A MODEL FOR A SUPERVISED VISITATION PROGRAM

This article describes the Supervised Visitation Project run by the Victim Assistance Program of Akron, Ohio, a project that enables children to meet safely on a regular basis with their otherwise inaccessible noncustodial parents. This article establishes a need for supervised visitation, offers a structure for such a program, profiles clientele and staff, explains the available services–visitation, evaluation, mediation, and therapy/support–and presents conclusions based on the experience of the Akron program and the comparison and contrast of three other existing programs.     

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.     

SUPERVISED VISITATION

Reviews of case files for 676 families who received supervised visitation services at one of four programs and interviews with 201 participating parents provide a portrait of the families receiving services, their experiences, and the outcomes. Programs successfully serve a wide variety of families and garner high ratings of user satisfaction, but half of the families exit without formal closure. Families that drop out receive fewer court hearings and evaluations for the problems that brought them into the programs in the first place, suggesting that they may feel neglected. In most cases that formally exit the program, the visitation situation improves over time, although interviewed parents give mixed reports about their visitation situations after they leave the programs.     

SUPERVISED VISITATION A Profile of Providers

Surveys with 94 administrators of supervised visitation programs, 51 family court judges, and 40 administrators of child protective services agencies provide a national picture of supervised visitation services, their utility, and areas of unmet need. Although the programs are perceived to fill an important need, they struggle to survive financially, particularly those that handle family court cases. In addition, because many programs operate without adequate access to the assessment and treatment services that some families need, judges frequently want visitation supervisors to assist them in determining suitable custody and visitation arrangements, a role that supervised visitation programs do not feel is appropriate. Many different types of entities provide effective supervised visitation services; many different service formats work. Architects of new programs should fashion services that use local resources to maximum advantage.     

TRAUMATIZED CHILDREN IN SUPERVISED VISITATION

This article reviews the range of trauma experienced by many children in supervised visitation services and describes common themes in the development of their personalities from clinical and research findings. It then proposes a series of ways to structure supervised access services in order to help children feel psychologically safe in the relationship with the visited parent.     

STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR SUPERVISED VISITATION NETWORK PRACTICE: INTRODUCTORY DISCUSSION

In 1996, members of the Supervised Visitation Network approved initial standards and guidelines for practice. The approach taken was to develop standards of good practice that could be both educational and advisory. It was recognized that the standards as approved were a start and also that they would need to be revised with time and experience. That review is currently in process. The standards and guidelines are published here to reach practitioners in the field, including attorneys and court personnel whose clients require supervised visitation, and to encourage comments and debate. This introduction reviews the evolution of the guidelines, outlines the contents, and identifies areas needing further development.     

RAISING THE BAR: WHY SUPERVISED VISITATION PROVIDERS SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO MEET STANDARDS FOR SERVICE PROVISION

The New York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NYSPCC) has provided a supervised visitation program (SVP) for high‐risk families for almost two decades. Parents needing supervised visitation often have histories of domestic violence, child abuse and neglect, mental illness or substance abuse, therefore providers delivering services must be adequately trained and supervised in order to protect the child from further harm during the visitation process. This article describes the need for SVP's, parental issues warranting consideration, the special needs of children in these circumstances, policy recommendations for provider standards, and a certification process to be developed and adopted in New York State.     

AN EVALUATION OF SUPERVISED ACCESS II

Two studies examined reactions of family members to supervised access (SA) services. In Study 1, 121 users of SA services were interviewed about their satisfaction. A subsample was interviewed about family relationships and children's well-being, at Time 1 and 5 months later. In Study 2, 29 children attending SA services were interviewed. Results showed that both custodial and noncustodial parents were very satisfied with the centers. There was no evidence that relationships between ex-spouses or their attitudes toward one another improved over a 5-month period. Children attending centers showed a high level of externalizing symptomatology. Children were positive about their experiences, although older children felt that the centers were not well equipped for their age group. Although the aim of centers is to provide a safe place for children, some children still experience emotionally disturbing events. Most children had little understanding about why they were attending centers.     

MANDATED CUSTODY EVALUATIONS AND THE LIMITS OF JUDICIAL POWER

Kelly and Ramsey are clearly correct that a shift from a “how to” approach to custody evaluations to one that asks the more fundamental question “why” is long overdue. However, in addition to assessing the efficacy of custody evaluations (which Kelly and Ramsey propose), the legal system must also clarify the justification for imposing this extensive—and often expensive—intrusion into the privacy of parents. Three possible justifications for these intrusions are examined in this article: privilege, harm, and voluntariness. Is divorce a privilege, rather than a right, and can qualifications (including intrusive and expensive ones) be attached to requesting that privilege? Are custody evaluations instead justified as a means of avoiding harm to children? If a harm justification is asserted, exactly what harm do evaluations prevent, and how do they accomplish this harm avoidance? Finally, given the high value placed on parental cooperation by the family courts, is it simply too perilous for a parent to oppose a custody evaluation if one is suggested, either by the other parent or by the court? If so, are consents to custody evaluations truly voluntary?     

LEGAL IMPLEMENTATION OF PARENT EDUCATION PROGRAMS FOR DIVORCING AND SEPARATING PARENTS

This article traces the legislation permitting or mandating the use of parent education for divorcing and separating parents in state courts. Explored are State mandatory and discretionary programs, local court rules, voluntary programs, and some of the constitutional issues that are raised.     

PREVENTION PROGRAMS FOR DIVORCED NONRESIDENT FATHERS

Divorced nonresident fathers are a promising target for preventive efforts to assist families after divorce. The research literature suggests that such programs should focus both on the frequency and the quality of the child's contact with the father, as well as the quality of postdivorce mother–father relations. Dads For Life (DFL) is the program for this target group with the most convincing evidence of preventive effects. This eight-week program centers on professionally made videos. It was tested in a randomized trial with 214 families. In comparison to control families, children in families in which the father participated in DFL had significantly lower internalizing problems. The preventive impact of DFL was strongest for the most troubled youngsters.