Using Parental Attachment in Family Court Proceedings: An Empirical Study of the DMM‐AAI

Abstract

Two methods for classifying Adult Attachment Interviews (AAI) for family court decisionmaking, Berkeley and DMM, differ in their usefulness for family court. Both expand Ainsworth's three ABC infant categories. The Berkeley method adds a fourth Disorganised/Unresolved category in adulthood, but has low specificity and validity for risk parents. The DMM method identifies an expanding array of strategies across the lifespan, as neurological development makes more complex strategies possible. This study examined DMM-AAI classifications in a sample of 332 British AAIs and compared the results to published meta-analyses of the Berkeley AAI. Six a priori hypotheses addressed the central question raised: which classificatory method for the AAI is more useful for child protection? DMM-AAI classifications differentiated between (i) normative adults, (ii) parents with mental health problems, (iii) parents in family court proceedings and (iv) incarcerated violent criminals on attachment, psychological trauma and pervasively high or low arousal. We assert that the DMM-AAI is sufficiently valid and discriminating for court use and that it can contribute to court decision-making when integrated with other assessments and clinical reports.

Using Parental Attachment in Family Court Proceedings: DMM Theory about the Adult Attachment Interview

“…Overall, the DMM‐AAI differentiated normative and psychiatric groups with relatively few errors. The DMM has not, however, been validated in published studies of maltreating parents; the accompanying empirical paper (Spieker et al ., 2021) addresses that gap in the knowledge base.…”

“…However, the content of the interview does not determine the classification, which, instead, is based on the structure of the discourse and its relation to the interviewer's questions. Spieker et al (2021), Crittenden and Landini (2011), and Crittenden and Heller (2017) provide coding details. Coders can often identify socio-economic status and some aspects of culture, but remain unprejudiced by physical appearance, race, past personal…”

“…Spieker et al . (2021), Crittenden and Landini (2011), and Crittenden and Heller (2017) provide coding details. Coders can often identify socio‐economic status and some aspects of culture, but remain unprejudiced by physical appearance, race, past personal experience with the parent, etc., thus promoting impartiality.…”

“…Assessment of parental attachment can contribute to court decision‐making if the AAI method offers enough variation and precision to address individual differences across the whole range of human functioning (Spieker & Crittenden, 2018). The DMM‐AAI does that (Spieker et al ., 2021). Nevertheless, the AAI requires two experts with appropriate certification: an authorised interviewer to deliver the interview and a currently certified DMM evaluator to analyse the discourse and classify the outcome .…”

Assessment Tools in Child Protection Practice and Research

“…To date, the DMM-AAI has been empirically assessed with a) normative adults and b) those with a psychiatric diagnosis. In this paper, by Susan Spieker et al (2021), the authors aimed to provide initial evidence for DMM-AAI for assessment of parents who may harm their children since this would be a very relevant application of the tool. To this end, a sample of 81 care proceedings cases were compared to a normative group (n = 125), adults in psychotherapy (n = 105) and violent offenders (n = 20).…”