Risks and benefits of post-separation parenting apps: perceptions of family law professionals in Australia and New Zealand

被引:4
作者
Heard, Genevieve M. [1 ]
Irving, Michelle A. [2 ]
Smyth, Bruce M. [2 ]
Payne, Jason L. [3 ]
Althor, Glenn [4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Relationships Australia Victoria, Melbourne, Australia
[2] Australian Natl Univ, Ctr Social Res & Methods, Canberra, Australia
[3] Univ Wollongong, Sch Hlth & Soc, Wollongong, Australia
[4] Relationships Australia New South Wales, Customer Experience Dept, Sydney, Australia
[5] Australian Natl Univ, Populat Hlth Exchange, Canberra, Australia
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
Mobile apps; post-separation parenting; digital communication; coercive control; technology-facilitated abuse; TECHNOLOGY; VIOLENCE;
D O I
10.1080/09649069.2023.2206225
中图分类号
D9 [法律]; DF [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
Mobile phones have become an essential part of modern family life. Their proliferation has been accompanied by a diverse range of apps, including apps for separated parents. Family law professionals are increasingly being asked about post-separation parenting apps by clients. Yet the empirical evidence about their potential benefits and risks is sparse. The present study draws on qualitative data from an online survey of 344 family law professionals in Australia and New Zealand about their attitudes to co-parenting apps. Three broad potential benefits of co-parenting app functions were identified: accountability, convenience and containment. Drawing on a realist evaluation framework, we find that the same app functions were identified as posing a variety of potential risks, including technology-facilitated abuse, depending on context. We argue that family law professionals need a good understanding of the potential benefits and risks of co-parenting apps, along with the contextual factors that can determine outcomes.
引用
收藏
页码:143 / 164
页数:22
相关论文
共 27 条
[1]  
Braun V., 2006, Qualitative Research in Psychology, V3, P77, DOI [10.1191/1478088706qp063oa, DOI 10.1191/1478088706QP063OA, DOI 10.1080/10875549.2021.1929659, https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa]
[2]   Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis [J].
Braun, Virginia ;
Clarke, Victoria .
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH IN SPORT EXERCISE AND HEALTH, 2019, 11 (04) :589-597
[3]   The Spyware Used in Intimate Partner Violence [J].
Chatterjee, Rahul ;
Doerfler, Periwinkle ;
Orgad, Hadas ;
Havron, Sam ;
Palmer, Jackeline ;
Freed, Diana ;
Levy, Karen ;
Dell, Nicola ;
McCoy, Damon ;
Ristenpart, Thomas .
2018 IEEE SYMPOSIUM ON SECURITY AND PRIVACY (SP), 2018, :441-458
[4]  
Davis J., 2020, How artifacts afford: The power and Politics of everyday things
[5]   Technology-facilitated Domestic and Family Violence: Women's Experiences [J].
Douglas, Heather ;
Harris, Bridget A. ;
Dragiewicz, Molly .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY, 2019, 59 (03) :551-570
[6]   "What's Mum's Password?": Australian Mothers' Perceptions of Children's Involvement in Technology-Facilitated Coercive Control [J].
Dragiewicz, Molly ;
Woodlock, Delanie ;
Salter, Michael ;
Harris, Bridget .
JOURNAL OF FAMILY VIOLENCE, 2022, 37 (01) :137-149
[7]   Technology facilitated coercive control: domestic violence and the competing roles of digital media platforms [J].
Dragiewicz, Molly ;
Burgess, Jean ;
Matamoros-Fernandez, Ariadna ;
Salter, Michael ;
Suzor, Nicolas P. ;
Woodlock, Delanie ;
Harris, Bridget .
FEMINIST MEDIA STUDIES, 2018, 18 (04) :609-625
[8]  
Dworkin J., 2016, CONT PERSPECTIVES FA, V10, P279, DOI DOI 10.1108/S1530-353520160000010011
[9]   Communication Technology and Postdivorce Coparenting [J].
Ganong, Lawrence H. ;
Coleman, Marilyn ;
Feistman, Richard ;
Jamison, Tyler ;
Markham, Melinda Stafford .
FAMILY RELATIONS, 2012, 61 (03) :397-409
[10]   Understanding 'context' in realist evaluation and synthesis [J].
Greenhalgh, Joanne ;
Manzano, Ana .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2022, 25 (05) :583-595