An interpretative analysis of the mediation rhetoric of fathers' rightists: Privatization versus personalization

Abstract

Abstract The fathers' rights movement has been active in advocating family mediation as an alternative to the adversarial legal process for settling separation and divorce disputes. This article, based on a two‐year study consisting of participant observation, ethnographic interviews, and document analysis, attempts to determine if fathers' rightists are seeking to privatize justice in the pursuit of gaining a better deal from their divorce or if there are other reasons behind their actions. Thirty‐two members from four fathers' rights groups were interviewed about their opinions and experiences with lawyers, judges, and the legal system. Fathers' rightists cited gender bias as the central negative experience that was a source of their personal troubles as divorced fathers. Mediation is advocated by fathers' rightists as a superior method of negotiating their postdivorce role and situation because this process is understood as protecting their gendered interests. This research apprises family mediators of the personal, gendered, and political aspects of family mediation.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 10 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.