Mapping the use of social science in Australian courts: the example of family law children’s cases

References

• Primary Sources
   Google Scholar
• Legislation
   Google Scholar
• Evidence Act 1995 (Cth)
   Google Scholar
• Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)
   Google Scholar
• Cases
   Google Scholar
• Aldridge & Keaton [2009] FamCAFC 229
   Google Scholar
• Allen v Green [2010] FamCA 14
   Google Scholar
• Aytugrul v R (2012) 247 CLR 170
   Google Scholar
• In the Marriage of B and B [Supervision of Access] (1988) FLC 91-948
   Google Scholar
• Baranski & Baranski and Anor [2012] FamCAFC 18
   Google Scholar
• Best and Best (1993) FLC 92-418
   Google Scholar
• Brickley and Brickley [2014] FCCA 3137
   Google Scholar
• Danci and Danci (1984) FLC 91-560
   Google Scholar
• Dylan v Dylan [2007] FamCA 842
   Google Scholar
• E and E (1979) FLC 90-645
   Google Scholar
• Forck v Thomas (1993) FLC 92-372
   Google Scholar
• Hall and Hall (1979) FLC 90-713
   Google Scholar
• JB v BG (1994) FLC 92-515
   Google Scholar
• Johnson and Johnson (1997) FLC 92-764
   Google Scholar
• K v B (1994) FLC 92-478
   Google Scholar
• KMB & PRL & Child Representative [2005] FamCA
   Google Scholar
• Le Gallienne and Le Gallienne (1987) FLC 91-809
   Google Scholar
• Liddell and Liddell [2014] FCCA 2813
   Google Scholar
• Lyons v Adder [2014] FamCAFC 6
   Google Scholar
• M v D; Australian Capital Territory (1995) FLC 92-584
   Google Scholar
• Malave v Ratcliffe [2015] FCCA 201
   Google Scholar
• Maloney v The Queen (2013) 252 CLR 168
   Google Scholar
• Maluka v Maluka (2011) FLC 93-464
   Google Scholar
• Maxwell & Maxwell [2011] FMCAfam 997
   Google Scholar
• McGregor and McGregor (2012) FLC 93-507
   Google Scholar
• Meyer and Shipton No 2 [2013] FCCA 2198
   Google Scholar
• Patsalou and Patsalou (1995) FLC 92-580
   Google Scholar
• Patau & Dallon [2015] FCCA 1841
   Google Scholar
• In the Marriage of R [Children’s Wishes] [2002] FamCA 383
   Google Scholar
• Raby and Raby (1976) FLC 90-104
   Google Scholar
• Roth and Roth [2008] FMCAfam 781
   Google Scholar
• Salvati v Donato (No 2) [2009] FMCAfam 883
   Google Scholar
• Salvati v Donato [2010] FamCAFC 263
   Google Scholar
• SCVG v KLD [2011] FamCAFC 100
   Google Scholar
• Sheldon & Weir [2011] FamCAFC 212
   Google Scholar
• In the Marriage of Smith and Swain (1979) FLC 90-400
   Google Scholar
• Tyers and Stafford [2014] FCCA 480
   Google Scholar
• Woods v Multi-Sort Holdings Pty Ltd (2002) 208 CLR 460
   Google Scholar
• Secondary Sources
   Google Scholar
• Justice J Allsop (2011) ‘Continuing Judicial Education: The Australian Experience’, International Forum on Judicial Training, National Judges College of China, Beijing.
   Google Scholar
• Tom Altobelli (2006) ‘ The Effective Use of Social Science Research in Family Law in Australia’, 12th National Family Law Conference, Perth, Family Law Section, Law Council of Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Tom Altobelli (2011) ‘When a Child Rejects a Parent: Why Children Resist Contact’ 25 Australian Journal of Family Law 185.
   Google Scholar
• Paul Amato (1984) ‘The Piers-Harris Children’s Self Concept Scale: An Evaluation of Its Use on an Australian Population’, Working Paper, IFS.
   Google Scholar
• Paul Amato (1986) ‘Father Involvement and the Self-esteem of Children and Adolescents’ 7 Australian Journal of Sex Marriage & Family 6.
   Google Scholar
• Paul Amato and John Gilbreth (1999) ‘Nonresident Fathers and Children’s Well-Being: A Meta-analysis’ 61 Journal of Marriage and the Family 557. doi: 10.2307/353560
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Susan Armstrong (2001) ‘“We Told You So … ” Women’s Legal Groups and the Family Law Reform Act 1995’ 15 Australian Journal of Family Law, 129.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Law Reform Commission (1994) ‘Equality Before the Law: Justice for Women’ (Part 1) and ‘Equality Before the Law: Women’s Equality’ (Part II) Report No 69, Commonwealth of Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Amy Baker (2005) ‘The Long-Term Effects of Parental Alienation on Adult Children: A Qualitative Research Study’ 33 The American Journal of Family Therapy 289. doi: 10.1080/01926180590962129
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicholas Bala (1989) ‘Recognizing Spousal Contributions to the Acquisition of Degrees, Licences and Other Career Assets: Towards Compensatory Support’ 8 Canadian Journal of Family Law 23.
   Google Scholar
• Nicholas Bala (2012) ‘Parental Alienation, Contact Problems and the Family Justice System’, AIFS Seminar Series (powerpoints only).
   Google Scholar
• Jonathan Beach QC (2009), ‘Scientific Evidence: A Need for Caution in Decision-Making’, paper presented at Judicial Reasoning: Art or Science? Conference, National Judicial College of Australia, ANU College of Law and Australian Academy of Forensic Sciences, http://njca.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Scientific-Evidence-A-Need-for-Caution-in-Decision-making-Beach.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Anne Blanchard (1993) ‘Violence in Families: The Effects on Children’ 34 Family Matters 31.
   Google Scholar
• Anne Blanchard et al (1992) ‘I Just Couldn't Stop Them’: Western Australian Children Living with Domestic Violence, School of Social Work, Curtin University.
   Google Scholar
• Clara Bookless-Pratz and Peter Mertin (1990) ‘The Behavioural and Social Functioning of Children Exposed to Domestic Violence: A Pilot Study’ 15 Children Australia 4. doi: 10.1017/S1035077200002935
   Google Scholar
• Inge Bretherton (1992) ‘The Origins of Attachment Theory: John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth’ 28 Developmental Psychology 759. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.28.5.759
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carol Bruch (2001) ‘Parental Alienation Syndrome and Parental Alienation: Getting It Wrong in Child Custody Cases’ 35 Family Law Quarterly 527.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diana Bryant ( Chief Justice of the Family Court of Australia) (2012) ‘The Use of Extrinsic Materials – with Particular Reference to Social Science and Family Law Decision-Making’, Conference Paper, Judicial Conference of Australia Colloquium, Fremantle Western Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Kylie Burns (2004) ‘The Way the World Is: Social Facts in High Court Negligence Cases’ 12 Torts Law Journal 215.
   Google Scholar
• Kylie Burns (2012) ‘The Australian High Court and Social Facts: A Content Analysis Study’ 40 Federal Law Review 287.
   Google Scholar
• Tony Butler (2016) ‘ Sentencing and Neuroscience: Traumatic Brain Injury among NSW Prisoners’ (Justice Health Research Program, Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales), Current Issues in Sentencing Conference, National Judicial College of Australia, Canberra.
   Google Scholar
• Kenneth Byrne (1989) ‘Brainwashing in Custody Access: The Parental Alienation Syndrome’ 4 Australian Family Lawyer 1.
   Google Scholar
• Naomi Cahn (1991) ‘Civil Images of Battered Women: The Impact of Domestic Violence in Child Custody Decisions’ 44 Vanderbilt Law Review 1041.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonnie Carlson (1986) ‘Children’s Observations of Interpersonal Violence’ in A Roberts (ed) Battered Women and Their Families, Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Judy Cashmore and Patrick Parkinson (2014) ‘The Use and Abuse of Social Science Research Evidence in Children’s Cases’ 20 Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 239. doi: 10.1037/law0000010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrew Cherlin (1981) Marriage, Divorce, Remarriage, Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Richard Chisholm (2007) ‘Making It Work: The Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Act 2006’ 21 Australian Journal of Family Law 143.
   Google Scholar
• Richard Chisholm (2008) ‘The Harmful Impact of Parental Conflict on Children (and the Harmful Impact of Legislative Complexity on People Trying to Help Children): A Brief Reply to Max Wright’ 21 Australian Journal of Family Law 152.
   Google Scholar
• Richard Chisholm (2012) ‘Risks in Using Social Science Publications’ 26 Australian Journal of Family Law 78.
   Google Scholar
• Richard Chisholm (2015) ‘Rewriting Part VII of the Family Law Act: A Modest Proposal’ 24 Australian Family Lawyer 17.
   Google Scholar
• Richard Chisholm and Clare Petre (1976) ‘Of Children, Custody and Cliches’ September Australian Current Law Digest 233.
   Google Scholar
• M Cox (2010) Bridging the Gap on Parental Alienation: A Survey for Legal and Mental Health Professionals in Family Law (Psy.D. dissertation, Alliant International University, Los Angeles, California).
   Google Scholar
• Kenneth Culp Davis (1942) ‘An Approach to Problems of Evidence in the Administrative Process’ 55 Harvard Law Review 364. doi: 10.2307/1335092
   Google Scholar
• Peggy Davis (1986–87) ‘“There Is a Book out … ”: An Analysis of Judicial Absorption of Legislative Facts’ 100 Harvard Law Review 1539. doi: 10.2307/1341230
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• David H Demo and Alan C Acock (1988) ‘The Impact of Divorce on Children’ 50 Journal of Marriage and the Family 619. doi: 10.2307/352634
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John Dewar (2010) ‘Can the Centre Hold?: Reflections on Two Decades of Family Law Reform in Australia’ 24 Australian Journal of Family Law 139.
   Google Scholar
• Heather Douglas (2012) ‘A Consideration of the Merits of Specialised Homicide Offences and Defences for Battered Women’ 45 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology 367. doi: 10.1177/0004865812456851
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• David Faigman (2008) Constitutional Fictions: A Unified Theory of Constitutional Facts, Oxford Scholarship Online.
   Google Scholar
• Family Law Council (1977) First Annual Report, AGPS.
   Google Scholar
• Family Law Council (1982) Watson Committee Report (Wardship, Guardianship, Custody, Access, Change of Name), AGPS.
   Google Scholar
• Family Law Council (1987) Access – Some Options for Reform, Commonwealth of Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Family Law Council (1994) Letter of Advice to the Attorney General on the Operation of the (UK) Children Act 1989, Family Law Council.
   Google Scholar
• Family Law Council Report (2004) Relocation.
   Google Scholar
• Family Law Council Report (2006) Recognition of Traditional Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander – Child Rearing Practices.
   Google Scholar
• Family Violence Committee (2013) ‘ Family Violence Best Practice Principles’ (ed 3.2), Family Court of Australia and Federal Circuit Court of Australia, http://www.familycourt.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/fcoaweb/about/policies-and-procedures/family-violence-best-practice-principles-december-2015.
   Google Scholar
• John Fantuzzo and C Lindquist (1989) ‘The Effects of Observing Conjugal Violence on Children: A Review and Analysis of Research Methodology’ 4 Journal of Family Violence 77. doi: 10.1007/BF00985658
   Google Scholar
• Barbara Jo Fidler and Nicholas Bala (2010) ‘Children Resisting Postseparation Contact with a Parent: Concepts, Controversies, and Conundrums’ 48 Family Court Review 10. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-1617.2009.01287.x
   Google Scholar
• Jay Folberg (ed) (1984) Joint Custody and Shared Parenting, BNA Books.
   Google Scholar
• Ian Freckelton (2013) ‘Judicial Notice’ in I Freckelton and H Selby, Expert Evidence: Law, Practice, Procedure and Advocacy (5th ed), Thomson Reuters.
   Google Scholar
• Frank Furstenberg et al (1983) ‘The Life Course of Children of Divorce: Marital Disruption and Parental Contact’ 48 American Sociological Review 664. doi: 10.2307/2094925
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richard Gardner (1987) The Parental Alienation Syndrome and the Differentiation Between Fabricated and Genuine Sexual Abuse, Creative Therapeutics.
   Google Scholar
• Richard Gardner (1998) The Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Guide for Mental Health and Legal Professionals (2nd ed), Creative Therapeutics Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Richard Gardner (2001) ‘Should Courts Order PAS Children to Visit/Reside with the Alienated Parent? A Follow-up Study’ 19 The American Journal of Forensic Psychology 61.
   Google Scholar
• Ivo Giesen (2015) ‘The Use and Incorporation of Extralegal Insights in Legal Reasoning’ 11 Utrecht Law Review 1. doi: 10.18352/ulr.308
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joseph Goldstein et al (1973) Beyond the Best Interests of the Child, Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Marie Gordon, QC (2013) ‘Infants and Toddlers: Furthering Our Collective Understanding of Their Needs in Post-separation Parenting Plans’, 6th World Congress on Family Law and Children’s Rights, Sydney.
   Google Scholar
• Regina Graycar (2012) ‘Family Law Reform in Australia, or Frozen Chooks Revisited Again?’ 13 Theoretical Inquiries in Law 241. doi: 10.1515/1565-3404.1291
   Google Scholar
• Ben Grunwald (2013) ‘Sub Optimal Social Science and Judicial Precedent’ 161 University Pennsylvania Law Review 1409.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brenda Hale (2013) ‘Should Judges Be Socio-legal Scholars?’, Socio-Legal Studies Association Conference, University of York.
   Google Scholar
• David Hamer and Gary Edmond (2016) ‘Judicial Notice: Beyond Adversarialism and into the Exogenous Zone’ 25 Griffith Law Review 291–318.
   Google Scholar
• Joe Harman (2012) Family Violence: The Impact on Parents and Children (and How to Improve Practice Through Awareness), Toongabbie Legal Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Alan Hayes (2015) ‘Social Science and Family Law: From Fallacies and Fads to the Facts of the Matter’ in A Hayes and D Higgins (eds), Families, Policy and the Law: Selected Essays on Contemporary Issues for Australia, Australian Institute of Family Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Dyson Heydon (2004), Cross on Evidence ( 7th Australian ed), LexisNexis Butterworths Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Megan Hoey (2002) ‘The High Court and Judicial Notice: Woods v Multi-Sport Holdings’ 27 Alternative Law Journal 130.
   Google Scholar
• Institute of Family Studies (1980) Newsletter No 1, September, Commonwealth of Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Peter Jaffe et al (1990), Children of Battered Women, Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Janet Johnston (1994) ‘Domestic Violence and Parent-Child Relationships in Families Disputing Custody’, Conference Paper, National Family Court Seminar, Sydney.
   Google Scholar
• Joint Select Committee (1992) Report on Certain Aspects of the Operation and Interpretation of the Family Law Act, Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia.
   Google Scholar
• ‘Justice’ (British Section of ICJ) (1975) Parental Rights and Duties and Custody Suits, Stevens.
   Google Scholar
• Justice Robert French (2007) ‘Judicial Professional Development – Cultural Awareness or Knowing Something about Everything’, District and County Court Judges Conference, Fremantle.
   Google Scholar
• Miranda Kaye and Julia Tolmie (1998a) ‘Discoursing Dads: The Rhetorical Devices of Fathers’ Rights Groups’ 22 Melbourne University Law Review 162.
   Google Scholar
• Miranda Kaye and Julia Tolmie (1998b) ‘Fathers’ Rights Groups in Australia and Their Engagement with Issues in Family Law’ 12 Australian Journal of Family Law 19.
   Google Scholar
• Michael Kearney (2014) ‘The Scientists Are Coming: What Are the Courts to Do with Social Science Research?’ in A Hayes and D Higgins (eds), Families, Policy and the Law: Selected Essays on Contemporary Issues for Australia, Australian Institute of Family Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Joan Kelly and Michael Lamb (2000) ‘Using Child Development Research to Make Appropriate Custody and Access Decisions for Young Children’ 38 Family Court Review 297. doi: 10.1111/j.174-1617.2000.tb00577.x
   Google Scholar
• Joan Kelly and Michael Lamb (2001) ‘Using the Empirical Literature to Guide the Development of Parenting Plans for Young Children: A Rejoinder to Solomon and Beringen’ 39 Family Court Review 365.
   Google Scholar
• Michael King (1991) ‘Child Welfare Within Law: The Emergence of a Hybrid Discourse’ 18 Journal of Law and Society 303. doi: 10.2307/1410197
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allison Orr Larsen (2012) ‘Confronting Supreme Court Fact Finding’ 98 Virginia Law Review 1255.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Audrey Marshall (1977) ‘Social Workers and Psychologists as Family Court Counsellors Within the Family Court of Australia’ 30 Australian Social Work 9. doi: 10.1080/03124077708549502
   Google Scholar
• Hon Justice Peter McClellan (2015) ‘Legislative Facts and s 144-A Contemporary Problem?’, Supreme Court of New South Wales Annual Conference 2015, https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/media-centre/speeches/supreme-court-of-new-south-wales-annual-conference.
   Google Scholar
• Jennifer McIntosh and Richard Chisholm (2007–08) ‘Shared Care and Children’s Best Interests in Conflicted Separation: A Cautionary Tale from Current Research’ 20 Australian Family Lawyer 3.
   Google Scholar
• Jennifer McIntosh and Richard Chisholm (2008) ‘Cautionary Notes on the Shared Care of Children in Conflicted Parental Separation’ 14 Journal of Family Studies 37. doi: 10.5172/jfs.327.14.1.37
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jennifer McIntosh et al (2015) ‘Responding to Concerns about a Study of Infant Overnight Care Postseparation, with Comments on Consensus: Reply to Warshak’ 21 Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 111. doi: 10.1037/h0101018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joan Meier (2009) ‘A Historical Perspective on Parental Alienation Syndrome and Parental Alienation’ 6 Journal of Child Custody, 232. doi: 10.1080/15379410903084681
   Google Scholar
• Naomi Michaels (1967) ‘The Dangers of a Change of Parentage in Custody and Adoption Cases’ 83 Law Quarterly Review 547.
   Google Scholar
• Lawrie Moloney et al (2007) Allegations of Family Violence and Child Abuse in Family Law Children's Proceedings: A Pre-reform Exploratory Study ( Research Report No 15), Australian Institute of Family Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Jane Morgan and Zedner L Lucia (1992) Child Victims, Clarendon.
   Google Scholar
• Graham Mullane (1998) ‘Evidence of Social Science Research: Law, Practice, and Options in the Family Court of Australia’ 72 Australian Law Journal 434.
   Google Scholar
• National Judicial College of Australia (2015) 13th Annual Report 2014-15, ACT.
   Google Scholar
• Lyn Newlands (2009) ‘Lifting the Veil: The Changing Face of Judgments Publishing in the Family Court of Australia’ 17 Australian Law Librarian 250.
   Google Scholar
• Linda Nielsen (2014) ‘Woozles: Their Role in Custody Law Reform, Parenting Plans and Family Court’ 20 Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 164. doi: 10.1037/law0000004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christine Nolan (1991) ‘ Family Violence – a Child Protection Issue’ in Family Violence Professional Education Taskforce, Family Violence: Everybody’s Business, Somebody’s Life, Federation Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vincent Papaleo and Tim Di Stefano (2013) ‘Something Old, Something New, and Something Borrowed: Considering Parental Alienation from a Different Perspective’, Conference Paper, Family Law Conference: Reclaiming the Ground, New Zealand Law Society Family Law Conference, New Zealand.
   Google Scholar
• Patrick Parkinson (1994) ‘Children Who Witness Domestic Violence’, Conference Paper, Macquarie University.
   Google Scholar
• Patrick Parkinson (2007) ‘The Values of Parliament and the Best Interests of Children – A Response to Professor Chisholm’ 21 Australian Journal of Family Law 213.
   Google Scholar
• Patrick Parkinson and Judy Cashmore (2014) ‘The Use and Abuse of Social Science Research Evidence in Children’s Cases’ 20 Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 239. doi: 10.1037/law0000010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zoe Rathus (2010), ‘Social Science or “Lego-science”? Presumptions, Politics and Parenting and the New Family Law’ 10 Queensland University of Technology Journal of Law and Justice 164.
   Google Scholar
• Zoe Rathus (2012) ‘A Call for Clarity in the Use of Social Science Research in Family Law Decision-Making’ 26 Australian Journal of Family Law 81.
   Google Scholar
• Zoe Rathus (2014) ‘The Role of Social Science in Australian Family Law: Collaborator, Usurper or Infiltrator?’ 52 Family Court Review 69. doi: 10.1111/fcre.12071
   Google Scholar
• Helen Rhoades (2006) ‘Yearning for Law: Fathers’ Groups and Family Law Reform in Australia’ in S Sheldon and R Collier (eds) Fathers’ Rights Activism and Law Reform in Comparative Perspective, Hart.
   Google Scholar
• Helen Rhoades (2008) ‘The Dangers of Shared Care Legislation: Why Australia Needs (Yet More) Family Law Reform’ 36 Federal Law Review 279.
   Google Scholar
• Helen Rhoades (2010) ‘Children’s Needs and “Gender Wars”: The Paradox of Parenting Law Reform’ 24 Australian Journal of Family Law 160.
   Google Scholar
• Helen Rhoades (2015) ‘Rewriting Part VII of the Family Law Act’ 42 Australian Family Lawyer 1.
   Google Scholar
• Helen Rhoades and Shurlee Swain (2011) ‘A Bold Experiment?: Reflections on the Early History of the Family Court’ 22 Australian Family Lawyer 11.
   Google Scholar
• Helen Rhoades et al (2008) Enhancing Inter Professional Relationships in a Changing Family Law System: Final Report, University of Melbourne.
   Google Scholar
• Amy Rublin (2011) ‘The Role of Social Science in Judicial Decision Making: How Gay Rights Advocates Can Learn from Integration and Capital Punishment Case Law’ 19 Duke Journal of Gender Law and Policy 178.
   Google Scholar
• Michael Saini et al (2012) ‘Empirical Studies of Alienation’ in Kathryn Kuehnle and Leslie Drozd (eds) Parenting Plan Evaluations: Applied Research for the Family Court, Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brenda See (2004–05) ‘Written in Stone? The Record on Appeal and the Decision-Making Process’ 40 Gonzaga Law Review 157.
   Google Scholar
• Andrew Serpell (2011) ‘Social Policy Information: Recent Decisions of the High Court of Australia’ 21 Journal of Judicial Administration 109.
   Google Scholar
• Christopher Sharpley and Ruth Webber (1989) ‘Coparenting: An Alternative to Consider in Separation Counselling’ 10 Australian Journal of Sex, Marriage & Family 111.
   Google Scholar
• Elizabeth Sheehy et al (2014) ‘Securing Fair Outcomes for Battered Women Charged with Homicide: Analysing Defence Lawyering in R v Falls’ 38 Melbourne University Law Review 666.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russell Smyth (1999a) ‘Other than “Accepted Sources of Law”?: A Quantitative Study of Secondary Source Citations in the High Court’ 22 University of New South Wales Law Journal 19.
   Google Scholar
• Russell Smyth (1999b) ‘Academic Writing and the Courts: A Quantitative Study of the Influence of Legal and Non-legal Periodicals in the High Court’ 17 University of Tasmania Law Review 164.
   Google Scholar
• Russell Smyth (2000) ‘The Authority of Secondary Authority: A Quantitative Study of Secondary Source Citations in the Federal Court’ 9 Griffith Law Review 25.
   Google Scholar
• Bruce Smyth (ed) (2004) Parent-Child Contact and Post-separation Parenting Arrangements ( Research Report No 9), Australian Institute of Family Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Bruce Smyth (2005), ‘Time the Rethink Time? The Experience of Time with Children after Divorce’ 71 Family Matters 4.
   Google Scholar
• Bruce Smyth and Anna Ferro (2002) ‘When the Difference Is Night and Day: Parent-Child Contact after Separation’ 63 Family Matters 54.
   Google Scholar
• Bruce Smyth et al (2001) ‘Patterns of Parenting after Divorce: A Pre-reform Act Benchmark Study’ 15 Australian Journal of Family Law 114.
   Google Scholar
• Susan Steinman (1981) ‘The Experience of Children in a Joint Custody Arrangement: A Report of a Study’ 51 American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 403. doi: 10.1111/j.1939-0025.1981.tb01389.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Des Storer (1981) ‘ Migrant Families in Australia: A Review of Some Social and Demographic Trends of Non Anglo Saxon 1947–1981’, Working Paper No 3, Institute of Family Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Julie Stubbs and Julia Tolmie (1999) ‘Falling Short of the Challenge? A Comparative Assessment of the Australian Use of Expert Evidence on the Battered Woman Syndrome’ 23 Melbourne University Law Review 709.
   Google Scholar
• Alexander Tanford (1990) ‘The Limits of a Scientific Jurisprudence: The Supreme Court and Psychology’ 66 Indiana Law Journal 137.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anne Thacker and Jennifer Coates (1991) Submission to the Joint Select Committee on Certain Aspects of the Operation and Interpretation of the Family Law Act, National Committee on Violence against Women, OSW, Canberra.
   Google Scholar
• Kieran Tranter (2015) ‘Citation Practices of the Australian Law Reform Commission in Final Reports’ 38 University of New South Wales Law Journal 323.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shellee Wakefield and Annabel Taylor (2015) Judicial Education for Domestic and Family Violence: State of Knowledge Paper, Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety Limited (ANROWS), Sydney.
   Google Scholar
• Laurens Walker and John Monahan (1987) ‘Social Frameworks: A New Use of Social Science in Law’ 73 Virginia Law Review 559. doi: 10.2307/1072923
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Judith Wallerstein and Sandra Blakeslee (1989) Second Chances: Men, Women and Children a Decade after Divorce, Ticknor and Fields.
   Google Scholar
• Judith Wallerstein and Joan Kelly (1980) Surviving the Breakup: How Children and Parents Cope with Divorce, Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Richard Warshak (2014) ‘Social Science and Parenting Plans for Young Children: A Consensus Report’ 20 Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 46. doi: 10.1037/law0000005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nerida Wilson (2012) Using the Research Persuasively, 27th Annual Calabro SV Consulting Family Law Residential, Ashmore, Queensland.
   Google Scholar
• Women’s Legal Services NSW (2009) ‘How to Win Cases and Influence Judges: Using Social Science Research in Family Law Matters’, National Association of Community Legal Centres Conference, Perth.
   Google Scholar
• Max Wright (2008) ‘Best Interests, Conflict and Harm – a Response to Chisholm and Parkinson’ 22 Australian Journal of Family Law 72.
   Google Scholar