FAMILY GROUP CONFERENCING AND CHILD PROTECTION MEDIATION: ESSENTIAL TOOLS FOR PRIORITIZING FAMILY ENGAGEMENT IN CHILD WELFARE CASES

Family group conferencing (FGC) and child protection mediation maximize family engagement in child welfare cases by prioritizing families' roles in discussions and decisions. This article examines how FGC helps professionals to focus on family and community strengths, encourages family engagement, and provides targeted case plans for families and timely, permanent placements for children. It explores how courts and agencies use these interventions to empower families to contribute to resolutions in ways that are not possible in traditional litigation processes. These complementary processes help children and families by providing forums where families are allowed to make informed choices and take an active role in creating plans for their future.     

NEGLECTED INFANTS IN FAMILY COURT

This paper applies the science of early childhood development to the question of neglect in infancy to offer best practice guidance to family law and child protection professionals charged with acting in their best interest. The paper discusses the challenges of presenting cases of infant neglect, particularly emotional neglect, to the court. Current science on the implications of neglect for brain development, and long term mental health are discussed. Recommendations for assessment, intervention and questions that should be addressed in court deliberations are outlined.     

FAMILY/CHILD JUDICIAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION (JDR)

This article outlines the Pilot Project in Pre-trial Judicial Settlement Conferencing in Family and Child Welfare/Protection Matters, which was designed and implemented by the authors, The Honourable Judge Nancy A. Flatters of the Provincial Court of Alberta, Family and Youth Court, at Calgary. The article also outlines the basis, rationale, and development underlying this emerging nontraditional judicial approach to the resolution of these disputes and the resulting settlement outcomes.     

REFLECTIONS ON THE STATE OF CONSENSUS-BASED DECISION MAKING IN CHILD WELFARE

Consensus approaches to child protection decision making such as mediation and family group conferencing have become increasingly widespread since first initiated about 25 years ago. They address but are also constrained by paradoxes in the child protection system about commitments to protecting children and to family autonomy. In a series of surveys, interviews, and dialogues, mediation and conferencing researchers and practitioners discussed the key issues that face their work: clarity about purpose, system support, family empowerment, professional qualifications, and coordination among different types of consensus-building efforts. Consensus-based decision making in child protection will continue to expand and grow but will also continue to confront these challenges.     

FAMILY DEFINITIONS AND CHILDREN'S RIGHTS IN CUSTODY DECISION MAKING: THE IMPORTANCE OF A CHANGING LITIGANT CONTEXT

Recent scholarship has advocated two distinct approaches to promoting the preservation of children's attachment relationships during custody disputes between their biological and nonbiological parents. Some scholars argue that legal recognition of expansive definitions of the family is the key to protecting children's attachments, while others argue that such protection is contingent upon legal recognition of children's rights. This research examines the efficacy of these competing arguments through an analysis of 75 cases decided in 21 states and the District of Columbia between 2004 and 2005. Findings suggest that judicial attention to definitions of the family is generally confined to cases involving specific types of litigants; namely, former homosexual partners, couples who utilized fertility technologies, former stepparents, and presumptive fathers. In these instances, attention to broad conceptions of the family is associated with the maintenance of children's attachment relationships. Beyond this particular context, however, judges focus almost exclusively on balancing children's interests and rights against those of their biological parents. These findings suggest that both children's rights and family definitions influence judicial decisions, but their impact is context specific. For those scholars advocating legal change, this is an important insight because it shifts the debate from an “either/or” focus to one that recognizes the importance of the litigant context in custody decision making.     

A COMMENT ON WILLIAM J. HOWE AND HUGH MCISAAC'S ARTICLE “FINDING THE BALANCE” PUBLISHED IN THE JANUARY 2008 ISSUE OF FAMILY COURT REVIEW

This article is a response to an article written by William Howe and Hugh McIsaac that questions their recommendations that court‐based mediation not be used when certain types of persons appear in court. We assert that it will be very difficult for the court to identify these people. Further, we argue that mediation practice has advanced so far that even these persons (those with serious issues of domestic violence, substance abuse, and mental health) should be given an opportunity to participate in mediation before being referred to the adversarial court process.     

The Impact of Child‐Parent Psychotherapy on Child Dependency Court Outcomes

Although parental compliance with court orders in child welfare cases is key to achieving physical parent‐child reunification and successful case closure, little research has examined how parent‐child relationship‐focused rehabilitative services uniquely influence case outcomes. This project fills this gap by investigating links between court ordering of and parental participation in Child‐Parent Psychotherapy (CPP) with court outcomes. Data were obtained from court records of 448 court‐involved parents. Hierarchical regressions revealed that greater participation in CPP led to reunification and successful case closure but not faster case closure. Courtroom professionals should consider parent‐child relationship‐based therapies as tools for achieving child welfare goals.     

SUBSTANCE-ABUSING FATHERS IN FAMILY COURT

Although all forms of substance abuse disproportionately affect men during early to middle adulthood, when many are fathering children, the status of substance-abusing men as parents is largely ignored in public policy, service delivery, and research exploring the consequences of chronic drug and alcohol abuse. In this review, the authors highlight issues of potential concern to professionals working with this poorly understood, negatively stereotyped population of fathers in family court settings. After reviewing the existing literature on substance-abusing fathers and their children, the authors challenge family court personnel to use (a) awareness of stereotyping, (b) clinical assessment, (c) the principles of therapeutic jurisprudence, and (d) treatment resources to minimize, as much as possible, the risk for poor developmental outcomes incurred by children with a substance-abusing father.     

INTRODUCING PERSPECTIVES IN FAMILY LAW AND SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH

This article provides an editorial introduction to the following three related articles on the growing use and influence of social science research in family law. It first considers why this has become problematic and identifies some common strategies used by advocates, sometimes under the guise of scholarship, to destroy the standing of research findings contrary to their ideological or political position. Then it discusses briefly the remedies proposed to mitigate these kinds of problems within the following three articles.     

CHILD RELOCATION: AN INTRACTABLE INTERNATIONAL FAMILY LAW PROBLEM

This article examines the current state of the law on child relocation across the major common law‐based jurisdictions, with particular emphasis on the contrasting approaches to the problem in Australia and the United Kingdom. It then goes on to suggest changes aimed at achieving more principled and predictable outcomes.     

FAMILY CARE COMMITMENT DISCRIMINATION: BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN WORK AND FAMILY

This Note discusses the pervasive problem of employment discrimination based on family responsibilities, or family care commitment discrimination. Employees with family care commitments often find themselves being pulled in opposing directions—between work and family. When an employee is forced to choose work, for financial reasons, over family, his or her family ends up suffering. The current state and federal statutes aimed at employment discrimination are insufficient to deal with family care commitment discrimination. This Note proposes a change to the current legislation and explains how this change will protect employees and families, while causing employers to internalize externalities by adopting more family‐friendly policies.     

Evolving Federal Policies and Their Implications for Greenbook Interventions

This article addresses the influence of the Greenbook on federal policy in the past 20 years and traces the history of federal policy responses to the co‐occurrence of domestic violence and child maltreatment. While there has been some success in getting the domestic violence and child abuse fields to embrace equally the needs of adult and child survivors of domestic violence, federal legislation has progressed slowly, reflecting that ambivalence. Strengthening cross‐system policy advocacy and increasing evidence that addressing domestic violence improves outcomes for children are identified as ongoing needs.     

FAMILY LAW EDUCATION REFORM PROJECT: A FACULTY PERSPECTIVE

The Family Law Education Reform Project Report calls for shifting the family law teaching paradigm from a focus on case‐based analysis toward a problem‐solving, interdisciplinary approach. This essay encourages law professors to take seriously this shifting teaching and learning paradigm. Aligning family law curriculum with the realities of practicing family law is a critical step in this process. This essay discusses the numerous intellectual challenges family law professors will face as they reflect on the proposed FLER Project curriculum.     

REPORT FROM THE WINGSPREAD CONFERENCE ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND FAMILY COURTS

In February 2007 the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges and the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts brought together a working group of thirty‐seven experienced practitioners and researchers to identify and explore conceptual and practical tensions that have hampered effective work with families in which domestic violence has been identified or alleged. Five central sets of issues were raised at the conference and are discussed in this report. These include the following: differentiation among families experiencing domestic violence, screening and triage, participation by families in various processes and services, appropriate outcomes for children, and family court roles and resources. The report emphasizes the need for continued multidisciplinary collaboration in order to better serve families affected by domestic violence and it includes an appendix of consensus points as well as suggestions for formation of ongoing work groups.     

ARE WE REALLY LOOKING OUT FOR THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD? APPLYING THE NEW ZEALAND MODEL OF FAMILY GROUP CONFERENCES TO CASES OF CHILD NEGLECT IN THE UNITED STATES

This Note advocates for state laws to be amended to implement family group conferencing (FGC) as the first step in cases of alleged child neglect. FGC was developed in New Zealand nearly twenty years ago and have since become a realistic method of balancing the best interests of the children, families, agencies, courts, and communities involved in the child welfare system. A FGC is a meeting among family members and professionals that is conducted in order to develop a plan for a child who is the victim of neglect. FGC places the family at the center of the welfare proceedings and empowers them to reach a solution without having to resort to the often lengthy and expensive adversarial court system. If FGC is incorporated into the child welfare systems throughout the United States, communication between the parents, social services, and the courts could increase, helping families adequately address the problem of neglect and getting the children out of the child welfare system quickly and more efficiently.     

ASSESSING AND COMMUNICATING SOCIAL SCIENCE INFORMATION IN FAMILY AND CHILD JUDICIAL SETTINGS: STANDARDS FOR JUDGES AND ALLIED PROFESSIONALS

Social science is increasingly important in judicial decision making and family law development. This increased use means that judges, lawyers, mental health professionals, and social scientists must assess the quality of social science information and communicate it in a multidisciplinary environment. This article provides tools for improving multidisciplinary communication by identifying logical, methodological, and community standards for assessment and communication that are fundamental both to the scientific method and to the inquiries the Daubert decision instructs judges to make in their gatekeeper evaluations of scientific information. Employing a common set of standards can result in a significant improvement in the quality of the social science knowledge used in judicial settings.     

A PRACTITIONER'S PERSPECTIVE ON UNIFIED FAMILY COURTS: CASE STUDIES

As a summary of simple examples demonstrating practical advantages of a family court, this article relates a few experiences from the perspective of a family law attorney who practices regularly in the Fulton County Family Division in Atlanta.