COLLABORATIVE PRACTICE IN THE CANADIAN LANDSCAPE

This article looks at the growth of collaborative practice in Canada in the last decade and the legal and Canadian cultural underpinnings influencing this growth. Government recognition of and support for collaborative process has come from both the federal and provincial governments. Statutory support in family law statutes and in ethical standards for lawyers encourage alternate dispute resolution and have helped normalize consensual dispute resolution options. The article also looks at decisions from Canadian courts relating to the practice of collaborative law, including the confidentiality of collaborative process negotiations as set out in the participation agreement and the standard of care necessary for collaborative lawyers.     

AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF COLLABORATIVE PRACTICE

This article summarizes empirical research about Collaborative Practice, the Collaborative movement, its interaction with other parts of the dispute resolution field, and its impact on the field. It reviews studies of Collaborative Practice describing the individuals involved in Collaborative cases, how the process works, the operation of local practice groups, and the impact of Collaborative Practice on legal practice generally. Based on this analysis, it suggests an agenda for future research. Finally, it offers suggestions for constructive development of the Collaborative field.     

INFORMED CHOICE AND EMERGENT SYSTEMS AT THE GROWTH EDGE OF COLLABORATIVE PRACTICE

Integrated interdisciplinary team practice evolves over time as collaborative lawyers encounter the limitations of their own skill‐set in helping clients to reach consensual resolution outside the courts. Team collaboration represents the evolutionary growth edge of the collaborative practice movement. Working in teams with financial neutrals and mental health professionals who act as coaches and child specialists, collaborative lawyers become engaged in an emergent learning system called into being to assist each couple through their divorce. All professionals working on a collaborative team case participate in the process from the beginning and share responsibility for helping the clients achieve the values‐based goals identified by them early in the process. This shared professional engagement in the divorce conflict resolution process gives rise to a need for agreed roadmaps and protocols, sophisticated planning and debriefing sessions, case conferencing, and careful attention to the quality of communications at the negotiating table. None of this can happen at a “best practices” level without mutual trust between and among the professionals and a culture of transparency and accountability. These characteristics emerge over time as a natural outgrowth of working in teams.     

FAMILY DISPUTE RESOLUTION: CHARTING A COURSE FOR THE FUTURE

This article summarizes ideas for future directions in the field of family dispute resolution, as discussed by legal experts, social scientists, and other participants at the Indiana University–Bloomington conference on family dispute resolution. Five major categories of future directions were discussed: (1) clarifying differing goals for work in this field; (2) recognizing, understanding, and assessing for heterogeneity among couples and families facing divorces, break ups in adult relationships, and reconfigurations of adult relationships with the children ("relationship dissolution"); (3) testing our assumptions and commonly held beliefs about relationship dissolution; (4) empirically testing the efficacy of interventions for families experiencing relationship dissolution; and (5) disseminating research findings to those on the frontline.     

HUNTER‐GATHERER COLLABORATIVE PRACTICE

This article describes the development of a practice group based on a hunter‐gatherer model, with the mission of providing high quality collaborative divorce services, with an emphasis on protecting children and divorcing partners, and expanding access to middle‐ and lower‐income families. The practice group professional disciplines include law, mental health divorce coaching, co‐parent coaching, financial analysis, and case administration. These professionals have collectively associated their individual practices to address challenges facing their collaborative practices. With common purpose, the practice group builds skills, generates client base, nurtures trust, and lays a common knowledge base. Collaborative divorce teams formed from its members serve divorcing families with efficient, cost‐conscious, interest‐based negotiation processes that protect children and help parties productively move on with their lives.     

IMPLICATIONS OF THE DIVORCE MEDIATION ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENT FOR MEDIATION PRACTICE

The development of the Divorce Mediation Assessment Instrument (DMAI), based on six dimensions—commitment, social-psychological factors, values, understanding, skills, and conflict—was in response to the need to systematically assess clients' readiness for divorce mediation and to inform and guide intervention. Tests on DMAI showed high reliability, and reasonable instrument validity. The implication of DMAI for mediation practice is discussed in terms of the various outputs of DMAI: DMAI score, subscale score, and item score. Issues in assessment raised included highlighting strengths, working on agreements, and preventive intervention. DMAI's implication for theory building and research is also discussed. Careful assessment is needed for appropriate use of mediation, and the DMAI provides a model of assessment which has clinical, empirical, and theoretical validity.     

THE TRUANCY INTERVENTION PROGRAM OF THE RAMSEY COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE: A COLLABORATIVE APPROACH TO SCHOOL SUCCESS

Chronic truancy has far‐reaching effects, both for the youth who become disconnected from school and for society. Crime, unemployment, underemployment, drug abuse, alcohol abuse and risky sexual activity have all been linked to chronic truancy. In 1995, the Minnesota Legislature authorized the creation of diversion programs specifically for truants. That same year, in response to the growing truancy problem, Ramsey County Attorney Susan Gaertner directed her staff to create a program for early intervention in truancy cases. From its beginning, the goals of the Truancy Intervention Program (TIP) have been to reduce the rate of truancy, to increase school connectedness, and to improve high school graduation rates. The program has accomplished these goals and, along the way, forged strong bonds of cooperation with schools, law enforcement agencies, and service providers. Ten years after the creation of TIP, the graduation rates in the city of St. Paul, the largest school district in the county, have improved by over 50 percent; the number of students missing 15 days of school of more (excused as well as unexcused) has decreased by more than 50 percent; and a large majority of chronic truants and their families have been successfully connected to services to address underlying problems.     

OREGON'S INTEGRATED FAMILY COURT OF THE FUTURE

相似文献