CHILD CUSTODY DISPUTES IN FAMILIES OF MUSLIM TRADITION

Islam is one of the fastest growing religions in America and by all accounts, there are 2.35 million Muslims in the country today. Muslims separate and divorce at rates consistent with the general population and almost half of those born in the United States are in relationships with non‐Muslims. It is not surprising that issues of religious education take center stage in child custody disputes. In addition, 64% of foreign Muslims cite the U.S. disrespect for Islam as the overwhelming factor in their resentment for America and Americans and they constitute the greatest potential risk for child abduction of American Muslim children. As more Muslim Americans separate and access the family law courts, we as lawyers, judges and child custody experts must be prepared to address the unique aspects of religion and foreign travel that these families present.     

FROM INFANTS TO ADOLESCENTS A Developmental Approach to Parenting Plans

Divorce and the resultant process of child custody decision making impact heavily on the lives of children. Increasingly, parents and professionals have realized the importance of encouraging shared responsibility in child rearing following separation and divorce. This shared responsibility must continue throughout a child's life and into young adulthood. This article introduces a comprehensive child-and family-focused model of decision making. The goal of this model is to assist professionals in their work with parents and to help parents formulate parenting plans that reflect the ever-changing developmental needs of each child and that specify how each parent will meet the particular needs of each child in the family. Through the use of educational parenting seminars and the completion of a Needs Assessment for each child, flexible parenting plans are created and positive co-parenting skills develop.     

NATIONAL ATTITUDES REGARDING GENDER BIAS IN CHILD CUSTODY CASES

Recent changes in family law have mandated equal treatment in child custody cases. Surveys of 4,579 attorneys and judges from four states, deemed to be nationally representative, were used to discover whether attorneys or judges perceive any favoritism toward mothers' or fathers' claims in the awarding of custody of children. Whereas attorneys, particularly males, perceive that mothers continue to be favored over fathers in custody cases, judges do not share this opinion.     

GENDER BIAS IN CHILD CUSTODY DECISIONS

Throughout history, gender stereotypes have played a key role in child custody dispositions. Despite current gender-neutral statutes, men's advocacy groups claim that custody decisions continue to discriminate against fathers. Women's advocacy groups and the media counter that custody decisions discriminate against mothers. Contradictory perceptions can be traced to the imprecision of the best interest standard, anecdotal cases that have been popularized in the media, a selection bias among cases that are decided in court, the absence of reliable nonpartisan research, distortions of existing research, and implicit assumptions about which parent should get custody. Gender stereotypes that favor mothers' preferential claims to custody are not supported by research, and the primary parent presumption is regarded as seriously flawed. Rather than focus on the demands of adults, custody reform should address the needs of children.     

PLANNING FOR POSTDIVORCE FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS

This article proposes that the focus of child custody evaluation and mediation needs to be broadened beyond custody arrangement to consideration of the range of factors that may impact on postdivorce relationships. A review of current social science literature shows that factors such as quality of parent-child relationships and level of parental conflict may be as important as residence schedule in influencing children's postdivorce adjustment. The article offers strategies for involving parents in drafting agreements to guide relationships with each other and with the children. The goal is for parents to thoughtfully tailor relationships and parenting practices to children's needs during the transition from a one-household family to a new family plan.     

The Place for Custody Evaluations in Family Peacemaking

Custody evaluations can serve the dual purpose of providing neutral, objective information to the court while also contributing to the possibility of earlier settlement, which coincides with the therapeutic jurisprudence goal of more positive outcomes for children and families. Research suggests that most cases settle after custody evaluations. However, most of the literature is focused on the use of custody evaluations for litigation. Evaluators, attorneys, and mental health consultants can influence parents to focus more on children's needs and less on their conflict as they go through the evaluation process. This article urges family courts to develop processes and require professionals to learn skills needed for an interdisciplinary process to utilize evaluations in peacemaking.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• All custody evaluation processes should aim to reduce and/or shorten children's exposure to parental conflict.
• Evaluators, attorneys, and mental health professional consultants should use the evaluation process to influence parents to be more aware of their children's needs and less invested in their adversarial positions.
• Evaluators should learn to write and orally present information and state opinions with consideration of the parents themselves as consumers of the custody evaluation as well as the court.
• Attorneys and mental health professional consultants should help clients review the report, process their emotional reactions, and consider their options for settlement versus litigation in terms of emotional and financial costs to the family.
• Court processes should be developed to contain the time and cost of custody evaluations and provide dispute resolution after custody evaluations.

     

AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OF SUPERVISED ACCESS AND CUSTODY EXCHANGE SERVICES

An exploratory outcome study to investigate the ability of a supervised access and custody exchange center to function as a safe visitation enforcement mechanism of the court was accomplished as part of a larger study investigating child well-being. During a 6-month period of program participation, frequency and consistency of noncustodial parents' access to children dramatically increased and interparental conflict significantly decreased, demonstrating that supervised visitation and custody exchange centers that function in partnership with family court during interim court processes can address the unmet needs of family court and high-conflict domestic disputant as well.     

The Views of Psychologists,Lawyers, and Judges on Key Components and the Quality of Child Custody Evaluations in Australia

This study aimed to understand the expectations of and the agreement between professional groups regarding the quality of single‐expert reports written by psychologists (known as child custody evaluations in the United States). 13 psychologists, 18 family lawyers, 26 children's lawyers, and 8 judges (N = 65) in New South Wales, Australia, rated the overall quality of reports and the quality of various components of them. Interprofessional congruence on importance ratings allowed key components to be derived. The results revealed that the overall quality of reports was rated positively, however, significant discrepancies were found between importance and quality ratings on the various components, indicating that reports fall short of expectations in many areas.     

THE IMPACTC OF DIVORCE ON FAMILIES

Australian research on the impact of separation and divorce on children and their families has consistently shown that although separation is a stressful event in the lives of families, the long-term prospects for these families is encouraging. A number of issues arising from the research presented in this article warrant closer consideration by decision makers, court administrators, and professionals dealing with disputing families. First, programs aimed at reducing conflict and assisting families to deal with the emotional impact of separation need to be given priority. Second, there is sufficient indication to suggest that poverty as a result of separation and divorce has a debilitating effect on women and children. Third, in dealing with disputes over custody and access, care needs to be taken to respect the needs of individual children. Finally, high conflict in a family postseparation should be a warning to pay particular attention to the potential harm of applying joint custody and frequent access presumptions.     

DIVORCING FAMILIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN IN THE COURT'S FAMILY SERVICES UNIT Profiles and Impact of Services

Little is known about the families being served by court support services, or the effectiveness of the services provided. This study investigates 137 higher conflict, divorcing families with young children, who received services from the Family Services division. The study utilizes questionnaire data filled out by family services clinicians. The families presented with multiple mental health needs, including allegations of substance use and physical, emotional and sexual abuses of spouses and, to a lesser extent, children. Results detailed evaluation outcomes pertaining to joint legal and physical custody, showing an increase in joint legal custody, with little difference in physical custody arrangements. Evaluators did encourage less parental dropout. The data also profiled parents least likely to attend mandatory parenting education, accept evaluators' recommendations, and settle their case with mediation assistance. Identifying these families early can help family services clinicians track families into individualized service plans as needed.     

BUILDING A MULTIDISCIPLINARY, COLLABORATIVE CHILD PROTECTION SYSTEM

The process of preparing lawyers and other professionals to work for the benefit of troubled children requires an understanding of concepts that extend far beyond the traditional course structure currently employed in American law schools. It is clear that mental health problems of children and families, compounded by substance abuse, influence behavior, resulting in children entering family and juvenile courts as victims of abuse or neglect and committing criminal acts. It is incumbent on law schools to incorporate training in fields far different from the traditional didactic experience in legal curricula if they are to address the current needs of children and familes who are ensnared in the nation's juvenile justice system. The beginning point of this process is within the legal training apparatus of America. Law schools must expand their curriculum to incorporate other disciplines to produce an advocate capable of serving the interest of children and society.     

A study of families in high-conflict custody disputes: effects of psychiatric evaluation

Each year approximately 2.5 million people divorce, subjecting more than 1 million children to the losses of familial breakup. Hostility in families can be greatly exacerbated by parents' repeated failures to negotiate an altered lifestyle for the family which provides for the children's best interests. Interventions with highly conflictual parents and their children must necessarily address the interface between the mental health and legal professions. How families experience this process must be carefully studied in order to create new strategies for change, not only within the families, but also to facilitate the legal system's cooperation with mental health professionals. To date, little research has been conducted which assesses the efficacy of methods used by mental health professionals to intervene in contested child custody cases. This paper describes a program at the Isaac Ray Center, Inc., designed to help parents settle their custody disputes out of court. The article presents findings based on an 18-month follow-up questionnaire and court records for 45 parents. Data concerning custody settlement, relitigation, and parents' satisfaction with the evaluation process, their attorneys, and the custody outcome are presented and discussed.     

Tippins and Wittman Revisited: Law,Social Science,and the Role of the Child Custody Expert 14 Years Later

It has been 14 years since Tippins and Wittmann ( 2005 ) voiced concern for the overreaching role the expert may play in matters of family law. This article sets their levels of inference within the context of the culture of both law and social science. We examine how inferences are impacted by the relative emphasis child custody experts give to the five stakeholders involved in child custody evaluations (CCEs): courts, lawyers, parents, children, and professional governing bodies. Acculturation of the assessor to law contributes to more egregious inferences, versus the more modest ones Tippins and Wittmann advocated. How evaluators prioritize stakeholders shapes their opinion and methodology. We offer an expanded perspective that views how their levels of inference are manifest in reports, methodology, and recommendations and the influence of the culture of law and the mindset of the clinician. We hope to encourage clinicians to find ways to operationalize clinical humility, assume their proper role, and remain true to their master identity as licensed mental health professionals and their proper sphere of authority.     

IDEOLOGIES OF JOINT CUSTODY

This article discusses the way that the ideological endorsement of joint custody as being in the chilďs best interests has resulted in significant issues, especially those more likely to be raised by mothers, being marginalized or suppressed. Although more commentators and researchers are now taking issue with some of the problems inherent in joint custody arrangements, many New Zealand professionals working with separating families continue to view the arrangement very positively. As a consequence, there has been little evaluation of those family situations where joint custody is not in the chilďs best interests, especially those where there is ongoing hostility between parents.     

Children Resisting Contact with a Parent Due to Abuse,Alienation, or Other Causes: Can a Proactive Role for Lawyers Contribute to Better Outcomes?

Lawyers have a significant role to play in cases where children are resisting contact with a parent, or the family appears to be going down that path, in the context of parental alienation, family violence or other factors. These cases pose great challenges for lawyers dealing with parents, as their clients are often anxiety‐ridden, angry, scared, and may have difficulty focussing on the long‐term interests of their children or themselves. A lawyer may be one of the first professionals encountered by the parents; lawyers for parents are advocates, but they are also in a position to provide wise counsel, to help triage the situation, provide practical advice, and early, helpful solutions. This article sets out practical suggestions for lawyers acting for parents. What can and should lawyers do to ensure they are part of the solution, not part of the problem? Lawyers need to be able to identify the potential problems and provide practical help to the family – whether they are acting for the “preferred” parent, the “rejected” parent, or the involved children.     

Legal Aid in Mental Hospitals

This report on the experience of five in-hospital legal aid projects and one community-based project for the deinstitutionalized examines the workloads of the lawyers and paralegals who labor in this setting and the various approaches and predispositions they bring to the job or learn while they are at it. The caseloads as well as interviews and observations reveal enormous differences in approach from project to project. The work of some lawyers and their aides confirms the utility and importance of making legal aid directly available to patients on the hospital grounds. But the experience of a couple of other projects warns that certain styles of lawyering can be counterproductive and damaging. In general, lawyers in the mental hospital setting must avoid the legalistic and overly adversarial approach to the problems that are brought to them—many of which are of uncertain legal content, credibility, or psychological makeup. Lawyers must also be careful not to have their own legal priorities get in the way of the best interests of their patient-clients or even those of the hospital as a total institution. The best approach to lawyering in the institutional setting is one that softens the "traditional" legal and adversarial aspects in favor of a more mediatory stance in which fact finding, counseling, and the resolution of issues by compromise are dominant functions. And significant legal attention should be devoted to each of the major categories of problems faced by patients—commitment-discharge, institutional, and civil—if the institutional lawyer's credibility and effectiveness are to be maintained both with the patients and the staffs in charge of their treatment and custody.     

It is Just Good Business: The Case for Supporting Reform in Divorce Court

This article examines the ways in which divorce and child custody proceedings can impact employee productivity and suggests that it behooves businesses to become involved in supporting efforts to improve the process—both as a matter of community service and because it can impact their bottom line. This article further outlines some improvements that are being implemented or considered in various jurisdictions.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• Divorce does not just impact the parties and their children. It also impacts the work productivity of the individuals involved.
• The population of individuals seeking court involvement in child custody issues has changed, and new processes must be developed to address their needs.
• There are new ideas about how to restructure the divorce process in ways that could benefit both the individuals and their employers.

     

CHILDREN'S RIGHTS IN EUROPEAN LEGAL PROCEEDINGS: WHY ARE FAMILY PRACTICES SO DIFFERENT FROM LEGAL THEORIES?

Debates about child custody following parental separation often have been framed in terms of a battle between the competing rights of different family members. In the United States, advocates of mothers’ rights square off against proponents of fathers’ rights, with each side claiming to truly represent children's rights. Of course, not all advocates lay claim to children's rights in contact and custody disputes merely as a tactical maneuver. Some experts believe that children are entitled to (and benefit from) their own, independent legal advocate in custody cases. In theory, at least, the position that children lay claim to a third set of independent rights is strongly held in Europe, more strongly than in many U.S. states, because of the adoption of United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in Europe, but not in the United States. In this article, we examine children's rights in custody disputes from a European perspective, particularly children's legal right to contact with their parents, as well as the children's right to be heard in custody and contact disputes. We find that, despite differences in legal theory, tradition, and family demographics, European countries ultimately face a familiar reality: Custody and contact disputes are, in reality, more about renegotiating family relationships than they are a matter of a mother's, father's, or child's rights.