Citation

Brems C, Carssow KL, Shook C, Sturgill S, Cannava P. Child Abuse Negl. 1995; 19(3): 345-353.

Affiliation

Department of Psychology, University of Alaska Anchorage, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1995, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

9278734

Abstract

Court-appointed child advocates, attorneys, guardians ad litem, and therapists were asked to rate preferred traits for mothers and fathers, and to make custody decisions and abuse likelihood ratings for children in one of two vignettes that varied only as to whether mother or father was described as incompetent to parent without threat of further abuse. Results revealed that this sample of professionals did not hold double standards with respect to attributes important for mothers versus fathers. To the contrary, interpersonal sensitivity traits, traditionally identified as most prevalent among women, were valued equally in mothers and fathers and preferred for both parents to interpersonal potency, traditionally ascribed more readily to men. Further, decisions about custody and placement or abuse likelihood were not affected by any sex-role stereotypes professionals held about parents, nor by professionals' gender or specific occupation. The only factor that affected custody judgments and abuse likelihood ratings was the competence of the parent in question. These findings suggest that biases with regard to gender to gender or traditional sex-role preferences for parents are disappearing among professionals who make important placement decisions in the lives of abused children. Future studies must assess whether these theoretical findings translate into actual behavior in real-life abuse cases for the professional groups represented in this sample.

Language: en