Denetimli Ebeveyn-Çocuk Görüşmesi Programları
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.
SUPERVISED PARENT- CHILD(REN) VISITATION PROGRAMS
The parent-child(ren) Supervised Visitation (SV) programs enable children and parents to havesafe and conflict-free interactions. The programs vary in their contexts. SV programs in childwelfare context aim either the reunion of the parent(s) and child(ren) or maintaining a safe andhealthy relationship between parent(s) and child(ren) under the protection of social services. TheSV programs in child custody dispute context focus on enhancing conflict free and safe contactsbetween noncustodial parent and child(ren). The services provided under SV services may varyfrom one-on-one supervision to supervised exchanges. The requirements of providing SVservices, rules and training standards are defined by Supervised Visitation Network(SVN)studiously and broadly applied in Western Cultures. However, the SV services in Turkey arelimited to monitored exchange practically. The lack of well-designed services put children andparents 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.
___
- “About SVN.” (n.d.). Retrieved 12.03.2017, from: http://www.svnetwork.net/;
http://www.svnetwork.net/about.asp
- 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.
- 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.
- Bailey, M. (1999). Supervised access: A long-term solution? Family And Conciliation Courts
Review, 37(4): 478-486.
- “Basın Odası Haberleri” (2016).Retrieved 12.03.2017
fromwww.tuik.gov.tr,http://www.tuik.gov.tr/basinOdasi/haberler/2016_32_20160316.
- Birnbaum, R., & Alaggia, R. (2006). Supervised visitation:A call for a second generation of
research.Family Court Review, 44(1):119–134.
- Convention on the Rights of the Child. Retrieved 31.08.2016, from www.ohchr.org:
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CRC.aspx
- Demirkan, S. Y., Ersöz, A. G., Şen, R. B., Ertekin, E., Sezgin, Ö., Turğut, A. M., &Şehitoğlu, N.
(2009). Boşanma Nedenlerı̇ Araştırması. Ankara. Retrieved 23.03.2017 from www.aile
.gov.tr;http://ailetoplum.aile.gov.tr/data/54293ea2369dc32358ee2b25/kutuphane_56_bo
sanma_nedenleri_arastirmasi.pdf
- Dickens, J. (1999). International and UK perspectives on child contact centres.Journal of Social
Welfare and Family Law, 21(2): 180–186.
- Edelson, J. L. (1999). Children's witnessing of adult domestic violence. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 14(8): 839-870.
- Eurostat (2015). Marriage and divorce statistics. Retrieved 25.02.2017 from http://europa.eu/;
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statisticsexplained/index.php/Marriage_and_divorce_statistics
- Forsberg , H., & Pösö, T. (2008). Ambiguous position of the child in supervised meetings. Child
and Family Social Work, 13: 52-60.
- Holt, S. (2016). The voice of the child in family law: A discussion paper. Children and Youth
Services Review, 68: 139-145
- 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.
- 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
- HÜNEE. (2015). Türkiye’de kadına yönelik aile içi şiddet araştıması. Ankara. Retrieved
fromwww.hacettepe.edu.tr; http://www.hips.hacettepe.edu.tr/KKSATRAnaRaporKitap26Mart.pdf
Jenkins, J. M., Park, N. W., & Peterson‐Badali, M. (1997). An Evaluation Of Supervised Access
II. Family Court Review, 35(1):51-65.
- 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.
- Kesen, N. F., Karakuş, Ö., & Deniz, E. (2012). Yetiştirme yurtlarinda kalan çocuklarin kuruluşa
geliş nedenlerinin incelenmesi. Toplum ve Sosyal Hizmet, 23(1):139–150.
- 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.
- Koçyıldırım, G. (2010). Sosyal Hizmet Bakış Açısıyla Çocuk Teslimine ve Çocukla Kişisel İlişki
Kurulmasına Dair İlamlarınİcrası Uygulamaları (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
HacettepeÜniversitesi, Ankara.
- Knox, S., & Orr, M. (2001). Knock child contact centre: Evolution and evaluation. Child Care in
Practice, 7(1): 57-66.
- Maxwell, S. M., & Oehme, K. (2001). Strategies to Improve Supervised Visitation Services in
Domestic Violence Cases. Violence Against Women Online Resources.
- Oehme, K., & Maxwell, S. (2004). Florida’s Supervised Visitation Programs:The Next Phase. The
Florida Bar Journal, January: 44-48.
- 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.
- 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 .
- 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.
- Pipe, M. E., Lamb, M. E.,Orbach, Y., &Cederborg, A. C. (2013).Child sexual abuse: Disclosure,
delay, and denial. Psychology Press: Mahwah, NJ.
- 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.
- Resmi Gazete 28497 (Aralık, 2012).Koruyucu Aile Yönetmeliği. Retrieved 28.03.2017 from
www.resmigazete.gov.tr; http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2012/12/20121214-
2.htm
- 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.
- 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.
- Sayan Karahan, A. (2012). Boşanma Sonrası Yaşama Uyum (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).
Hacettepe Üniveristesi, Ankara.
- 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.
- 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.
- Stahl, P. M. (2014). Velayet Değerlendirmeleri: Basitten Karmaşık Konulara. Ankara: Türk
Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları No:43.
- 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.
- Sullivan, M. J. (2008). Co-parenting and the parenting coordination process.Journal of Child
Custody, 5(1-2): 4-24.
- 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
- TBRCG. (2016). The Buckeye Ranch Common Grounds Program. Retrieved 16.02.2016from The
Buckeye Ranch : http://www.buckeyeranch.org/programs/common-ground/
- The Buckeye Ranch (2015). Common Ground Rules (Unpublished document).
Thoennes, N., & Pearson, J. (1999). Supervised visitation: A profile of providers. Family and
Conciliation Courts Review, 37(4): 460–477.
- 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.
- Turner, J. S. (2009). American Families in Crisis: A Reference Handbook. ABC-CLIO.
- 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/resolvestatic/reports/2006/2006-05.pdf
- Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu (2014).Kadına Yönelik Aile İçi Şiddet İstatistikleri. Retrieved 21.12.2015,
from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/VeriTabanlari.do?ust_id=109&vt_id=31
- WHO (2014). Child maltreatment. Retrieved 09.01.2016, from: www.who.int;
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs150/en/
- Yılmaz, E. A., & Fışıloğlu, H. (2008). Turkish Parents’ Post-Divorce Adjustment A. Journal of
Divorce and Remarriage, 42: 83–107.