LEGAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT OF CASES WITH AN ALIENATED CHILD

Cases entering the family court with an alienated child require intensive and coordinated case management to intervene effectively. It is critical to link the authority of the court with the delivery of mental health services to address the complex systemic factors that may entrench a chilďs unwarranted rejection of a parent. This article provides principles of legal and psychological case management for families with an alienated child, followed by various structural interventions, including sample court orders, for managing these cases as they progress through the family court process. Finally, criteria for making custody recommendations in the most severe cases of child alienation are provided.     

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.     

THE “EYE OF THE BEHOLDER”: PROFESSIONAL OPINIONS ABOUT THE BEST INTERESTS OF A CHILD

Child custody evaluations (CCEs) are a central feature of parenting litigation in many North American jurisdictions. However, there has been little recent research comparing CCE decisions about children's interests with decisions made by judges. This article presents empirical research about the extent to which Ontario judges accept custody and access recommendations from CCEs employed by Ontario's Office of the Children's Lawyer. The central finding was that the judges fully agreed with the CCEs only about half of the time. Possible explanations for this finding are explored, the most salient of which is the effect of delay in Ontario family litigation. In conclusion, the article suggests that a more efficient synthesis of the judicial and CCE decision‐making processes might be more consonant with the best interests of children involved in these disputes.     

“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.     

WHO SHALL HAVE CUSTODY?: A Case for the Equal Consideration of Fathers

Current statutes and case decisions formally declare that fathers and mothers should be treated equally in child custody dispute awards. Outcomes of actual court awards, however, favor mothers, presumably because this is viewed by judges as being in the best interests of the child. A review of research derived from child and animal studies suggests there is no basis for favoring mothers over fathers in awarding child custody.     

AND HOW ARE THE CHILDREN?

Recent innovations in American child custody law have affected both the substantive law and the procedures by which custody decisions are reached. Professor Bruch describes these developments, analyses their underpinnings in psychology and ideology, and identifies both intended and unrecognized effects of the dispute resolution process on the custody decision. She concludes that many new doctrines and procedures that have been widely assumed to benefit children, including joint custody and mediation, often disserve children's interests.     

THERAPEUTIC WORK WITH ALIENATED CHILDREN AND THEIR FAMILIES

This article describes goals and strategies for family-focused counseling and therapy when children are alienated from a parent after separation and divorce. The confidential intervention takes place within a legally defined contract and is based on a careful assessment of the dynamics of the multiple factors that contribute to the alienation and how the chilďs development is affected. Strategies for forming multiple therapeutic alliances with often reluctant, recalcitrant, and polarized parents are discussed together with ways of helping the child directly.     

CURRENT RESEARCH ON CHILDREN'S POSTDIVORCE ADJUSTMENT

This article reviews the current research on the effects of marital conflict, parental adjustment, custody, and access on children following divorce. Evidence from research demonstrates that significantly more adjustment problems confront children, especially boys, of divorced parents compared to those in never-divorced families. However, when assessed in years following the divorce, these children are functioning in normal limits and do not appear "disturbed," although the media report the opposite. The article discusses an important British study finding that marital conflict and not the divorce affect children and that divorce may mitigate some of the more destructive effects. The analysis of research dealing with joint custody brings together both current and ongoing studies. A surprising finding in one study was that mothers who share custody are more satisfied than those having sole custody and whose children see their father periodically. However, both groups expressed more satisfaction with their residential arrangement than did sole-custody mothers whose children had no paternal contact. Court-ordered joint custody was less satisfactory than when the parents voluntarily agreed to that arrangement, and spouses reporting high levels of marital conflict tended to do less well in joint custody arrangements than did families with less conflict.     

论子女最佳利益原则

子女最佳利益原则已发展成为各国家庭法在处理父母离婚后子女监护案件时的最高准则。虽然该原则其概念本身含有不确定性 ,具有多种可以不同明确表达的空间 ,但采用该原则的世界各国仍致力于列出若干决定子女最佳利益的具体准则。本文作者主张我国婚姻法应引进“子女最佳利益”原则作为处理子女监护问题时的最高指导原则 ,摒弃父母权利本位思想     

RESEARCH UPDATE

In this report, overall findings from the most recent custody studies of children ages 3 to 16 years, made publicly available within the past 6 years, are briefly reviewed to establish a framework of general principles for decision making around custody and access issues. Most of the comparisons drawn are between joint and sole custody, with some attention being given to differences between mother and father sole custody. All of these studies are of children's adjustment to the physical custody, or residential arrangements, rather than to legal custody, which refers to parents' decision-making authority.     

Common Misconceptions in Addressing Domestic Violence in Child Custody Disputes

Domestic violence has been recognized as an important factor to consider in determining the best interests of children in custody and visitation disputes. However, there remain many misconceptions about the extent and impact of domestic violence in child custody proceedings. Several misconceptions are identified and juxtaposed with the reality of emerging knowledge in this field, and implications are outlined. These issues are illustrated by the perspectives of 62 women victims and 95 children exposed to domestic violence who had to navigate the justice system after separation from an abuser. Recommendations are offered for enhancing professional education, resource development, and collaboration among courts and community service providers.     

Judging the Best Interests of the Child: Judges' Accounts of the Tender Years Doctrine

With dramatic changes in family life over the last several decades, child custody law has shifted from a maternal preference to a more egalitarian standard, the best interests of the child. Despite this change in the law, scholars have debated whether gender continues to play a role in the resolution of custody disputes. Drawing on feminist legal scholarship and sociolegal research on judges, I assess the current debates over gender and custody by examining the accounts of judges who frequently adjudicate custody cases. I conduct in-depth, face-to-face interviews with twenty-five trial court judges in Indiana and investigate judges' accounts about whether they continue to use the tender years doctrine in custody disputes, even though the custody statute is explicitly gender-neutral. Then, I assess several competing explanations of the variation across judges' accounts, including the judges' gender role attitudes, gender, age, and political party affiliation. In exploratory analyses, I also examine the contested custody rulings of a subset of nine judges to assess whether judges' accounts are congruent with their actual custody decisions. I discuss the implications of these findings in light of feminist legal scholarship as well as empirical research on child custody adjudication.     

High Conflict Divorce,Violence, and Abuse: Implications for Custody and Visitation Decisions

Today, judges are faced with the daunting task of determining the best interests of the child and making appropriate custody awards to that end. The best interests of children becomes a critical question when domestic violence is involved; yet, determining what constitutes domestic violence is often debated. Research is often divided on what constitutes domestic violence. One body of research focuses on conflict, another focuses on domestic violence. What the first group identifies as intense emotional distress and disagreement, the other identifies as abuse. Judges making custody determinations in such cases are faced with the difficult challenge of distinguishing between a divorce with “high conflict” and a domestic violence case with ongoing abuse. This article will summarize the legal, philosophical, and historical understandings of the “high conflict” family and its potential impact on children. It will also provide practical judicial guidelines for making the important distinction between high conflict and domestic violence and subsequently crafting appropriate and safe child custody awards.     

The red herring of adolescent mental health

An increase in adolescent distress and mental health symptoms has been clearly documented since the COVID-19 pandemic, as has increased exposure to adverse childhood experiences. Layer on top of these stressors being a youth of divorcing or separating high conflict families, and adolescent symptomatology can suddenly become a flashpoint for parental attention, division and conflict. Approaching cases using an ecological and family systems framework is necessary for accurate conceptualization and assessment of best interests in the context of child custody evaluations. Doing so ensures that adolescent mental health does not become a red herring in high conflict cases, leading to undue focus on the adolescent's mental health without considering other salient factors in the case, such as the broader parent conflict. Programs offered at the Center of Excellence for Children, Families & the Law at William James College designed to improve the lives of youth by addressing parental conflict are described.     

MAKING A PLACE AT THE TABLE:

This response to Timothy Tippins and Jeffrey Wittmann's article "Empirical and Ethical Problems with Custody Recommendations: A Call for Clinical Humility and Judicial Vigilance" builds upon the authors' conclusions that custody evaluations cannot and should not be a substitute for the socio-legal judgment of the best interests of the child. Recognizing that clinical humility and judicial vigilance may not be sufficient to restrain the misuse of psychological evaluation, we offer for consideration three structural changes that would provide for a more appropriate use of the skills and talents custody evaluators bring to legal decisions. We suggest using custody evaluators in the less adversarial setting of preparing parenting plans, revising the procedures by which custody evaluations are elicited in litigation, and adopting the approximation standard for child custody determinations.     

CHILD SUPPORT IN THE UNITED STATES

This article reports on the results of a telephone survey conducted with a random sample of households screened for eligibility to receive child support in the state of Colorado. Despite the recent enactment of ambitious child legislation at the state and federal levels, the accounts of 731 custodial parents reveal a massive level of unmet need, with child support problems being most extreme for those never married to the chilďs other parent. These mothers typically lack an order establishing a legal obligation to pay child support and have incomes that fall below the poverty level. Overall, women of Colorado with child support orders received only about half of the support they were due, and 73 per cent of all women due support reported that they had experienced problems in collecting support either currently or in the past. The average amount of back due child support owed to the 60 per cent of women in the sample who reported an arrearage was $12,000. Analysis revealed that payment behaviour tracked with the length of time since separation with payment patterns worsening over time and irregular visitation and/or the presence of problems around child access. Female obligors exhibited the same payment patterns as their male counterparts but were more apt to maintain visitation. The article documents the dramatic, negative economic consequences of irregular or missing child support payments for custodial parents, and discusses the additional legal and financial commitments needed to improve the situation. The efficacy of private child support transfers to achieve an adequate standard of living for all children is called into question.     

The Effects of Joint Legal Custody on Mothers,Fathers, and Children Controlling for Factors That Predispose a Sole Maternal versus Joint Legal Award

Findings from comparisons of joint and sole custody families that do not control for predivorce differences in demographic and family process variables (factors that may predispose families to choose or be awarded joint custody) are of limited generalizability, since obtained group differences may be attributable to predisposing (self-selection) factors, custody, or both. This study compared a random sample of 254 recently separated, not-yet-divorced families on 71 predivorce variables that might plausibly differentiate between families awarded joint legal versus sole maternal custody. Twenty such factors were identified and controlled for in subsequent comparisons of 52 sole maternal and 26 joint legal custody families 2 years postdivorce. Families with joint custody had more frequent father–child visitation, lower maternal satisfaction with custody arrangements, more rapid maternal repartnering, and fewer child adjustment problems (net of predivorce selection factors). Moreover, these effects did not appear to be moderated by level of predecree parental conflict. No association between custody and fathers' compliance with child support orders was obtained.     

Bias in the Family: Race,Ethnicity, and Culture in Custody Disputes

This essay examines the role of racial, ethnic, and cultural bias in custody cases. It analyzes cases where the court explicitly considered the parents’ racial, ethnic, or cultural background and cases where the court did not acknowledge these factors but where it is clear from the court's opinion that biases influenced its decision. It then briefly describes the literature on implicit bias to demonstrate how biases may influence the assessments of custody evaluators, lawyers, and judges despite best efforts to make fair and impartial decisions. Drawing on studies suggesting that individuals can reduce their implicit biases and their effects on decision making, the essay explores individual strategies and institutional reforms to address bias in custody disputes.     

HOW JUDGES DECIDE WHETHER SOCIAL PARENTS HAVE PARENTAL RIGHTS: A FIVE‐FACTOR TYPOLOGY

Courts have issued conflicting rulings regarding the rights (e.g., custody, visitation) and responsibilities (e.g., child support) of non‐biological gay parents. This analysis establishes a typology of five factors that most commonly influence judges' decisions. These factors include: interpretation of parenting statutes, legislative intent, parental intent, legal documents establishing parenthood, and the child's best interests. Despite these common themes, there is still much discrepancy among court rulings. Based on this analysis, there are steps parents can take to protect their legal rights and living arrangements. Finally, policy suggestions are offered for courts and lawmakers. These legal actors can take steps (e.g., clarifying statutes) that would provide certainty for families in case of parental separation or the biological parent's death.     

JOINT CUSTODY AND THE PRESCHOOL CHILD

A longitudinal study of 25 families, with children aged 14 months—5 years, in joint custody, is reported. Varying motivations that lead divorcing parents to undertake and sustain joint custody are discussed, together with the stresses and gratifications of these arrangements for the parents and children. Findings are that where both parents are motivated primarily by interest in the child, where the parenting is sensitive and where the child is shielded from interparental conflict, young children do well. Such families were not the majority in this study. Significant differences emerged in the adjustment of the 1–3 age group as compared with the 3–5 age group which point to greater difficulties for the 3–5 year-olds.