French version : Link
In 2010, a report of the HAS [1] concludes that psychoanalysis is not a recommended treatment for autism ... Who on earth, beyond a handful of psychoanalysts directly concerned by this negative appreciation, would still recommend psychoanalysis for the treatment of autistic children?
So, what should we to think of psychoanalysis appreciation of the children’s needs and parenthood?
This question is relevant, particularly when the parents are separated, because it is the interest of the child.
For a long time, many institutions have been under the influence of psychoanalysis lobbying as that of the "Défenseur des Droits" (Defender of Human Rights), the "Fondation Pour l'Enfance" (Foundation for Childhood), our elected officials, government, our judicial courts, the ENM [2], etc.
I will try to demonstrate the following in the next pages :
1. psychoanalysts exercise an active lobbying on our institutions and the decisions of family courts (demonstration),
2. psychoanalysts have staged a number of loud propaganda feats (enumeration),
3. Attachment Theory contradicts psychoanalysis (demonstration),
4. attachment process seen by psychoanalysis (enumeration),
5. Attachment Theory altered by psychoanalysis (enumeration),
6. judicial practices are under psychoanalytic influence.
Note 1: In this article, I employ indifferently 'psychoanalysts' to designate: psychiatrists, child psychiatrists and psychologists who are influenced by psychoanalytic practice and fiercely anchored on the dogma such as : castrator father, Oedipus, children libidinals stages, anaclisis theory, instincts theory, object relations theory, etc.
Note 2: It is important to distinguish "developmental psychology" to the "psychoanalysis (Development)". The first is scientific [3]. The second and its countless terminological variants are not, have never been and never will be probably unable to justify the dogmas it preaches.
1) Some psychoanalysts exert a toxic lobbying on our institutions
The main "competitors" of psychoanalysis are for example development and behavioral psychologies. Unlike psychoanalysis, they are scientific [3] because they are based on evidence. This is not the case for psychoanalysis. This is why psychoanalysis is gradually marginalized in scientific investigations:
- In 1980, most Freudian references are removed from the DSM III [4] by the American Psychiatric Association for their lack of scientific character.
- In 2004, INSERM [5] produces a thick report demonstrating psychoanalysis lack of therapeutic effectiveness for the majority of mental disorders. [6]
- In 2010, a report of the HAS concludes that psychoanalysis should not be used when dealing with autism ...
The psychoanalyst Maurice Berger plays a key role in this lobbying. He is the keystone and the coordinator [7] of a number of psychoanalytical associations that now oppose a bill aimed at facilitating shared custody. Note also, these psychoanalysts work in network [8].
An example of the consequences of this lobbying, directly involves Mrs Derain when she was Ombudsperson for Children! While Mrs. Bertinotti, Secretary for the Family, had already refused to sponsor a pseudo debate organized by two associations of psychoanalysts: the APPEA [9] and COPES [10]. Mrs. Derain got trapped herself. In April 2013, she had granted her high patronage! This "debate" was yet clearly biased against shared custody as the conclusions were printed in advance on the invitation brochure! Unlike these psychoanalysts, Mrs Derain had to remain neutral and not engage in a charade of pseudo-scientific debate. Note, however, that she was more prudent during another quite similar false debate organized by WAIMH.fr [11] in October 2013. There she made the following preliminary statement: "... / ... Today, I again took some risk in coming to discuss with you and benefiting from your analyzes. I say this without polemic... / ... I was warned the conditions of a certain number of persons of this day, the organization of this day, by drawing my attention to the fact that there is a bias. ... / ..." (Source: recording).
In France, each year, there are 130,000 divorces (and a total over 200,000 separations), 57% of which with children. According to the latest report from the Ministry of Justice [12], under the influence of judges, about 10% of families are subjected to a "measure being conducted": psychiatric evaluation, mediation, social inquiry, etc.
According Miviludes, about 70% of (psychiatric court experts?) have a psychoanalytic training ... Therefore, it is this corporation very condemned which takes advantage of the tens of millions euros achieved by this activity with the judicial world, without counting that this are also predominantly psychoanalysts who form the magistrates from the ENM [19], who advise them and accompanying them in their decisions, and who insure their "improvement" through training such as those provided by the COPES.
The COPES is an association of psychoanalysts openly committed against share custody and the form of co-parenting it authorizes... The "knowledge" of these psychoanalysts relies on psychoanalytic dogmas which have never been validated and are even contradicted by developmental psychology. In addition to indoctrinate the magistrates (19), this association also provide training and internship to social workers and professionals in the early childhood ... But psychoanalysis is not scientific [3] and strongly refuses any form of assessment ...
2) Some strokes of brilliance!
Example 1: Maurice Berger and his associates deceive magistrate Marc Juston and the "Centre d'Analyse Stratégique du Premier Ministre" (Center for Strategic Analysis of the Prime Minister) by falsely claiming that California has rolled back its shared custody legislation [13] ...
Example 2: Maurice Berger and his associates are the authors of various books whose contents are nothing else than intellectual swindles as: : « Divorce, séparation : Les enfants sont-ils protégés ? » (Divorce, separation : Are children protected?) [14] et « Garde alternée : Les besoins de l’enfant » (Shared custody : the needs of the child) [15]...
Example 3: Maurice Berger usurped the name of the famous pediatrician (to 60/70) Thomas Berry Brazelton. He added his name next to that of Brazeltonin order to take advantage of Mr. Brazelton’s reputation [15], and introduced a calendar Brazelton would have written himself : "Brazelton calendar changed by Maurice Berger" (not confused with the scale of Brazelton which is totally different) ...
This usurpation is fundamentally vicious. Because, not content to have usurped his name, Maurice Berger presents Thomas Berry Brazelton as a specialist in parental separation and he claims to be inspired by the alleged "scientific work" of Mr. Brazelton. In reality, Mr. Brazelton never realized any research in this area. He just simply provide a personal opinion in one of his books intended for a general public and we note his opinion on shared custody is rather positive for children less than three years when the frequency of alternation is adapted to the age of the child. His opinion is therefore closer to scientific developmental psychologists than that of psychoanalysts.
Brazelton Institute itself confirmed it has never been made aware of this so-called Brazelton schedule !!! Yet, Maurice Berger and the WAIMH.fr continue to promote it in the media, in books, etc. as much as they can in order to deceive the French people to dissuade it to discuss this subject...
Example 4: Maurice Berger, Bernard Golse and several other psychoanalysts, were the instigators of a false petition intended to disrupt the democratic debates of the National Assembly in May 2014 about the Family Act (APIE) [16]. These psychoanalysts then lied to the media in arguing that their petition had been exclusively signed by professionals of the childhood!
Example 5: On April 8, 2013, APPEA, the COPES, the SFPEADA [17] and the FNEPE [18] have organized a pseudo debate about shared custody for children of separated parents. On October 4, 2013, it was the turn of the WAIMH.fr [19]. In these organizations of psychoanalysts, Maurice Berger claims he "knows" the child's needs for parenting. In his presentations, he systematically conceals scientific studies [3] that directly threaten Freudian-Lacanian doctrines, including the only French scientific study which has been published by a high level international journal [20]. The study concludes that children in shares custody arrangements have a better self-esteem.
Example 6: When it comes to autism, psychoanalysis is fundamentally anti-mother: "Mother crocodile"! In this regard, Jacques Lacan stated: [21] "A large crocodile in whose mouth you are - this is the mother. We don’t know what may take her suddenly, to close its gateway. This is the desire of the mother. So, I tried to explain that there was something which was reassuring. I say simple things, I improvise, I must say. There is a stick, a stone stick of course, powerful, opening the gateway, it is stuck. It is called a phallus. It is the stick that protects you, if, suddenly, it closes.".
When it comes to parenting, psychoanalytic dogmas are fundamentally anti-father [22] [23] ... But, they are still taught [24]: "Phallic stage (about 4 years old): Until now the father was considered as an auxiliary mother. / When the real father is non-existent, the fatherly role is played by everything which separates the mother from the child, work, family ... etc. / the father's function must be recognized by the mother and the child. / This paternal function must exist in the mind of the mother from the beginning.".
3) Attachment Theory contradicts psychoanalysis
At the beginning of the XXth century, psychoanalysis was alone in its interest of parent-child relationships and their genesis. This is why John Bowlby became a psychoanalyst at first. Then, under the influence of Lorenz, and later of Harlow, Bowlby discovered that the theory of object relations based on nurturing (to be explained later), dear to traditional psychoanalysts, was false and he developed Attachment Theory.
In 1969 and in 1988, the psychoanalyst John Bowlby therefore proposed his theories on attachment in the form of testable hypotheses, by means of direct observation and experimental procedures. His approach, which was based on systems theory [25] and a scientific methodology [3], was based on ethology and developmental psychology.
He immediately noticed the Attachment Theory was in opposition to Freudian metapsychology because it derogates from the dogmas: the castrator father, Oedipus, the different stages of libido for children, the theory of instincts, the theory of object relations, the theory of anaclisis, etc. ! At the beginning, he thought, like most psychoanalyst, that only the mother could be an attachment figure, but he later proved this was an error and that anyone who took care of the child and surrounds him could such as the father, siblings, etc. [26]
In 1972, the scientific psychologist René Zazzo even wrote that attachment theory "leads to the negation of the libido certainly, perhaps the unconscious, to the refusal of any metapsychology" [27]. As the production of a psychoanalyst, Attachment Theory therefore constitutes a "divergence", a "heresy", and since the 50’s, it led the unfortunate psychoanalyst John Bowlby to be rejected by his own psychoanalytic community and dismissed as a heretic [28]!
It is easy to see that psychoanalysts are deeply protectionist of Freudian and Lacanian dogmas and show no flexibility on matters of faith! However today, psychoanalysts cannot really continue to oppose Attachment Theory, because it is widely known and recognized. They must therefore necessarily deal with it. As a result, they have structured ideologically acceptable versions to integrate it into their psychoanalysis framework, or returned to earlier versions when possible hierarchy of parental roles was still under question (around 1967) and did not include notions of multiple attachments. Several examples are given below (see the §5).
4) The process of attachment according to the psychoanalytic theory
I will try to expose some foundations of psychoanalysis. This will allow the reader to better understand why psychoanalysts will never admit the child’s attachment may develop with his father as well as his mother.
The theory of instincts: The notion of instinct was theorized by Freud in his first writings. He defined it as a constant source of motivation for a satisfaction while being the initial mean of this satisfaction. The instinct can be characterized by:
- its source (this is the somatic process localized in a part of the body),
- its thrust (this is the force with which it is imposed),
- its object (this is what enables the instinct to achieve his aim),
- its purpose (it is the satisfaction of the desire which has the effect of removing the thrust).
The notions of instinct of life and death have been promoted by Freud, and then again by the psychoanalyst Melanie Klein. The instinct of life (libido) includes the sexual instinct and the instinct of self-preservation. The instinct of death (thanatos) drive the reduction of tensions, auto-aggression and destruction.
For psychoanalysts, sexuality is first non-genital. It is animated by instincts which underpin on organic functions such as hunger for example. For psychoanalysis, when an infant is hungry, it means that:
- Its source is his stomach (his hunger),
- Its thrust is function of the time during which he has not eaten,
- Its object is the breast of his mother,
- Its goal is the pleasure of sucking.
The theory of object relations: This theory is purely psychoanalytic. The object in question in this theory is the one already mentioned in the theory of instincts. Object relations theory makes reference to the notions of presence and absence of the object. According to psychoanalysts, the infant would become aware of the existence of his mother when she is absent and this would allow him to differentiate himself from her and therefore to attach to her. This perception is contrary to that of the genuine Attachment Theory which proves the child develops links of attachment with the person(s) present(s) and that attachment is only function of the presence (and not of the absence, or feeding). Let us remember that for psychoanalysts "the object is born in the absence".
As such, to justify its "instinct theory of attachment", Bernard Golse, child psychiatrist under the influence of psychoanalysis, wrote that presence and absence are the two sides of the same thing [29]. By magic, the contradiction and resulting dispute disappears and becomes irrelevant. Through this strategic retreat, Bernard Golse hopes to restore the credibility of psychoanalysis [30]: "Now, it is time the psychoanalysts agree to take into account the theory of attachment without taxing it of heretic or anti-psychoanalysis. It is not in any way to confuse the general, but only to admit a metapsychology of the absence and a metapsychology of the presence are absolutely inseparable in that the absence and the presence (the object) are also closely intertwined like the concavity and convexity of a same curve: thus the attachment object would be after the discovery by the child of its role self-preservation for him (the first stage of the pulsion) and its intermittent absences (second stage of the pulsion), this one the child could seduce in seeking to offer himself as the object of his own pulsions (third stage of the pulsion).".
The anaclisis theory: According to the psychoanalysts, the sexual instinct is closely correlated to certain bodily functions. For example, the infant who takes pleasure in sucking the breast would feel an excitement. Therefore, the psychoanalysts relate the sexual instinct is linked to the need for food. The pleasure obtained would transform then the organic instinct (hunger) in sexual instinct (the breast).
The act of feeding himself for the infant would constitute an autoerotic pleasure. For this reason, psychoanalysts argue the child explores the world by taking to his mouth everything he touches. According to psychoanalysts, the concept of anaclisis intervenes in the choice of object. The infant would elect some objects of love among the people who originally provided him the first objects of self-preservation functions (such as hunger), which would also be the first sexual object (such as the mother's breast). That is the choice of objects by anaclisis. This is why psychoanalysts will be eternally unable to admit that there is no hierarchy in parental roles. They therefore advocate that the mother is necessarily the first object of love for the child. As such, in the best of cases, the father can only be an auxiliary mother.
Therefore we can also note that , in terms of ordinary common sense, this tends to deny the existence and viability of nannies, nurseries, baby bottles, etc.
5) The Attachment Theory revised by psychoanalysts
The following examples end the demonstration that psychoanalysts cannot bear the maturity reached today by the Attachment Theory and cannot conceive the links of attachment of a child with both his parents are of the same nature and of the same quality. In fact, except in very uncommon cases, there is no reason a child would not love his father as much as his mother. Also note 93% of children of separated parents feel that the share custody is in their best interest [31].
Example 1: Toward 1947, when it was only in its infancy, the Attachment Theory was interested, in a simplistic manner (doing the impasse of the hypothesis of a link father/child), only in the link of attachment mother/child. That is why in a publication of his initiative, supposed to "prove" a father is worth less than a mother [32], Maurice Berger writes: "This text, aimed at parents and professionals make the point on the current knowledge in the area of share custody for babies. / Several of these works were published between 1945 and 1950, and their validity has therefore been confirmed with a sufficient perspective.". Everybody can notice that the works dating from after 1950 have not been found up to this day, they would have "validated" these "knowledge" !
Example 2: The psychoanalysts Mario Speranza and Lisa Ouss-Ryngaert thus say [33]: "The growing interest for the work of Bowlby can be explained by the ability of his theory to integrate psychoanalytic understanding of affective and relational reciprocity l mother/child with the studies on the post-piagetian cognitive development thus providing the basis for most of the current research on cognitive-emotional skills of children.". It is therefore clear that psychoanalysts keep of the Attachment Theory what really interests them as "The link mother/child" and the alleged ability of the Attachment Theory to integrate psychoanalysis!
Example 3: Bernard Golse develops an “attachment instinct theory" [34] in indicating that these two theories (Instinct Theory and Attachment theory) which are contradictory ... would not ultimately be opposed ! According to him, the attachment could serve as a "conceptual bridge between the theory of attachment and the Object relations theory, because the attachment would be played between self-preservation and sexual instinct ... the attachment then appears as the motion of a life instinct not yet libidinalised in anaclisis mechanisms ...". Bringing forward the alleged existence of an attachment instinct theory obviously comes to mean the attachment is instinct!
Not only they try to dilute the modern Attachment Theory in psychoanalytic theory, other psychoanalysts will even trivialize the exclusion of John Bowlby from their own community as if it was a false repressed memory!
Theories of instincts, anaclisis, object relations, instinct of attachment, etc. have no scientific validity [3]. These are pure psychoanalytic theories. Without any evidence, none of them is validated in the field of scientific psychology. None of them has never been published in a specialized magazine of high level. These theories exist only in the ideological convictions and in the logorrhoea of the most dogmatics psychoanalysts.
6) The judiciary practices under psychoanalytic influence
Therefore, the current judicial practices do not conform with the child’s best interest. The indicators of the suffering of children from separated parents educated by one of their parents are grouped in a synthetic text accessible here: see this note [35]. We can also realize it from reading the latest report of the Ministry of Justice [36]. It is specified that judges reject shared custody for various reasons including: "the age of the child," and "the bad relations between the parents"… But these contra-indications only come from arguments which are used by associations of psychoanalysts such as those mentioned above and not from the psychology of development [37]!
For young children, developmental psychologists who worked on the subject of parental separations recommend the alternation between each parent when it is possible with a periodicity of one day per year of age ... Note also that when an infant goes to day nursery, it is already an alternation in which the infant is faced with strangers, sometimes up twelve hours a day [38].
For the confrontational situations, some psychoanalysts claim that the scientific study of Gerard Poussin [20] would prove it is not recommended to set up a share custody in case of parental conflict. That is anothe another lie. Mr. Poussin’s research only proves children in share custody have a better self-esteem.
In addition to the 20% of children who cannot see their father [39], each year approximately 1000 fathers commit suicide after having lost all their links with their children [40]. All scientific studies [3] concerning suicide point out the loss of family landmarks is one of the aggravating factors of suicide.
7) Conclusion
The bases of the freudian metapsychological construction are the sexual instinct and the different libidinals stages (psychoanalysis of development). We can beat the issue to death , that will be always true for all honest readers of Freud. On this subjective basis , Freud has suggested a theory of psychic development as one of the fundamentals of psychoanalysis. But Freud's contributions were focused on specific problems. In addition, he used a method of observation in which his clinical sensitivity played a crucial role in his observations. His observations were so much charged of interpretations of academic psychologists (Osofsky, 1982) that even psychoanalysts (Gedo, 1980) considered that they were extremely biased by methodological problems.
The sexual instinct is at the origin of the object relation because the object of the instinct is what will relieve the tension produced by this latter. The modern theory of the attachment shows,illustrated by experimental evidence , that the child is attached to prime(s) object(s) of love, not for reasons of instinct, but because he is surrounded by these persons (geographically present). Therefore, it is a reversal. This is not the libido which creates the relation ... it is the relation which makes possible the further sexuality!
Freud and psychoanalysis should have remained in history such as alchemy compared to chemistry. This has not been the case. Therefore, the Judges of the Family Court and the Judges for children have a responsibility to free themselves from the influence of psychoanalysis to take into account the contribution of the psychology of development: Chantal Zaouche-Gaudron , Gerard Poussin, Jean Camus, Richard HAS Warshak, Edward Kruk, Daniel Paquette, Robert Bauserman, William Fabricius, Linda A Nielsen, Joan B. Kelly, Michael E. Lamb, Blaise Pierrehumbert, etc.
The magistrates concerned to judge according to the best interests of the child, those likely to anticipate correctly the risks resulting from this conflict between psychoanalysis and scientific psychology, and those of the National School for the Judiciary should not hesitate to question the Health Authority: "Are the psychoanalyses (Freudian, Lacanian, jungian, etc. ) are part of the ecommended interventions to appreciate in the most accurate way the needs of the child in parenthood when it is particularly question of parental separation?".
Freud in his time and in ours ! - Free right...
Agrandissement : Illustration 3
Anaclisis theory
----------------------
[1] HAS : Haute Autorité de Santé
[2] ENM : Ecole Nationale de la Magistrature
[3] Une discipline est scientifique à partir du moment où elle apporte la preuve de ses concepts et dans la mesure où elle tient compte des critiques et des découvertes récentes. Ce n’est pas le cas de la psychanalyse qui n’est fondée que sur des dogmes.
[4] DSM III : Troisième révision du Manuel Diagnostique et Statistique des Troubles Mentaux
[5] INSERM : Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale Psychothérapie
[6] INSERM - Trois approches évaluées. Paris : Éditions de l’Inserm, 568 pages
[7] Recherche Google : Maurice Berger chef de file - Lien
[8] Pierre Laroche - Médiapart - Les psychanalystes fonctionnent en réseau : Lien
[9] APPEA : Association francophone de Psychologie et Psychopathologie de l’Enfant et de l’Adolescent
[10] COPES : Centre d’Ouverture Psychologique et Sociale
[11] WAIMH.fr : Branche francophone de la World Association for Mental Infant Health
[12] Ministère de la Justice - Direction des Affaires Civiles et du Sceau - Pôle d’Evaluation de la Justice Civile - La résidence des enfants de parents séparés - De la demande des parents à la décision du juge - Exploitation des décisions définitives rendues par les juges aux affaires familiales au cours de la période comprise entre le 4 juin et le 15 juin 2012 - Maud Guillonneau et Caroline Moreau - Novembre 2013 (voir page 31)
[13] Pierre Laroche - Médiapart - Marc Juston et le Centre d’Analyse Stratégique trompés par les écrits d'une ex-sage-femme et quelques pédo-psychanalystes ! Lien
[14] Pierre Laroche - Médiapart - Faux et usage de psychanalyse : Lien
[15] Pierre Laroche - Médiapart - L’usurpation du nom de Brazelton par le psychanalyste Maurice Berger : Lien
[16] Pierre Laroche - Médiapart - Pétition des 5500 charlatans, loi famille et psychanalyse ! Lien
[17] SFPEADA : Société Française de Psychiatrie de l’Enfant et de l’Adolescent et Disciplines Associées
[18] FNEPE : Fédération Nationale des Écoles des Parents et des Educateurs
[19] Pierre Laroche - Médiapart - Le lobbying de la psychanalyse sur les décisions de justice familiale : Lien
[20] Poussin, G. ; Lebrun-Martin, E. 2002. « A french study of children’s self-esteem after parental separation », International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 16, 313-326.
[21] Le Séminaire - Livre XVII - L’envers de la psychanalyse - Seuil - 1970 - Page 129
[22] Pierre Laroche - Médiapart - La parentalité en psychanalyse : Lien
[23] Pierre Laroche -Médiapart - Liste des principaux indicateurs des effets de la garde classique (1 WE sur 2) sur les familles : Lien
[24] Cours étudiants en Soins Infirmiers - Le développement psychosocial de l'enfant : Lien
[25] Il s’agit des théories de Bateson (école de Palo Alto) inspirées de la théorie générale des systèmes de Ludwig von Bertalanffy.
[26] René Zazzo - L'attachement - 1979
[27] Serban Ionescu - René Zazzo et la psychologie clinique - Enfance - Tome 49 - n°2 - 1996. Page : 223
[28] Mario Speranza et Lisa Ouss-Ryngaert - La psychologie du développement et les théories psychanalytiques du développement : le problème de l'inférence et de la cohérence épistémologique - Presses Universitaires de France - La psychiatrie de l'enfant - Janvier 2010 - Vol. 53 - Page 13
[29] Bernard Golse - Entre psychanalyse et attachement, le concept de pulsion d’attachement comme moyen de penser la symbolisation en absence et en présence de l’objet - Texte rédigé pour la revue « Dialogue » - Page 6
[30] Bernard Golse - Attachement et psychanalyse impact sur la rencontre avec les bébés et les adolescents - Texte présenté à la Journée d'Etude du GERCPEA à Luxembourg le 23 novembre 2001.
[31] Etude du Professeur de Psychologie William Fabricius (2003) référencée dans Children’s Living Arrangements Following Separation and Divorce: Insights From Empirical and Clinical Research - Joan B. Kelly - 2007: Lien
[32] Maurice Berger - Le droit d'hébergement du père concernant un bébé - Août 2003
[33] Mario Speranza et Lisa Ouss-Ryngaert - La psychologie du développement et les théories psychanalytiques du développement : le problème de l'inférence et de la cohérence épistémologique - Presses Universitaires de France - La psychiatrie de l'enfant - Janvier 2010 - Vol. 53 - Pages 5 à 29
[34] Bernard Golse - Entre psychanalyse et attachement, le concept de pulsion d’attachement comme moyen de penser la symbolisation en absence et en présence de l’objet - Texte rédigé pour la revue « Dialogue » - 2010 - Lien
[35] Pierre Laroche - Médiapart - Liste des principaux indicateurs des effets de la garde classique (1 WE sur 2) sur les familles : Lien
[36] Ministère de la Justice - Direction des Affaires Civiles et du Sceau - Pôle d’Evaluation de la Justice Civile - La résidence des enfants de parents séparés - De la demande des parents à la décision du juge - Exploitation des décisions définitives rendues par les juges aux affaires familiales au cours de la période comprise entre le 4 juin et le 15 juin 2012 - Maud Guillonneau et Caroline Moreau - Novembre 2013 (voir page 29)
[37] Pierre Laroche - Médiapart - Liste des principaux indicateurs des effets de la résidence alternée sur les familles : Lien
[38] DREES et LAPSS - La garde des enfants en dehors des plages horaires standard - Études et résultats N° 551 - janvier 2007 : Lien
[39] INED - Quand la séparation des parents s’accompagne d’une rupture du lien entre le père et l’enfant - mai 2013
[40] Travaux préparatoires à l’élaboration du Plan Violence et Santé en application de la loi relative à la politique de santé publique du 9 août 2004 - Docteur Anne TURSZ - Mai 2005 - approuvé par le Ministère de la Santé et des Solidarités - Vers page 71
-