Résumé
La investigación realizada tuvo como objetivo identificar riesgos psicosociales considerados por jueces en decisiones sobre pérdida de la patria potestad. El tipo y diseño de la investigación fue cualitativo. Las fuentes de información eran dos: (1) se preseleccionaron 50 documentos judiciales en las siguientes ciudades de Colombia: Bogotá, Tunja y Duitama y (2) se hizo una entrevista grupal con ocho jueces. Los documentos fueron analizados con un protocolo y para diseñarlo, se determinaron categorías orientadas por los objetivos y sustento teórico. La entrevista consistió en un grupo focal. El audio de la entrevista se transcribió literalmente y se realizó un análisis categorial inductivo. Los hallazgos indican que en la mayor parte de casos, la causal más común corresponde al abandono. Allí se identifica más un interés por viajar con el niño fuera del país sin tener que pedir permiso al progenitor demandado. Igualmente se observa que poco se tiene en cuenta la interdisciplinariedad y el interés superior del menor dentro de las decisiones. En el momento de tomar la decisión los jueces utilizan más la lógica silogística que la realista. Empero, en la discusión generada dentro del contexto de la entrevista grupal, anteponen la experiencia profesional y posiblemente vivencias propias para describir las situaciones evaluadas (lógica realista). De la misma manera, reconocen riesgos psicosociales que no quedan expuestos en el documento judicial. Finalmente, se encuentra la necesidad de evaluar más detalladamente la historia relacional de la pareja parental, ya que suelen existir secuelas psicológicas que afectan las competencias parentales.
Suspension of custody as a right of the child may lead to psychosocial risks considered as potential dangers to the well-being of the child, his family or his community in various dimensions. It is therefore important to consider the possibility of these psychosocial risks when making these judicial decisions about the loss of parental rights. The phenomenon of psychosocial risk has been more studied in working environments and also linked to health problems. This fact assigns a new connotation to this study, since it opens the door to the interdisciplinarity from Psychology and Law, when investigating if the psychosocial risks in the judicial decisions on loss of parental authority are taken into account. The research aims to identify psychosocial risks considered by family judges in decisions about loss of custody. The type and design research is qualitative, since one of its general pretensions is the understanding. The sources of information are two. The first corresponds to 50 pre-selected court documents in the Colombian cities of Bogota, Tunja and Duitama. The other is a group interview with 8 family judges. The documents were analyzed by means of a protocol. For the design and implementation of the protocol, categories oriented by interdisciplinary research team objectives, theoretical support and expectations were made. The interview consisted of a focus group interview with family judges (four men and four women). The audio of the interview was transcribed literally and an inductive categorical analysis was made. Results of the analysis of the interview and documents were contrasted. Judicial documents reviewed show that judges use syllogistic logic when seeking to accommodate situations to the causal. Within the judicial decisions it is observed that the best interest of the minor is not privileged. The analysis of the interview in which the use of experience and intuition is observed following a realistic logic, invites us to reflect on aspects such as: the subjectivity of udges in the evaluation, the pressure they face on the number of lawsuits and the speed of judgment, and the need to revise the causal deprivation of liberty superior to one year. The judges manifest a deficit in the interdisciplinary work and the lack of more training in aspects of mental health that would make possible the use of psychological reports and the greater understanding of causes such as disability. It was possible to identify a pattern that leads to the decision of loss of custody power by abandonment (most common causal): (1) Search for legal advice. (2) To promote the notoriety of the physical and emotional distance between the defendant and the child. (3) Establish the claim. (4) Accumulate evidential evidence on the causal. (5) Obtain witnesses. In the discussion generated in the group interview, judges recognize psychosocial risks that are not exposed in the court document or sentence. Finally there is the need to assess in more detail the relational history of the parental couple, as they tend to be psychological consequences that affect parenting skills. The discussion between the researchers of Family Psychology and those of Family Law appear questions that build an interdisciplinary bridge. One limitation of the study was that it was not possible to have sufficient time and resources to conduct group and individual interviews with a greater number of family judges in other cities of the country and achieve more generalizable results. The research question on whether judges take into account the risks to make the decisions is answered that it attends to the grounds provided in the law taking the decision guided by the syllogistic logic. Causals can be equated with psychosocial risks.
Résumé
Los equipos psicosociales de la administración de justicia desde 1982 asesoran a los jueces en materia de conflictos familiares. El estudio que se presenta informa cómo se ha elaborado el discurso de este colectivo, y parte de la noción de discurso de Michel Foucault, desde su visión problemática. Luego recoge, a través de entrevistas y grupos de discusión, las opiniones de los trabajadores sociales y psicólogos de Madrid y Barcelona sobre la gestión del discurso. El estudio plantea un supuesto inicial sobre un menor protagonismo de los trabajadores sociales en la creación del relato que corresponde a una práctica común y busca una explicación y una descripción de lo sucedido. El trabajo que se presenta forma parte de una investigación académica básica y exploratoria de tipo cualitativo, basada en el principio fundamental de obtener los discursos principales para la resolución de los objetivos planteados como nuevas alternativas técnicas del trabajo psicosocial en los juzgados de familia y las tareas que desarrollarán los equipos psicosociales con las familias. Como conclusiones cabe resaltar que los trabajadores sociales forenses ven el futuro con optimismo, valoran su propia intervención en la ayuda a los jueces y creen que habría que impulsar una actuación profesional más propia. Los psicólogos y trabajadores sociales forenses entienden que hay un problema de falta de discurso psicosocial, por lo que es necesaria una mayor implicación en producir investigación en el área del discurso psicosocial. Aunque al evaluar la aportación de los trabajadores sociales la realidad resulta más pobre.
From 1982, psychosocial justice teams advise judges in family conflicts. This study explores how the discourse has been developed for this group. The article begins with the notion of discourse by Michel Foucault, from his problematic vision. Then, the views of social workers and psychologists on the management of speech, which have been collected through interviews and focus groups. The study raises an initial assumption of a lesser role of social workers in the creation of the story that corresponds to common practice and seeks an explanation and description of what happened. The object of this research was to expound and to reveal the place of the professional expert social worker in the psychosocial teams of the administration of justice in (Gomez & Soto 2015a). The social workers have an important role in the psychosocial teams in the administration of justice in the judges are at the receiving end of the social reports, the families are the object of this report and other professionals in the judicial system such as the psychologists, play their role in this team. Each professional group mentioned above requires a different type of task and a different assessment method: Social workers are the qualified professionals; the families are the object of the investigation, as they are the focus of the investigation. The opinion of the social worker is important and so is the perception of the situation of their professional group, in which they have the main role. The psychologists are the other professional group who serve the families and the courts during the investigation. Their perception of the discourse is valued as privileged witnesses. It is also interesting to note the significance of their contribution within this psychosocial collaboration. The techniques to be implemented can be defined as group discussion: the format is open, the components must be homogeneous and heterogeneous at the same time. The researcher suggests the topic of discussion and does not intervene any more except to guide the meeting or to control aspects of the meeting. The recorded information is then analyzed and the group then proposes a discourse referred to as the popular social perception. The in-depth interview is a technique of the qualitative dimension and does not require excesive intervention from the researcher; the aim of the in-depth interview is to draw a life history. The research compared the professional realities of forensic social workers in and from the view of psychologists and the social workers themselves. Psychologists were respected professionals of the social work, but they had important differences of opinion about the role they should play in the administration of justice and their relationships with the judges. The forensic social workers look at the future with optimism and value their intervention in support of the judges; they feel that they should promote a more professional line of action within the lexica and techniques of social work playing a more important role in their activities. The psychologists and forensic social workers understand that there is a lack of psychosocial discourse and a greater involvement is required in the production of research and documented work with -in the psychosocial discourse. In particular, when the contributions of social workers are evaluated, this reality is lacking.