Using Outcome Measurement to Promote Continuous Quality Improvement for Children in Foster Care

Continuous Quality Improvement is the term used to measure progress toward achieving safety, permanency, and well‐being for children in foster care. This report highlights the results of a 2014 survey conducted by the National Resource Center on Legal and Judicial Issues asking states to identify how they are using performance measures to improve the lives of children in care, which measures are being used, whether the newly‐created well‐being measures are being integrated into the original set of court performance measures, and how performance measures are being used to support Continuous Quality Improvement. Although there is much more to do, the number of performance measures being used, the number of states sharing data between courts and child welfare agencies, and the number of documented examples of improvement in lives of abuse and neglected children are all encouraging signs.     

REEVALUATING WHERE WE STAND: A COMPREHENSIVE SURVEY OF AMERICA'S FAMILY JUSTICE SYSTEMS

The call for court reform remains critical in the face of the growing complexity of burgeoning family law cases nationwide. Many states have restructured their court systems using the unified family court model, resolving legal, personal, emotional, and social disputes with the aim of improving the well‐being of families and children. Other states utilize the traditional approach, resulting in cases being handled in a fragmented, time‐consuming and expensive manner. In this article, Professor Barbara A. Babb presents the results of her nationwide survey regarding how each state handles family law matters. The survey is a follow‐up to her comprehensive 1998 survey and her 2002 survey update. The results of the recent analysis reveal that a total of thirty‐eight states now have either statewide family courts, family courts in selected areas of the state, or pilot or planned family courts, representing seventy‐five percent of states. The number of states without a specialized or separate system to handle family law matters has decreased from seventeen states in 1998 to thirteen in 2006. These changes are significant when one considers the complexities involved in court reform. The need for court reform remains an urgent one, as family law cases occupy a significant percentage of court dockets across the country. Families and children deserve a court system where justice is effective and efficient and where their legal, personal, emotional, and social needs are resolved in a therapeutic and holistic manner.     

Children Exposed to Domestic Violence: Making Trauma‐Informed Custody and Visitation Decisions

This article explores the risks for young children and the challenges for courts that emerge when parents who are victims or perpetrators of intimate partner violence seek court decisions on child visitation or custody matters. We focus particularly on children age five and younger, a group that is disproportionately represented in families affected by intimate partner violence, and especially vulnerable to its traumatic impact. We examine the literature on children's response to violence between their parents and the literature on parental alienation, a counter‐charge that may arise when one parent alleges violence as a reason to limit the other parent's access to the children. We look at challenges faced by both mental health professionals and courts involved in custody determinations and make policy recommendations to help courts make trauma‐informed decisions that best serve children.     

An Exploratory Study of Custody Challenges Experienced by Affirming Mothers of Transgender and Gender‐Nonconforming Children

Family courts have lacked familiarity with evidence‐based recommendations regarding the best interests of transgender and gender‐nonconforming (TGNC) children, resulting in some affirming parents losing physical and/or legal custody. This exploratory, qualitative study with 10 affirming mothers of TGNC children who had experienced custody‐related challenges reported on salient themes, including “blame” for causing children's gender nonconformity, coercion by ex‐partners, bias in the courts, negative impact on children, emotional and financial toll on participants, and the critical importance of adequate resources. Findings indicate the need for better‐educated family court professionals, as well as socioemotional support and financial and legal assistance for affirming parents of TGNC children.     

Introduction: Problem‐Solving Courts

Problem‐solving courts have become a significant feature of the U.S. justice system, and their popularity appears to be growing internationally with courts under way or in development in countries such as Australia and Great Britain. Drug courts are the most visible type of problem‐solving court, but other varieties are beginning to take hold. Mental health courts, domestic violence courts, and community‐based courts among others are beginning to handle a considerable portion of the legal workload in many jurisdictions. Criminal law violations as well as neighborhood conflicts and interpersonal disputes are increasingly being referred to problem‐solving courts rather than to traditional criminal or civil courts.     

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.

     

Beyond Therapy: Problem‐Solving Courts and the Deliberative Democratic State

Problem‐solving courts (drug courts, community courts, domestic violence courts, and mental health courts), unlike traditional courts, attempt to get at the root of the individual and social problems that motivate criminal behavior. Theoretical understandings of problem‐solving courts are mostly Foucauldian; proponents argue that these new institutions employ therapeutic techniques that encourage individuals to self‐engineer in ways that subtly increase state power. The Foucauldian approach captures only some elements of problem‐solving courts and does not fully theorize the revolution in justice that these courts present. Problem‐solving courts, domestic violence courts in particular, orient not just around individual change but also around social change and cultural transformation. Combining the Foucauldian idea of a therapeutic state (as developed by James Nolan) with an understanding of the deliberative democratic mechanisms of larger‐scale structural transformation (found in Habermas and others) leads to a more balanced and empirically open orientation to the actual motivations, goals, and achievements of problem‐solving courts.     

ENGLISH COURTS' TREATMENT OF THE CHILDREN OF SAME‐SEX COUPLES

This article reviews the historical approach of the English Courts to the children who are raised in same‐sex households; it discusses the very recent reformation of attitude of the courts, and of the legislators, to such family arrangements, and it examines the current attitude of the English Courts. The article considers how the courts have struggled historically to apply ordinary welfare principles in the different context of homosexual parenting, and discusses the complex inter‐play of family relationships when children are born into same‐sex families through donor insemination. The article discusses the ongoing challenges for the courts in dealing with cases of this kind.     

The Court's Role in Promoting Comprehensive Justice for Pregnant Drug and Alcohol Users

Drug use during pregnancy is an important social and medical issue. Legislatures and courts have offered a variety of responses, ranging from imprisonment to comprehensive service programs that are rehabilitative in nature. This article discusses the prevalence and effects of prenatal drug use, followed by a presentation of the scope of legal responses and treatment options. Some courts do not provide outreach services for drug‐offending mothers, while others may offer a limited range of services. In contrast, a comprehensive justice approach would provide a wide range of health, employment, and social programs for the offender. This approach is based on philosophies of restorative justice, therapeutic jurisprudence, and procedural justice. Such a theory‐based comprehensive justice program ultimately benefits mothers, children, and the community. Considerations are offered for judges who seek to implement a comprehensive justice approach to address this important problem.     

The Impact of Model Court Reform in Arizona on the Processing of Child Abuse and Neglect Cases

Arizona juvenile courts have taken a series of steps over the past five years to improve the quality and timeliness of court proceedings in child abuse and neglect matters. These efforts encompass both procedural reforms to front‐load the early hearing process as well as reforms that require a clearly demarcated permanency hearing and permanency determination process. A comparative analysis of the impact of these changes in four selected counties reveals that child abuse and neglect cases are handled in a more timely manner; that children are spending considerably less time in out‐of‐home placements; that courts are becoming more specific in the orders generated at dependency hearings (particularly initial hearings); and that the State and federal governments have realized sizeable savings in placement costs.     

Helping Children in the Child Welfare Systems Heal from Trauma: A Systems Integration Approach

Numerous organizations touch the lives of children and their families following incidents of maltreatment, including family/dependency courts, child welfare agencies, foster parent associations, foster care agencies or substitute care facilities, mental health agencies, and others. The way these organizations work together is critically important. They have the potential to promote child safety and reduce the harmful impact of maltreatment on children, but also, unfortunately, at times their actions may worsen the traumatic experience for children and their families. The National Child Traumatic Stress Network conducted a survey of 53 child‐serving organizations in 10 states, to assess the ways the organizations gather and share trauma‐related information and the basic training about child trauma their staffs receive. The goal was to determine how the various service systems, including the courts, communicate with each other about trauma and the extent to which, alone or in combination, they promote children's healing following traumatic events. The survey results point to a need to improve collaboration on issues associated with child maltreatment and trauma. Judges can be important leaders in bringing about necessary changes. Recommendations for judges and courts are included.     

Exploring Indian Child Welfare Act implementation and case outcomes

Despite the passage of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) more than four decades ago, little is known about how or how well it is being implemented into practice by the state courts or how implementation may be related to improved outcomes for Indian children and families. This study explores how ICWA implementation in five state court sites is related to case outcomes. One hundred and fifty-one ICWA cases were reviewed for factors including active efforts findings, tribal presence at hearings, use of qualified expert witness (QEW) testimony, notice, and confirmation of ICWA status. Results are mixed. Specific ICWA implementation measures and aggregate measures were mostly not related to outcomes, but early implementation, such as having the tribe present at the first hearing, did appear related to timely permanency. Implications of these findings and future research directions are discussed.     

WHEN PARENTS ARE ON A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD, COURTS CRY FOUL AT SMOKING

Should courts regulated a parent's legal smoking habit because it is in the best interests of the children? This article explores the historical views of smoking and the potential and probable health hazards associated with cigarette smoking. By a review of the dangers associated with smoking as well as court cases that have considered smoking as endangement to children, this note suggests that courts do have the power to curtail a parent's smoking habit and in turn should regulate such behavior, especially when it is medically proven that it is in the best interests of the children.     

MEASURING PROGRESS IN IMPROVING COURT PROCESSING OF CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT CASES

With all of the changes in federal law relating to child maltreatment, foster care, and adoption, courts have become active partners with child welfare agencies in assuring safety and permanency for children. Outcome measures are needed to track achievement of the distinct goals of courts and those goals they share with child welfare agencies. This article presents a set of measures that focuses on the court contribution to desirable outcomes for children and families. These measures have undergone extensive development, review, and field testing by representatives from several national organizations interested in court reform and child welfare, but they still require more discussion and refinement. Indeed, outcome measures are an essential component of a process of continuing improvement, which means they need to be reviewed periodically to ensure they are valid, reliable, and not redundant.     

NIPPING IT IN THE BUD®: ADOPTING A FAMILY DRUG COURT APPROACH TO FIGHTING THE CYCLE OF ALCOHOL ADDICTION FOR CHILDREN WHEN PARENTS ARE CONVICTED OF DUI

Many states have implemented Drug Courts in recent years by combining drug and alcohol treatment with ongoing judicial supervision. Through the use of incentives such as reduced and dismissed charges and fines combined with supervised treatment, Drug Courts have been shown to be very effective in helping to break the cycle of addiction, crime, and repeat incarceration for those involved. However, these courts do little to address situations in which the addict is the custodial parent of a minor child, who is exponentially more at‐risk for future alcohol addiction simply by being the child of an alcoholic, due to both environmental and biological factors. Thus, while the parent's addiction is theoretically being addressed by the courts, little is being done, absent a showing of abuse or neglect, by the judicial system to combat the seeds of addiction that have already been planted in these children. Therefore, this Note advocates for states to include an alcohol education and counseling program aimed at children of alcohol‐related offenders based on the Drug Court Model. Participation in this program would then act as a mitigating factor for the addicted offender when receiving their final sentence. This proposed program would then serve as a model for other states to adopt in the near future.     

In the Best Interests of an Indian Child: The Indian Child Welfare Act

Before passage of the Indian Child Welfare Act in 1978, state, private, and federal agencies systematically removed Indian children from their families and tribal communities, placing them with non‐Indian families with little appreciation for the detrimental impact that cultural deprivation would have on these children. State courts often ignored the sovereign authority of tribal courts with regard to their children, and were, more often than not, unwilling to acknowledge the importance of the perspective of the child's tribe and/or extended family members. With passage of the Indian Child Welfare Act in 1978, Congress imposed upon state child welfare practices substantive and procedural requirements to which state courts must adhere, most notably the mandate that state courts must now give primary consideration to the placement of Indian children within their extended families and tribal communities. In addition, federal law requires state courts to recognize tribal court authority and jurisdiction over tribal children. This article reviews the history of federal, state, and private practices that propelled Congress to pass the ICWA, the changes that have resulted from this vital legislation, and the challenges that face courts in ensuring that state courts meet these requirements.     

TRADE‐OFFS IN FORMULATING A CONSISTENT NATIONAL POLICY ON ADOPTION*

Just as the courts must consider the trade‐off between the best interest of the child and parental rights in involuntary termination of parental rights, policy on international adoption must consider the trade‐offs between the best interest of the child and the long‐term interests of the nation. We argue that countries that suspend international adoptions do not maximize social welfare. A consistent national policy to maximize the well‐being of the children and society at large would be to devote resources today to the oversight of international adoption in accord with child protections under the Hague Convention, while at the same time developing a domestic system of care that provides for the physical and developmental needs of orphaned children in the context of permanent families.     

PROTECTING CHILDREN'S RIGHTS IN CONTACT DISPUTES: THE ROLE OF CHILDREN'S CONTACT SERVICES IN AUSTRALIA*

This article explores the role of Children's Contact Services (CCSs) in protecting children's right to express, and have heard, their wishes in contact disputes. The findings presented are drawn from the Australian Children's Contact Services Project and were based on 142 interviews with representatives from the government, the courts and legal profession who refer families to CCSs, service staff, as well as the parents and children who use the services. An analysis of client data from 396 families who had used one of six contact services in Victoria and Queensland during the month of August 2003 was also conducted. The findings suggested that CCSs successfully engaged children in a “dynamic self‐deterministic” process where children were able to explore their own wishes in relation to contact visits over time as their relationship goals changed. John Eekelaar described this process as being central to making decisions that are in children's best interests.