Abstract
Motherhood represents a social construct that is given meaning within patriarchal systems of law and custom. The present study analyzes the Israeli legal discourse surrounding motherhood, parenting capacity, and sexual conduct of marginalized women whose parental rights were terminated. It examines how information about a mother’s sexual heteronormal life style played a role in the construction of her motherhood as maternal unfitness. Drawing from 80 court decisions terminating parental rights, three themes emerged: the bad wife as a marker of the bad mother, “legitimate” sexual life as a pre-condition to desirable parenting, and negative views of women who give birth out of marriage. Maternal unfitness was associated with sexual immorality, illegitimacy, and “inappropriate” sexual choices. Alternative explanations of the findings are discussed from a critical feminist and legal perspective. Implications of the findings are outlined, particularly the need for women’s voices to be heard in every decision-making process regarding state control of their parenting, and the need for professionals to avoid bias against socially marginalized women and engage in critical reflective thinking regarding why information about a mother’s sexual conduct and life style is considered relevant to any assessment of her parental fitness and the child’s best interest.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ben-David, V. (2011). Voices in compulsory adoption adjudication of minors in Israel: The hegemonic voice of the professional expert and the unheard voice of the biological parents. Adoption Quarterly, 14(2), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926755.2011.560791.
Ben-David, V. (2015). Profiles of families at high risk of child maltreatment in Israeli court cases dealing with the termination of parental rights. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 32(4), 359–373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-015-0378-4.
Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1991). The social construction of reality. London: Penguin Books.
Boyd, S. B. (2013). Motherhood and law: Constructing and challenging normativity. In M. Davies & V. Munro (Eds.), The Ashgate companion to feminist legal theory (pp. 268–270). Farnham, UK: Ashgate.
Budd, K. S. (2001). Assessing parenting competence in child protection cases: A clinical practice model. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 4, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009548509598.
Budd, S. K., Felix, D. E., Swee, C. S., Saul, A., & Carleton, A. R. (2006). Evaluating parents in child protection decisions: An innovative court-based clinic model. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 37(6), 666–675. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.37.6.666.
Budd, S. K., Connell, M., & Clark, R. J. (2013). Assessment in a child protection context. In R. K. Otto & I. B. Weiner (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Forensic psychology (Vol. 11, pp. 139–171). Hoboken: Wiley & Sons.
Calvert, J. (2020). Battle of the sexes: A history of social change and a solution for maintaining a child’s best interest in light of the #MeToo movement. Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality, 8(1), 5 https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1105&context=ijlse.
Choi, P., Henshaw, C., Baker, S., & Tree, J. (2005). Supermum, superwife, supereverything: Performing femininity in the transition to motherhood. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 23(2), 167–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/02646830500129487.
Davidson-Arad, B., Peled, E., & Leichtentritt, R. (2008). Representations of fathers and mothers in court petitions for dependent minor status for children at risk. Children and Youth Services Review, 30(8), 893–902. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.12.016.
Denzin, N. K. (1989). Interpretive biography. London: Sage Publications.
Dunkerley, S. (2017). Mothers matter: A feminist perspective on child welfare-involved women. Journal of Family Social Work, 20(3), 251–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/10522158.2017.1322163.
Ferraro, K. J., & Moe, A. M. (2003). Mothering, crime, and incarceration. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 32(1), 9–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241602238937.
Fineman, M. A. (1995). The neutered mother, the sexual family and other twentieth century tragedies. New York: Routledge.
Friedman, M. (2015). Unpacking MILF: Exploring motherhood, sexuality and feminism. Atlantis: Critical Studies in Gender, Culture & Social Justice, 36(2), 49–60 https://journals.msvu.ca/index.php/atlantis/article/view/1378/pdf_7.
Gambrill, E., & Shlonsky, A. (2001). The need for comprehensive risk management systems in child welfare. Children and Youth Services Review, 23(1), 79–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0190-7409(00)00124-9.
Greaves, L., Pederson, A., Varcoe, C., Poole, N., Morrow, M., Johnson, J., … Irwin, L. (2004). Mothering under duress: Women caught in a web of discourses. Journal of the Association of Research for Mothering, 6(1), 16–27. https://jarm.journals.yorku.ca/index.php/jarm/article/viewFile/4882/4076
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1998). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues (pp. 195–220). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Harnett, P. H. (2007). A procedure for assessing parents' capacity for change in child protection cases. Children and Youth Services Review, 29(9), 1179–1188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.04.005.
Johnston, D. D., & Swanson, D. H. (2003). Invisible mothers: A content analysis of motherhood ideologies and myths in magazines. Sex Roles, 49, 21–33. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023905518500.
Johnston, D. D., & Swanson, D. H. (2006). Constructing the “good mother”: The experience of mothering ideologies by work status. Sex Roles, 54, 509–519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9021-3.
Kerrick, M. R., & Henry, R. L. (2017). “Totally in love”: Evidence of a master narrative for how new mothers should feel about their babies. Sex Roles, 76, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0666-2.
Kline, M. (1995). Complicating the ideology of motherhood: Child welfare, law, and first nation women. In M. Fineman & I. Karpin (Eds.), Mothers in law: Feminist theory and the legal regulation of motherhood (pp. 118–141). New York: Columbia University Press.
Kotchick, B. A., & Forehand, R. (2002). Putting parenting in perspective: A discussion of the contextual factors that shape parenting practices. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 11(3), 255–269. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016863921662.
Krane, J., & Davies, L. (2000). Mothering and child protection practice: Rethinking risk assessment. Child & Family Social Work, 5(1), 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2206.2000.00142.x.
Malacrida, C., & Boulton, T. (2012). Women’s perceptions of “childbirth” choices: Competing discourses of motherhood, sexuality and selflessness. Gender & Society, 26(5), 748–772. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243212452630.
McConnell, D., & Llewellyn, G. (2005). Social inequality, ‘the deviant parent’ and child protection practice. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 40(4), 553–566. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1839-4655.2005.tb00987.x.
Miller, W. L., & Crabtree, B. F. (1992). Primary care research: A multi method typology and qualitative road map. In B. F. Crabtree & W. L. Miller (Eds.), Doing qualitative research (pp. 3–28). Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Peled, E., & Levin-Rotberg, T. (2013). The perceptions of child protection officers toward mothering in prostitution. Social Service Review, 87(1), 40–69. https://doi.org/10.1086/670233.
Rapp, R. (1999). Testing women, testing the fetus: The social impact of amniocentesis in America. New York: Routledge.
Reich, J. A. (2002). Maternal sin and salvation: Child protective services and the policing of mothers’ sexual behavior. Journal of the Motherhood Initiative for Research and Community Involvement, 4(1), 46–57 https://www.academia.edu/4978255/Maternal_Sin_and_Salvation_Child_Protective_Services_and_the_Policing_of_Mothers_Sexual_Behavior.
Reid, C., Greaves, L., & Poole, N. (2008). Good, bad, thwarted or addicted? Discourses of substance-using mothers. Critical Social Policy, 28, 211–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261018307087990.
Schwandt, T. A. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: Interpretivism, hermenentics, and social constructionism. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 189–213). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Schwandt, T. A. (2006). Opposition redirected. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19(6), 803–810. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518390600979323.
Scott, E. S., & Emery, R. E. (2014). Gender politics and child custody: The puzzling persistence of the best-interest standard. Law and Contemporary Problems, 77, 69–108 http://lcp.law.duke.edu/.
Sichi, M. (2015). Mothers in resistance: An exploration of the perspectives of women with child protective services experiences. Our lady of the Lake University. ProQuest number: 3664637. https://search.proquest.com/openview/5c4b68dd80f81c2701eff330758d92e2/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
Sinai-Glazer, H. (2016). Who else is in the room? The good mother myth in the social worker–mother client encounter. Social Policy & Society, 15(3), 351–367. https://doi.org/10.1017/S147474641500038X.
Sinai-Glazer, H., & Peled, E. (2017). The perceptions of motherhood among family social workers in social services departments in Israel. British Journal of Social Work, 47(5), 1482–1499. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcw111.
Slack, K. S., Berger, L. M., DuMont, K., Yang, M. Y., Kim, B., Ehrhard-Dietzel, S., … Holl, J. L. (2011). Risk and protective factors for child neglect during early childhood: A cross-study comparison. Children & Youth Services Review, 33(8), 1354–1363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.04.024
Sloan, L., & Wahab, S. (2000). Feminist voices on sex work: Implications for social work. Affillia, 15(4), 457–479. https://doi.org/10.1177/088610990001500402.
Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tefre, O. (2015). The justifications for terminating parental rights and adoption in the United States. Children and Youth Services Review, 48, 87–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.12.009.
Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research analysis types and software tools. New York: The Palmer Press.
Turner, S. G., & Maschi, T. M. (2015). Feminist and empowerment theory and social work practice. Journal of Social Work Practice, 29(2), 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650533.2014.941282.
Wall, G. (2001). Moral constructions of motherhood in breastfeeding discourse. Gender & Society, 15, 592–610. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124301015004006.
Wattenberg, E., Kelley, M., & Kim, H. (2001). When the rehabilitation idea fails: A study of parental rights termination. Child Welfare, 80(4), 269–289.
Zilberstein, K. (2016). Parenting in families of low socioeconomic status: A review with implications for child welfare practice. Family Court Review, 54(2), 221–231. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12222.
Funding
The present study was funded by a research grant from the Zefat Academic College (grant number 54/2017). Study materials are available in Hebrew upon request.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
The authors state that the research was conducted according to the ethical standards outlined by the journal and the manuscript was constructed according to all necessary ethical standards.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ben-David, V., Enosh, G. Motherhood and Maternal Fitness of Mothers Whose Parental Rights Were Terminated in Israel: The Importance of Sexual Heteronormality and Legitimacy. Sex Roles 84, 599–609 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-020-01189-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-020-01189-z