Confidentiality and the Juvenile and Family Courts

Court proceedings and court records are traditionally open to the public. The courts are public institutions, and openness serves a number of important purposes including protection of the free discussion of governmental affairs and the enhancement of the quality and integrity of the fact finding process. But court proceedings also address family matters including adoptions, juvenile delinquency, child protection, and domestic relations cases. These types of cases often involve personal issues, and many family members would prefer that they remain private. In most states, many of these proceedings have been closed to the public. Strong policy reasons support both openness of family court proceedings and privacy considerations for family members, particularly children. This article addresses confidentiality in the context of juvenile and family court proceedings. It takes the position that the tension between these conflicting policies can be reduced if most family court proceedings are presumptively open, but judges are given the authority to place conditions on the information that can be revealed by observers outside the courtroom. Additionally, the article asserts that if the courts and the media take steps to change their practices and their relationship with one another, both the public interest and the confidentiality interest of the parties can be better served.     

Lessons Learned from Developing a Trauma Consultation Protocol for Juvenile and Family Courts

Juvenile and family courts hold a unique position among the many stakeholders that comprise a healing community for persons experiencing adversity or trauma. Specifically, judges and other court leaders can promote the implementation of screening for trauma, the alignment of appropriate and effective treatment for trauma when indicated, and the accountability of systems for coordination and support of such services. To that end, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges undertook a field‐based project — consisting of multiple semi‐structured court surveys — to elucidate the key features of a trauma‐informed court and how to assist courts in becoming more trauma‐responsive for both consumers and staff. With the assistance of courts in 11 pilot sites across the nation, the project has led to the development of a protocol called trauma consultation or trauma audit, which is outlined here. Our work in developing the consultation protocol highlighted the need to better understand (1) the prevalence and impact of secondary traumatic stress in court staff, (2) the potential for environment to contribute to traumatic stress reactions, and (3) the importance of consistent trauma screenings and subsequent use of findings. Practical suggestions for courts to become more trauma‐informed are also provided.     

“少子化”与流动儿童、少年在城就读的发展空间

我国城市在独生子女政策施行以来出现的“少子化”趋势必将对城市基础教育产生深远的影响，由此带来的为城市解决流动儿童、少年的在城就学问题提供了巨大发展空间和契机。城市政府可以在应对“少子化”对教育冲击的框架下适当考虑流动儿童、少年的就学问题，获取“双赢”的结果。这也是城市适应自身“少子化”趋势和快速城市化过程中城乡大量人口迁移情况的一种必然趋势。     

Environmental Considerations for Trauma‐Responsive Juvenile and Family Courts: A Review of the Literature with Recommendations for Practice

Juvenile and family courts serve some of our most vulnerable populations, many of whom have experienced some traumatic event. People suffering with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are known to be more sensitive to environmental stimuli, and many of the environmental conditions within courts can be challenging for those suffering traumatic stress. Trauma‐responsive practices help foster conditions of healing, which can benefit both the court user and those who work within the court. Research reviewed in this article demonstrates the likelihood of negative behavioral and emotional responses to specific environmental factors for people suffering PTSD and other stress reactions, and offers recommendations to minimize environmental stressors.     

Zero to Three: Critical Issues for the Juvenile and Family Court

Infants are the fastest growing population in foster care. Without intervention they are at great risk of poor developmental outcomes. Juvenile and family courts have a unique opportunity to make a positive difference in the lives of the babies in their care. This article outlines six critical issues that impact the development of very young children in the child welfare system and recommends strategies that juvenile and family courts can use to address the needs of this most vulnerable population.     

Enhancing the Mental Health and Well‐Being of Infants,Children, and Youth in the Juvenile and Family Courts: A Judicial Challenge

At the invitation of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, judges from the 30 largest juvenile jurisdictions in the country and mental health professionals met for two days in Tampa, Florida, March 18–19, 2000. Their discussions over this two‐day period resulted in the first draft of this document. Meeting again in July in Snowbird, Utah, members of the group reviewed and revised the original document. This second revision was mailed to members of the group and to the officers and board of the National Council for their review. Comments from this second draft were incorporated into the final document as it appears in this issue of the Juvenile and Family Court Journal. The experience and expertise represented by this dedicated group of judges and mental health professionals is reflected in the contents of this paper. Each of the participants is actively engaged in the process of systemic change in the delivery of mental health services in their communities, each can recount both successes and failures in the process of creating this change, and each brings experience and insight to this forum. This position paper is intended for the use of judges, court administrators, and mental health professionals who work with youth in the juvenile courts of our country. It is intended as a basic framework for the development of community systems of care which will serve children, youth, and families experiencing mental health problems appropriately and well.     

Overview of the Faith,Law, and Morality Project of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges and Forum Presentations

On Monday, November 27, 1995, twenty-five judges, faith leaders, and community representatives converged on Lake Tahoe for the start of a bold experiment. Each of the participants had been formally invited to participate in a forum to discuss the important moral and ethical issues facing society today. Set in a retreat environment at Incline Village, Nevada, this forum would open a dialogue between judges, members of the faith community, and others about common issues and concerns. The participants' mission was to work in groups to draft a joint resolution – a call to action for judges, faith leaders and the community. Their work would be inspired by short reflections on faith, law and morality offered by fellow participants. The discussion format would alternate between small groups of six to seven each and the group as a whole. Most important would be the opportunity to listen; the diversity of individual viewpoints would enrich the participants' thinking on the fundamental yet complex interrelation between law and morality. How did it work? Exceedingly well.     

An Evaluation of the Use of Videotaped Evidence for Juvenile Witnesses in Criminal Courts in England and Wales

For the first time, the UK Criminal Justice Act (1991) allowed the videotaped evidence of a child to be substituted for the child's evidence-in-chief in a criminal court. The present study is an evaluation of that legislation. One hundred and fifty children were observed testifying in a criminal court in the UK. The use of the videotaped evidence and subsequent cross-examination of the child witness (usually via the closed circuit television system) was also observed. The data base from the Lord Chancellor's Department of all trials involving child witnesses in England and Wales was also analysed. The results showed that the introduction of the video technology into the criminal courts reduced the levels of stress of child witnesses but did not increase the conviction rates.     

The Precautionary Principle as a Device for Greater Environmental Protection: Lessons from EC Courts

Given that the precautionary principle has never been defined in the EC Treaty, the EC jurisdictions have been playing a key role in determining the status as well as the scope of that principle. Although scholars have hitherto been paying heed to the case law on food safety, the literature has become a little thinner when one considers environmental case law. This article attempts to set the scene to explain how the precautionary principle can be invoked in different judiciary procedures at the EU level.