Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Quinton, D.
Right arrow Articles by Dance, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Quinton, D.
Right arrow Articles by Dance, C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, Vol. 4, No. 4, 519-531 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/1359104599004004008

Contact between Children Placed Away from Home and their Birth Parents: Ryburn’s ‘Reanalysis’ Analysed

David Quinton

University of Bristol

Julie Selwyn

University of Bristol

Alan Rushton

Institute of Psychiatry, London

Cherilyn Dance

Institute of Psychiatry, London

Ryburn has critically reviewed our article on the research issues in the study of contact between children placed away from home and their birth parents (Quinton, Rushton, Dance, & Mayes, 1997). We argue that Ryburn seriously misrepresented our position. He also presented a ‘reanalysis’ of the studies we discussed, supplemented with references to other studies that we did not quote, which aimed to show that our conclusions were wrong. In this article we respond to Ryburn’s critique and raise questions concerning his interpretation of data and methods of reviewing that suggest that his conclusions from the research are unreliable.

Key Words: adoption • fostering • methodology • research


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br J Soc WorkHome page
N. Biehal
Reuniting Children with their Families: Reconsidering the Evidence on Timing, Contact and Outcomes
Br. J. Soc. Work, July 1, 2007; 37(5): 807 - 823.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin Child Psychol PsychiatryHome page
E. Neil, M. Beek, and G. Schofield
Thinking about and Managing Contact in Permanent Placements: The Differences and Similarities between Adoptive Parents and Foster Carers
Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, July 1, 2003; 8(3): 401 - 418.
[Abstract] [PDF]