Safe or sorry? Rights,responsibilities and retribution—the new three Rs of education in New Zealand?

A school is a microcosm of society and thus is subject to the problems existing within society generally. The rights and responsibilities of persons outside the school gates apply within the school also. The school environment is unique in that not only is a young person compelled to attend but he or she must spend a great deal of each day within the school's jurisdiction. May it then be argued that there is an enhanced responsibility of schools towards the emotional and physical welfare of their students in relation to matters within their control? This article will examine whether a New Zealand public school has a responsibility that extends further than a moral duty for the safety of its students. Particularly it will consider a school's potential liability in respect of the various forms of student‐to‐student bullying and harassment. It examines the potential for an action against a school under human rights legislation, at common law, and in criminal law.     

“I WANT MY MOMMIES”: THE CRY FOR MINI‐DOMAS TO RECOGNIZE THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILDREN OF SAME‐SEX COUPLES*

In child custody cases, courts will look to the best interests of a child to maintain visitation/custody rights only with the child's biological parent, not third parties. However, with a same‐sex couple, it is inevitable that one parent will not be the biological parent. Thus, when that parent is in a mini‐DOMA state, where same‐sex couples from non‐mini‐DOMA states do not have to be recognized, that parent will be viewed as a third party and lose all visitation/custody rights if the couple separates. This note advocates that mini‐DOMAs allow both the biological and nonbiological parents of a same‐sex couple to have visitation/custody rights of their children if it would be in the best interest of the children to do so.     

Rights,responsibilities and regulation – the three Rs of education: a consideration of the state's control over parental choice in education

Education is both a right and a responsibility. International instruments such as the International covenant on civil and political rights and the International convention on the rights of the child affirm the right of all children to education. This right is spelt out in the education legislation of all states and territories in Australia. Education is not only free but is compulsory for all children between certain ages. The obligation is imposed on parents (in accordance with definitions contained therein) to ensure that their children are both enrolled at and attend school. However, parental choice of education provider is allowed within each jurisdiction by way of state, private or church schools, all of which are registered and regulated to varying degrees by the state. The legislation of each jurisdiction also makes some degree of provision for parents who choose to opt out their children from any formal education setting and to educate them at home. Home education is also subject to state regulation. The assumption by the state of the responsibility for education guides this policy and legislation. The argument for state control of all education, no matter how and by whom it is provided, is that the state has an overriding interest in ensuring the economic well-being of its citizens and the growth of its intellectual capital. The state acknowledges that the responsibility for education is shared with parents, primarily by providing penalties for parents who fail to ensure enrolment and attendance of their children at a school. There is evidence that more and more parents in developed countries worldwide are choosing to educate their children at home, and anecdotal evidence suggests that Australia is part of this trend. To this end, this article critically examines the balance and relationship between the exercise of parental choice and responsibility in education, and state regulation and control. It does so by examining the means by which the legislation of different jurisdictions allows for choice in the exercise of the right to education, with particular reference to home education, places limitations on that choice and imposes control on the delivery of education outside state schools.     

THE EVOLUTION—OR END—OF MARRIAGE?: REFLECTIONS ON THE IMPASSE OVER SAME‐SEX MARRIAGE

The debate over legalizing same‐sex marriage implicates the question of whether doing so would signal the end—or destruction—of the institution of marriage. The appeal to preserving a millennia‐old tradition of marriage against change fails to reckon with the evolution that has already occurred. Invocations of gender complementarity between parents as essential to child well‐being also conflict with growing recognition in family law that children's best interests can be served by gay and lesbian parents. Canada's path toward same‐sex marriage suggests that impasse need not be inevitable. In the United States, this impasse stems in part from the problem that same‐sex marriage serves as an emblem of everything that threatens marriage.     

Blood Will Not Justify My Relation: Same‐Sex Couples and their Battle for Standing as De Facto Parents

A parent's right to maintain a relationship with his/her child lies within the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution; however, this right does not apply to every type of parent. Although the U.S. Supreme Court granted same‐sex couples the right to marry, they still face parental rights issues when their child(ren) are nonbiological or nonadoptive because they lack standing for custody and/or visitation as de facto parents. Moreover, the rise of nontraditional same‐sex‐couple families has been placing states in a predicament, and the lack of uniform rights for de facto parents creates great inconsistency across the United States. The creation of a uniform statute with specific elements distinguishing de facto parents from mere caretakers will grant same‐sex nonbiological parents standing and create uniformity across the United States.     

THE KIDS' TURN PROGRAM EVALUATION: PROBING CHANGE WITHIN A COMMUNITY‐BASED INTERVENTION FOR SEPARATING FAMILIES

We provide evaluation results for Kids' Turn, a community‐based divorcing parent education program. Based on pre‐ and post‐test results from 61 parents, we found that parents reported improvements over time in interparental conflict, the number of topics parents argue about, parental alienation behaviors, parent anxiety and depression, and children's internalizing behaviors. These changes over time remained after we accounted for child sex, parent and child age, and time since separation. However, we did not observe any change in parenting behaviors. We discuss these results in light of factors influencing the ability of community‐based programs to affect change in families after divorce.     

When I grow up… I don't want to be broke: The problems with child actor trust fund requirements

Child actors have consistently been treated as typical minority laborers, with all of their earnings legally belonging to their parents. After many child actors were left with scraps at the end of their minority, Coogan's law was enacted in California to require parents of child actors to withhold some of their earnings in a trust. However, almost a century after Coogan's law was passed, there are still many child actors left with nothing. This Note proposes to both enact further union regulations to protect child actors in every state, and also to raise the required amount withheld from fifteen percent (15%) to fifty percent (50%).     

The Chat Room Moderator: Creating a Duty for Parents to Control Their Cyberbully

The advent of new technologies allowing people to communicate via the Internet has opened many windows to social interaction. At the same time, it has shifted the focus of child harassment from the playground to the computer. Instead of face‐to‐face bullying, children are now being bullied on the Internet, in a phenomenon known as “cyberbullying.” Cyberbullying is widespread, affecting generally twenty‐five percent of the child population in the United States. It is also more dangerous, as a child can be bullied at any time in the supposed comfort of his/her own home. To combat this behavior, many states have passed measures to ban or criminalize cyberbullying in school‐related settings. Nevertheless, children and adolescents continue to cyberbully their peers. Furthermore, most of these statutes do not address cyberbullying that occurs outside school or from a child's own home. Thus, this Note proposes that cyberbullying can be better combated by placing responsibility on parents to reasonably control their children in cases of cyberbullying. Based on the recently enacted ‘Cyber‐safety Act” from the Canadian Province of Nova Scotia and Restatement of Torts § 316, this Note proposes (1) placing tort responsibility on parents who know that their child is a cyberbully and do nothing about it and (2) allowing parents to avoid liability when their child truly cannot be controlled.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• Cyberbullying is a major problem that must be addressed beyond the schoolyard.
• The law may provide recourse for the parents of a cyberbullying victim and can hold the parents of a cyberbully responsible.
• The Nova Scotia Cyber‐safety Act is a good model for holding parents liable for their child's acts because it balances the desire to end cyberbullying and the understanding that some minors are uncontrollable.

     

PUNCHING THE PARENTING TIME CLOCK: THE APPROXIMATION RULE,SOCIAL SCIENCE,AND THE BASEBALL BAT KIDS*

The American Law Institute proposes that in contested physical custody cases the court should allocate to each parent a proportion of the child's time that approximates the proportion of time each has spent performing caretaking functions in the past. Examined through the lens of child development research, the approximation rule is unlikely to improve on the best interests standard. It is difficult to apply; is perceived as gender‐biased; creates a new focus for disputing parents; renders a poor estimate of parents’ contributions to their child's best interests; overlooks parents’ intangible, yet significant, contributions to their child's well‐being; and miscalculates the essence of how a child experiences the family. A preferable alternative is a better defined, contemporary best interests standard that accommodates new knowledge and reforms that encourage nonadversarial, individualized resolutions of custody disputes.     

Why Requiring Parents to Pay for Postsecondary Education is Unconstituional and Bad Policy

For divorced parents, the question of who should pay for their child's college tuition is very difficult, especially when the issue was never addressed in their separation agreement. Consequently, some states allow judges the discretion to extend child support duties for noncustodial parents after considering certain factors. Such factors may lead to the requirement of parental contributions to their child's postsecondary education. While many states have amended their statutes to encompass extended child support, Pennsylvania is the only state to have found their statute unconstitutional. Based on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision in Curtis v. Kline, this Note argues that, in order to diminish inequalities between divorced and nondivorced parents, as well as between children of divorced and nondivorced parents, all states should amend their child support statutes to declare that no parent is obligated to pay for his/her child's postsecondary education, unless voluntarily agreed to, in writing, prior to the child entering college.     

Raised By a Predator: Sex Offender Parents and an Effort To Keep Them Out of the Child's Home

Registered sex offenders are obligated to comply with rules put forth by their state's registry. While there are stringent guidelines regarding the offender's interaction with the public, a sex offender's ability to obtain custody of their child is less rigid. Statutes differ on the level of scrutiny referencing their right to parent, which leaves an opening for offenders to abuse their child. This Note proposes the adoption of a model statute in which registered Tier III sex offender parents who were convicted for a crime involving a minor are precluded from gaining physical or legal custody of their child.     

STATE CHILD EMOTIONAL ABUSE LAWS: THEIR FAILURE TO PROTECT CHILDREN WITH GENDER IDENTITY DISORDER

Emotional abuse of children with Gender Identity Disorder by parents is very difficult to identify and prevent. State investigators of abuse and neglect often have a hard time determining if the reasons for mental illness and psychological harm in children are due to the actions of their parents, or if they stem from other sources. Once identified, it becomes even harder to prove in court for purposes of ordering services or removing the child from the home if the abuse is severe enough. With children who are gender non‐conforming, this task becomes exponentially more difficult due to the low prevalence rate, discrimination, stereotypes, and a parent's right to bring up their child as they choose. These youth face discrimination and violence in school, work, their communities, and also within their own families. Emotional abuse statutes are too vague to protect youth who are gender non‐conforming. The vague and unclear laws lead to inconsistency in the application of the law and lack of protection of the children because judges and investigators are not aware of how parent's actions harms youth with gender identity disorder. Therefore, states should adopt the model statute within this Note which defines specific actions by parents which would not qualify as abuse when involving gender conforming youth but qualifies as abuse for children with gender identity disorder. Many states already have statutes which define physical abuse, sexual abuse and abandonment by specific actions by parents towards their children. This proposal will enable both the state and the judges to properly identify victims with gender identity disorder of emotional abuse and provide for their protection.     

Who made the disclosure? Recorded discussions between children and caretakers suspecting child abuse

Within investigations of suspected child abuse, the child's account is often at the core of the judicial process. When analysing the child's account, it is therefore important to consider how parents may have discussed the suspected abuse prior to the official investigation. However, no studies up to the present time have investigated discussions in real cases where parents suspect that their children have been abused. We analysed a sample (N = 19) of recorded conversations between parents and their children, delivered to the police as evidence for alleged physical or sexual abuse. Analyses of the questions used and the information provided in the discussions showed that the parent's strategies when questioning their children were extremely leading and that in the majority of the cases, all new information was provided by the parents. In spite of this, the parents deemed the recorded conversations as records of the children's accounts. While the sample was small and likely to be unrepresentative of child abuse suspicions in general, the findings have important practical implications. The results indicate that when planning an interview in a case where the alleged abuse relies on what a child allegedly has told a parent, particular caution should be taken when referring to these conversations.     

Saved By the Bell: Reclaiming Home Court Advantage for At‐Risk Youth Funneled into the School‐to‐Prison Pipeline

Far too often, minority students are faced with punitive disciplinary actions and are consequently directed to the “school‐to‐prison” pipeline. From education to discipline, implementation of policies that criminalize minor delinquent behavior pushes these students out of school and into the juvenile justice system. Traditional disciplinary actions that would land students in the principal's office have gradually transformed to students being handcuffed and thrown in jail. This Note proposes a model statute requiring states with a high criminal delinquency rate to implement school‐based youth courts in public high schools.     

Associations between Parent and Child Reports Of Interparental Conflict/Violence And Child Difficulties in A Family Mediation Setting*

We examined the association between parents’ (N = 52 mothers and 52 fathers) and children's (N = 27) reports of interparental conflict and child difficulties in a family mediation setting. Parents’ reports of conflict were moderately associated with children's reports of exposure to parental conflict, but only fathers’ reports of conflict were associated with children's reports of negative responses to parent conflict. While mothers and fathers agreed on their child's difficulties, only mothers’, not fathers’, report of child difficulties were moderately related to child reports of child difficulties. Mothers’ and fathers’ reports of conflict generally were not strongly associated with reports of child difficulties. In contrast to parent reports, children's reports of exposure to parents’ conflict were moderately and significantly related to self‐reported child difficulties and moderately related to parents’ reports of child academic difficulties. The magnitude of the association between the child's report of interparental conflict and self‐report of difficulties was stronger than the association between parent report of conflict and parent report of child difficulties, suggesting that parents may not fully understand their child's exposure to parent conflict/violence or the problems their child is experiencing.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Family law stakeholders prioritize the creation of parenting arrangements that are in the best interest of the child; however, it is unclear how to gather information about the child and the child's perspective in order to inform such arrangements.
• The study results suggest that parents may not agree with each other or with the child about important family issues, such as parent conflict and child difficulties. For example, parents may not fully understand their child's exposure to parental conflict/violence when in the midst of custody negotiations.
• More research is needed to determine the best method for gathering information about the child during custody proceedings. In the meantime, it is important to gather information from multiple sources and to consider the agreement and differences across such sources of information.

     

Visit Coaching: Building on Family Strengths to Meet Children's Needs

Visits between children in foster care and their families often do not build on family strengths or help them demonstrate they can meet their children's safety and developmental needs. Visits can alienate parents, children, and foster parents, and the parent's grief, anger, and preoccupation with complying with court‐ordered treatment often obscure their children's needs. Visit coaching is an innovative approach that can replace parenting classes and office‐based visits with hands‐on guidance for families in meeting their children's needs. The visit coach, who may be their caseworker or a variety of other trained individuals, helps parents take charge of visits and demonstrate more responsiveness to each child.     

CERVICAL CANCER PREVENTION: MANDATING THE HPV VACCINE AS A CONDITION OF SCHOOL ATTENDANCE

This Note advocates that states require all females entering the sixth grade to be vaccinated with the HPV vaccine Gardasil, as a means of preventing cervical cancer deaths in the United States. States that do pass such a mandate would receive federal funding to help disperse the cost of the expensive three‐dose vaccine, especially to those females most in need. Subject to each individual state's mandate, parents would be allowed to opt their children out of such a mandate for religious, medical, and/or philosophical reasons.     

Child protection as surveillance of African American families

The over-representation of black children in US out of home care results from racial bias in placement decisions and a political choice to address startling rates of child poverty by investigating parents instead of tackling poverty's societal roots. The impact of state disruption and supervision of African American families is intensified when it is concentrated in inner-city neighbourhoods – the system's ‘racial geography.’ A small case study of a black neighbourhood in Chicago with high rates of out of home placement found profound effects on both family and community social relationships, as well as reliance on child protective services for financial assistance, linking surveillance of black families to the neoliberal shrinking of public programmes. The surveillance of African American women by the child welfare system is also intensified by these women's disproportionate involvement in the prison system. Acknowledging racial bias in child welfare reveals the need to radically transform the system from one that relies too much on punitive disruption of families to one that generously supports them.     

Providing Interdisciplinary Services to At‐Risk Families to Prevent the Placement of Children In Foster Care

Grandparents need support to take on the responsibility of children whose parents cannot care for them due to drug addiction, mental health issues, HIV illness, or other health problems. Without support and assistance, these families and children are likely to end up enmeshed in the already overburdened child abuse and neglect system. The University of Maryland has created a model program providing social work and legal services to at‐risk grandparent families to help avoid the unnecessary placement of these children in foster care. In this new program, student attorneys and student social workers worked with the grandparent client to help stabilize the family, providing representation or advice on housing, public benefits, custody, and school‐related issues. Joint education of student attorneys and student social workers in a clinical experience enhances their understanding of their roles and those of the other profession and prepares them for a more thoughtful and informed approach to family law, child welfare cases, and at‐risk children.     

GIVING CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE: ADVANCING THE HIGHLY MOBILE STUDENT POPULATION TOWARD HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION

Varied curricula among public school districts within the same state often result in localized core courses and high school graduation requirements. This inconsistency makes it difficult for highly mobile students–who make frequent non‐promotional school transfers during the school year–to obtain full or partial credit for successfully completed coursework, hindering progress toward graduation and increasing dropout rates. While student mobility permeates all communities, it is particularly devastating to some of the most vulnerable children in our society, including homeless children, foster youth, children from low‐income and single‐parent households, migrant students, youth in juvenile correctional facilities, and children of military families. Current federal legislation addresses only some of these groups, leaving many students underserved by the education system. This Note advocates for states to adopt legislation that specifically requires a standardized credit‐recognition system, allowing schools to award full and partial credit for coursework completed elsewhere within the state. Specifically, it addresses the importance of keeping highly mobile students in their schools of origin, when it is in their best interest. It further focuses on the need for state and local policies to require school districts to award and accept full and partial credit for coursework completed in another in‐state school district.