A Multidisciplinary Perspective on the Role,Functions, and Effectiveness of Parenting Coordination

Based on a survey conducted in 2018 in collaboration with the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts’ (AFCC) Task Force on Parenting Coordination, this paper explores issues related to the process and perceived outcomes of parenting coordination for families post separation and divorce. The views expressed emerge from a diverse and multidisciplinary sample (n = 289) from legal, mental health, and conflict resolution backgrounds. Almost half of all participants (46%) were mental health professionals (psychologist, psychiatrist, social worker), followed by attorneys (28%), family mediators (17%) and judges (5%). Over half of all participants identified as a parenting coordinator (PC) (53%). Based on the results, participants had the highest level of agreement that the goal of parenting coordination should be to assist in sheltering the children from parental conflict and to help the coparents reduce interparental conflict. Participants assigned greater success to parenting coordination when there was demonstration that coparenting conflict decreased. Several differences were noted among professional disciplines and specifically between legal and mental health professionals. Mental health professionals rated higher on the effectiveness of PCs to help children adjust and limit their involvement in the parental conflict, while legal professionals focused on PCs’ ability to help families resolve legal disputes. The implications of the results are discussed, including how best to measure the success of parenting coordination and to prioritize outcomes related to the success of parenting coordination across disciplines to create greater consistency in the field.     

Building and Enhancing Efficacious Coparenting in Parenting Coordination

Parenting coordination is a dispute resolution process to assist the subset of separating/divorcing parents who remain entrenched in high conflict coparenting post‐separation/divorce. Based on factors known to impact positive child outcomes, its goals include assisting parents to protect children from their conflict and implementing a framework that will assist the child to have a good relationship with both parents. Despite significant efforts, parenting coordination often falls short of achieving its intended goals, which include not only healthy child adjustment but also efficacious coparenting, which is itself an important mediator and moderator of child outcomes. This article raises questions and concerns about the extent to which child outcomes may be limited if the goals of parenting coordination are limited to establishing and implementing a disengaged, parallel model of coparenting, while avoiding or giving up on efforts to build and enhance cooperative coparenting. Given preliminary findings indicating some parents note change here express dissatisfaction with the process and outcomes, it is necessary to consider whether the seemingly intractable subset of parents referred for parenting coordination might benefit from something more or different. We discuss two innovations: One aims to strengthen individual parent readiness and responsiveness and the other brings parents together in a child‐centered team‐building approach. Though cooperative coparenting is a challenging and unrealistic goal for some parents, further research is necessary to understand more fully which interventions help which families, when and in what manner.     

Parenting Coordination In Cases Involving Intimate Partner Violence

Parenting Coordination is a “hybrid legal‐mental health role that combines assessment, education, case management, conflict management, dispute resolution and, often times, decision‐making functions (AFCC, 2019, https://www.afccnet.org/Portals/0/PublicDocuments/Guidelines%20for%20PC%20with%20Appendex.pdf?ver=2020-01-30-190220-990 ). This article addresses issues that arise when the case has allegations or findings of intimate partner violence (IPV). Considerations of the type of IPV, the severity, timing, perpetrator and effects on coparenting are discussed in the context of the parenting coordinator's role. Through screening and assessment, we differentiate the kinds of cases with the presence of IPV where a PC may be effective as opposed to other IPV cases that may not predict success for retaining a PC.     

Perspectives of Mothers,Fathers, and Parenting Coordinators Concerning the Process and Impact of Parenting Coordination

In a small pilot study, 31 interviewees, including 12 parenting coordinators, 11 mothers, and 8 fathers representing 14 different parenting coordination cases retrospectively described child and family functioning both pre‐ and post‐parenting coordination in phone interviews. They also detailed how often and how well different issues that arose during the parenting coordination work (acrimony, problem‐solving communication, triangulation of the child into the conflict) were actively addressed. Parties tended to view coparenting more positively when reflecting on post‐ compared with pre‐intervention, but reported less change in child adjustment. Discrepancy among same‐case informant reports was common. Parenting coordinators (PCs) consistently rated their interventions as more frequent and successful than did parents. Mothers and fathers largely disagreed on interventions they experienced. While this small N pilot can offer no definitive conclusions, it underscores need for research and wisdom in including both parents' perspectives.     

LEGISLATING FOR SHARED PARENTING: EXPLORING SOME UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS

In 2006, the Australian parliament introduced new family law legislation about substantively shared overnight parenting arrangements between divorced couples. Other countries and state legislatures are currently debating the merits of similar legislation. A largely unquestionable premise underpins this reform, namely that the majority of children from separated families demonstrably benefit from the ongoing, warm and available involvement of both parents, in a climate of well-managed interparental conflict. The Australian legislation moves beyond encouragement of shared parenting in divorce cases with adequately functioning parents; it extends into grey areas which, to date, remain poorly serviced by credible research, including its application to children of all ages and to parents experiencing significant levels of ongoing conflict. Drawing on data from a longitudinal high-conflict divorce sample, this article challenges three assumptions that underpin a legislative preference for shared parenting, that shared parenting is viable and sustainable for divorced parents in conflict, that shared care enables improved cooperation between parents, and that as a result children will be less affected by their parents' conflict. The article further explores the influence of the mediation process on the choice and durability of shared parenting arrangements.     

Duel or Dual: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Parenting Coordination for Uber‐Conflicted Parenting Relationships

Parenting coordination for families struggling with severe conflict can be challenging for both the family and the parenting coordinator (PC). These families can put an inordinate strain on the PC as they lobby their positions and try to bias the PC against the other parent. The interdisciplinary dual‐PC model is an innovative approach using aspects of the collaborative practice model to enhance the efficacy of the process while utilizing the strengths of both disciplines. Through a case illustration, the identification of the family dynamics and situations that give rise to use of this approach shall become clear. This article also demonstrates the potential benefits to both the family and the PCs. All aspects synthesize into a cohesive, well‐balanced approach to the uber‐conflicted parenting relationships.     

Critical Review of Research Evidence of Parenting Coordination's Effectiveness

Parenting coordination (PC) has been in use since the mid‐1980s, but research on its effectiveness is sorely lacking. We review the extant research organized by three themes: (1) parenting coordinators’ perceptions of their role and function; (2) professionals’ and parents’ views and perceptions of PC; and (3) outcomes of PC, including some measures of effectiveness of the PC process. While these studies provide some insight into PC effectiveness, there is still a lack of research that uses objective outcome measures of efficacy and that considers characteristics of the co‐parent dyad, personality difficulties, or the professional discipline of the parenting coordinator. Future research recommendations are discussed.     

Court‐Based Interventions in Spain for Families in Divorce Transition: Challenges in the Implementation of (Co)‐Parenting Coordination

Families facing separation or divorce in Spain encounter a number of obstacles, including a primarily adversarial and slow justice system, nonspecialized courts and judges, and a lack of resources to help them through the process. Recent legislation at the regional level (autonomous communities) is moving toward emphasizing shared parental responsibility and introducing parenting plans, while at the national level, legislation advances slowly. One of the main challenges professionals are facing in high‐conflict couple separation is protecting children from the effects of being in the middle of their parents’ conflict. Traditional psychological, legal, and social services are insufficient to support parents and protect their children from interparental hostile conflict—which can be exacerbated by litigation, professional intervention, domestic violence, or addiction. This article illustrates, through a case study, the implementation of parenting coordination in Spain. Different jurisdictions in Spain are slowly implementing (co‐)parenting coordination, an in‐depth intervention designed to support these families. The objective is to help families focus on children's needs and follow the court‐approved parenting plans or court orders, reduce relitigation, and improve parental communication and conflict resolution skills. This article analyzes different aspects and challenges relating to the implementation of parenting coordination in Spain. Recommendations are then made to address them.     

ETHICAL, LEGAL, AND PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE ISSUES INVOLVED IN ACTING AS A PSYCHOLOGIST PARENT COORDINATOR IN CHILD CUSTODY CASES

The use of Psychologist Parent Coordinators in child custody cases (called Special Masters in California) is becoming increasingly prevalent across the country. This postdivorce parenting coordination role is a legal/psychological hybrid, demanding knowledge and skill in legal domains (legal procedure, relevant case law, etc.), psychological domains (child development, family systems, etc.), and dispute resolution (mediation and settlement processes). Situated in the interface of legal and psychological paradigms, Parent Coordination may be reviewed by multiple legal and psychological regulatory bodies. Coming from varying perspectives, the practice guidelines and mandates of these legal, ethical, and licensing agencies impose multiple standards of review of Parent Coordination. A brief overview of the legal and psychological review processes applicable to Special Master work in California, as they relate to common issues that confront the Parenting Coordinator across the country, is the focus of this article. They suggest that the current lack of coordination of review processes creates a minefield of professional risk for the psychologist who chooses to practice in this role.     

PARENTING COORDINATION: IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES1

The parenting coordinator model (“PC model”) has been implemented in many states as an intervention for dealing with high conflict families in domestic relations proceedings before the courts. The PC model has been repeatedly recommended by professionals as an intervention to help families structure, implement, and monitor viable parenting plans and to reduce relitigation rates where high conflict threatens the family adjustment process. This article summarizes current professional literature on the PC model and discusses the PC model as it has been implemented in various states, outlining the implementation issues encountered. This information may serve as a guide for determining the feasibility of establishing the PC model in other jurisdictions, and provides insight into potential impediments and possible resolutions.     

“Just Describing is Not Enough”: Policy Learning,Transfer, and the Limits of Best Practices

Despite widespread use in the cultural field, best practices remain theoretically and empirically under-researched. The aim of this article is to achieve better understanding of their use and effectiveness in policy learning and transfer, using a case study of a cross-national policy coordination process in the European Union, the Open Method of Coordination. Using empirical data from interview and participant observation material, the article highlights several fundamental challenges of best practices, such as issues of contextualization, representativeness, and critical analysis. It finishes by offering six critical reflection questions on the use of best practices.     

Female inmates, family caregivers, and young children's adjustment: A research agenda and implications for corrections programming

Attendant to the exponential increase in rates of incarceration of mothers with young children in the United States, programming has been established to help mothers attend to parenting skills and other family concerns while incarcerated. Unfortunately, most programs overlook the important, ongoing relationship between incarcerated mothers and family members caring for their children—most often, the inmates' own mothers. Research reveals that children's behavior problems escalate when different co-caregivers fail to coordinate parenting efforts and interventions, work in opposition, or disparage or undermine one another. This article presents relevant research on co-caregiving and child adjustment, highlights major knowledge gaps in need of study to better understand incarcerated mothers and their families, and proposes that existing interventions with such mothers can be strengthened through targeting and cultivating functional coparenting alliances in families.     

Emerging Parenting Coordination Practices Around the Globe: What We Have Learned

Parenting coordination is emerging in numerous countries around the globe as a response to the need to protect children in families whose parents experience high conflict following their separation or divorce. This article describes the different trends in the implementation of parenting coordination programs in Canada, Spain, and Italy and the socio‐legal contexts in which they have evolved. An analysis will also be presented of the unique challenges faced by these countries and the ensuing debates on issues related to the referral process, legal procedures, decision‐making authority, judicial immunity, confidentiality, and professional requirements and training for the appointment of parenting coordinators. The authors will present what has been learned from their respective experiences and make recommendations to promote continued development.     

TRAINING,SKILLS, AND PRACTICES OF PARENTING COORDINATORS: FLORIDA STATEWIDE STUDY

This report details findings from the nation's first statewide study on parenting coordination. A survey was presented to all known practicing parenting coordinators (PCs) in Florida (N = 207), with 67 (32%) responding. Data concerning PC demographics, how PCs do their work, and how they perceive their clients at different stages of the parenting coordination process suggest substantial similarity between mental health and family law professionals in almost every realm of questioning. Study limitations, implications for further research, and practice considerations are discussed.     

COPARENTING ARRANGEMENTS IN A JURISDICTION WITH STATUTORY GUIDELINES

Some states have recently moved away from the traditional winner-loser model of child custody to one focused on coparenting. Under the old approach, divorce decrees typically "awarded" custody to one parent while relegating the other to a "visitor" with poorly defined status. The new system is premised on the child's need for a continuing relationship with both parents and promotes this goal by upgrading the noncustodial parent's status and time-share, assigning substantive rights and responsibilities to both parents. To give effect to the shared parenting idea, Texas adopted joint custody and statutory visitation guidelines legislatively. The policy covers all major aspects of parental rights and duties with great specificity (not just child support, for which all states must have guidelines). It applies equally to divorce and paternity cases. Judges are authorized to deviate from standard visitation guidelines but must state a rationale for doing so on request. Parties may also negotiate and agree to arrangements at variance with the guidelines, subject to approval by the court. This article describes the statutory regime in Texas and its implementation in the family court system. Based on a sample of divorce and paternity cases in the state's largest jurisdiction, it documents innovative court interventions and a wide array of coparenting and support arrangements.     

New AFCC Guidelines for Parenting Coordination (2019)

In 2017, AFCC President Annette Burns (2017–18) commissioned a Task Force, led by Dr. Debra Carter, to review the many changes and developments in parenting coordination that had occurred across the United States, in Canada, and across the world in the approximately 12 years since the 2005 Parenting Coordination Guidelines were released. Though primarily commissioned to update and revise the 2005 Guidelines, the Task Force also identified emerging issues in need of exploration – the use of technology in parenting coordination, parenting coordination as an intervention when intimate partner violence is a component of the dynamic, the importance of multicultural awareness and responsiveness, and the overall impact of the statutes, rules, and regulations that had evolved in significantly varying forms since parenting coordination first presented as an intervention for court‐involved families. The work of the Task Force, including the new (2019) Guidelines for Parenting Coordination, is presented.     

Parenting Coordination and Confidentiality: A (Not‐so) Delicate Balance

This article describes the current state and range of information protection in the growing number of states and Canadian provinces that employ parenting coordination in an effort to reduce repeat custody litigation. The predominant approach—in which what is revealed during the process is not confidential—is analyzed in terms of its compatibility with the parenting coordinator's multiple tasks of educating parents, seeking to facilitate agreements, and, if necessary, providing the court with a report, a recommended decision, or an arbitrated result. Using a case scenario with multiple parts, the article then examines such confidentiality schemes in practice by providing an action‐oriented series of questions that illustrate how much of this topic must be resolved through a parenting coordinator's exercise of discretion in the absence of rule clarity. The article then raises a number of policy questions about whether current parenting coordination confidentiality norms strike the optimal or even the correct balance on information protection and concludes by identifying several policy options that might address these questions.     

The Impact of Safe Harbor Legislation on Court Proceedings Involving Sex Trafficked Youth: A Qualitative Investigation of Judicial Perspectives

The passage of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) facilitated the conceptual shift in reframing youth involved in sex trafficking as victims, rather than criminals. Many states have passed legislation in the form of Safe Harbor laws to protect sex trafficked juveniles from criminal charges and provide rehabilitative services (Polaris, 2015). Nevertheless, limited research has examined the impact of Safe Harbor laws and the role juvenile and family court judges play in how minor victims of sex trafficking are treated by the court system. Consequently, the purpose of this qualitative study was to examine juvenile and family court judges’ knowledge and perceptions of Safe Harbor legislation and identify legal challenges when presiding over cases involving sexually exploited youth. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with a national sample (N = 82) of family and juvenile court judges. Findings suggest that respondents perceive Safe Harbor laws to have positively affected both attitudes and practices, although several challenges and unintended negative effects were identified. Further, dispositional issues, difficulties with case identification, legal and policy issues, and challenges with interagency collaboration were identified as ongoing issues to address. Legal implications as well as practice and policy considerations based on the study findings are discussed.     

“MORE OF A STREET COP THAN A DETECTIVE”: AN ANALYSIS OF THE ROLES AND FUNCTIONS OF PARENTING COORDINATORS IN NORTH CAROLINA

This research project examined roles and functions of parenting coordinators (PCs) identified by AFCC's Guidelines for Parenting Coordination and other literature. The researcher used a semi‐structured interview schedule that included information about practices, procedures, and a series of five case‐based vignettes that contained commonly occurring ethical and legal dilemmas in PC practice. The results found that PCs generally saw their role as enforcers of existing orders and primarily used skills in conflict management, parent education, and information coordination with other professionals. PCs would use arbitration powers to make minor decisions or refer to court as a last resort.