Advanced

Våldsam förälder - lämplig förälder?

Julén, Tove LU (2012) JURM02 20112
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Uppsatsen är en studie med huvudsyfte att undersöka vilken betydelse domstolen fäster vid våld inom familjen vid bedömning av umgänge och vårdnad. Den försöker även finna svar på om och i så fall i vilken utsträckning det görs skillnad mellan fäder och mödrar som förövare. Gällande rätt och dess utveckling redovisas inom områdena vårdnad, umgänge samt riskbedömning. Dessutom presenteras relevanta delar av annan svensk lagtext samt Barnkonventionen. Lagstiftningen på området jämförs sedan med praxis. Den praxis som redovisas utgörs av vårdnadsmål som avgjorts av hovrätterna under 2011 där uppgifter om våld förekommer. Rättsfallen refereras och kommenteras var för sig. En sammanställning görs sedan för att se vilka mönster som framträder.... (More)
Uppsatsen är en studie med huvudsyfte att undersöka vilken betydelse domstolen fäster vid våld inom familjen vid bedömning av umgänge och vårdnad. Den försöker även finna svar på om och i så fall i vilken utsträckning det görs skillnad mellan fäder och mödrar som förövare. Gällande rätt och dess utveckling redovisas inom områdena vårdnad, umgänge samt riskbedömning. Dessutom presenteras relevanta delar av annan svensk lagtext samt Barnkonventionen. Lagstiftningen på området jämförs sedan med praxis. Den praxis som redovisas utgörs av vårdnadsmål som avgjorts av hovrätterna under 2011 där uppgifter om våld förekommer. Rättsfallen refereras och kommenteras var för sig. En sammanställning görs sedan för att se vilka mönster som framträder. Genomgången visar att våld inom familjen sällan tillmäts särskilt stor vikt. Många gånger görs omskrivningar som döljer det våld eller de övergrepp som förekommit. Jämförelsen mellan könen visar också att fäders våld ges en avgörande betydelse i högre utsträckning än mödrars.

En slutsats i uppsatsen är att det än idag föreligger en relativt stark presumtion för gemensam vårdnad - även när uppgifter om övergrepp förekommer. Detta trots att det tydliggjorts från regeringen att det inte längre ska föreligga en sådan presumtion i något fall. Trots att risken att barn far illa enligt lagen inte får överskuggas av något annat intresse visar det sig att det inte ser ut så i praktiken. Bland de refererade rättsfallen framträder att barnets behov av en nära och god kontakt med båda föräldrarna många gånger får väga tyngre. Likaså ges inte barnperspektivet den tyngd som lagstiftaren avsett. Istället får barnets intresse ibland stå tillbaka för rättvisa mellan föräldrarna eller en förälders möjlighet att återanpassas till samhället.

Uppsatsen visar också att domstolarna många gånger är allt för dåliga på att redogöra för de resonemang de för. Domstolarna ska i domen inte enbart redogöra för sina slutsatser utan också hur de har kommit fram till dessa. Häri ingår vad de anser vara styrkt och varför. Detta underlåter många domstolar att göra, framför allt de gånger hovrätten fastställer tingsrättens dom.

Slutligen leder uppsatsen också fram till att principen om barnets bästa är ytterst vag och odefinierad. Både domstolar och föräldrar - men kanske framför allt barnen - hade kunnat dra fördel av ett förtydligande. Barnets bästa är visserligen med all nödvändighet en komplex princip. Ett visst mått av klargörande står dock fortfarande att önska. (Less)
Abstract
The essay is a study with a main aim of investigating to what extent the court attaches importance to family violence in their assessment of right of access to children and custody. It also attempts to see to what extent male and female parents as perpetrators are treated differently. Current law and its development in the areas of custody, right of access to children and risk assessment are explored. Furthermore are relevant parts of The Convention on the Rights of the Child and other Swedish legislative texts presented. Legislation within this area is then compared to practice. The practices described in this essay consist of all cases of custody settled by the Courts of Appeal (Hovrätterna) in 2011 in which violence has been reported.... (More)
The essay is a study with a main aim of investigating to what extent the court attaches importance to family violence in their assessment of right of access to children and custody. It also attempts to see to what extent male and female parents as perpetrators are treated differently. Current law and its development in the areas of custody, right of access to children and risk assessment are explored. Furthermore are relevant parts of The Convention on the Rights of the Child and other Swedish legislative texts presented. Legislation within this area is then compared to practice. The practices described in this essay consist of all cases of custody settled by the Courts of Appeal (Hovrätterna) in 2011 in which violence has been reported. The cases are referenced and commented upon separately. A summary is then made to see which patterns emerge. This shows that courts rarely attach particular importance to domestic violence. In several cases euphemisms are used to downplay the violence or abuse that occurred. The comparison between male and female violence shows that a much greater importance is attached to the fathers’ violence than to the mothers’.

One conclusion of the paper is that there is a relatively strong presumption for joint custody - even in cases where abuse has been reported. This despite the fact that the government has clearly stated that such a presumption should no longer exist. Although the law states that no other interest should overshadow the risk of the child suffering, it appears that this has not been the case in practice. Among the referenced cases it appears that a child’s need of a good, close contact with both parents is often given more emphasis. In addition to this the child’s perspective is not given the weight intended by legislators. Instead, the child's interests sometimes come second to the balance between the parents’ interests or one parent's ability to be reintegrated into society.

The essay also shows that the courts often fail to justify their reasoning adequately. Not only should the courts, in their verdicts, report the results but also how they reached these conclusions. This includes what they consider to be proven, and why. Many courts neglect to do so, especially in cases where the Court of Appeal confirms the district court's ruling.

Finally, the paper also concludes that the principle of the child’s best interest is unhelpfully vague and undefined. Both the courts and the parents - but perhaps above all the children - would benefit from a clarification. The child's best interest must necessarily be a complex principle. However a certain degree of further clarification is to be desired. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Julén, Tove LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
When is a violent person suitable as a parent?
course
JURM02 20112
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
familjerätt, fiscal law
language
Swedish
id
2302601
date added to LUP
2012-02-22 10:11:03
date last changed
2012-02-22 10:11:03
@misc{2302601,
  abstract     = {The essay is a study with a main aim of investigating to what extent the court attaches importance to family violence in their assessment of right of access to children and custody. It also attempts to see to what extent male and female parents as perpetrators are treated differently. Current law and its development in the areas of custody, right of access to children and risk assessment are explored. Furthermore are relevant parts of The Convention on the Rights of the Child and other Swedish legislative texts presented. Legislation within this area is then compared to practice. The practices described in this essay consist of all cases of custody settled by the Courts of Appeal (Hovrätterna) in 2011 in which violence has been reported. The cases are referenced and commented upon separately. A summary is then made to see which patterns emerge. This shows that courts rarely attach particular importance to domestic violence. In several cases euphemisms are used to downplay the violence or abuse that occurred. The comparison between male and female violence shows that a much greater importance is attached to the fathers’ violence than to the mothers’. 

One conclusion of the paper is that there is a relatively strong presumption for joint custody - even in cases where abuse has been reported. This despite the fact that the government has clearly stated that such a presumption should no longer exist. Although the law states that no other interest should overshadow the risk of the child suffering, it appears that this has not been the case in practice. Among the referenced cases it appears that a child’s need of a good, close contact with both parents is often given more emphasis. In addition to this the child’s perspective is not given the weight intended by legislators. Instead, the child's interests sometimes come second to the balance between the parents’ interests or one parent's ability to be reintegrated into society.

The essay also shows that the courts often fail to justify their reasoning adequately. Not only should the courts, in their verdicts, report the results but also how they reached these conclusions.  This includes what they consider to be proven, and why. Many courts neglect to do so, especially in cases where the Court of Appeal confirms the district court's ruling.

Finally, the paper also concludes that the principle of the child’s best interest is unhelpfully vague and undefined. Both the courts and the parents - but perhaps above all the children - would benefit from a clarification. The child's best interest must necessarily be a complex principle. However a certain degree of further clarification is to be desired.},
  author       = {Julén, Tove},
  keyword      = {familjerätt,fiscal law},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Våldsam förälder - lämplig förälder?},
  year         = {2012},
}