SUPERVISED PARENT- CHILD(REN) VISITATION PROGRAMS

Öz

The parent-child(ren) Supervised Visitation (SV) programs enable children and parents to have safe and conflict-free interactions. The programs vary in their contexts. SV programs in child welfare context aim either the reunion of the parent(s) and child(ren) or maintaining a safe and healthy relationship between parent(s) and child(ren) under the protection of social services. The SV programs in child custody dispute context focus on enhancing conflict free and safe contacts between noncustodial parent and child(ren). The services provided under SV services may vary from one-on-one supervision to supervised exchanges. The requirements of providing SV services, rules and training standards are defined by Supervised Visitation Network(SVN) studiously and broadly applied in Western Cultures. However, the SV services in Turkey are limited to monitored exchange practically. The lack of well-designed services put children and parents in an ambiguous and stressful position in multiple ways both in the short and long term. These services need to be improved immediately to meet the needs of the society. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Supervised Visitation,Monitored Exchange,Contact Center,High Conflict Parents,Custody Dispute

DENETİMLİ EBEVEYN-ÇOCUK GÖRÜŞMESİ PROGRAMLARI

Öz

Denetimli ebeveyn-çocuk görüşme programları, ebeveynlerle çocukların arasında güvenli ve çatışmadan uzak bir şekilde etkileşim olabilmesini sağlar. Çocuk koruma hizmetleri bünyesinde gerçekleştirilen denetimli görüşme hizmetleri, kimi zaman aile ile çocuğun yeniden bir araya gelmesine hizmet ederken, bunun mümkün olmadığı durumlarda çocukla ebeveynleri arasındaki ilişkinin kopmamasını amaçlar. Diğer yandan, velayet anlaşmazlıkları söz konusu olduğunda bu hizmetler, çocukla velayeti elinde bulundurmayan ebeveyn arasında sağlıklı ve ebeveynler arası çatışmadan uzak ilişki tesis edilmesini sağlar. Denetimli görüşme hizmetleri birebir denetimden, çocuk teslimi sırasında yapılan denetime kadar farklılık gösterebilir. Bu hizmetleri verebilmek için gerekli koşullar, hizmetlere ilişkin kurallar ve bu hizmetleri verecek kişilere ilişkin eğitim standartları, Denetimli Görüşme Ağı(SVN) tarafından titizlikle tanımlanmıştır ve batı kültürlerinde yaygınlıkla uygulanmaktadır. Ancak, ülkemizdeki denetimli görüşme hizmetleri çoğunlukla güvenli çocuk teslimi ile sınırlı kalmakta olup, bu hizmetlerin iyi tasarlanmış bir şekilde sunulmuyor olması, hem çocukları hem de ebeveynleri kısa ve uzun vadede belirsiz ve sıkıntılı bir duruma düşürmektedir. Bu hizmetler, toplumun ihtiyaçları doğrultusunda ivedilikle iyileştirilmelidir. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Denetimli Ebeveyn-Çocuk Görüşmesi,Güvenli Çocuk Teslimi,Ebeveyn-Çocuk Görüşme Merkezi,Yüksek Çatışmalı Aileler,Çekişmeli Velayet

Kaynakça

1. “About SVN.” (n.d.). Retrieved 12.03.2017, from: http://www.svnetwork.net/; http://www.svnetwork.net/about.asp
2. Andersson, G., & Arvidsson, M. B. (2008). Contact person as a court-ordered solution in child visitation disputes in Sweden. Child and Family Social Work, 13(2): 197–206.
3. Babb, A. B., Danziger, G. H., Morgan , J. D., & Mack, W. (2009). Supervised visitation and monitored exchange: Review of the literature and annotated bibliography.Retrieved 31.08.2016, from http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2494868.
4. Bailey, M. (1999). Supervised access: A long-term solution? Family And Conciliation Courts Review, 37(4): 478-486.
5. “Basın OdasıHaberleri” (2016).Retrieved 12.03.2017 fromwww.tuik.gov.tr,http://www.tuik.gov.tr/basinOdasi/haberler/2016_32_20160316.
6. Birnbaum, R., & Alaggia, R. (2006). Supervised visitation:A call for a second generation of research.Family Court Review, 44(1):119–134.
7. Convention on the Rights of the Child. Retrieved 31.08.2016, from www.ohchr.org: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CRC.aspx
8. Demirkan, S. Y., Ersöz, A. G., Şen, R. B., Ertekin, E., Sezgin, Ö., Turğut, A. M., &Şehitoğlu, N. (2009). BoşanmaNedenleri̇ Araştırması.Ankara.Retrieved 23.03.2017 fromwww.aile.gov.tr;http://ailetoplum.aile.gov.tr/data/54293ea2369dc32358ee2b25/kutuphane_56_bosanma_nedenleri_arastirmasi.pdf

9. Dickens, J. (1999). International and UK perspectives on child contact centres.Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 21(2): 180–186.
10. Edelson, J. L. (1999). Children's witnessing of adult domestic violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14(8): 839-870.
11. Eurostat (2015). Marriage and divorce statistics. Retrieved 25.02.2017 from http://europa.eu/; http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Marriage_and_divorce_statistics
12. Forsberg , H., & Pösö, T. (2008). Ambiguous position of the child in supervised meetings. Child and Family Social Work, 13: 52-60.
13. Holt, S. (2016). The voice of the child in family law: A discussion paper. Children and Youth Services Review, 68: 139-145
14. Huefner, J. C., Pick, R. M., Smith, G. L., Stevens, A. L., & Mason, W. A. (2015). Parental involvement in residential care: Distance, frequency of contact, and youth outcomes. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24(5): 1481-1489.
15. HÜNEE. (2009). Türkiye’de kadına yönelik aile içi şiddet araştırması. Ankara. Retrieved on 25.02.2017, from www.hacettepe.edu.tr; http://www.hips.hacettepe.edu.tr/TKAA2008-AnaRapor.pdf
16. HÜNEE. (2015). Türkiye’de kadına yönelik aile içi şiddet araştıması. Ankara. Retrieved fromwww.hacettepe.edu.tr; http://www.hips.hacettepe.edu.tr/KKSA-TRAnaRaporKitap26Mart.pdf
17. Jenkins, J. M., Park, N. W., & Peterson‐Badali, M. (1997). An Evaluation Of Supervised Access II. Family Court Review, 35(1):51-65.
18. Johnston, J. R., & Straus, R. B. (1999). Traumatized Children In Supervised Visitation What Do They Need? Family And Conciliation Courts Review, 37(2): 135-158.
19. Kesen, N. F., Karakuş, Ö., & Deniz, E. (2012). Yetiştirme yurtlarinda kalan çocuklarin kuruluşa geliş nedenlerinin incelenmesi. Toplum ve Sosyal Hizmet, 23(1):139–150.
20. Kiraly, M.& Humphreys, C. (2013). Perspectives From Young People about Family Contact in Kinship Care:“Don't Push Us—Listen More”. Australian Social Work, 66(3):314-327.
21. Koçyıldırım, G. (2010). SosyalHizmetBakışAçısıylaÇocukTeslimineveÇocuklaKişiselİlişkiKurulmasınaDairİlamlarınİcrası Uygulamaları (UnpublishedMaster’sThesis).HacettepeÜniversitesi, Ankara.
22. Knox, S., & Orr, M. (2001). Knock child contact centre: Evolution and evaluation. Child Care in Practice, 7(1): 57-66.
23. Maxwell, S. M., & Oehme, K. (2001). Strategies to Improve Supervised Visitation Services in Domestic Violence Cases. Violence Against Women Online Resources.
24. Oehme, K., & Maxwell, S. (2004). Florida’s Supervised Visitation Programs:The Next Phase. The Florida Bar Journal, January: 44-48.
25. Oehme, K., & O’Rourke, K. (2011). Protecting victims and their children through supervised visitation: A study of domestic violence injunctions. Faulkner L. Rev., 3:261.
26. Park , N. W., Peterson-Badali, M., & Jenkins, J. M. (1997). An Evaluation Of Supervised Access I Organizational Issues. Family And Conciliation Courts Review, 35(1): 37-50 .
27. Perry, A., & Rainey, B. (2007). Supervised, supported and indirect contact orders: Research findings. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 21(1): 21–47.
28. Pipe, M. E., Lamb, M. E.,Orbach, Y., &Cederborg, A. C. (2013).Child sexual abuse: Disclosure, delay, and denial. Psychology Press: Mahwah, NJ.
29. Pulido, M. L., Forrester, S. P., & Lacina, J. M. (2011). Raising the bar:Why supervised visitation providers should be required to meet standards forserviceprovision. Family Court Review, 49: 379-387.
30. ResmiGazete 28497 (Aralık, 2012).KoruyucuAileYönetmeliği. Retrieved 28.03.2017 from www.resmigazete.gov.tr; http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2012/12/20121214-2.htm
31. Roulston, A., &Mccolgan, M. (1997). An examination of the role of observation in supervised access and its implications for child protection work. Child Care in Practice, 4(1):17-28.
32. Saini, M., Van Wert, M., & Gofman, J. (2012). Parent–child supervised visitation within child welfare and custody dispute contexts:An exploratory comparison of two distinct models of practice. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(1):163-168.
33. SayanKarahan, A. (2012). BoşanmaSonrasıYaşamaUyum(Unpublished doctoral dissertation).HacettepeÜniveristesi, Ankara.
34. Sirvanli-Ozen, D. (2005). Impacts of divorce on the behaviour and adjustment problems, parenting styles, and attachment styles of children: Literature review including Turkish studies. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 42:37–41.
35. Smith, G. T., Shapiro, V. B., Sperry, R. W., &LeBuffe, P. A. (2014).A strengths-based approach to supervised visitation in child welfare. Child Care in Practice, 20(1): 98-119.
36. Stahl, P. M. (2014). Velayet Değerlendirmeleri: Basitten Karmaşık Konulara. Ankara: Türk Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları No:43.
37. Straus, R. B., Blaschak-Brown, N., & Reiniger, A. (1998). Standards And Guidelines For Supervised Visitation Network Practice:Introductory Discussion. Family And Conciliation Courts Review, 36(1): 96-107.
38. Sullivan, M. J. (2008). Co-parenting and the parenting coordination process.Journal of Child Custody, 5(1-2): 4-24.
39. SVN Standards Task Force and the Standards and Guidelines Committee. (2006, July). "Standards For Supervised Visitation Practice". Retrieved 16.02.2016 from http://www.svnetwork.net/: http://www.svnetwork.net/standards.asp
40. TBRCG. (2016). The Buckeye Ranch Common Grounds Program. Retrieved 16.02.2016from The Buckeye Ranch : http://www.buckeyeranch.org/programs/common-ground/
41. The Buckeye Ranch (2015). Common Ground Rules (Unpublished document).
42. Thoennes, N., & Pearson, J. (1999). Supervised visitation: A profile of providers. Family and Conciliation Courts Review, 37(4): 460–477.
43. Turell, S. C., & Keiffer, L. (2011). Child Custody and Safe Exchange/Visitation: An Assessment of Marginalized Battered Parents' Needs. Journal of Child Custody, 8:301-322.
44. Turner, J. S. (2009). American Families in Crisis: A Reference Handbook. ABC-CLIO.
45. Tutty, L., Alberta, Weaver-Dunlop, J., Barlow, R. A., Jesso, D., & Home, Y. S. K. (2006). Evaluation of the Community Safe Visitation Program: Updated 2006. Retrieved 21.12.2015, fromwww.ucalgary.ca ; http://www.ucalgary.ca/resolve-static/reports/2006/2006-05.pdf TürkiyeİstatistikKurumu (2014).KadınaYönelikAileİçiŞiddetİstatistikleri. Retrieved 21.12.2015, fromhttp://www.tuik.gov.tr/VeriTabanlari.do?ust_id=109&vt_id=31
46. WHO (2014). Child maltreatment. Retrieved 09.01.2016, from: www.who.int; http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs150/en/
47. Yılmaz, E. A., & Fışıloğlu, H. (2008). Turkish Parents’ Post-Divorce Adjustment A. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 42: 83–107.