• Leena Autonen-Vaaraniemi Tampere University
Keywords: divorce professionals; divorce; fatherhood; qualitative attitude approach


This article examines divorce professionals’ attitudes and stances in response to common criticisms of how they deal with divorce outcomes for fathers, according to which men are discriminated against in negotiations on the custody and living arrangements of their children. The study applied the relatively new qualitative attitude approach, and hence a further aim was to test its fitness for studying attitudes. Eighteen Finnish family professionals who worked with divorce cases — social workers, psychologists, district court judges, and lawyers — participated in semi-structured interviews in which they discussed claims designed to be provocative. The family professionals were found to show both collective, shared attitudes and diversity in attitudes and stances. The participants strove to position themselves as gender-neutral and as promoters of equality between mothers and fathers, and thus in accordance with the ideal of a good professional. The divorce professionals argued that their overriding aim was to secure the well-being of children. The method revealed some attribution bias, manifested as victim blaming, where fathers themselves were in part held accountable for the gendered post-divorce situation. The results highlight potential areas of cooperation between different types of divorce professionals that could lay a foundation for improving services and support for divorced parents and children.


Download data is not yet available.


Metrics Loading ...

Author Biography

Leena Autonen-Vaaraniemi, Tampere University

University lecturer, social work


Aarto-Pesonen, L., & Tynjälä, P. (2017). The core of professional growth in work-related teacher education. Qualitative Report, 22(12), 3334–3354.

Arroyo, J., & Peek, C. W. (2015). Child welfare caseworkers’ characteristics and their attitudes toward non-custodial fathers. Child Abuse & Neglect, 47(1), 140–152.

Amato, P. R, Meyers, C. E., & Emery, R. E. (2009). Changes in nonresident father-child contact from 1976 to 2002. Family Relations, 58(1), 41–53.

Andreasson, J., & Johansson, T. (2019). Becoming a half-time parent: Fatherhood after divorce. Journal of Family Studies, 25(1), 2–17.

Astor, H. (2007). Mediator neutrality: Making sense of theory and practice. Social & Legal Studies, 16(2), 221–239.

Autonen-Vaaraniemi, L. (2010). Men’s activism, moral reasoning and good fatherhood in post-divorce family context. NORMA–Nordic Journal for Masculinity Studies, 5(1), 45–59.

Baitar, R., Buysse, A., Brondeel, R., De Mol, J., & Rober, P. (2013). Divorce professionals in Flanders: Policy and practice examined. Family Court Review, 51(4), 542–566.

Baker, A. J. L. (2007). Knowledge and attitudes about the parental alienation syndrome: A survey of custody evaluators. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 35(1), 1–19.

Banks, S. (2020). Ethics and values in social work (5th ed.). Red Globe Press.

Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. Ballantine Books.

Baum, N. (2016). The unheard gender: The neglect of men as social work clients. The British Journal of Social Work, 46(5), 1463–1471.

Billig, M. (1991). Ideology and opinions: Studies in rhetorical psychology. Sage.

Billig, M. (1996). Arguing and thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology. Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1987)

Bogoch, B. (2008). Adversarial agreements: The attitudes of Israeli family lawyers to litigation in divorce practice. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 36(2), 85–105.

Bogoch, B., & Halperin-Kaddari, R. (2006). Divorce Israeli style: Professional perceptions of gender and power in mediated and lawyer-negotiated divorces. Law & Policy, 28(2), 137–163.

Bogoch, B., & Halperin-Kaddari, R. (2007). Co-optation, competition and resistance: Mediation and divorce professionals in Israel. International Journal of the Legal Profession, 14(2), 115–145.

Brasaite, I., Kaunonen, M., Martinkenas, A., & Suominen, T. (2016). Health care professionals’ attitudes regarding patient safety: Cross-sectional survey. BMC Research Notes, 9(1), 1–7.

Braver, S. L., Cookston, J. T., & Cohen, B. R. (2002). Experiences of family law attorneys with current issues in divorce practice. Family Relations, 51(4), 325–334.

Cohen, O., & Segal-Engelchin, D. (2000). Suzi and Mr. S: Gender role stereotyping in social workers’ court reports in custody and access case. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 70(3), 475–500.

Cook, L., & Gregory, M. (2020). Making sense of sensemaking: Conceptualising how child and family social workers process assessment information. Child Care in Practice, 26(2) 182–195.

Costa, L. L. F., Esteves, A. B. D., Kreimer, R., Struchiner, N., & Hannikainen, I. (2019). Gender stereotypes underlie child custody decisions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 49(3), 548–559.

Cox, R. B., Brosi, M., Spencer, T., & Masri, K. (2021). Hope, stress, and post-divorce child adjustment: Development and evaluation of the co-parenting for resilience program. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 62(2), 144–163.

Crawford, B., & Bradley, M. S. (2016). Parent gender and child removal in physical abuse and neglect cases. Children and Youth Services Review, 65, 224–230.

Davidson-Arad, B., Cohen, O., & Wozner, Y. (2003). Social workers custody recommendations: Contributions of child’s expected quality of life and parental features. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 39(1-2), 11–26.

Fix, M. P., & Johnson, G. E. (2017). Public perceptions of gender bias in the decisions of female state court judges. Vanderbilt Law Review, 70(6), 1845–1886.

Forsberg, H., & Autonen-Vaaraniemi, L. (2017). Moral orientations to post-divorce fatherhood: Examining Finnish men’s descriptive practices. Families, Relationships and Societies, 8(1), 23–36.

Forsberg, H., Kääriäinen, A., & Ritala-Koskinen, A. (2018). Children’s residence in divorce disputes – examination of social work reports to the court. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 40(1), 21–36.

Goffman, E. (1986). Frame analysis. An essay on the organization of experience (Reprint). Northeastern University Press. (Original work published 1974, Harper & Row)

Hakovirta, M., & Rantalaiho, M. (2011). Family policy and shared parenting in Nordic Countries. European Journal of Social Security, 13(2), 247–266.

Israel, J. (1979). Om relationistisk socialpsykologi [On relational social psychology]. Bokförlaget Korpen.

Kalmijn, M. (2015) Father-child relations after divorce in four European countries: Patterns and determinants. Comparative Population Studies, 40(3), 251–276.

Kneer, M., & Bourgeois-Gironde, S. (2017). Mens rea ascription, expertise and outcome effects: Professional judges surveyed. Cognition, 169, 139–146.

Kruk, E. (2010). Parental and social institutional responsibilities to children’s needs in the divorce transition: Fathers’ perspectives. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 18(2), 159–178.

Kullberg, C., & Fäldt, J. (2008). Gender differences in social workers’ assessments and help-giving strategies towards single parents. European Journal of Social Work, 11(4), 445–458.

Lamb, M.E., & Sagi, A. (Eds.). (2014). Fatherhood and family policy. Routledge.

Malmi, P. (2009). Discrimination against men: Appearance and causes in the context of a modern welfare state. [Doctoral dissertation, University of Lapland].

Mattison, M. (2000). Ethical decision making: The person in the process. Social Work, 45(3), 201–212.

Meyer, D. R, Cancian, M., & Cook, S. T. (2017). The growth in shared custody in the United States: Patterns and implications. Family Court Review, 55(4), 500–512.

Nathanson, P., & Young, K. K. (2006). Legalizing misandry: From public shame to systemic discrimination against men. McGill-Queen’s University Press.

Nielsen, L. (2017). Re-examining the research on parental conflict, coparenting, and custody arrangements. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 23(2), 211–231.

Nouman, H., Enosh, G., & Niselbaum-Atzur, P. (2016). The role of parental communication, child’s wishes and child’s gender in social workers’ custody recommendations. Children and Youth Services Review, 70, 302–308.

Peltola, S., & Vesala, K. M. (2013). Constructing entrepreneurial orientation in a selling context: The qualitative attitude approach. Poznan University of Economics Review, 13(1), 26–47.

Pesonen, H., Niska, M., & Vesala, K. M. (2013). The societal role of Evangelical Lutheran parishes in rural Finland: A qualitative approach to local attitudes. Rural Theology, 11(2), 68–82.

Rosen, L. N., Dragiewicz, M., & Gibbs, J. C. (2009). Fathers’ rights groups: Demographic correlates and impact on custody policy. Violence Against Women, 15(5), 513–531.

Saini, M., Black, T., Lwin, K., Marshall, A., Fallon, B., & Goodman, D. (2012). Child protection workers’ experiences on working with high-conflict separating families. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(7), 1309–1316.

Sanders, L., Geffner, R., Bucky, S., Ribner, N., & Patino, A. J. (2015). A qualitative study of child custody evaluators’ beliefs and opinions. Journal of Child Custody, 12(3-4), 205–230.

Sjølie, H., Karlsson, B., & Binder, P.-E. (2013). Professionals’ experiences of the relations between personal history and professional role. Nursing Research and Practice, Article ID 265247.

Smithson, J., Barlow, A., Hunter, R., & Ewing, J. (2015). The ‘child’s best interests’ as an argumentative resource in family mediation sessions. Discourse Studies, 17(5), 609–623.

Sodermans, A. K., Matthijs, K., & Swicegood, G. (2013). Characteristics of joint physical custody families in Flanders. Demographic Research, 28(29), 821–848.

Solsona, M., Ferrer, L., Simó-Noguera, C., & Spijker, J. (2020). Divorce and gendered family (re)configurations in a sample of employed and higher educated mothers and fathers. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 61(7), 463–486.

Sullivan, M., & Burns, A. (2020). Effective use of parenting coordination: Considerations for legal and mental health professionals. Family Court Review, 58(3), 730–746.

Taylor, R. J. (2004). Then and now: A follow-up study of professionals’ perceptions of parenting after divorce classes. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 41(3-4), 135–142.

Thomas, J. (2011). Analysing Thurstone and Likert attitude scales as data collection methods. Journal of Paramedic Practice, 3(5), 250–254.

Vesala, K. M., & Rantanen, T. (Eds.). (2007a). Argumentaatio ja tulkinta: Laadullisen asennetutkimuksen lähestymistapa [Argumentation and interpretation: The qualitative attitude approach]. Gaudeamus.

Vesala, K. M., & Rantanen, T. (2007b). Laadullinen asennetutkimus: Lähtökohtia, periaatteita, mahdollisuuksia [Qualitative attitude research: Starting points, principles, possibilities]. In K. M. Vesala & T. Rantanen (Eds.), Argumentaatio ja tulkinta: Laadullisen asennetutkimuksen lähestymistapa [Argumentation and interpretation: The qualitative attitude approach] (pp. 11–61). Gaudeamus.

Vuori, J. (2001). Äidit, isät ja ammattilaiset: Sukupuoli, toisto ja muunnelmat asiantuntijoiden kirjoituksissa [Mothers, fathers and professionals: Gender, repetition and variety in expert texts]. Tampere University Press.

Vuori, J. (2009). Men’s choices and masculine duties: Fathers in expert discussions. Men and Masculinities, 12(1), 45–72.

How to Cite
Autonen-Vaaraniemi, L. (2022). FAMILY PROFESSIONALS’ ATTITUDES AND STANCE-TAKING ON POST-DIVORCE FATHERHOOD: A QUALITATIVE ATTITUDE APPROACH. International Journal of Child, Youth and Family Studies, 13(1), 56-81.