Iaals' Honoring Families Initiative: Courts and Communities Helping Families in Transition Arising from Separation or Divorce

• It is time for a national dialogue about the feasibility of creating out‐of‐court alternatives for separating and divorcing families.
• Research indicates that separating parents who provide their children with consistency, emotional support, and low conflict help children successfully adapt in the transition process.

     

Presumptions,Burdens, and Best Interests in Relocation Law

The pure “best interests” approach to relocation law is a failure. It is unpredictable and expensive, increasing conflict and discouraging settlement. The “fundamental questions” proposed by Parkinson and Cashmore in their article will not reform the law. Real reform will require the use of presumptions or burdens to guide best interests. “Presumptions” are not “rules,” but only starting points. No simple presumption “for” or “against” all relocations can be justified, but there are large categories of cases that do warrant presumptions: interim moves, unilateral relocations, shared care, and predominant primary caregivers. The first three involve presumptions against relocation, while the last—the largest category—warrants a presumption that relocation is in the best interests of the child, unless the contrary is proved. There will remain a small minority of in‐between cases where none of these presumptions will operate, recognizing the limits of our general knowledge. It is time to move the relocation reform debate beyond pure “best interests,” to the next stage, to a serious discussion of which cases warrant presumptions, and of what strength.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• Pure best interests approach to relocation law is a failure
• Presumptions or burdens needed to reform the law, but not just “for” or “against”
• Presumptions are identified for four categories of relocation cases: interim moves, unilateral relocations, shared care, and predominant primary caregivers

     

Families in Circle Process: Restorative Justice in Family Law

This article explores the use of “circle process”—a form of restorative justice—in family law and places this effort within a larger movement within the law toward law as a healing profession, or the “comprehensive law movement.” It explores the features and underpinnings of circle process and its relationship to original forms of dispute resolution such as those used in African‐style mediation and indigenous people's dispute resolution in North America. Values expressed by these forms of dispute resolution are argued to be particularly relevant in family law. Finally, it focuses on an innovative and exciting court‐sponsored program begun in Chicago in 2008, using circle process with families in conflict, in the Cook County Parentage and Child Support Court. This program's results suggest potential benefits and cautions of using circle process in family law.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Restorative justice, in particular, circle process, can be used to resolve family law cases.
• Circle process widens the group of participants in alternative dispute resolution of family law matters.
• Circle process brings more voices to the table, namely, extended family, friends, and supporters, thus enhancing the group's decisionmaking.
• Judges will want to be sure the families in question are appropriate for circle process before referring them to this method of resolving disputes.
• Circle processes can result in improved communication and relations among families in conflict.
• Circle process reflects the values of “original dispute resolution,” which often in turn reflects ubuntu, the idea that all humankind is interconnected.
• Circle process is part of a greater movement towards law as a healing profession/the comprehensive law movement, which includes therapeutic jurisprudence.

     

Helping Families by Maintaining a Strong Well‐Funded Family Court that Encourages Consensual Peacemaking: A Judicial Perspective

This article explores alternatives for the court process that promote a child‐centered approach to resolution of family law issues including a summary of procedures used in Los Angeles County to assist families. The article also explores alternatives to the traditional custody litigation model.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Evaluations and trials are not the only tools available in family law.
• Structured court ordered counseling can provide a meaningful intervention and reduce family conflict.
• Alternative forms of mediation can help families address the “need to be heard” and retain personal autonomy in decision making.
• The court system should help educate families about how to resolve conflict in a safe, effective, and meaningful way.

     

Association for Conflict Resolution Guidelines for Eldercaring Coordinators

On November 6, 2014, the AFCC Board of Directors endorsed the Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR) Guidelines for Eldercaring Coordination, including ethical principles for Eldercaring Coordinators, training protocols, and court pilot project template. The collaboration between Task Forces created by ACR and the Florida Chapter of AFCC, composed of twenty U.S./Canadian and twenty Florida‐wide organizations, produced both an overarching guide to assist in the development of programs and a more detailed model addressing state/province‐specific needs and characteristics. Eldercaring coordination is a dispute resolution option specifically for high‐conflict cases involving the care, needs, and safety of elders.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• There are currently no dispute resolution options for parties involved in high‐conflict cases regarding the care, needs, and safety of an elder.
• The ACR Guidelines for Eldercaring Coordination address the discrepancies between dispute resolution options available for parents in conflict regarding their minor children and mature families with unresolved concerns about the care, needs, and safety of an elder.
• The ACR Guidelines for Eldercaring Coordination provide information regarding the ethical practice of eldercaring coordination including a specific definition, recommended qualifications, ethical practices, grievance procedures, training protocols, and a court pilot project template.
• The practice of eldercaring coordination will address the influx of court cases expected as baby boomers continue to age, reducing delays in court hearings, as parties will have the opportunity to resolve their concerns without continuous court attention.
• As of June 2015, five states began Pilot Projects on Eldercaring Coordination, which will be studied by an independent research group to enhance the progress of the process and to develop the best practices for initiating the programs elsewhere.

     

Family Peacemaking with an Interdisciplinary Team: A Therapist's Perspective

Interdisciplinary teams provide an unparalleled opportunity for peacemaking in families within the consensual dispute resolution continuum. This interdisciplinary environment was born out of the integration of Collaborative Law, in which lawyers limit the scope of their services to settlement by way of a signed agreement, and Collaborative Divorce, a team approach to divorce services that includes a lawyer for each party along with a Collaborative Divorce Coach for each party, a neutral financial specialist, and a neutral child specialist. Taken together, Interdisciplinary Collaborative Practice supports the resolution of legal issues out of court as well as addressing any emotional, relational, or behavioral problems that create obstacles to the successful resolution of the separation process.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Collaborative Practice creates legal representation in a consensual environment limiting services to settlement negotiations by way of a written agreement.
• The International Academy of Collaborative Professionals includes 5,000 members in twenty‐five countries.
• Legal representation in a consensual environment together with interdisciplinary teams create endless possibilities for dispute resolution processes.
• Collaborative Lawyers, Collaborative Divorce Coaches, child specialists, and financial specialists can create custom‐fit interdisciplinary teams that work together out of court to support families through marital transition.
• Interdisciplinary teams are family centric, bridging appropriate disciplines and resources to the needs of the family to address the vast majority of divorce‐related problems.
• Divorcing families are moving targets, learning and evolving through the process.
• Therapeutic teams support families with more complex relational, emotional, and mental health problems to find resolutions out of court.
• Divorce is a mainstream event in Western culture; we need supportive processes to encourage the best possible outcomes for all family members, especially the children.

     

Does Level of Intimate Partner Violence and Abuse Predict the Content of Family Mediation Agreements?

This study investigated whether reported levels of intimate partner violence (IPV) and/or abuse (IPV/A) victimization are related to reaching agreement and to the content of mediation agreements of parties seeking to resolve family‐ and child‐related issues. Whether or not parties reached agreement was analyzed for 105 cases at a law school mediation clinic. Agreement content was coded for the 71 cases that reached agreement. Levels of IPV and IPV/A were determined separately for males and females, using a standardized measure. Regression models were utilized to examine reports of IPV or IPV/A as predictors. Results indicated that mediation may help families with a reported history of IPV and IPV/A address a variety of concerns; levels of partner violence/abuse predicted numerous issues in mediation agreements, including arrangements regarding legal custody, parenting time, holidays, child exchanges, interparental communication, safety restrictions, counseling referrals, child support, financial arrangements, and other miscellaneous topics (e.g., relocation). However, some findings were consistent with concerns raised about the use of mediation with parties reporting IPV and IPV/A; for example, increasing levels of male‐perpetrated IPV/A predicted increased likelihood of making an agreement to share legal custody. Further research is needed to resolve the longstanding debate of whether divorce mediation is an effective and safe process for parties demonstrating IPV/A.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• This study adds to the debate of whether divorce mediation is an effective and safe process for parties demonstrating IPV/A.
• It examines whether reported levels of IPV and IPV/A victimization are related to reaching agreement and to the content of mediation agreements of parties seeking to resolve family‐ and child‐related issues.
• Results provide some evidence that mediation may help families with a reported history of IPV and IPV/A address a variety of concerns.
• However, some findings are consistent with concerns raised about the use of mediation with parties reporting IPV and IPV/A.
• Findings have implications for the practice of family mediation with parties reporting a history of IPV or IPV/A.

     

Reforming Relocation Law: An Evidence‐Based Approach

In recent years, there has been much discussion within international fora about the need for a greater consensus on how to approach relocation cases. Empirical research on the lived experience of parents and children who have been through relocation disputes has an important role to play in providing an evidence base for decisions on policy. In this article, we summarize the findings of a 5‐year prospective longitudinal study of relocation disputes in Australia and make recommendations in the light of this and other research evidence concerning a new approach to relocation law. We argue that there should be no presumptions. Nonetheless there is an appropriate place for legislative or appellate guidance on how to approach these disputes. “Good faith” should be irrelevant to decision making, and children should not be placed in the center of the conflict. The adjudication of relocation disputes should be on the basis of asking three questions: First, how close is the relationship between the nonresident parent and the child and how important is that relationship developmentally to the child? Second, if the relocation is to be permitted, how viable are the proposals for contact with the nonresident parent? Third, if the relationship between the child and the nonresident parent is developmentally important to the child and is likely to be diminished if the move is allowed, then (a) what are the viable alternatives to the parents living a long distance apart? and (b) is a move with the primary caregiver the least detrimental alternative?

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• Describes the findings of empirical research on relocation disputes in Australia on the lived experience of children and families postrelocation disputes.
• Reviews various features of relocation law and proposals for reform in the light of this research evidence.
• Proposes an approach to deciding relocation cases based upon three essential questions.

     

A Systematic Approach to Domestic Abuse–Informed Child Custody Decision Making in Family Law Cases

This article introduces an approach to domestic violence–informed decision making developed under the auspices of the National Child Custody Differentiation Project, a cooperative undertaking among the Battered Women's Justice Project, the Association of Family & Conciliation Courts, the National Council of Juvenile & Family Court Judges, Praxis International, and the U.S. Department of Justice Office on Violence Against Women. This approach has four essential elements: (1) identifying domestic abuse; (2) understanding the nature and context of domestic abuse; (3) determining the implications of abuse; and (4) accounting for the nature, context, and implications of abuse in all custody‐related recommendations and decisions.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Applying a systematic approach to domestic violence can help practitioners identify, understand, and account for abuse in family law cases.
• The approach recommended here is suitable for use by anyone who is involved in a contested child custody case at any stage of the proceeding.
• The specific application of the recommended approach will vary depending upon the practitioner's role and function in the case, relationship to the parties, and access to information, as well as the nature of the proceeding and the issues to be decided.

     

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.

     

The Parenting Coordinator as Peacemaker and Peacebuilder

Parenting coordinators serve as case managers in high‐conflict families with the goal of protecting the children from parental conflict. Parenting coordinators are peacemakers and peacebuilders who identify and help set up structures in the family to support peace between the parents. The family court should promote and develop equipoise in litigants and professionals. Because parents who continue in conflict postdecree often have difficulty empathizing with their co‐parents and with their children, they might benefit from meditation training to increase mindfulness, empathy, and compassion. Self‐compassion training could also increase well‐being and more effective co‐parenting and aid in building peace in the family.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Parenting coordination is a child‐focused intervention with high‐conflict parents that can help protect children from their parents' conflict.
• Parenting coordinators are peacemakers who resolve disputes between the parents and facilitate negotiation and communication between them and help them make decisions.
• Parenting coordinators are also peacebuilders who help identify and build structures and processes in the family system to strengthen interparental peace.
• Equipoise can be developed in litigants and professionals through mindfulness and compassion training.
• Family court judges can work with parenting coordinators in a team approach, in a manner similar to what occurs in problem‐solving courts, to benefit the families and the judicial system.

     

Unbundled Services to Enhance Peacemaking for Divorcing Families

Unbundling, also known as limited‐scope representation, has been adopted by judges, the organized legal profession, and divorcing parties. Unbundling is a legal access approach to better and more affordably serve unrepresented divorce litigants as well as to assist overburdened and underfunded courts. This article will focus on another critical benefit of unbundling: the ability of divorcing professionals to provide information and support to divorcing families to help reduce family conflicts. This article shall discuss four unbundled peacemaking roles that lawyers can play: (1) Collaborative Lawyer; (2) Lawyer Coach for Self‐Represented Litigants; (3) Lawyer for Mediation Participants; and (4) Preventive Legal Health Care Provider.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Overview of limited‐scope lawyering roles
• Impact of unbundled representation on peacemaking
• Best practices of noncourt lawyering

     

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.

     

CYBER‐ABUSE—A NEW WORLDWIDE THREAT TO CHILDREN'S RIGHTS

Cyberspace is a new frontier for both international and domestic family law. On the one hand, it presents great opportunities for society and, on the other, great dangers particularly for children. This paper explores a number of issues from a domestic and international family law perspective. These issues include:

• ? What is cyberspace, how has it emerged, and where is it likely to go?
• ? What are the potential dangers for children that arise from children's engagement with cyberspace?
• ? What is the nature and extent of domestic and international family laws that protect children from the dangers of cyberspace?
• ? What are some of the present and emerging policy issues that impact on these matters?

Cyber‐abuse is a term that encompasses a wide range of aggressive online activities.     

A REVIEW OF PROGRAMS DESIGNED TO PREPARE PARENTS FOR CUSTODY AND VISITATION MEDIATION

Mediation orientation programs are an increasingly common resource for parents preparing to mediate custody and visitation disputes. In this paper, we review empirical studies on program effectiveness and describe a range of programs in the U.S. Most are brief and psychoeducational in nature, focusing on the mediation process and the effects of conflict on children. Programs typically provide information through reading materials, slides, and videos, either in a group setting or online. Few evaluate program effectiveness. We offer suggestions for program evaluation and introduce an assessment‐based framework for providing individualized services for parents. Key Points for the Family Court Community

• ? Few Mediation Orientation programs have been empirically evaluated.
• ? Useful research designs would include (1) assessing participants both before and after the program and (2) comparing program participants to non‐participants.
• ? The psychoeducational components of Mediation Orientation programs may need to be tailored for low‐ and high‐conflict couples.

     

A Rigorous Quasi‐Experimental Design to Evaluate the Causal Effect of a Mandatory Divorce Education Program

All couples with minor children who filed for divorce within a specific 6‐week period (N = 191 couples) in one jurisdiction were ordered to attend a divorce education program. The control group included about 20 couples randomly selected from each of six 6‐week intervals before and six 6‐week intervals after the treatment interval (N = 243 couples). Archival records were searched for variables such as legal and residential custody award, visitation percentage, and relitigation. The impact of the program was assessed by evaluating, for each variable, whether the data for program interval departed from the straight (regression) line drawn through all the control group intervals. Only the visitation time award significantly differed: 27.75% for treatment couples and 22.46% for control couples. Analyses show that the father's attendance at the program primarily accounts for the difference.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• There are considerable methodological weaknesses in most of the existing evaluations of divorcing parent education programs.
• Stronger, more scientifically rigorous—and thus persuasive—designs are possible in court settings, such as the regression discontinuity quasi‐experimental design we feature here.
• Archival records, such as various court filings, are a rich and relatively untapped source of data.
• Being mandated to attend a single 2‐hour divorcing parent education class caused an increase in the visitation time award in divorce decrees.
• There is a disconnect between being mandated by a judge to attend a program and actual attendance.

     

The role of victim characteristics in the disposition of murder cases

Using data from prosecutors' files in a sample of 33 U.S. counties, we examine how victims' conduct and victims' demographic characteristics affect the disposition of murder cases at various stages of the criminal justice process. We find that victims' age and past conduct do not significantly influence legal outcomes in murder cases, but their race, gender, and conduct at the time of the incident do so. Although these effects vary across the criminal justice decision-making stages considered, they generally are consistent with the claim that killings of disreputable or stigmatized victims tend to be treated more leniently. We also find some evidence that the effects of victim characteristics are stronger in jury proceedings than in bench proceedings, and that the influence of a victim's race on the disposition of murder cases is conditioned by the racial composition of the county in which the case is processed.     

Dignity as (Self‐)Determination: Hopi Sovereignty in the Face of US Dispossessions

In 2013, the Arizona Snowbowl Ski Resort began spraying artificial snow made from reclaimed wastewater on Arizona's highest peak, a place the Hopi people call Nuvatukya'ovi, “Snow‐on‐top‐of‐it.” As one of the Hopis’ most sacred places, the home of the katsinam and the southwestern boundary marker of their aboriginal territory, the Hopi have fought for decades to stop development of the ski resort, which today sits on US Forest Service land. Viewing the history of this dispute through the lens of Atuahene's notion of a “dignity taking,” this article argues that despite never having been relocated, the indignities that the Hopi have suffered by US dispossessions of much of their aboriginal territory are the product of a series of bureaucratic sleights of hand that only bear the mark of legality if one ignores history and denies the enduring right to self‐determination and sovereignty that Hopi have continuously claimed with regard to the totality of their aboriginal land.

Yuuyahiwa,

Ayamo Nuvatukya'ove'e.

Oo'oomawutu,

angqw puma naayuwasinaya,

pewi'i.

They are preparing themselves [for a journey],

Over there at the snow‐capped mountains [San Francisco Peaks].

The clouds,

From there, they are putting on their endowments [of rain power],

To come here.

A Hopi katsinam song recalled by Emory Sekaquaptewa (from Sekaquaptewa and Washburn, 2004, 468)

     

Assessing the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency: An Evaluation of a Court‐Based Delinquency Prevention Program

In 2002, the State of Ohio mandated juvenile courts to provide prevention for at‐risk youth. This study examined official court records to evaluate the effectiveness of a prevention program administered by the Greene County Juvenile Court. A sample of 362 youth referred to the program for the years 2002 to 2009 by concerned caretakers, teachers, and police was analyzed. Consistent with intake goals, 81.7% of clients were referred for at‐risk but not actually delinquent behaviors. Completion of the prevention program did not predict future court referrals, but neither did seriousness of referral behavior. Children with two biological parents were significantly more likely to complete the program, whereas referrals to Strengthening Families Program and substance abuse screening significantly predicted program noncompletion. Implications for policy and research are discussed.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• This article highlights efforts by county juvenile court to implement a secondary prevention program for at‐risk but not officially court‐referred youth.
• Delinquency prevention research depends on good juvenile court data and adequate comparison groups.
• Evidence‐based predelinquent interventions with external process and outcome evaluations should be the standard.