THE POTENTIAL OF THE FAMILY LAW EDUCATION REFORM PROJECT FOR FAMILY LAWYERS1

Family lawyers are major beneficiaries of the reforms set out in the Family Law Education Reform Project (FLER) Report. This commentary from a veteran family law practitioner explores the needs of the family law bar for the training of law students in practical, interdisciplinary, client‐centered lawyering that goes beyond the traditional case method. I trace many of the current innovations evolving in family law practice and how FLER reforms will not only benefit law schools but also have a major impact in the courts and private practice sector.     

STATEWIDE INITIATIVES TO ENCOURAGE ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND ENHANCE COLLABORATIVE APPROACHES TO RESOLVING FAMILY ISSUES

Over the past 27 years, since the concept of the multidoor courthouse was first introduced, methods for resolving family issues have increasingly focused on less adversarial and more collaborative approaches. Infrastructures have developed in a variety of ways in different states to initiate, support, and promote these approaches, and pilot projects have provided an invaluable avenue for testing and implementing changes. This article will describe some of the current statewide initiatives to develop infrastructure and implement change through creative pilot projects and will propose strategies to sustain these changes.     

WHAT FAMILY LAWYERS ARE REALLY DOING WHEN THEY NEGOTIATE

How should lawyers negotiate? This article outlines an empirical study of how lawyers rate each other in negotiation behaviors. After discussing what skills are needed for effective negotiation behavior, we then look more closely at how family lawyers in particular are negotiating. Examining some troubling data, we find that family lawyers appear to be more adversarial and less problem solving than other types of practitioners. We conclude by discussing why this might be so and what the family law bar and family law professors should be doing in the future to address this problem.     

DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND THE POSTDIVORCE FAMILY: IMPLICATIONS OF A PARADIGM SHIFT1

Over the past two decades, there has been a paradigm shift in the way the legal system handles most family disputes—particularly disputes involving children. This paradigm shift has replaced the conventional model of adjudication with a more collaborative, interdisciplinary, and forward‐looking family dispute resolution regime. It has also transformed the practice of family law and fundamentally altered the way in which disputing families interact with the legal system. This essay examines the elements of this paradigm shift in family dispute resolution and explores the opportunities and challenges it offers for families, children, and the legal system.     

GOING TO COURT AS A LAST RESORT: ESTABLISHING A DUTY FOR ATTORNEYS IN DIVORCE PROCEEDINGS TO DISCUSS ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION WITH THEIR CLIENTS

This Note advocates for the creation of a uniform ethical requirement that all attorneys in divorce proceedings involving children inform their clients about alternative dispute resolution (ADR), particularly mediation and collaborative law. By emphasizing cooperation and negotiation among the divorcing parents, both mediation and collaborative law offer these would-be litigants the opportunity to move forward with their parental duties long after the divorce is finalized. Using the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct as a template, this ethical requirement will ensure that clients are fully informed of the availability of ADR and of the chance to forgo potentially unnecessary litigation. Ultimately, the implementation of an ethical requirement holds the potential to minimize the impact of divorce on children by facilitating the process of moving forward for the family as a whole.     

CHILDREN,THE UNCRC,AND FAMILY LAW IN ENGLAND AND WALES

There is no doubt that, overall, there has been a great deal of activity in relation to children's rights under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) since it was ratified by the UK government in 1991. Of particular significance in the context of family law, however, are the provisions of Article 12, which have in many ways proved to be more problematic than other provisions, not least because, in the context of family law, children's participation rights are necessarily juxtaposed with the long‐standing and hitherto unchallenged rights of parents to make important decisions about family life. The reorganisation in 2001 of the family court welfare services in England and Wales with the creation of the Children and Family Courts Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS), generated a new impetus for the consideration of children's participation rights and, at an organizational level, considerable progress has been made in embracing the provisions of the UNCRC. More problematic, however, is the acceptance of children's participation in making decisions about their futures by adults using and working in the family justice system. At the level of the courts, judicial attitudes are slow to change and in England, as court judgments often demonstrate, these are firmly rooted in a view of children as being incompetent in such issues; at the level of parents using the system, it is arguable that new discourses about the best interests of the child serve as a proxy for continuing discourses about parents’ rights that have become evident, most recently, in the context of an increasingly influential fathers’ rights lobby; and at the level of welfare practitioners, recent research also demonstrates that, although the rhetoric of children's rights is widely accepted, the willingness and ability to make these real in the context of family proceedings is, for a variety of reasons, less in evidence.     

USING EXTERNSHIPS TO INTRODUCE FAMILY LAW STUDENTS TO NEW PROFESSIONAL ROLES

Law schools are seeking ways to familiarize family law students with exciting new professional roles arising in connection with family court reform. This article describes the family law externship program at William Mitchell College of Law which includes a classroom component allowing students placed in different practice settings to compare and contrast their experiences. The program assists students in making career choices and enhances their ability to counsel future clients.     

构建民事审前调解程序的思考

现行法院调解制度存在调审合一、律师参与有限、当事人不出庭等方面问题,影响了调解作用的发挥。建议借鉴国外立法,建立审前调解程序,实行调审分离,设立专门调解法官,加强律师功能,规定当事人亲自参与调解,并确定审前调解时限为1个月,裁判程序中不予调解制度等。     

CONFIDENTIALITY,DUE PROCESS,AND JUDICIAL DISQUALIFICATION IN THE UNIFIED FAMILY COURT: REPORT TO THE HONORABLE STEPHANIE DOMITROVICH

To the extent that courts realize the pure one judge–one family notion of the unified family court—in which one judge handles all domestic relations, probate, juvenile dependency, juvenile delinquency, and domestic violence cases involving members of the same family—they encounter three potential legal barriers: confidentiality of court records in some of the cases, due process issues arising from the consideration of material from a related case file in which the parties to the current case may or may not be parties, and judicial disqualification arising from the judge's handling of a previous case involving the family. This article summarizes information obtained from a survey conducted for the Children and Family Law Committee of the National Conference of State Trial Judges, of courts in sixteen states, to learn how they have resolved these legal issues.     

BRINGING CHILDREN TO THE MEDIATION TABLE:

With the rise of divorce mediation as an effective means of resolving divorce and custody disputes, a question that arises is whether a child should actively participate in the mediation process to make his or her voice heard. This article discusses the costs and benefits of involvement, focusing on four specific approaches to the inclusion of children in divorce mediation. This article comes to the conclusion that the integration of children in mediation ought to be considered on a case-by-case basis, and further proposes that a child be included in divorce mediation in circumstances where the child's input is needed to help parents resolve an issue of dispute that concerns their child's interests.     

TAILORING THE INTERVENTION TO THE CHILD IN THE SEPARATING AND DIVORCED FAMILY

Longitudinal and national studies show that many children of divorce suffer grave emotional and educational difficulties. These difficulties, which are evident before, during, and long after divorce, have complex roots in skewed family relationships, such as troubled parent/child relationships, the psychiatric disturbance of one or both parents, and continuing parental conflict. Although it is abundantly clear that these families are in dire need of a wide range of sophisticated educational and clinical programs, both brief and extended, to address the different subgroups within this population, few such programs are available. Of particular concern are high-conflict families where the divorce may have triggered a thought disorder Family-centered and group programs that make use of recent research findings have been successful in addressing both parents and children within different target groups in the divorce population. Programs based on these successful demonstration projects should be made widely available through the courts and/or in the community.     

FAMILY LAW AND THE NEUROSCIENCE OF ATTACHMENT,PART I

In this far‐reaching interview, Allan Schore, renowned scientist, clinical psychologist, and clinical neuropsychologist, considers the place of neuroscience in facilitating developmental knowledge and better decision making in family law matters. He details current science on the neurology of attachment formation, the function of early caregiving relationships, gender, neuroscience perspectives on conflict and family violence, and implications for parenting arrangements. At the meta level, Schore describes the responsibilities of the family law system in promoting the development of the child. On the faculty of the Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, UCLA, Schore is on the editorial staff of 35 journals in various academic and clinical fields. His integration of neuroscience with attachment theory is documented in three seminal volumes, Affect Regulation and the Origin of the Self, Affect Dysregulation and Disorders of the Self , and Affect Regulation and the Repair of the Self, as well as numerous articles and chapters. He has justifiably earned the nickname of “America's Bowlby.”     

FAMILY LAW AND THE NEUROSCIENCE OF ATTACHMENT,PART II

Daniel Siegel is renowned for his ability to translate neuroscience for professions working outside the arena of science. Here, Siegel discusses advances in interpersonal neurobiology, specifically considering applications for family law. Siegel is a clinical professor of psychiatry and co‐director of the Mindful Awareness Research Center at UCLA and director of the Mindsight Institute. He is the author of numerous articles, chapters, and books, including the internationally acclaimed professional texts, The Developing Mind: Toward a Neurobiology of Interpersonal Experience and The Mindful Brain: Reflection and Attunement in the Cultivation of Well‐Being.     

THROUGH A DIFFERENT LENS: USING FILM TO TEACH FAMILY LAW

This article discusses the aspects of narrative and character development that make films a useful tool to supplement classroom legal education. Moreover, utilizing film is particularly effective for learning and exploring the dynamics of human relationships at the center of family law cases. When designing a film and family law course instructors should seek to promote creative thinking, cultural competence, student exploration of bias and assumptions and best practices for attorneys based on the examples provided in the film. Films make the learning process more fun, but still provide substantial opportunities to broaden students' concept of the impact of law on family members.     

UNIFIED FAMILY COURTS

Fragmented court systems are especially problematic for domestic violence victims because they typically are involved in more than one proceeding that stems from the same pattern of abuse. The proceedings are handled in different courts and before different judges, who are often unaware of these orders being issued in other proceedings. Consequently, conflicting orders are prevalent and the protection and needs of victims are often not met. A unified family court, on the other hand, provides one court with the subject-matter jurisdiction to handle all family-related matters and one judge to hear all cases that involve a single family, resulting in conflicting orders being issued less frequently. Additionally, the needs of victims are better served as a result of the services component. Given the fragmented state of the court systems in New York and Pennsylvania, United States; Alberta, Canada; and Australia, unified family courts should be implemented in each locality.