To Örebro University

The relationship between a child and its parents (caregivers) is essential for the child’s development and well-being. When one of these parents uses violence against the other parent (intimate partner violence, IPV), this will affect the child one way or another: physically, psychologically, cognitively, socially. When two parents separate, the circumstances surrounding contact between the child and its parents change. The aim of this thesis is to analyse – in the context of Swedish parenting ideals and family norms – aspects of children’s relationships (after parental separation) with a father who has used violence against the mother in order to bring forward a foundation to discuss if and under what circumstances a continued contact is in the best interest of the child. The empirical basis for the thesis consists of two different sets of data. The first is qualitative interviews with children living at a women’s shelter (n=10). The second is a subset of data from a large evaluation study investigating support tochildren who had witnessed IPV. The latter material  comprises interviews with and psychometric data on 165 mothers and 165 children. Results from the first article show that a majority of the children (75%) had continued contact with their fathers after parental separation, and that even in cases where there were indications of child abuse, about 50% of the children had unsupervised face-to-face contact with their fathers. This high rate can possibly be explained by the assumption (supported in legislation) that children have a need for contact. Further, the second article shows that children with and without contact do not differ in their level of well-being; i.e. contact with a violent father does not have the positive effect on children that has been found in general samples. In the third article, the violent fathers are described by the children as lazy and unreliable. Child–father contact is discussed in terms of why, when and how contact is in the child’s best interest.

Despite the well-documented negative consequences for children experiencing violence perpetrated bytheir fathers against their mothers, little is known about how characteristics of exposure to violence are related to child–father contact after parental separation. In this study, we (a) describe contact patterns between children and fathers after parental separation and (b) analyze links between patterns ofviolence and contact in a sample of child witnesses to intimate partner violence in Sweden. Information about 165 children (aged 3–13 years) was obtained from their mothers, who had been subjected to violence by the child’s father. In 60% of the cases, the parents had joint custody. Results suggest that children without contact with their father have witnessed more violence than children with contact. However, when they do have contact, previous violence against the mother does not correlate either with amount or type of child–father contact. Instead, high socioeconomic status and negotiation skills correlated positively with amount of contact.

The situation of children exposed to intimate partner violence (IPV) raises certain issues related to child neglect. Little is known about how children exposed to IPV perceive and describe their living conditions. This paper addresses this lack by analysing aspects of fathers’ care in descriptions given by children whose fathers have subjected the mothers to IPV. The analysis is based on qualitative interviews with 10 children aged 8–12 years. Three themes constitute the results. First, the fathers are not described by the children as engaged and responsible care providers. Second, in their general descriptions of how mothers and fathers fill complementary roles for the child, parenthood seems to mean in practice that the mother is the provider of (almost) everything the child may need. Third, the mere absence of violence seems to be judged ‘good-enough’ fathering in the children’s descriptions. Altogether, this leads to the conclusion that being exposed to IPV and believing that mothers are responsible for their welfare precludes children from viewing their fathers as responsible for their well-being. The limited utility for child welfare practice of a ‘child-based’ definition of neglect in cases of IPV is discussed, and alternatives are suggested.