymised to the point that I can no

longer retrieve the data I will not be able to remove the data and it will not be traceable to

anyone, including me.

Will what my child talks about be kept confidential?

Yes.

I will follow ethical and legal practice and all information about your child will be handled in

confidence. All information that is collected will be kept strictly confidential. All records related

to your child’s participation in this research study will be handled and stored appropriately. Your

child’s identity on these records will be indicated by a pseudonym rather than by their name. The

data will be kept for a minimum of 3 years. Data collected during the study will be stored and

used in compliance with the UK Global Data Protection Regulation (GDPR, 2018).



Are there times when my child’s data cannot be kept confidential?

If your child tells me something that makes me concerned about their safety or the safety of

someone else then I might have to share that information with others in order to keep them or

223

someone else safe. However, I would always aim to discuss this with your child first when

possible. Because I am meeting with between 4-6 young people, there is a chance that your child

may recognise some of the things they said in my research. To protect your child’s identity, their

name will be a pseudonym so that others are less likely to be able to recognise them and what

they said.

For more information and contact details

If you have any questions or concerns about any aspect of the research, including the researcher

please contact me:

Jordan Stone



Email: [email protected]

Telephone: 077958393662

If you have any concerns about the research then you can contact Simon Carrington who

works for the Tavistock and Portman research department. His contact details are:

Simon Carrington, Head of Academic Governance and Quality Assurance

[email protected]

If you are interested in your child taking part in this research please sign your name below:

Your name...................................Signed.....................Date...../...../.....

If you are interested in attending a meeting with myself to hear more about the research please

sign your name below (there will also be an opportunity to sign a consent form in this meeting if

you wish for your child to take part):

Your name...................................Signed.....................Date...../...../.....

Alternatively, if you wish for your child to take part but do not wish to attend the parents

meeting then please contact me using the details above and I will send you a consent form

for you to sign.

Thank you for your help.

Appendix 9. Consent forms provided to participants & parents of participants

A. Consent form provided to participants

224

Participant Assent Form

Title

Children and Young People’s experiences of their parent’s divorce or separation.

Please tick the statements below if you agree with them

1. I have read and understood the information sheet and have had the

chance to ask questions.

2. I understand that I only have to participate if I want to and I am allowed to stop taking part in

the research.

3. I agree to take part in the research.

Please Tick

Here

225

4. I agree for my interviews to be recorded.

5. I understand that a different name will be used for me in the write up of the research and that

this is done to protect my identity as much as possible.

6. I understand that what I say will only be used for this research and nothing else.

7. I understand that the only time where my data might be shared is when there is an

issue of safety around me or somebody else.

8. I understand that the research will be written up as a thesis which means it can be

accessed through libraries and that it may be shared anonymously with your school,

the Local Authority Educational Psychology Service or with professionals who

work with children and young people.

226

9. I know that if I am worried or concerned about anything I will have …….[named

person], who I can talk to if I am worried or want to talk about something that went on in

the interview.



Please Circle,

I agree/ do not agree to participate, please sign your name below:

Your name..........................Signed........................Date...../...../..... 



Thank you for your help.

227

B. Consent form provided to parents of participants

Parent Consent Form

Title

Children and Young People’s experiences of their parent’s divorce or separation.

Please Initial

Here

228

Please initial the statements below if you agree with them

1. I have read and understood the information sheet and have had the

chance to ask questions.

2. I understand that my child’s participation is voluntary and they are free to

withdraw at any time without giving a reason.

3. I agree for my child participate in the research.

4. I agree for the interviews with my child to be recorded.

5. I understand that my child’s data will be anonymised using a pseudonym

and that this is done to protect their identity as much as possible.

6. I understand that my interviews will be used for this research and cannot be

accessed for any other purposes.

7. I understand that the only time where my child’s confidential data might be

shared is when there is an issue of safety around them or somebody else.

8. I understand that the research will be written up as a thesis which means it

can be accessed through libraries and that it may be shared anonymously with

my child’s school, the Local Authority Educational Psychology Service or with professionals

who work with children and young people.

Please Circle:

I agree/ I do not agree for my child to participate, please sign your name below

Your name...................................Signed.....................Date...../...../.....

Thank you for your help.

Appendix 10. Scoping letter to parents

Dear Parent/Carer,

My name is Jordan Stone and I am training to be an Educational Psychologist at the Tavistock

and the Portman NHS Trust. I am doing some research about children and young people’s

experiences of their parent’s divorce or separation. I am interested in speaking to children and

young people who have experienced their parent’s divorce or separation. If this is an experience

that applies to your family, I would love the opportunity to tell you more about the research and

what it would involve, so you and your child can make an informed decision about whether you

would like to take part

229

If you feel that you would be happy for your child to take part, you will be invited in to meet

with me to hear more about the research and ask any questions you may have. You can then

decide whether or not you wish for your child to take part.

This letter is to determine whether you would be interested in your child taking part in research

of this kind. By expressing your interest through the form below does not mean that you or your

child has to take part. By completing the form below, you will let me know that it is ok to send

you further information regarding my research. I can send this to you or you can pick this up

from the reception at your child’s school.

To help you decide whether your child may be suitable for this research I have included some of

the requirements below:

• Parent’s who identify as divorced or separated.

• Your child was aged 5 or over when parents separated.

• You have informed your child of your separation.

• Parents have been separated for 6+ months.

• Your child is not currently attending an external agency for support due to the

divorce/separation e.g. CAMHS

• Your child isn’t personally involved in any court proceedings for the divorce.

If you feel your child meets this criteria and you are interested in hearing more about the

research please return the form below to [named person].

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------

Please Circle:

I am interested/ I am not interested in receiving more information about this research, please

sign your name below

Your name...................................Signed.....................Date...../...../.....

Thank you for your help.

Appendix 11. Full analysis export from MAXQDA showing the link between Themes

through to Segmented Text

see attached USB

Appendix 12. Raw Transcripts produced following Individual Interview (King only, see

USB for all participants.

Interview 1 GEM

230

Participant: KING

Date:28.11.18

Time: 10:05 am

Key

italic text: intonation

… short pause

.. correction of speech

[] interruption e.g. laughter, longer pause, noise, writing

volume

Jordan: there we go, okay.

KING: Hellooo

Jordan: Hello…so I am interested King, in what you associate and what comes first into your

head when you think of your parent’s divorce or separation. So, I want you to in these boxes,

draw, write or tell me what first comes to your mind when you think about your experience of

your parent’s divorce or separation. You can put one image or word or phrase in each box.

[writing and drawing in the first box]

KING: that’s me

Jordan: is it…and who’s this one?

KING: that’s my mum

Jordan: and that’s your mum… lovely and what are you going to put in your second box and

then we can talk about each one in turn when you’ve finished them

KING: huh?

Jordan: so what we’ll do is, if you fill in your four boxes and then we’ll talk about each one

afterwards.

KING: okay, urrrmm

Jordan: so that’s the first thing that you thought of, isn’t it? is there anything else that comes to

your mind that you want to put..it can be a word or a drawing?

[pause]

KING: w-when you spell why is it W-H-Y?

Jordan: it is, yes. good spelling.

KING: Why…[pause, writing]…urm yeah

231

Jordan: yeah so this..in this b-box you’ve put a question

KING: yes

Jordan: yes that’s really interesting. Is there anything else you want to put in these boxes?

KING: hmmm…[pause, writing]…do you spell daddy with two d’s.

Jordan: yes

KING: I still call my mum mummy and my dad daddy

Jordan: that’s really nice, I bet they like that

KING: after 10 years

Jordan: well I’m sure they like that, I wish I still did that

KING: I’m going to be eleven in January.

Jordan: are you? have you got anything exciting planned?

KING: urm no, it’s on January the 12

so I just make one list of presents so, the things my mum

tries get me for Christmas and the things she can’t get, she can try and get it for my birthday.

Jordan: ah that’s lucKING..so you

KING: but I’ll still get happy with whatever I got.

Jordan: ah that’s so sweet of you. So have you finished this one, why is my daddy…

[pause, writing]

KING: there

Jordan: oh lovely, thank you. So you’ve written, why is my daddy so mean to my mummy?

KING: yes urmm

[pause 6 seconds]

Jordan: you still..you thinking about the fourth one? [pause] I like how you’ve used some

pictures and some drawings as well, I mean some pictures and some writing.

[pause writing]

KING: urr…angry plus sad equals sangry.

232

Jordan: sangry [laughs]. that’s clever that should be a new emotion that we should know about,

shouldn’t it. I quite like that. Have you got a fourth one, and then we can go through some of the

ones you’ve already put down.

KING: umm…I met nice people with some of the r-relationships my mum was in but then I had

to finish for some reason, but I couldn’t get told because urm, she said it was adult business

…and…and I’m a child.

Jordan: so are you saying that when your mummy has met other people , you’ve made some nice

relationships with them but sometimes you don’t get to carry on seeing them?

KING: yeah…there was a nice guy called Alan.

Jordan: yeah, do you want to tell me about him?

KING: urrrm he lives in the the block that’s near the o2 arena.

Jordan: yeah

KING: called the sphere

Jordan: oo that sounds exciting did you get to go?

KING: yeah we urm we lived there for a bit (coughs)

Jordan: so, you lived there for a bit…

KING: yeah…and then my mum urm she used to be a urm person who did drugs but then she

stopped and then she went to AnA meetings and she’s stopped it since urm I was urm…she

started stop..she started to stop when I was 2, I think

Jordan: okay, so when you were little

KING: yeah but she’s..she doesn’t want nothing to do with it now. she feels sick when she thinks

about it and one of my friends here called Dean

Jordan: yeah

KING: he’s here because I was telling his mum, called Anna that urm urm that he should come

here because it’s a really fun school.

Jordan: ah so you were helping him to see how nice it was here.

KING: yeah but me, my mum and his mum got into a fight cos urm his mum got urm she used to

be urm urm sa..alcoholic thing. I don’t know the word.

Jordan: I think you got it right. so she’s

KING: the alcoholic then

233

Jordan: yeah…so that..is that made..is that made it hard for you and luke to still be friends

KING: yehh..nah not really.

Jordan: okay

KING: and his..his..it’s funny when his brother Fred urm urm err gets in a fight cos urm he goes

on his tiptoes and goes like that and then he urm acts all big and it’s really funny.

Jordan: is he smaller than you guys?

KING: I’m the oldest.

Jordan: you’re the oldest

KING: I’m also the oldest in the school.

Jordan: are you?

KING: out of the kids not the adults.

Jordan: not the adults [laughs] okay. I’ve worked that one out. So have you..is th..is this

everything that you wanted to put down?

KING: urrrm yeah

Jordan: yeah, you don’t want to put anything in this one

KING: hmm no

Jordan: no?

KING: I can’t think of anything else

Jordan: you can’t think of anything else? cos you..you mentioned about meeting some of your

mums new…

KING: oh yeah

Jordan: …friends. did you want to put that in there?

[writing]

KING: is it ‘s’ or ‘c’

Jordan: ‘c’…[pause writing] lovely thank you. that’s some really nice writing haven’t..

KING: should I write a name, on one of those up there

Jordan: it’s up to you if you want to. you don’t have to

234

KING: okay

Jordan: perfect so shall we look at this…

KING: I also have a thir-thirteen year old nephew

Jordan: do you? so he’s older than you. gosh that’s..how does that feel?

KING: urm I don’t know

Jordan: you don’t know? can you..so let’s have a look at this one.so what have you put in this

box?

KING: urm I’m pretty sure my mum was sad i-I-i-i can’t remember.

Jordan: okay so you..

KING: I don’t know if she was sad or happy or angry

Jordan: but you have a feeling that she felt sad when it happened

KING: yeah I feel sad and angry

Jordan: and you feel sad and angry. do you want to tell me about a time that you felt sad and

angry?

KING: urmm

Jordan: can you remember a time?

KING: I can’t remember cos it was aggges ago.

Jordan: it felt like a long time ago. and do you ever feel sad and angry now?

KING: umm most of the time I feel sad but I don’t feel angry anymore

Jordan: okay do you wanna tell me about the times…

KING: I felt angry because urm I feel angry because when my dad left I thought I couldn’t see

him again and then I thought it was all his fault.

Jordan: ah so you felt angry because you might not..you..thought you might not see him again

KING: yeah

Jordan: and that you..you blamed him

KING: yeah

235

Jordan: do you wanna tell me..can you remember a time where you felt like that?

KING: err…

Jordan: when you thought you might not see him again?

KING: it was urm, I think it was like 6 months ago. where my mum urm…they had a big

argument because my dad was really late

Jordan: yeah

KING: and then she got really mad urm and just said urm she said that’s it urm you can’t see him

until he’s urm older because err you’re too er irresponsible and he said you’re always late she

said you’re always late and then the time before that urm he urm made my mum really really sad

and said urm you don’t do anything for King the only..the..the only thing you use your money on

is for urm drugs and alcohol and and stuff

Jordan: so how did that make you feel when mum said that dad couldn’t see you again because

he was too irresponsible?

KING: she didn’t mean it she just got super duper angry

Jordan: yeah

KING: urm… I knew she didn’t mean it but I did get worried.

Jordan: you got worried?

KING: yeah

Jordan: worried that you might not be able to see him again?

KING: yeah because…that’s what she said

Jordan: yeah and then you said that she..that he..that daddy spends money on other things other

than on you

KING: no, my dad said that that’s what she does

Jordan: oh your dad said that’s what she does

KING: but she doesn’t

Jordan: but she doesn’t. and how did you feel when he said that?

KING: urm I didn’t hear it cos I only heard it when she was screaming down the phone at him

saying urm how dare you say urm urrm that all the only thing I I spend my money on is drugs

and alcohol urm you inconsiderate c-u-n-t

Jordan: oh I see and and so they were on the phone together and you were you were in the house

236

KING: yeah

Jordan: and what were you doing while mum was on the phone?

KING: urm I was in my room. cos I know not to go into the room when my mum’s sad or angry.

but sometimes it’s okay cause I give her a hug when she’s sad and when she’s angry

Jordan: that’s nice of you and does that help?

KING: yeah

Jordan: and does it help you to feel better, to give a hug to mum?

KING: yeah

Jordan: oh that’s really nice. and are there are there..any other times where you felt these sorts of

feelings angry and sad or seen mummy sad.

KING: no

Jordan: no, that’s the only time you can remember?

KING: wait see my mum sad?

Jordan: yeah or feel..

KING: no I’ve seen my mum sad loads of time.

Jordan: do you wanna tell me about that?

KING: last year, I think, or the year before maybe,

Jordan: yeah

KING: urm my mum had a boyfriend called Dave,

Jordan: yeah

KING: urm urm and then on Christmas she said my mum said she loved unicorns

Jordan: yeah

KING: urm and then he she..said get me can you get me something that’s unicorny and then he

got her a unicorn bath duck urm a er a flying unicorn for little kids and a unicorn lollipop

Jordan: ah that’s nice

KING: but urm she urm it was like those things from the works like is was little kid..it was little

kid it was a little kids toy an

237

Jordan: okay

KING: he didn’t put any effort into it and it made her really sad and then she got super duper

duper happy because my nan got her urm her Pandora bracelet that she really wanted

Jordan: ah so you’ve noticed that mum got a little bit sad when she didn’t receive the presents

that she wanted at Christmas time

KING: she just got sad that he didn’t put any thought into it. cos urm on Christmas she doesn’t

even ask for anything, she just says if you’ve got me a present fine but if you haven’t all I want

is a picture of urm all urm 1,2,3,4,5 a picture of 5 of my n..or a picture of all 5 of my nieces.

because I have er 5 cousins, billy, tasha, tate, olivia and angela

Jordan: wow all girls as well, that’s a lot

KING: and it’s funny because my mum was the first to be born out of the..my three aunts. she

had one child

Jordan: yeah

KING: and aunty Claire urm was the second, she had two, billy and tasha

Jordan: yeah

KING: urm aunty evie was the was the urm is the youngest and she had three

Jordan: did she?

KING: yeah tasha, angela and olivia

Jordan: so it’s like one two, three and youre the only boy?

KING: err yeah

Jordan: yeah, what’s that like to be the only boy in a family of girls?

KING: I like urm more girly things but I try not to show it in front of my friends, cos I get scared

Jordan: do you want to tell me about that? what do you get scared about

KING: urm I get scared if they will laugh at me

Jordan: you get scared they might laugh

KING: yeah cos they all my er family that I grew up with, I was the only boy other than my

grandad and uncle dan which is urm aunty esme’s husband.

Jordan: ah okay so there you were..there’s only three boys and two of them are adults?

KING: yeah.

238

Jordan: so that seems likely that you might like to play with some girl things like your cousins.

KING: yeah and I like styling hair

Jordan: you like styling hair?

KING: yeah I asked if I could get urm a doll head for Christmas

Jordan: oh that sounds like a good idea

KING: or just something I can do hair on. so, I can do different designs and stuff

Jordan: yeah, so you can practice

KING: yeah

Jordan: excellent, I think that sounds really fun. so is-is there anything else you wanted to say

about this box or should we move onto the next one?

KING: urm I don’t know what the next one is that’s why it’s a question

Jordan: so it says why did they split up

KING: I don’t know don’t know why

Jordan: so that’s your question cos you’re unsure about wha..why they split up? have you

any..can you..remember any times where that was spoken about in? no? has mummy ever

mentioned it to you?

KING: no

Jordan: No

KING: that next question, why is my daddy so mean to my mummy? because urm they always

get into arguments cause he’s late or he didn’t pick up the phone or its just they just get in

arguments a lot of the time.but it’s gotten better now, now they barely have a argument but

sometimes they might just have urm urm an aggressive debate but it doesn’t turn into a argument

Jordan: ok so yo..that sounds like so at first they had quite a lot of arguments about dad being

late

KING: they still do have big arguments but just not often

Jordan: just not as often, so they’ve gotten better

KING: umhmm

Jordan: can you remember, so you told me about a time

239

KING: sugar

Jordan: oops you’ve lost your page…oh good memory

KING: this is from my other friend that in class, called Alfie. we have a game called geometry

dash. I have geometry dash sub zero and the normal one and geometry dash world. he has the

same as me and he also has geometry dash meltdown.

Jordan: oh gosh.

KING: and these are the codes for something that urm is in the game.

Jordan: that sounds very complex

KING: we are on our iPad when we go to choosing urm he’s gonna get really excited

Jordan: aww that’s I’m so glad you’ve done that. so you said here that urm it’s gotten better

mummy and daddy they still have some arguments but not as many, just some disagreements

KING: yeah

Jordan: and can you remember a time about that? remember a time where they’ve had sort of a-

another disagreement?

KING: that time that I’ve told you

Jordan: the one you’ve told me already. are there any more that you can remember?

KING: how long does that say? it says 19 is that the time.

Jordan: it’s how long we’ve been in here

KING: oh that’s long.

Jordan: it is quite long. yeah we-we’ve nearly finished though haven’t we. is there anymore to

say about this one?

KING: urm no. I feel tired

Jordan: tired?...have you got any examples of how daddy is mean to mummy.

KING: no, I try not to yawn when I’m talking about my parent’s cos my eyes water and it’s not

because I’m sad. and then the people think I’m sad by talking about it.

Jordan: okay

KING: and that’s why I keep rubbing my eyes

Jordan: that’s okay

240

KING: and I have a bad neck

Jordan: you got a bad neck as well?

KING: yeah, in the night when I breathe in

Jordan: umm

KING: urm it’s like its cold there and then I have to cough a lot.

Jordan: is that all the time or just recently?

KING: um just recently

Jordan: just recently, so you might be feeling a little bit under the weather. It’s the weather

outside isn’t it, its quite cold and nippy…okay

KING: are we done with the questions.

Jordan: we’re just going to go to this one and then were finished.

KING: oh okay.

Jordan: so I met some nice people, so do you want to tell me about that

KING: there’s a man called Chris

Jordan: yeah

KING: urm he had er we stayed there for quite a while he was a really really nice man.

Jordan: yeah

KING: and he was super duper strong.

Jordan: super duper strong. want to tell me about that?

KING: and one time I got really lucKING because urm he has a x-box

Jordan: yeah

KING: urm and then I knew how to turn it on and I could watch YouTube videos and stuff

Jordan: yeah

KING: and at the time it was when frozen just came out so everyone it was like a couple months

after frozen came out.

Jordan: yeah

241

KING: maybe a like 2 years not a couple months..

Jordan: [laughs]

KING: and then urm yeah I got to just watch some videos and I searched up urm let it go fire

version there was all different versions. there was the frozen one

Jordan: yeah

KING: which was about snow and ice and there was a one about earth which was urm ground

and mice

Jordan: wow

KING: urm

Jordan: so you got to play on all of that when you were at his house

KING: and I played a game urm papa something sagas. you might have played it before, I don’t

know but it was fun. and he had er a really good game that I loved so much urm I can’t

remember it though.

Jordan: so it sounds like by staying at Alan’s house you were able to play on some games and

have quite a lot of fun there.

KING: yeah

Jordan: yeah, and then what happened after that?

KING: urm they split up and then urm my mum thought I was still a baby and then she said

because they disagreed on what channel to watch in the telly

Jordan: oh okay

KING: but it was probably something else

Jordan: oh so it sounds like that mum gave you a different reason as to what you think the reason

was to why they split up

KING: and I just said okay because I didn’t wanna get angry if she told me what it actually was

and and or get sad.

Jordan: okay so you just took her word for it.

KING: yeah

Jordan: did you have any reasons yourself why they might have split up. could you remember?

KING: urm no

242

Jordan: no. okay. is there anything else you want to tell me about meeting nice people.

KING: errrr

Jordan: are there any other times where that’s happened.

KING: no

Jordan: no.

KING: all the other guys was. not all the other guys she she not just someone who just goes on

lots and lots of dates

Jordan: yeah

KING: urm, she yeah urm some of the other guys.

Jordan: yeah

KING: urm it one of the man he urm ended out to sell drugs and my mum didn’t know. so,

he..they had to split up. the other guy was the man on Christmas.

Jordan: yeah. that’s was Dave was it? yeah

KING: yeahh urm I don’t know why Chris. They..I don’t know why they split up

Jordan: so it sound’s like Chris was the one that you urm you quite enjoyed spending time with.

KING: yeah

Jordan: yeah

KING: and urm yeah I still don’t know why my mum and dad urm split up.

Jordan: okay

KING: it was probably because of the ch-kids he had

Jordan: oh cos he ha..has other children

KING: yeah he has 14

Jordan: he has 14

KING: from all different people

Jordan: and are many..are any of those..are they older, younger than you?

KING: urm quite a lot is older

243

Jordan: quite a lot of them are older

KING: when when they got together

Jordan: yeah

KING: urm urrm they..my dad had 7

Jordan: okay

KING: when my mum and my dad got together

Jordan: yeah

KING: my dad already had 7 from different people

Jordan: okay

KING: then when they split by the time they split up

Jordan: yeah

KING: there was 14 altogether. including me

Jordan: okay, so you think that might be a reason why cos he may have had some other children

with other people.

KING: yeah

Jordan: I see. and do you get to see any of-of your siblings

KING: noo, yeah when he picks me up to do stuff with me.

Jordan: yeah

KING: I might see a brother, one of my brothers called Leon

Jordan: yeah

KING: he’s really fun.

Jordan: ah that’s nice. he’s re..and what do you do together?

KING: urm I haven’t..we haven’t seen each other in ages so we don’t really know what to talk

about so I just brought up the subject about fortnight and urm I don’t play it and I just said, I

don’t know why people are still getting crazy, because its old now, just because its updating

every single..all the time the kids just lie and say urm I’ve got like a thousand v bucks or

something or I got the new skin.

244

Jordan: yeah so you feel like a lot.. quite a lot of people are into fortnight and you’re not..you

don’t really understand why?

KING: umm I like it but I’ve only played it like three times.

Jordan: I see and you get to buy new skins don’t you, on there and do dances and things

KING: yeah

Jordan: I understand. so you see, what was he called leon?

KING: yeah

Jordan: that’s your brother’s name? and you mentioned you’ve got other..have you got other

brothers and sisters?

KING: urrm

Jordan: or just brothers?

KING: I have brothers and sisters

Jordan: okay

KING: but all together its 14

Jordan: so that is quite a lot. so must be quite hard to r..keep track of all of them

KING: have you..have you got one of these books?

Jordan: I haven’t but I’ve I’ve been looking at it and I really like the look of it

KING: urm the the author called Emily coxhead

Jordan: yeah

KING: urm

Jordan: looks like I might want to get one

KING: yeah the author

Jordan: yeah

KING: she urm…Emily about the author, Emily Coxhead is a fluffy haired British designer,

illustrator and happy thing maker, founder of the happy newspaper. Emily aims to bring a bit of

sunshine to the world. she has no idea what she’s doing but she’s having a lovely time.

Jordan: [laughs]

245

KING: urm

Jordan: sounds like she’s a really lovely person. doesn’t it?

KING: and she puts these books around London and she puts them on buses trains and bus stops.

Jordan: does she? that’s really kind of her

KING: and just on like on the floor or in where the newspaper is. you..if you get one you start

seeing lots of them. cos I want I had to one time my mum rented one of those little e-cars, those

really small ones and then all of a sudden I just started seeing loads of them on the streets

Jordan: did you, and do you find them really useful?

KING: no

Jordan: No [laughs]

KING: they’re tiny! they’re only two seats

Jordan: oh I mean one of the books. not the car. so you don’t find the car useful?

KING: the boots the boots tiny it’s not even as big as this chair. you can’t fit the chair in the car

Jordan: I’ve seen them, they look like little boxes

KING: yeah just about that big.

Jordan: [laughs] okay. so do you feel like you’ve had had enough to say? or would you like to

say something else?

KING: urm I don’t know. urm. I think I’m done.

Jordan: you think you’re done? okay

KING: I don’t know what else to say

Jordan: so should I turn this off? if you’re finished?

KING: okay

Jordan: okay. thank you.

Interview 2 FANI

Participant: Kanye KING

Date:17.01.19

Time: 10:54 am

Key

246

italic text: intonation

… short pause

.. correction of speech

- stutter/hesitation

[] interruption e.g. laughter, longer pause, noise, writing

() volume

Jordan: so can you remember what we spoke about last time King?

KING: the bad things about when parents leave each other

Jordan: yeah what do you remember about that

KING: urm nothing

Jordan: so you don’t remember what we spoke about…urm can you remember how you felt

about what we spoke about…how did it make you feel after we met?

KING: I felt normal

Jordan: you felt normal, that’s good, can you tell me more about that?

KING: um I just went back to class and then I got on with my day

Jordan: that’s good and did you have a good day after that?

KING: um hmm

Jordan: good…and so do you remember that..when you were talking we did that drawing didn’t

we and you did some..there were four boxes

KING: umhm

Jordan: and you put how you felt..like four things can you remember the first one that you did

KING: ummm I felt sad and angry

Jordan: you did yeah that is what you put, and then you put them together to make a new word

KING: Sangry

Jordan: yeah can you..i was wondering afterwards whether you could remember a time where

you felt sangry, or sad and angry

KING: urm at playtime just now

Jordan: at playtime just now…and which one was that both sad and angry or was it

KING: I was sad and angry

247

Jordan: both of them…and have there been any other times where you felt sad and angry maybe

about regarding your parents…

KING: I felt sad and angry when my nan’s dog had to leave to go back to my nans, he stayed

there for 5 weeks..6 weeks at my house

Jordan: yeah

KING: and then he left

Jordan: oh so you had your nans dog living with you and then he had to go back to your nans

house

KING: yeah

Jordan: do you want to tell me about that..tell me more about that

KING: I can’t just pop over and see him because she lives in Ipswich

Jordan: oh I see so she lives far away

KING: yeah

Jordan: and that means it’s harder to go and see him

KING: umm

Jordan: and when was the last time you saw him?

KING: I can’t remember

Jordan: you can’t remember. what type of dog was he or she?

KING: king Charles spaniel crossed with pug and his name was Charlie

Jordan: ah how lovely. I quite like those dogs are they the ones with the big floppy curly ears?

KING: er yeah

Jordan: what colour was he

KING: he was ginger and white

Jordan: ginger and white, I don’t think I’ve seen a ginger one, I bet he was really..

KING: it’s not like ginger ginger it’s just brownish ginger

Jordan: ah I see sounds like a really

KING: like cinnamon

248

Jordan: sounds..like cinnamon, sounds like a really nice colour a bit like this colour

KING: umm a bit brighter

Jordan: a bit brighter than that okay and remember we were talking about um your parents not

being together didn’t we..las..didn’t we last time

KING: umhmm

Jordan: and…

KING: and then you told me if I feel uncomfortable I give you this

Jordan: yes you can have him again so you might want to put him next to you in case that’s

KING: I wanna use this one

Jordan: ah I love penguins…they’re my fave…erm and is there been any times where you felt

sad about that about your parents not being together?

KING: yes

Jordan: do you wanna tell me about that?

KING: urm a couple days ago I felt sa..[cough]..I felt sad because it was my birthday

Jordan: umm

KING: [coughs] and then my dad said he’d come at 1 o clock but he was all the way at Romford

so he couldn’t come at one o clock and then urm he came really late cos he had to get bus cos he

didn’t have urm a car

Jordan: umm

KING: and my sis was there and we were supposed to go ice skating

Jordan: um

KING: and we couldn’t because he came late, but we went to my my nn..other gran his his mum

Jordan: yeah

KING: yeah

Jordan: and how did that make you feel when that happened?

KING: erm annoyed a little bit

249

Jordan: annoyed

KING: but I was fine with it cause he does that lots of times

Jordan: yeah you said that last time that sometimes he’s he’s late quite a lot didn’t you…do you

wanna tell me more about how you feel when he’s late

KING: I’m used to it now so I don’t really care

Jordan: and has that always been the same him sort of being late to come and get you

KING: ummhmm

Jordan: yeah

KING: but not not all the time sometimes he he just comes

Jordan: I understand and was it different before when urm mummy and daddy were together

KING: urm I can’t remember

Jordan: can’t remember

KING: they split up when I was 4

Jordan: okay

KING: cos when they met urm my dad already had 7 kids

Jordan: umm

KING: without me and then when by the time he know my mum and him split up in four years

he had 7 more kids

Jordan: yeah so you think that might be

KING: somehow

Jordan: somehow so you think that might be why they split up

KING: yeah

Jordan: you said you feel..so you feel sad when he is late to pick you up

KING: umhmm

Jordan: have there been any other times you can remember so you said on Saturday he was late

are there any other times that sort of stick in your mind

KING: urm one time I..I think I told you this before

250

Jordan: yeah

KING: last time he me and my hi..him and my and my mum got into a big fight

Jordan: yeah

KING: cos he’s..he said urm my mum doesn’t do anything for me do you..all the money she erm

errr gets she urm spends on drugs

Jordan: yeah

KING: and then she went crazy because she’s she used to do drugs before she had me and then

she real..she worked really hard to stop

Jordan: yeah [pause] so that made you feel sort of sad when he said that to mum

KING: umhmm

[pause]

Jordan: and have there been an-any other times where they’ve had arguments like that

KING: yeah but I can’t re-really remember

Jordan: you can’t really remember them…what do you think it is about that one that stays in

your mind, makes that one easier to remember?

KING: umm I don’t know I just remember it

Jordan: just remember it

KING: cause she was shouting down the phone a lot

Jordan: yeah

KING: he was..like really really screaming

Jordan: so she was clearly quite upset as well

KING: yeah

Jordan: and you said last time didn’t you that you’d seen your mum sad quite a lot of times and

do you feel that’s often because she’s having arguments with dad…yeah..and do they still argue

now

KING: umhmm

Jordan: yeah and what’s that like when they argue how do you feel

251

KING: scared

Jordan: you feel scared, do you wanna tell me about that?

KING: hm?

Jordan: do you wanna tell me a bit more about how you feel scared

KING: because they’re shouting..they they’re shouting in the next room but it’s really loud

Jordan: you can hear even though they’re in the next room

KING: yeah [pause] I need a pen

[gets up to get a pen]

Jordan: you can bring that over if you want…urm … so there in the next room shouting can you

remember a time where that’s happened

KING: I just told you

Jordan: yeah any other times other than that one?

KING: oh urm…oops…um…ouch

Jordan: are you okay?

KING: yeah…one time them I can’t

Jordan: you can’t that’s okay…so how about feeling angry then, so you’ve mentioned that you

felt sad and angry haven’t you can you remember a time that really made you feel angry with

regards to your mum and dad splitting up

KING: I don’t really get angry cos of that but one the..the time that I..time that I used more

strength than I knew I had was when I was in my mainstream school, I think I was in year 3

Jordan: umm

KING: I got super duper angry and I messed up a whole room I got all the bottles of paint and I

just threw it everywhere and all the glitter and stuff

Jordan: ummm

KING: huh? [teacher is at the window]

Jordan: yeah?

[teacher interrupts comes in to talk to King about his altercation with another pupil in the

playground]

252

Jordan: sorry King so you were saying you got super duper angry and you were throwing some

paint pots in the classroom

KING: yeah and urm you know those urm I didn’t know that I was that strong but I wasn’t using

all my strength

Jordan: um

KING: if you’ll believe me..urm though..you know those classroom windows those thin ones

that are like this big

Jordan: yeah

KING: and they have like the metal things in it…I punched through it

Jordan: ahh and how..you must have felt really angry at that point then

KING: yeah but I was so angry I didn’t even feel feel it

Jordan: yeah

KING: when it was going on in in o my knuckles

Jordan: yeah of course and can you remember what made you feel that angry…you can’t

remember?

KING: I kno..i can’t remember anything afterwards I get..after I get angry

Jordan: so you just kind of get the rage but you don’t really remember what it is

KING: I cant.. I don’t remember I just get

Jordan: but you you felt that you were quite strong because you maybe came back from that

when you felt that bad and that angry

KING: no I felt really I felt really strong because I punched through that..the wi..the window

Jordan: oh I see so you had a lot of like physical strength to punch through the window

KING: yeah

Jordan: and what happened after that

KING: urm I got excluded for 2 days

Jordan: oh how did that make you feel

KING: I don’t even know why they do it, cos most kids don’t even like going to school

Jordan: yeah do you wanna tell me more about that?

253

KING: urm I didn’t really care

Jordan: you di..you feel like you didn’t really care

KING: um

Jordan: and did you go back to that school

KING: I go there every Wednesday

Jordan: ah okay that’s where you go on Wednesday afternoons

KING: yeah

Jordan: and are there any other times where you felt angry is that the one the only the main one

that you can remember

KING: err that’s the main one I can remember…yeah

Jordan: and you said that erm you don’t normally get angry with regard to your mum and dad

you feel more sad about that that one

KING: yeah

Jordan: or maybe sangry as you said

KING: yeah

Jordan: yeah was there a time that you felt you were like yes I definitely feel sangry today

KING: yeah

Jordan: yeah do want to tell me about that

KING: I just did

Jordan: so it’s the same one that’s okay

KING: yeah

Jordan: that’s fine…urm and you mentioned they have big arguments urm and you’ve told me

one haven’t you about it happened…a..a bit before about w-when mummy was screaming down

the phone

KING: yeah

Jordan: where there any other big arguments that you can remember..no..that was the main one

that sort ofmade you feel scared

254

KING: yeah

Jordan: but you mentioned that they argue a lot of the time

KING: yeah

Jordan: yeah

KING: how long has this been recording?

Jordan: well this one says 3 minutes but we just had to stop it didn’t we because urm your

teacher came in so th..it was actually on 8 minutes before that, so 8 plus 3 is…

KING: 11

Jordan: yeah so that’s what how long wev’e been here for.

KING: is this the microphone or is this the microphone.

Jordan: urm I think this is the microphone and that bit is the speaker

KING: oh

Jordan: urm…is there anything else that comes to your mind when you think about your

experience of your parent s divorce

KING: urm they didn’t have a divorce because they weren’t married

Jordan: oh okay so they’re they’re separation anything else that you can..that you want to talk

about…not sure?

KING: I never know what to talk about sometimes I just ring someone

Jordan: umm

KING: and them I’m I just I just zone out cos I don’t know what to say then I just put the phone

down…but then I call them back and say sorry I zoned out

Jordan: so sometimes you feel like that you can’t really think of what to say

KING: yeah

Jordan: that’s okay and is that how you feel now

KING: err a bit

Jordan: a bit

KING: but you’re not on the phone so

255

Jordan: no [laughs] I’m not on the phone, right here erm and you also mentioned that you’re not

sure why mum and dad split up didn’t you and that was a question that you had last time you

said oh I’m not quite sure

KING: um

Jordan: and can..and you just said today that you were quite little when that happened but that

you think maybe

KING: when I was three,

Jordan: yeah

KING: somehow, urm ask my mum if you’ve met her

Jordan: umm

KING: if you don’t believe me um I wanted to get out of the room cos the door was shut and I

couldn’t reach the handle

Jordan: um

KING: so urm I got the steps

Jordan: yeah

KING: like the steps that’s like this tall or something or like a little ladder and then urm I got I

took the the pins out of the door so the door just the door just fell down so I jumped onto the sofa

so it didn’t fall on me

Jordan: that was quick

KING: yeah…err one time also I w-weeent I went down to the shop in just wearing my welly

boots and a top I was like two and I only had 2ps and 1ps and I wanted to buy a sweet

Jordan: and you had what just the top and your welly boots on

KING: yeah

Jordan: [laughs]

KING: and a nappy

Jordan: and a nappy, do..you must have a felt a little bit cold doing that or was it summer time

KING: I can’t remember

Jordan: you can’t remember, do you remember getting any sweets, you had 1 p’s and 2

ps’..no…what sweets do you like to buy when you go to the shop

256

KING: ummm

Jordan: do you have a favourite?

KING: my favourite chocolate is Reece’s piece’s peanut butter cups

Jordan: that is a good choice

KING: my favourite sweets is umm…jaw-jaw-jawbreakers

Jordan: jawbreakers are they those

KING: I can just bite them I don’t know why theyr’e called jawbreakers they don’t break your

jaw

Jordan: are they big sort of circular things

KING: they you have to suck on them

Jordan: bet it takes a while to get through them doesn’t it..no

KING: you just bite it here

Jordan: are they little not the big ones

KING: err you can get big ones, jaw breaker jumbo lollipops

Jordan: yeah

KING: so like this big

Jordan: [laughs] but you can’t fit that in your mouth sounds like it might be quite hard to break

that one

KING: it’s just my mouth here that’s small, but inside its massive

Jordan: [laughs]

KING: sooo

Jordan: so once its’ in you can

KING: I can probably get that things head in my mouth

Jordan: [laughs]

KING: but I don’t wanna do it now cos it’s not mine

Jordan: no and also the fur might not be taste very nice

257

KING: umm

Jordan: [laughs] erm so you obviously said you were little when mum and dad split up

KING: yeah

Jordan: can you remember what is the first thing that you remember about them not being

together

KING: umm my mum was very sad

Jordan: your mum was very sad do you wanna tell me a bit more about that

KING: err pardon me

Jordan: that’s okay

KING: urm I can’t remember

Jordan: can’t remember do you remember what you were doing at the time when your mum was

sad

KING: umm

Jordan: no how you were feeling?

KING: sangry

Jordan: you were feeling sangry

KING: yes

Jordan: so when your mum feels sad you feel sangry?

KING: yes

Jordan: can tell me what she might have been sad about

KING: look a face

Jordan: ah that’s so good…ah how pretty..

KING: umm

Jordan: can you remember what she might have been sad about

KING: sh-sh my dad was cheating on her…

Jordan: oh okay

258

KING: a lot

Jordan: and you remember her feeling quite sad

KING: yeah she was probably mainly she was probably angry most of the time

Jordan: yeah so it sounds like you’ve noticed that sometimes you can feel sad and angry can’t

you and then that made that new emotion that you came up with that new feeling sangry

KING: yeah

Jordan: and what happened after that after you noticed that she was feeling angry about your dad

cheating

KING: errrr pardon

Jordan: what happened after what was the next thing that happened

KING: she tried to get a new boyfriend

Jordan: yeah

KING: but it didn’t work out

Jordan: are-are they some of the people you were talking about last time is it Joe or Arthur that

you mentioned

KING: yeah it was Joe and Arthur and a guy called richard

Jordan: okay

KING: he he he had lots of expensive things but my mum figured out that was because he was

selling drugs and stuff so she ended that relationship quickly

Jordan: yeah cos she said she’s tried quite hard hasn’t she to

KING: she has stopped

Jordan: move away from that

KING: yeah

Jordan: and you told me that when you one of your really good memories was when you got to

s..live with Arthur for a bit

KING: yeah

Jordan: can you tell me more about that time?

KING: he had a x-box 360

259

Jordan: yeah

KING: and there was this this game with little tiny balls it was like papa john’s saga but it was

the I can’t remember it but it was a really fun game

Jordan: yeah

KING: and I used that was it was..that was the time when frozen just came out

Jordan: yeah

KING: so I was searching up different types of frozen songs like I was searching up let it go fire

Jordan: yeah

KING: so it was different version about fire and stuff not about urm ice and snow

Jordan: yeah I remember you telling me you said there’s different versions of the song and you

can watch them

KING: yeah

Jordan: and you were able to do that at Chris’s house cos he had an x-box

KING: yeah and there was a..and he used to bring me to the park

Jordan: did he do you want to tell me about those times when he took you to the park

KING: there was a massive climbing frame that was about the size of the school

Jordan: ahh

KING: it was those big string ones

Jordan: yeah I know

KING: and there was a big wooden like a big wooden den that’s like the size of here there was a

couple workers there just to make sure nothing bad was going on

Jordan: so you were able to go to the park to do to play on that big climbing frame when you

were with Chris

KING: ummhmm

Jordan: was that near his house

KING: yeah and I didn’t know what a daughter was so I said what do you call a if you have a

son that is a girl

260

Jordan: yeah

KING: and then he didn’t understand and I told my mum afterwards

Jordan: yeah

KING: urm so I said what do you call if you have a if you have a child that’s that’s a gayl g-girl

Jordan: yeah

KING: what’s it called and then she said daughter cos she didn’t understand before

Jordan: why-why did you ask that question, what was it

KING: cos I didn’t know

Jordan: cos you didn’t know, can you remember why that came to your mind when you were

with Chris…has he got a daughter…that looks a little bit like a chick like a

KING: umm no he n-no he doesnt

Jordan: oh okay but your mum was able to answer the question that you had which is helpful

KING: yeah I was little when they when they split up

Jordan: yeh

KING: i was I was so little they thought I was um silly enough to believe that they couldn’t

decide on what programme to watch

Jordan: yeah

KING: that’s why they split up

Jordan: that’s Chris yeah do you wanna tel me about that then how that ma..what you thought

about when they said urm that its cos of the programme

KING: I believed her for a while

Jordan: um

KING: a couple months ago I asked her why did you really split up

Jordan: um

KING: annnd she never told me

Jordan: so you still don’t know

KING: nope

261

Jordan: did you have your own thinking around why they might have..did anything happen that

you can remember that made you think that might be why

KING: sometimes I just believe that it was because they couldn’t decide on what channel to

watch

Jordan: okay sometimes you think she might be telling the truth

KING: yeah

Jordan: and other times

KING: um sometimes I don’t sometimes I do

Jordan: sometimes you think that she’s telling truth and sometimes you think it might be another

reason that that they split up

KING: yeah

Jordan: and what happened after they split up

KING: um we moved into my mums friends house called sc..c-carol and

Jordan: yeah

KING: she has a daughter called scarlet who’s very spoilt she has she had another child

Jordan: um

KING: not sarah carol

Jordan: yeah

KING: urm yeah and she won’t use any of the things that she used of sarah she she wants it all to

be brand new and stuff

Jordan: yeah…so both the children are spoilt

KING: yeah

Jordan: and

KING: I have like a big massive um like size of that table but like full of scooters and stuff

Jordan: oh do they that is quite a lot of things isn’t it

KING: yeah um the front

Jordan: is that where you’re living now with…no that was just after chris

262

KING: thats that’s in x park where they..near my sisters, I live in x street down that way

Jordan: okay so not far from here

KING: I get bus to school by myself

Jordan: that’s very go..very grown up and how did you um feel when you had to move out of

chris’a house

KING: I was little so I just thought we were going on holiday

Jordan: so you didn’t really remember what was actually happening

KING: no I wish I did I can’t I forget lots of things and then like 10 years later I remember it

Jordan: yeah it think that does happen sometimes doesn’t it when we can’t really remember

what’s happened

KING: umm

Jordan: are there other things that you think oh ve I just remember that’s what happened when

you previously forgot

KING: umm no

Jordan: no have there been other times where you’ve had to move house or change where you

were living because mummy’ split up with somebody?

KING: um no

Jordan: no so that’s just the one that you remember

KING: um to-today I think we’re gonna do p.e

Jordan: oh

KING: but it’s not actually p.e as in what you do in normal school its just my class and Georgia

which is our teacher

Jordan: yeah

KING: brings us down to the lunch hall

Jordan: yeah

KING: annd last time we played hockey, last week

Jordan: yeah

263

KING: urm yeah and I scored lots of goals

Jordan: did you

KING: yeah but our team didn’t win I just I just scored lots of goal

Jordan: well well done for doing that..i-I I really like that I like how you’ve done the colours in

the eyes

KING: the eyes

Jordan: what urm do you know what sport you’re going to play today

KING: no we might not even do it

Jordan: oh whys that

KING: I don’t know, we we we we m-might just not

Jordan: we might just not

KING: cos we have to behave to do it, we can’t just we’re not just gonna do it if we haven’t

behaved

Jordan: yeah

KING: we have to behave in we have to earn it

Jordan: I see so you’ve got to sort of show that your..you’ve been doing the right thing, and do

you think you might have done that today

KING: you have to do it all week not just not just for one day

Jordan: ah and how has your week been

KING: good

Jordan: good well maybe there’s a a chance that you might be able to do it then which will be

nice wont it. you obviously sound like you quite enjoy it

KING: huh?

Jordan: you quite enjoy

KING: yeah

Jordan: playing hockey or w.. doing p.e. you gonna make another one

KING: no I’m just making a star with this paper and then I’m gonna cut it out…I don’t know

why I did it in the centre I should have done it on the side

264

Jordan: is there anything else that you wanted to talk to me about in terms of your experience of

your mum and dad being separated

KING: urm because they not together when I when my dad comes round to see me I

Jordan: um

KING: I go round to see my my..his mum

Jordan: so cos they’re not together you have to leave your house to go and see him at your nans

house

KING: my grans

Jordan: your grans sorry

KING: it’s fine…

Jordan: so your dad takes you to your grans house when he sees you

KING: yeah…not cos they are split up just because I ask him if we can

Jordan: oh ok so you like to go and see your gran

KING: because if they was together

Jordan: yeh

KING: then we’d be doing different stuff on days that hes free

Jordan: if they were together you would be doing different stuff

KING: yeah if they was together

Jordan: do you wanna tell me about that what would you be doing

KING: urm urm something like if it was a really cringey relationship something like going to

Victoria park onto the boats

Jordan: oh ok…so you might go out together as a family

KING: yeah

Jordan: and how would you feel if you got to do that

KING: I would feel really happy

Jordan: you’d feel really happy, is there a time where you’ve been able to do that

265

KING: no

Jordan: and you’re saying because they’re not together you have to do different things

KING: yeah

Jordan: …and one of those things is going to grans house with your dad

KING: yeah

Jordan: what else do you get..do you do with dad when you see him

KING: see my sister issey

Jordan: see your sister issey

KING: yeah she’s 8 yeah she’s 8 or 7

Jordan: and so is she one of your siblings that you see the most…yeah and how does that feel to

see one of them and not some of the others

KING: urm I haven’t even met all of them so

Jordan: do you wana tell me about that how does that feel

KING: urrm I don’t know

Jordan: you’re not sure but you see Amelie, what..do you want to tell me about your..seeing

Issey and what that’s like

KING: we look alike

Jordan: you look alike

KING: that’s the first thing I have to tell you

Jordan: oh

KING: we really really look alike

Jordan: and how does that..what’s that like having looking like your sister is that something you

think’s a good thing

KING: um a good thing

Jordan: a good thing and so when dad picks you up does he also pick up Issey

KING: er no sometimes urm we go to see her

Jordan: you just go and see her when you’re together

266

KING: sometimes she comes and stays over

Jordan: wow what at yur dads house

KING: er no at mine

Jordan: at yours what with your mum…that’s nice…what’s do you want to tell me about a time

when she stayed over then

KING: er on my birthday

Jordan: on your birth..she stayed over on your birthday

KING: yeah I had a nap and then I woke up

Jordan: yeah

KING: and I thought there was a mirror in front of me but it was her

Jordan: [laughs]

KING: and then I woke up a little bit more and then I got really scared

Jordan: so your..so she’s not mummy’s daughter is she

KING: nope

Jordan: no…but she still comes to stay with you and your mum.

KING: yep

Jordan: and where’s dad when that happens at his mums?

KING: probably not

Jordan: probably not

KING: probably in a pub somewhere

Jordan: tell me about that?

KING: urm he always does it he just says he’s doing work

Jordan: yeah

KING: and and that he’ll like this week we were supposed to do stuff on my birthday again

because we didn’t do much on Saturday

Jordan: um

267

KING: we didn’t even do anything urm yeah and he didn’t come round

Jordan: so you

KING: this week at all

Jordan: so sometimes he just doesn’t come even though he says he will.

KING: ummhmm

Jordan: and what do you think about that?

KING: er I just think he should try harder

Jordan: yeah to see you?

KING: yeah

Jordan: and it sounds like you feel that he isn’t really trying very hard? how’s that make you feel

KING: annoyed

Jordan: annoyed

KING: sangry

Jordan: sangry…so you’d like him to try harder to see you

KING: yeah

[pause]

Jordan: and do you feel like it might be the same for Issey does she?

KING: errr

Jordan: have a similar experience

KING: probably

Jordan: have there been times where you feel that he does try ?

KING: yeah

Jordan: do you want to tell me about those times

KING: umm even though he didn’t come on the time he said he would on my birthday

Jordan: umm

268

KING: he he came two hours late but that’s because he was in Romford and he had to go um

come to mine by bus and train and stuff because he didn’t have the car

Jordan: yeah so it sounds like even though he was like he still came on the day he said he was

going to come

KING: yeah and he said sorry

Jordan: and what was that like when he said sorry? was that did that help

KING: we’re doing this for 52 minutes that’s long

Jordan: no this way round

KING: oh

Jordan: we can finish whenever you want to

KING: okay I don’t I don’t really care how long we do it I’m just worried I might miss out on

p.e

Jordan: okay wel..do you know when p.e is

KING: no

Jordan: n do you want to let me know when you want to finished

KING: okay maybe in um urm in a couple minutes after this minute finishes

Jordan: okay

KING: so in two minutes

Jordan: okay in 2 minutes okay, so what would you like to talk about in those two minutes, are

there any other things that come to your mind when you are talking about dad being late

KING: one of the bad things

Jordan: yeah

KING: it’s not really bad but urm my mum I because I’m not around my dad a lot

Jordan: yeah

KING: there isn’t really like a man there so and I have lots of girl cousins

Jordan: yeah

KING: and not not girlfriends girlfriends but friends that are girls

269

Jordan: yeah

KING: because I grew up around girls most of my family are girls yay

Jordan: yeh you just mentioned that urm you what was you saying last time, you quite like doing

hair don’t you and things like that and you quite like playing with some girl things

KING: yeah

Jordan: and you were saying because there’s not a man what do you want to tellme more about

that what that’s like?

KING: er he’s not there to when I’m older he might not be there to say urm do you wanna go

round to the pub to have a drink or something

Jordan: um

KING: cos I’ll be doing something else because he won’t be there with me

Jordan: ah okay so you feel like when you get older you might miss out.

[interruption from family support worker]

Jordan: we’re nearly finished aren’t we

KING: yeah one minute

Jordan: one minute so you said when you get a bit bigger you urm he won’t won’t be there to

take you to the pub and things when you might want him to

KING: not just because of he won’t be able to take me to the pub that’s sounds a little bit bad

Jordan: [laughs] tell me more then what you mean?

KING: he won’t be around to ask me if he wants to go see a football match with me

Jordan: yeah

KING: or…or meet my my girlfriend or my boyfriend whichever I-I choose

Jordan: yeah so it sounds like y-you would like him to be there to do things with you but you

worry that he might not be

KING: I know my mum will be there

Jordan: yeah

KING: definitely

270

Jordan: that’s good that you know she will definitely be there

KING: yeah

Jordan: what makes you think dad won’t be there

KING: because he lets me down a lot

Jordan: cos he lets you down a lot…that sounds like it..that sounds quite tricky..sounds like it’s

quite hard to have someone that lets you down

KING: yeah

Jordan: do you want to tell me more about feeling let down

KING: I think I’ve written knock knock wrong urm

Jordan: no you’ve written it right

KING: umm I don’t really think I know what else to say now

Jordan: that’s okay would you like to finish

KING: urm…okay

Jordan: okay so should I turn it off then….thank you.