Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Researching other people's rows: Current research into divorce conciliation

  • 22 Accesses

Conclusion

This paper has been a review of some current issues in research to monitor conciliation and mediation in matrimonial disputes. We have argued that although the main faults of the Lord Chancellor's Department'sReport of the Inter-Departmental Committee on Conciliation have been well identified by critics, some of the criticisms are unnecessarily harsh and unfair. Second, we have pointed to the major weaknesses of research to date on conciliation. These are: (a) the absence of convincing controls to conciliated clients; (b) the lack of consumer research. We have suggested an aggressive research design to overcome the first of these problems and argued against theprima facie ethical objection to it. Finally, we have reviewed the issue of confidentiality of information in relation to research needs. We have suggested that a reluctance to betray confidences can not only be seen as part of a general adherence to the “informed consent” principle, but that, for us, it forms part of a general attitude to research that treats clients as responsible partners in the acquisition of knowledge and insight.

With these three themes in mind we look forward to research into conciliation that is (a) more convincing than the Robinson report; (b) more adventurous in tackling the problems of legitimate inference of the cause/effect type; (c) sensitive to ethical issues without being unnecessarily timid.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. P. Ambrose et al.,Surviving Divorce, Brighton, Wheatsheaf, 1983.

  2. J. Barnes,Who Should Know What?, Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1979.

  3. M. Blenkner, M. Bloom & H. Nielsen, “A Research Demonstration Project of Protective Services”,Social Casework 52 (1971), 483–499.

  4. British Sociological AssociationStatement of Ethical Principles and their application to sociological practice (mimeo), London, British Sociological Association, 1982.

  5. G. Davis,Research to Monitor the Bristol Courts Family Conciliation Service (mimeo), Bristol, Dept. of Social Administration, University of Bristol, 1980.

  6. G. Davis with P. Lees,A Study of Conciliation (mimeo), Bristol, Dept. of Social Administration, University of Bristol, 1980.

  7. G. Davis, “Conciliation — An Opportunity Missed”,The Law Society's Gazette, 12 October, 1983, 2510–2511.

  8. G. Kassebaum, D. Ward and D. Wilner,Prison Treatment and Parole Survival: An Empirical Assessment, New York, Wiley, 1971.

  9. A.H. Leighton,Human relations in a changing world, New York, Dutton, 1949.

  10. Lord Chancellor's Department,Report of the Inter-departmental Committee on Conciliation, London, HMSO, 1983.

  11. C. Moser and G. Kalton,Survey Methods in Social Investigation, London, Heinemann, 1971.

  12. M. Murch,Justice and Welfare in Divorce, London, Sweet and Maxwell, 1980.

  13. W.J. Reid & A.D. Smith,Research in Social Work, New York, Columbia University Press, 1981.

  14. G. Search,Surviving Divorce: A Handbook for Men, London, Elm Tree Books, 1983.

  15. C. Selltiz, G. Jahoda, M. Deutsch & S.W. Cook,Research Methods in Social Relations, London, Methuen, 1965.

  16. R.B. Sloane et al,Psychotherapy versus Behavior Therapy, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1975.

  17. R.B. Stuart & T. Tripodi, “Experimental Evaluation of Three Time-constrained Behavioral Treatments for Predelinquents and Delinquents”, in R.D. Rubin et al (eds.),Advances in Behavior Therapy, New York, Academic Press, 1973.

  18. The Guardian, “Editorial”,The Guardian, 15th July, 1983.

  19. R. Toseland & S. Rose, “Evaluating Social Skills Training for Older Adults in Groups”,Social Work Research and Abstracts 14(1) (1978), 25–33.

  20. D. Wallace, “The Chemung County Evaluation of Casework Service to Dependent Multiproblem Families; Another Problem Outcome”,Social Service Review 42 (1967), 379–389.

  21. J. Wallerstein and J. Kelly,Surviving the Breakup, London, Grant McIntyre, 1980.

  22. M. Ware and J.C. Caldwell, “Confidentiality, Privacy and Sensitivity in Household Surveys”,Australian Journal of Statistics 14(3) (1972), 197–203.

  23. R.A. Wells, J.A. Figurel & P. McNamee, “Communication Training vs. conjoint marital therapy”,Social Work Research & Abstracts 13.2 (1977), 31–39.

  24. J. Westcott, “Report of the Inter-departmental Committee on Conciliation — a Review”,The Law Society's Gazette, 12th October 1983, 2509–2510.

  25. L.T. Wilkins,Social Policy, Action, and Research, London, Tavistock, 1964.

  26. C. Yates, “Out of Court Conciliation Services: The Tolling Bell that Dropped a Clanger”,The New Law Journal, 11th November 1983, 993–994.

  27. C. Yates, “The Interdepartmental Committee — a step backwards”,Journal of Social Welfare Law (Nov., 1983), 335–341.

Download references

Author information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bradshaw, A., Pottinger, J. & Bowen, M. Researching other people's rows: Current research into divorce conciliation. Liverpool Law Rev 6, 166–187 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01080281

Download citation

Keywords

  • Informed Consent
  • Research Design
  • Ethical Issue
  • General Attitude
  • Current Issue