Reforming Relocation Law: A Reply to Prof. Thompson

This article provides a response to Prof. Thomson's critique, noting many points of agreement and also the broader consensus that is emerging among experts in the field. The research evidence, and the wider body of knowledge on children's well‐being generally, supports the proposition that relocation is a risk factor for children after parental separation but provides no support for a general presumption either in favor of, nor against, relocation. Nor should it be assumed that the interests of children are the same as those of their primary caregiver. We defend our three questions arguing the need in an adult‐centric debate to focus resolutely on children's interests rather than on adult rights. Both Prof. Thompson's approach and our own involve guided decision making with the child's best interests as the paramount consideration—his through weak presumptions based upon research about how judges respond to relocation issues and ours through focused questions based on research on how parents and children respond to relocations issues. We do not consider that codifying the existing practices of the courts represents real reform. We identify various risks involved in using presumptions, but note that, in jurisdictions with limited publicly funded resources for individual case assessment, presumptions, burdens or guidelines may be needed to offer rough justice to impecunious parents.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• Notes points of emerging agreement on relocation within the research community
• Explores the differences between the use of presumptions and focused questions and highlights the role of empirical research of the lived experience of children and families postrelocation disputes
• Identifies how the level of public resourcing for the family law system may impact upon decisions about the substance of the law concerning relocation

     

1‐800‐Skype‐Me

It is increasingly common that children of divorce are geographically separated from one of their parents. This article considers the challenges that arise from that reality by exploring this problem from a variety of perspectives and by providing practical tips to minimize the impact of the distance. A review of the Ontario caselaw and Arizona Guidelines reveal that certain factors are important in the resolution of these disputes, including: the age of the child, mode of transportation between homes, distance, prior contact, and feasibility of virtual access. Court‐ordered access may include remedies that, absent the distance issue, may be considered extreme, including moving to overnight/extended access periods for young children, permitting children to travel unaccompanied, favoring the nonresident parent for holidays and vacation time, allowing children to decrease contact with the nonresident parent, and decreasing or terminating child support. Where distance dictates the in‐person and virtual access schedules, creative solutions are critical to the successful resolution of these cases. Forward thinking family law professionals can meaningfully help parents to achieve better outcomes for children.     

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.

     

RELOCATION,RESEARCH, AND FORENSIC EVALUATION,PART I: EFFECTS OF RESIDENTIAL MOBILITY ON CHILDREN OF DIVORCE1

The issue of relocation presents courts and child custody evaluators with dilemmas on the issue of allowing a child to move with a parent to a new community and how to craft long‐distance parenting plans if relocation is allowed. The issue of the potential effects of residential moves on children of divorce has focused on the importance of the child–nonresidential parent relationship. The research literature on the effects of residential moves, or relocation, on children of divorce has not been fully integrated into the examination of this issue and its relevance for the child custody evaluation. The literature shows residential mobility is a general risk factor for children of divorce and this is a starting point for the custody evaluation, but it is not a basis for bias or a presumption against relocation. Predicting a child's adjustment to relocating or not relocating requires a careful and contextual investigation of the child and family circumstances. The research literature is a helpful frame of reference.     

Unintended and Unavoidable: The Failure to Protect Rule and Its Consequences for Undocumented Parents and Their Children

Parents without immigration status in the United States regularly face the threat of deportation and separation from their children. When an undocumented parent is brought to the attention of law enforcement through the child welfare system, they also face the potential of the loss of legal custodial rights to their children. The child welfare system and immigration enforcement mechanisms operate independent of one another with little regard for how actions in one can impact a parent's legal rights in the other, often permanently separating children from their parents. This article examines the particular issue of undocumented parents who are charged with the failure to protect their children from witnessing or otherwise experiencing abuse committed by a third party. It explores how such a charge, whether founded or unfounded, can result in loss of eligibility for immigration relief to which the undocumented parent would otherwise be entitled, as well as deportation of the parent and permanent separation of parent and child. These issues are situated within the larger context of the normative guideposts of both family and immigration law, namely, the best interests of the child and family unity. It identifies issues for further academic inquiry as well as tips for practitioners who may represent undocumented parents in either the family or immigration systems.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Learn about the potential consequences under family law and immigration law when an undocumented parent's child is abused by a third party
• Gain strategies for planning with undocumented parents to avoid the loss of the custody of their children in the event of a sudden deportation
• Be able to identify and address particular concerns for clients who are undocumented victims of domestic violence

     

VISITATION AND CHILD SUPPORT GUIDELINES

Fabricius and Braver argue that nonresident fathers incur appreciable visitation expenses and that their child support obligations should be reduced accordingly. To assess whether fathers incur "appreciable" expenses requires data from mothers and fathers on expenditures in dollar terms rather than data from college students on items kept in the nonresident father's house. The Fabricius and Braver data also overstate the degree to which all divorced fathers do anything for their children. Representative data indicate that father visitation declines substantially over time. Father's postdivorce, post–child support standard of living remains twice that of mothers and children. The cliff model—making adjustments for visitation only in the rare cases of very high shared physical custody—is sensible policy.     

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.

     

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.

     

Presumptions,Burdens, and Best Interests in Relocation Law

The pure “best interests” approach to relocation law is a failure. It is unpredictable and expensive, increasing conflict and discouraging settlement. The “fundamental questions” proposed by Parkinson and Cashmore in their article will not reform the law. Real reform will require the use of presumptions or burdens to guide best interests. “Presumptions” are not “rules,” but only starting points. No simple presumption “for” or “against” all relocations can be justified, but there are large categories of cases that do warrant presumptions: interim moves, unilateral relocations, shared care, and predominant primary caregivers. The first three involve presumptions against relocation, while the last—the largest category—warrants a presumption that relocation is in the best interests of the child, unless the contrary is proved. There will remain a small minority of in‐between cases where none of these presumptions will operate, recognizing the limits of our general knowledge. It is time to move the relocation reform debate beyond pure “best interests,” to the next stage, to a serious discussion of which cases warrant presumptions, and of what strength.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• Pure best interests approach to relocation law is a failure
• Presumptions or burdens needed to reform the law, but not just “for” or “against”
• Presumptions are identified for four categories of relocation cases: interim moves, unilateral relocations, shared care, and predominant primary caregivers

     

THE CALM AFTER THE STORM: USING MEDIATION TO RESOLVE PARENTING DISPUTES IN THE WAKE OF NATURAL DISASTERS

Hurricane Katrina not only tore apart communities along the Gulf Coast, it displaced hundreds of thousands of families throughout the country. Included in the massive numbers of displaced families were children from divorced, separated, or unmarried parents. As a result, many children have since relocated far away from one of their parents without court permission, causing an influx of parenting disputes among the unmarried parents. Litigation concerning parenting disputes that follow natural disasters is not only expensive, but is emotionally taxing on both parents and children and floods the already drained court system. This Note discusses alternative ways in which parenting disputes can be resolved following natural disasters. It explains how children are affected by relocating away from one of their parents and how those effects are comounded by natural disasters. Further, it explains how alternative dispute resolution methods help alleviate the effects of parenting disputes, specifically relocation disputes, on children. Finally, this Note proposes that all parents should be mandated to mediate any parenting disputes following natural disasters.     

Relocation Issues in Child Custody Evaluations: A Survey of Professionals

We report on a sample of 90 child custody evaluators in the United States, who completed an online questionnaire on their attitudes and beliefs in child custody relocation cases. Findings indicated that the vast majority of participants relied on relevant professional literature and utilized a relocation risk assessment forensic model. Participants found many risk, protective, and specific relocation factors important, but the triad of past parental involvement, support for the other parent, and child's age were afforded the most importance. Participants also reported that the moving parents sought relocation for educational/vocational reasons, to receive support of their extended family, or to remarry, while the nonmoving party most commonly opposed relocation due to fears of interference/damage to the nonmoving parent–child relationship, restrictive gatekeeping, and alienation. A common trend among participants was concerns over the possible detrimental impact of any relocation on the nonmoving parent–child relationship and quality of co‐parenting. The vast majority of participants reported that they made specific recommendations to the court about relocation, and the court agreed with their recommendation the overwhelming majority of the time. We discuss Implications of the findings as well as areas needing further research.     

Cognitive‐Behavioral Methods in High‐Conflict Divorce: Systematic Desensitization Adapted to Parent–Child Reunification Interventions

Children who are triangulated into their parents' conflicts can become polarized, aligning with one parent and rejecting the other. In response, courts often order families to engage mental health professionals to provide reunification interventions. This article adapts empirically established systematic desensitization and flooding procedures most commonly used to treat phobic children as possible components of a larger family systems invention designed to help the polarized child develop a healthy relationship with both parents. Strengths and weaknesses of these procedures are discussed and illustrated with case material.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• Family law and psychology agree that children should have the opportunity to enjoy a healthy relationship with both parents
• Adult conflict can polarize a child's relationships, including rejection of one parent
• Existing clinical and forensic “reunification” strategies often prove inadequate
• Reliable and valid cognitive behavioral methods can be adopted to facilitate this process
• A cognitive‐behavioral “exposure‐based” reunification protocol is discussed

     

Adoptions Gone Awry: Enhancing Adoption Outcomes Through Postadoption Services and Federal and State Laws Imposing Criminal Sanctions for Private Internet Rehoming

The federal government should invest in adopted children who make up the future of the country and are in dire need of rehabilitation and therapy because of their past circumstances. If the government steps in to rescue vulnerable children from inadequate or abusive birth parents by removal, it should also intervene when adopted families are faced with behavioral problems of adopted children that the adopted parents cannot address on their own. Postadoption services need to be accessible and effective to ensure the success of adopted families. Assisting families in crisis postadoption will lower the instances of dissolution and rehoming and keep adoptive families intact. In cases in which postadoption services fail, uniform federal legislation is necessary to make it a federal crime to advertise children for adoption on the Internet without proper certification and state legislation is required to make it a crime to pass on adopted children to strangers without judicial consent, to dissuade Internet rehoming. Internet rehoming of adopted children should be a serious crime as it is tantamount to child trafficking.© 2014 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Postadoption services need to be more accessible and more narrowly tailored to the needs of adoptive families to ensure the success of adoptions.
• Better postadoption services create better adoptive families and adoptive parents will not reach the point of dissolution or private Internet rehoming.
• Adoptive parents should be provided with information regarding all available postadoption resources after adoption is finalized and a government Web site should be created that lists all available resources.
• The federal government needs to provide funding to states that specifically target postadoption services.
• A uniform federal statute is required to punish parties who use Internet forums to avoid government oversight and privately rehome their adopted children.
• States should enact laws that criminalize the unauthorized interstate placements of children.

     

Reengineering the Child Support Scheme: An Australian Perspective on the British Government's Proposals

After years of problems with the Child Support Scheme in Britain, the Government has decided to attempt reform again, less than four years after a previous major change was implemented in 2003. The author evaluates these reform proposals, drawing upon his experience in leading a recent major review of child support policy in Australia. While many of the reform measures offer a sensible way forward for child support policy, Britain risks going backwards in terms of community acceptance of the child support obligation. The Government needs to consider the likely impact of its policy settings on private agreements about child support. Ways are proposed both to protect the Treasury and to promote the wellbeing of children by adopting different policy settings that ensure the resident parent has an incentive to bargain for the level of child support required by the new formula. The new formula itself is evaluated in the light of the international research on the costs of children. Ways are also suggested for developing a co-ordinated approach across government to the provision of support services for parents who do not live together.     

Ensuring Insurance for Foster Care: Requiring Foster Parents to Obtain Liability Insurance to Cover Harm Done to Foster Children in their Care

This Note proposes that all states should require that foster parents have liability insurance before children are placed in their care. This Note also proposes that the liability insurance needs to cover not just harm to third parties but also harm to the foster children through the negligent acts of the foster parents. This legislation will allow foster children to have standing to bring claims against their foster parents and insurance companies and give them a greater opportunity for recovery. Currently, the policies and statutes governing the policies in place do not cover all types of harm that can occur during the foster parent–child relationship. Certain policies leave children who are harmed by their foster parents’ negligence unable to recover any damages from the people who have harmed them. Because foster parents can be left to defend the actions themselves, they often become judgment proof due to their low income, leaving the children who are harmed with little chance of recovery.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• States need to require foster parents to obtain liability insurance, which covers harm done by the foster children to third parties, harm to the home, and any harm done to the child by the foster parents.

     

Parent–Child Discordance and Child Trauma Symptomatology Throughout Therapy: Correlates and Treatment Response

Children and their caregivers often disagree when reporting on child behavioural and emotional difficulties. But how does parent–child discordance relate to outcomes, particularly among children undergoing trauma therapy? This study examined parent–child discordance in relation to children’s trauma symptoms and therapy outcomes. Participants included 96 trauma-exposed children and their caregivers, who received Trauma-Focused Cognitive Behavioural Therapy. Discordance was calculated using absolute difference scores between child- and parent- reported psychological symptoms. Parent–child discordance, calculated at pre-therapy, post-therapy, and at a six-month follow-up, predicted the severity of children’s posttraumatic stress, dissociation, and internalizing and externalizing difficulties at each respective time-point. Pre-therapy discordance predicted improvements in externalizing behaviours after therapy and at follow-up. Improvements in discordance predicted improvements in trauma-specific symptoms over the course of treatment and at follow-up. The findings underscore how changes in parent–child discordance are related to child trauma symptoms and treatment response. Clinical implications and future directions are discussed.     

CONFLICT AND CO‐PARENTING: THE CONSTRUCTS OF NONRESIDENT FATHERS*

Scots law constructs a co‐parental role for nonresident fathers without clarifying how this should operate in practice. Personal Construct Theory (PCT) offers a useful approach to understanding such fathers’ distinct and changing conceptions of their role. Findings are presented from a study of 17 nonresident Scottish fathers maintaining contact with nonresident children. Idiographic analysis of data from repertory grid interviews administered three times over the course of a year shows that participants perceive family situations in terms of paternal involvement, impact, emotion, or antagonism. Changes in construing following family events support the PCT understanding of hostility; implications for family services are discussed.     

SUPERVISED VISITATION: A CALL FOR A SECOND GENERATION OF RESEARCH

With the divorce rate rising and related child visitation disputes becoming an increasingly difficult issue before the courts, supervised visitation programs have proliferated over the last decade. The literature demonstrates that ongoing contact between children and both parents following separation and/or divorce is important for children's socio‐emotional adjustment and positive child/parent relations. However, there is a paucity of literature demonstrating a relationship between supervised visitation programs and child/parent relationship outcomes. Based on the lack of outcome research the authors argue for a second generation of research regarding intended and unintended consequences of supervised visitation. This article reviews and synthesizes the current literature, highlighting strengths, limitations, significant findings and proposes a critical need for evidence‐based research.     

LIFE AFTER DEATH: THE NEED TO ADDRESS THE LEGAL STATUS OF POSTHUMOUSLY CONCEIVED CHILDREN

The advance of reproductive technology, coupled with a legal system that cannot keep up, has had a detrimental effect on posthumously conceived children. There is controversy over whether a child conceived after the death of one parent, by way of reproductive technology, is considered a child of that parent for inheritance purposes. An overwhelming majority of state legislatures have not given consideration to the unique question that posthumously conceived children pose. Legislative inaction has forced state courts to apply antiquated laws in the midst of a technological revolution. The result: children are being denied inheritance rights to their deceased parent's estate solely because of the way they were conceived. This Note advocates that all children should be given the same rights and benefits regardless of how they are conceived. To accomplish that goal, this Note proposes a model state statute to be adopted in all states. The model statute deems a posthumously conceived child to be the child of his or her deceased parent, and thus entitled to inheritance rights, if 1) the posthumously conceived child was provided for by will, or 2) the deceased parent intended to be a parent; there is a genetic relationship between parent and child; the child is born within three years from the death of his or her deceased parent; and the child's best interest, balanced against the state's interests, exceeds the state's interest. The desired effect of the statute is to put posthumously conceived children on equal footing with naturally conceived children.     

Helping Families by Maintaining a Strong Well‐Funded Family Court that Encourages Consensual Peacemaking: A Judicial Perspective

This article explores alternatives for the court process that promote a child‐centered approach to resolution of family law issues including a summary of procedures used in Los Angeles County to assist families. The article also explores alternatives to the traditional custody litigation model.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Evaluations and trials are not the only tools available in family law.
• Structured court ordered counseling can provide a meaningful intervention and reduce family conflict.
• Alternative forms of mediation can help families address the “need to be heard” and retain personal autonomy in decision making.
• The court system should help educate families about how to resolve conflict in a safe, effective, and meaningful way.