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.

     

Court‐Based Interventions in Spain for Families in Divorce Transition: Challenges in the Implementation of (Co)‐Parenting Coordination

Families facing separation or divorce in Spain encounter a number of obstacles, including a primarily adversarial and slow justice system, nonspecialized courts and judges, and a lack of resources to help them through the process. Recent legislation at the regional level (autonomous communities) is moving toward emphasizing shared parental responsibility and introducing parenting plans, while at the national level, legislation advances slowly. One of the main challenges professionals are facing in high‐conflict couple separation is protecting children from the effects of being in the middle of their parents’ conflict. Traditional psychological, legal, and social services are insufficient to support parents and protect their children from interparental hostile conflict—which can be exacerbated by litigation, professional intervention, domestic violence, or addiction. This article illustrates, through a case study, the implementation of parenting coordination in Spain. Different jurisdictions in Spain are slowly implementing (co‐)parenting coordination, an in‐depth intervention designed to support these families. The objective is to help families focus on children's needs and follow the court‐approved parenting plans or court orders, reduce relitigation, and improve parental communication and conflict resolution skills. This article analyzes different aspects and challenges relating to the implementation of parenting coordination in Spain. Recommendations are then made to address them.     

Young Children in Divorce and Separation: Pilot Study of a Mediation‐Based Co‐Parenting Intervention

This article reports on a cluster randomized pilot study of a mediation‐based intervention for separated parents of very young children, Young Children in Divorce and Separation (YCIDS). The control group intervention was “Mediation plus Reading.” Participants were separated parents attending mediation over a co‐parenting dispute concerning a child under the age of 5 years (n=33 cases). Nine of the 16 key child and parent outcomes were significantly better for the intervention group, with the remainder nonsignificant between groups. Mediators reported 35 per cent lower referral on to legal action for YCIDS cases following mediation. Implementation complexities of the YCIDS program led to the development of an online intervention format, now the subject of a further study. Further implications of this pilot study are discussed.     

CHILDREN'S AND PARENTS’ PERCEPTIONS ON CHILDREN'S PARTICIPATION IN DECISION MAKING AFTER PARENTAL SEPARATION AND DIVORCE*

This article outlines the views of children and parents involved in family law disputes, about the need for and appropriateness of children's participation in decisions regarding residence and contact arrangements. Ninety parents and 47 children (ranging in age from 6 to 18 years) who had been through parental separation, were interviewed. Both parents and children had a range of views about the general appropriateness and fairness of children being involved, but the great majority, particularly of parents, thought that children should have a say in these matters. Core findings of the study include the considerable influence that older children had over the arrangements either in the aftermath of the separation or in making further changes over time, and the higher stated need of children who had experienced violence, abuse, or high levels of conflict to be heard than those in less problematic and noncontested matters. Parents involved in contested proceedings supported the participation of children at a younger age than those who were not. There was a reasonable degree of agreement between parents and children about the need for children to be acknowledged and the value of their views being heard in the decision‐making process. Parents, however, expressed concern about the pressure and manipulation that children can face and exert in this process, whereas children were generally more concerned about the fairness of the outcomes, and maintaining their relationships with their parents and siblings.     

A Randomized Comparative Effectiveness Trial of Two Court‐Connected Programs for High‐Conflict Families

Parents who experience great amounts of legal conflict as they dissolve their relationship and arrive at their parenting arrangements require an outsize proportion of courts’ time and resources. Additionally, there is overwhelming evidence that conflict has a deleterious effect on their children. We partnered with the family court to conduct a study comparing the effectiveness of two programs for families deemed by their judge to be high conflict and thereby mandated to a program. Both involved one 3‐hour session; the existing program, Parent Conflict Resolution (PCR), used exhortational lecture and video; the newly designed experimental program, Family Transitions Guide (FTG), based on motivational interviewing, employed exercises attempting to get parents to decide for themselves what they needed to do for the sake of their children. Parents were assigned at random to one of the two programs (the literature often terms this a randomized clinical trial) and were interviewed just before it began and 9 months later, as was a child. Results showed that child's report of their own well‐being was significantly improved by FTG as compared to PCR and that these effects were mediated by children feeling less caught in the middle. On several variables, parent report showed that parents in PCR as compared to FTG felt decreased problems in co‐parenting and less interparental conflict, although the effects were not consistent across mother and father report. There was also evidence of diminished legal conflict over 9 months in FTG as compared to PCR.     

MAKING IT WORK

With the prevalence of divorce in our country, there is a serious need of services for divorcing families to be readily available and offered in a manner to increase the use of the services. Early intervention with the divorcing family is critical to help alleviate levels of parental conflict and decrease potential litigation. This article is an evaluation of the first year of court-mandated parenting psychoeducational workshops. The results demonstrate the positive effects of the workshops for most divorcing parents in terms of levels of ongoing conflict between parents, children's adjustment as observed by the parents, parents' adjustment, and parents' ability to settle the legal issues of the divorce and keep the children out of the middle of the conflict.     

Trauma‐Informed Interventions in Parent–Child Contact Cases

Parent–child contact problems may arise in the context of high conflict separation/divorce dynamics between parents. In cases where there are parent–child contact problems and children resist or refuse contact with one of their parents, there may also be incidents of child maltreatment, intimate partner violence, or compromised parenting that can be experienced by a parent or child as traumatic. The circumstances around separation and/or post‐divorce often result in intense stress for families. In this paper we distinguish between the stressful circumstances that may arise as a result of high interparental conflict and pulls for alignment from a parent, and the real or perceived trauma as a factor which contributes to resistance or refusal of a child to have contact with a parent. Interventions to address both trauma responses and the resist‐refuse dynamics are differentiated and discussed. After screening and assessment, the intent is to treat trauma responses with short‐term, evidence‐based therapy, either before or concurrent with co‐parent and family intervention.     

LEGISLATING FOR SHARED PARENTING: EXPLORING SOME UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS

In 2006, the Australian parliament introduced new family law legislation about substantively shared overnight parenting arrangements between divorced couples. Other countries and state legislatures are currently debating the merits of similar legislation. A largely unquestionable premise underpins this reform, namely that the majority of children from separated families demonstrably benefit from the ongoing, warm and available involvement of both parents, in a climate of well-managed interparental conflict. The Australian legislation moves beyond encouragement of shared parenting in divorce cases with adequately functioning parents; it extends into grey areas which, to date, remain poorly serviced by credible research, including its application to children of all ages and to parents experiencing significant levels of ongoing conflict. Drawing on data from a longitudinal high-conflict divorce sample, this article challenges three assumptions that underpin a legislative preference for shared parenting, that shared parenting is viable and sustainable for divorced parents in conflict, that shared care enables improved cooperation between parents, and that as a result children will be less affected by their parents' conflict. The article further explores the influence of the mediation process on the choice and durability of shared parenting arrangements.     

EVIDENCE OF A DIFFERENT NATURE: THE CHILD‐ RESPONSIVE AND LESS ADVERSARIAL INITIATIVES OF THE FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

This article charts the constellation of vision and research that underpin a new era in the Family Court of Australia, focusing on the development and outcomes of two programs that have attempted to meaningfully reinforce the centrality of children's rights and needs in family court proceedings. The Less Adversarial Trial and its front‐end Child Responsive Program (CRP) both aim to minimise the potentially negative effects on parents of a litigation process by application of a more intensive case management model adopted with the intention of altering the parents’ experience of the journey. Key features of this approach include the adoption of inquisitorial techniques, which include direct consultation with children through the CRP, modified application of the rules of evidence, and strong judicial management rather than being party driven. Findings from two studies into the pilot Children's Cases Program (now the Less Adversarial Trial) and the CRP are discussed. Significantly, evidence is outlined around the capacity of the new processes to impact on both the co‐parenting and parent–child relationships and to influence short‐term adjustment of complex families in high‐conflict dispute. In encouraging a more active focus on children's needs and views and by facilitating a stronger voice for children in proceedings that affect them, both initiatives advance Australia's commitments under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.     

PLANNING FOR POSTDIVORCE FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS

This article proposes that the focus of child custody evaluation and mediation needs to be broadened beyond custody arrangement to consideration of the range of factors that may impact on postdivorce relationships. A review of current social science literature shows that factors such as quality of parent-child relationships and level of parental conflict may be as important as residence schedule in influencing children's postdivorce adjustment. The article offers strategies for involving parents in drafting agreements to guide relationships with each other and with the children. The goal is for parents to thoughtfully tailor relationships and parenting practices to children's needs during the transition from a one-household family to a new family plan.     

Co‐Parent Court: A Problem‐Solving,Community‐Based Model for Serving Low‐Income Unmarried Co‐Parents

The Hennepin County Co‐Parent Court Project was a 3‐year demonstration project for unmarried co‐parents. The goal of the project was to remove barriers to co‐parenting in low‐income, unmarried parents. The Co‐Parent Court Project encompassed a number of services, including educational workshops, individual case management, parenting plans, legal mediation, and, if needed, supports and treatment for domestic violence. There are published articles that highlight the participant outcomes of the Co‐Parent Project. This article, however, focuses on the background for why this project was developed, components of this project, and lessons learned from implementation.     

Associations between Parent and Child Reports Of Interparental Conflict/Violence And Child Difficulties in A Family Mediation Setting*

We examined the association between parents’ (N = 52 mothers and 52 fathers) and children's (N = 27) reports of interparental conflict and child difficulties in a family mediation setting. Parents’ reports of conflict were moderately associated with children's reports of exposure to parental conflict, but only fathers’ reports of conflict were associated with children's reports of negative responses to parent conflict. While mothers and fathers agreed on their child's difficulties, only mothers’, not fathers’, report of child difficulties were moderately related to child reports of child difficulties. Mothers’ and fathers’ reports of conflict generally were not strongly associated with reports of child difficulties. In contrast to parent reports, children's reports of exposure to parents’ conflict were moderately and significantly related to self‐reported child difficulties and moderately related to parents’ reports of child academic difficulties. The magnitude of the association between the child's report of interparental conflict and self‐report of difficulties was stronger than the association between parent report of conflict and parent report of child difficulties, suggesting that parents may not fully understand their child's exposure to parent conflict/violence or the problems their child is experiencing.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Family law stakeholders prioritize the creation of parenting arrangements that are in the best interest of the child; however, it is unclear how to gather information about the child and the child's perspective in order to inform such arrangements.
• The study results suggest that parents may not agree with each other or with the child about important family issues, such as parent conflict and child difficulties. For example, parents may not fully understand their child's exposure to parental conflict/violence when in the midst of custody negotiations.
• More research is needed to determine the best method for gathering information about the child during custody proceedings. In the meantime, it is important to gather information from multiple sources and to consider the agreement and differences across such sources of information.

     

A Multidisciplinary Perspective on the Role,Functions, and Effectiveness of Parenting Coordination

Based on a survey conducted in 2018 in collaboration with the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts’ (AFCC) Task Force on Parenting Coordination, this paper explores issues related to the process and perceived outcomes of parenting coordination for families post separation and divorce. The views expressed emerge from a diverse and multidisciplinary sample (n = 289) from legal, mental health, and conflict resolution backgrounds. Almost half of all participants (46%) were mental health professionals (psychologist, psychiatrist, social worker), followed by attorneys (28%), family mediators (17%) and judges (5%). Over half of all participants identified as a parenting coordinator (PC) (53%). Based on the results, participants had the highest level of agreement that the goal of parenting coordination should be to assist in sheltering the children from parental conflict and to help the coparents reduce interparental conflict. Participants assigned greater success to parenting coordination when there was demonstration that coparenting conflict decreased. Several differences were noted among professional disciplines and specifically between legal and mental health professionals. Mental health professionals rated higher on the effectiveness of PCs to help children adjust and limit their involvement in the parental conflict, while legal professionals focused on PCs’ ability to help families resolve legal disputes. The implications of the results are discussed, including how best to measure the success of parenting coordination and to prioritize outcomes related to the success of parenting coordination across disciplines to create greater consistency in the field.     

Hybrid processes within parenting plan assessments: Rationale and an illustrative model

Parenting plan Assessments, also known as child custody evaluations, are forensic psychological investigations into the needs of children, the parenting capacities of their caregivers, and the resulting fit between the children's needs and caregiver capacities. Typically, they result in recommendations that are, in the opinion of the assessor, formulated to meet the best interests of children regarding a parenting plan, child sharing, parental responsibilities and ancillary services that are likely to support the children's optimal functioning as well as the functioning of the now reconfigured family. Such assessments are part of a pathway to untangling conflicts between the parents regarding the most appropriate parenting plan for the reconfigured family. Paradoxically, the assessment process can exacerbate the conflict, entrench parental polarization, and create lingering feelings of helplessness, frustration, and disempowerment in the parents. This article provides a rationale for the use of a hybrid process that incorporates alternative dispute resolution as an integrated part of the parenting plan assessment and provides an illustrative model of such a hybrid process.     

Treating Substance‐Abusing Parents: A Study of the Pima County Family Drug Court Approach

A geographical comparison‐group design was used to examine the effectiveness of the Pima County (Arizona) Court Assisted Treatment Services (CATS) program and its drug court intervention. The study compared the summary statistics for the volunteers to the family drug court (n=33) with a treatment‐refusal group (n=42) and a treatment‐as‐usual group (n=45) from a matched geographical area. The findings of this study indicate that the family drug court group had higher engagement and completion rates of residential treatment than was true of the other comparison groups. In addition, the volunteers to the family drug court group had fewer parental rights severed, a higher percentage of permanency decisions reached within one year, earlier permanency decisions, and a higher percentage of children placed with their parents. The implications of this study's findings for future evaluations of the components of a family drug court intervention are discussed.     

Catching Them Before Too Much Damage is Done: Early Intervention with Resistance‐Refusal Dynamics

Children often need help before their parents are ready to stop fighting. Children at the center of high‐conflict disputes, particularly those who resist contact with a parent, face extraordinary risks of maladjustment. Years of investigation and litigation may precede any meaningful attempt at intervention, based on the questionable belief that all elements of causality (or blame) must be established before any effective treatment can occur. Children's functioning may continue to deteriorate during this time, undermining their future adjustment and reducing the chance of successful intervention later. We illustrate the application of the coping‐focused, multisystemic Child Centered Conjoint Therapy model to assisting these families. Methods to assist children without compromising external investigations are discussed.     

DIVORCING FAMILIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN IN THE COURT'S FAMILY SERVICES UNIT Profiles and Impact of Services

Little is known about the families being served by court support services, or the effectiveness of the services provided. This study investigates 137 higher conflict, divorcing families with young children, who received services from the Family Services division. The study utilizes questionnaire data filled out by family services clinicians. The families presented with multiple mental health needs, including allegations of substance use and physical, emotional and sexual abuses of spouses and, to a lesser extent, children. Results detailed evaluation outcomes pertaining to joint legal and physical custody, showing an increase in joint legal custody, with little difference in physical custody arrangements. Evaluators did encourage less parental dropout. The data also profiled parents least likely to attend mandatory parenting education, accept evaluators' recommendations, and settle their case with mediation assistance. Identifying these families early can help family services clinicians track families into individualized service plans as needed.     

Perspectives of Mothers,Fathers, and Parenting Coordinators Concerning the Process and Impact of Parenting Coordination

In a small pilot study, 31 interviewees, including 12 parenting coordinators, 11 mothers, and 8 fathers representing 14 different parenting coordination cases retrospectively described child and family functioning both pre‐ and post‐parenting coordination in phone interviews. They also detailed how often and how well different issues that arose during the parenting coordination work (acrimony, problem‐solving communication, triangulation of the child into the conflict) were actively addressed. Parties tended to view coparenting more positively when reflecting on post‐ compared with pre‐intervention, but reported less change in child adjustment. Discrepancy among same‐case informant reports was common. Parenting coordinators (PCs) consistently rated their interventions as more frequent and successful than did parents. Mothers and fathers largely disagreed on interventions they experienced. While this small N pilot can offer no definitive conclusions, it underscores need for research and wisdom in including both parents' perspectives.     

The family law detection of overall risk screen (FL-DOORS): Utility as a repeated measure for assessing change in family violence risk over time

Conflicted parental separation is associated with risks to safety and wellbeing for all family members. The Family Law DOORS (FL-DOORS; Detection of Overall Risk Screen) is a standardized screening framework to assist identification, evaluation, and response to family safety risks. The FL-DOORS has previously been validated in two large Australian samples (N = 6089) and found fit-for-purpose as an indicator of family violence and wellbeing risks in separated families. Now, using pilot data from a community mediation context, we examine its utility as a repeated measure for detecting change in safety and wellbeing over time. A pilot cohort of 67 parents engaged in a mediation service for parenting and/or property disputes completed the FL-DOORS at intake (T1) and approximately 8 weeks later (T2). We assessed T1-T2 change scores and correlations in change between variables and used MANOVA to determine if clusters of related scales discriminated change across time. Findings support the psychometric capacity of the FL-DOORS for use as a repeated measure in risk monitoring. We also note possible effects of this early screening process for reducing risk prior to engagement in mediation input. We discuss implementation utility for family law services to monitor change in risk type and magnitude over time.     

Parenting Plans for Special Needs Children: Applying a Risk‐Assessment Model

Family courts are seeing an increasing number of separating or divorced families who have a special needs child. These cases present complex challenges for family law professionals charged with crafting parenting plans based on best interests standards. For many of these children, the typical developmentally based custodial arrangements may not be suitable, given the child's specific symptoms and treatment needs. We present a model for understanding how the general and specific needs of these children, as well as the demands on parents, can be assessed and understood in the context of divorce. This includes an analysis of risk and protective factors that inform timeshare and custodial recommendations and determinations. The risk assessment model is then applied to three of the most commonly occurring childhood neurodevelopmental and psychiatric disorders likely to be encountered in family court, namely, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, depressive disorders, and autistic spectrum disorders.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• There has been a dramatic rise in the population of children with neurodevelopmental, psychiatric, and medical syndromes whose parents are disputing custody in the family courts.
• Family law professionals of all disciplines should develop a fundamental knowledge base about the most commonly seen special needs children in family court, such as those with neurodevelopmental conditions like autistic spectrum disorder, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and severe depressive disorders (especially with teenagers), which may involve suicidal or self‐harming behaviors.
• Commonly recommended parenting plans may be inappropriate for many special needs children, as some function significantly below their chronological age and pose extreme behavioral challenges.
• A systematic analysis of risk and protective factors should inform timeshare arrangements and determinations with this varied population, including the safety of the child and severity of the disorder, parental commitment and availability to pursue medical, educational, and therapeutic services, the parental attunement and insightful about the problem, and the differential parenting skills of each parent.