Confidentiality and the Juvenile and Family Courts

Court proceedings and court records are traditionally open to the public. The courts are public institutions, and openness serves a number of important purposes including protection of the free discussion of governmental affairs and the enhancement of the quality and integrity of the fact finding process. But court proceedings also address family matters including adoptions, juvenile delinquency, child protection, and domestic relations cases. These types of cases often involve personal issues, and many family members would prefer that they remain private. In most states, many of these proceedings have been closed to the public. Strong policy reasons support both openness of family court proceedings and privacy considerations for family members, particularly children. This article addresses confidentiality in the context of juvenile and family court proceedings. It takes the position that the tension between these conflicting policies can be reduced if most family court proceedings are presumptively open, but judges are given the authority to place conditions on the information that can be revealed by observers outside the courtroom. Additionally, the article asserts that if the courts and the media take steps to change their practices and their relationship with one another, both the public interest and the confidentiality interest of the parties can be better served.     

Enhancing the Mental Health and Well‐Being of Infants,Children, and Youth in the Juvenile and Family Courts: A Judicial Challenge

At the invitation of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, judges from the 30 largest juvenile jurisdictions in the country and mental health professionals met for two days in Tampa, Florida, March 18–19, 2000. Their discussions over this two‐day period resulted in the first draft of this document. Meeting again in July in Snowbird, Utah, members of the group reviewed and revised the original document. This second revision was mailed to members of the group and to the officers and board of the National Council for their review. Comments from this second draft were incorporated into the final document as it appears in this issue of the Juvenile and Family Court Journal. The experience and expertise represented by this dedicated group of judges and mental health professionals is reflected in the contents of this paper. Each of the participants is actively engaged in the process of systemic change in the delivery of mental health services in their communities, each can recount both successes and failures in the process of creating this change, and each brings experience and insight to this forum. This position paper is intended for the use of judges, court administrators, and mental health professionals who work with youth in the juvenile courts of our country. It is intended as a basic framework for the development of community systems of care which will serve children, youth, and families experiencing mental health problems appropriately and well.     

Mental health, gender, and drug court completion

Drug-involved offenders report high rates of mental health problems that can negatively impact criminal justice outcomes. Yet, relatively little attention has been given to the mental health issues of drug court offenders. Therefore, this study examined 449 participants in a Delaware drug court and investigated relationships between mental health, gender, and program completion. Bivariate results indicated that gender was related to both mental health status and completion status. Multivariate findings revealed that two indicators of mental health, depression and being prescribed drugs for a psychological or emotional problem, were significant predictors of drug court completion. Policy implications include assessing the mental health status of all drug court participants at program entry so that services can be provided which aim to improve offender health and increase the likelihood of successful program outcomes. Drug courts must better meet the needs of participants with co-occurring disorders if they are to remain an effective and viable criminal justice intervention. This research was supported by grant RO1 DA12424 “Drug Court Offenders in Outpatient Treatment,” by the National Institute on Drug Abuse.     

CONFIDENTIALITY,DUE PROCESS,AND JUDICIAL DISQUALIFICATION IN THE UNIFIED FAMILY COURT: REPORT TO THE HONORABLE STEPHANIE DOMITROVICH

To the extent that courts realize the pure one judge–one family notion of the unified family court—in which one judge handles all domestic relations, probate, juvenile dependency, juvenile delinquency, and domestic violence cases involving members of the same family—they encounter three potential legal barriers: confidentiality of court records in some of the cases, due process issues arising from the consideration of material from a related case file in which the parties to the current case may or may not be parties, and judicial disqualification arising from the judge's handling of a previous case involving the family. This article summarizes information obtained from a survey conducted for the Children and Family Law Committee of the National Conference of State Trial Judges, of courts in sixteen states, to learn how they have resolved these legal issues.     

EARLY NEUTRAL EVALUATIONS: APPLICATIONS TO CUSTODY AND PARENTING TIME CASES PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION IN HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA

A program to apply Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE), a confidential, settlement‐oriented and accelerated alternative dispute resolution technique, to child custody and parenting time cases has been cooperatively developed by Hennepin county Family Court Services and the Minnesota Fourth Judicial District Family Court. Parties are referred by the court to a male/female team of experienced neutral evaluators for early feedback on the probable outcome of a full evaluation and an opportunity to negotiate a settlement. It has proven to be a highly successful program in its first 2 years, with the majority of cases reaching an early settlement. The ENE program reduces the stress and expense of custody disputes for clients, expedites judicial case management, maximizes Family Court Services staff efficiency, and focuses subsequent evaluations on critical issues.     

Faith‐Based Programs for Reentry Courts: A Summary of Issues and Recommendations

In 2002, the Bush Administration directed the Department of Justice to include faith‐based organizations in its distribution of funds earmarked for programs targeting the prevention and treatment of juvenile delinquency and substance abuse. Among the initiatives most likely to be affected by this new policy are reentry court programs that endeavor to reintegrate juvenile delinquents into their communities by placing them within local neighborhood‐based programs. However, reentry court personnel and leaders of faith‐based organizations are likely to encounter numerous challenges as they try to establish appropriate programming. In this article, we discuss the current understanding of First Amendment jurisprudence governing the federal funding of faith‐based organizations and summarize key issues identified by a National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges' workgroup on faith‐based programming that are necessary for including faith‐based organizations within a reentry court's continuum of care. We also discuss several concerns that reentry court personnel and faith‐based organizations should consider as they seek to maximize the impact of their programs.     

REPORT FROM THE WINGSPREAD CONFERENCE ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND FAMILY COURTS

In February 2007 the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges and the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts brought together a working group of thirty‐seven experienced practitioners and researchers to identify and explore conceptual and practical tensions that have hampered effective work with families in which domestic violence has been identified or alleged. Five central sets of issues were raised at the conference and are discussed in this report. These include the following: differentiation among families experiencing domestic violence, screening and triage, participation by families in various processes and services, appropriate outcomes for children, and family court roles and resources. The report emphasizes the need for continued multidisciplinary collaboration in order to better serve families affected by domestic violence and it includes an appendix of consensus points as well as suggestions for formation of ongoing work groups.     

Comparing targeted intervention modalities for high conflict co-parents: A quasi-experimental study

High conflict co-parents engage in recurrent litigation that significantly strains the court system and exacerbates their conflict. Given barriers to their engagement in service delivery (e.g., level of conflict, transportation, child care), it is vital to evaluate targeted interventions and to examine different intervention modalities (e.g., online, hybrid). This study compared court involvement and rates of parental agreement among 178 high conflict cases that received a multi-component intervention, either in-person or in a hybrid version. Results demonstrated no significant differences between groups in the change in number of court negotiations, child-related issues, or court services from before to after-intervention completion or in the proportion of parenting cases who reached an agreement. Both versions demonstrated significant reductions in parents' court involvement from before to after-intervention completion. These findings suggest the need for future research to evaluate the comparative efficacy of hybrid programs and in-person programs for high conflict co-parents with greater methodological rigor in light of the current study's findings and limitations.     

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.

     

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.

     

Association for Conflict Resolution Guidelines for Eldercaring Coordinators

On November 6, 2014, the AFCC Board of Directors endorsed the Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR) Guidelines for Eldercaring Coordination, including ethical principles for Eldercaring Coordinators, training protocols, and court pilot project template. The collaboration between Task Forces created by ACR and the Florida Chapter of AFCC, composed of twenty U.S./Canadian and twenty Florida‐wide organizations, produced both an overarching guide to assist in the development of programs and a more detailed model addressing state/province‐specific needs and characteristics. Eldercaring coordination is a dispute resolution option specifically for high‐conflict cases involving the care, needs, and safety of elders.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• There are currently no dispute resolution options for parties involved in high‐conflict cases regarding the care, needs, and safety of an elder.
• The ACR Guidelines for Eldercaring Coordination address the discrepancies between dispute resolution options available for parents in conflict regarding their minor children and mature families with unresolved concerns about the care, needs, and safety of an elder.
• The ACR Guidelines for Eldercaring Coordination provide information regarding the ethical practice of eldercaring coordination including a specific definition, recommended qualifications, ethical practices, grievance procedures, training protocols, and a court pilot project template.
• The practice of eldercaring coordination will address the influx of court cases expected as baby boomers continue to age, reducing delays in court hearings, as parties will have the opportunity to resolve their concerns without continuous court attention.
• As of June 2015, five states began Pilot Projects on Eldercaring Coordination, which will be studied by an independent research group to enhance the progress of the process and to develop the best practices for initiating the programs elsewhere.

     

An Interdisciplinary Case Management Protocol for Child Resistance or Refusal Dynamics†

High‐conflict parental separation cases associated with child's estrangement or contact refusal take an unusually large amount of court time and generate high emotional costs for parents and children. This paper reports on a study of a research‐based pilot project and protocol, called the Parenting Conflict Resolution (PCR), which is intended to reduce parental conflict, improve interparental communication, and support or restore the parent–child relationship. The protocol was developed at the Superior Court in Quebec City (Canada), and involves single judge case management, and lawyers' commitment to have the child's best interests as their primary consideration and to guide their clients to trust the process. The assigned judge and lawyers have the ongoing involvement of a mandated psychotherapist, taking a family systems approach with the case. The PCR also requires the parents to participate in a psycho‐educational, introspective group program to work on co‐parenting and communication skills. Ongoing communication between the professionals involved in the PCR is required to ensure cohesion and accountability. This pilot project was implemented with 10 high‐conflict families, 6 of which presented with the child's resistance or refusal to see one parent. A qualitative data study was undertaken into the experiences of all the participants. The most salient result is the resumption of parent–child contact in all six contact refusal cases. Discussion highlights key elements to successfully address these cases: (a) interdisciplinary program delivery, (b) systemic understanding of the contact problems, (c) focus on the child's best interest, (d) single judge assigned to the case, (e) lawyers' support of the parents' participation, and (f) psychotherapist reporting to the court.     

Family Conferencing: A Success for Our Children

Model Courts, assisted by the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, employ innovative best practices to better achieve permanency of children in the dependency system as required by the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA). Family Group Decision‐Making Conferencing has been used in the Miami Model Court since 1998. The judge chooses cases at the initial detention hearing, and parents must agree to the procedure. A Department of Children and Families social worker facilitates a well‐planned meeting between parents and their families and friends where parents' case plans are developed for the court to approve. In an evaluation of 87 such conferences, the National Council determined that the process has assisted families in identifying strengths and resolving problems. Satisfaction rate of participants was high, and parents became highly motivated. Conferencing produced more timely case processing times and more stable placements. In addition, within Miami's multi‐ethnic and multi‐cultural community, the conferences developed good communication between the generally middle‐class court staff and the primarily poor, immigrant, and native‐born parents.     

SOLVING THE FAMILY COURT PUZZLE: INTEGRATING RESEARCH,POLICY, AND PRACTICE

In my opening remarks to the 42nd Annual Conference of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, I discuss trends in family law cases from the Supreme Court of Washington and the U.S. Supreme Court. I also review the wide variety of advancements in the way that court systems approach family law cases. Noting a recent emphasis on the fundamental rights of parents, I advocate a new paradigm, moving away from a focus on the parents and toward a focus on the child.     

论破产法上债务人高管人员民事责任的追究

The Enterprise Bankruptcy Law has designed the regime for debtor’s senior managers to bear civil liabilities, while the framework design concerning the prosecution mechanism of civil liabilities is still unclear. How to establish a prosecution mechanism of civil liabilities of debtor’s senior managers in line with the purposes of the bankruptcy regime is a substantial issue during the implementation of Enterprise Bankruptcy Law. The realization of the civil liabilities regime of debtor’s senior managers depends on the establishment and operation of a relatively well-developed prosecution mechanism of civil liabilities. The focus of the prosecution mechanism of civil liabilities is to determine the subject of prosecution of civil liabilities, the way to realize civil liabilities, and the special hearing proceedings and authorities of the court. Taking steps to clarify and improve the prosecution mechanism of civil liabilities focusing on the subjects of prosecution (debtor’s senior managers) and authorities of the court, is the essence and systematic safeguard of realizing the civil liabilities regime of debtor’s senior managers in the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law. Gan Peizhong, Ph.D, is a professor of law and director of the Research Center for Enterprise and Company Law at Peking University. Prof. Gan is a recognized expert on economic law, company law, bankruptcy law and the reform of state-owned enterprises in China. He has released numerous articles on Chinese law journals and published many books. His major publications include Encyclopedia of Chinese Economic Law (vice editor-in-chief), New Studies on Economic Law (co-editor), New Studies on Enterprise Law (author), Studies on Chinese Economic Adjudication (editor-in-chief), Studies on Foreign Economic Law in Beijing (editor-in-chief), General Theories on Economic Law (co-editor), Legitimate Exercise of the Corporate Control Rights (author). Moreover, he was named the “leading young and middle-aged jurist” by Beijing Law Society in 1999. In addition, Prof. Gan is the deputy-president of the Securities Law Association, a member of the Standing Committee of the Economic Law Association under China Law Society. He also serves as the consultant of the Legislative Affairs Commission of the NPC Standing Committee and Beijing Municipal People’s Congress, as well as the Haidian District Court of Beijing.     

Increasing Family Reunification for Substance‐Abusing Mothers and Their Children: Comparing Two Drug Court Interventions in Miami

This study provides a quasi‐experimental test of 80 consecutive enrollments in the Miami‐Dade (Florida) Dependency Drug Court in order to examine the impact of a family‐based and gender specific intervention, Engaging Moms Program (EMP), on drug court graduation and family reunification. We compared EMP with case management services (CMS). Results indicated that 72% of mothers in the EMP graduated from drug court, and 70% were reunified with their children. In contrast, 38% of mothers receiving CMS graduated from drug court, and 40% were reunited with their children. EMP, then, appears to be a promising family drug court intervention.     

VI. Selected Issues

The National Council's one week course entitled “Judicial Response to Alcohol and Other Drugs” was developed and first offered in conjunction with this policy statement revision. To bring focus on some issues appropriate to both the monograph and the course, we requested faculty members to prepare summaries of their presentations. The papers that follow focus on topics we believe will be key issues for court concern in the foreseeable future.     

Understanding Culture in Kentucky's Courtrooms: An Essential Tool for Management and Long‐Range Planning

Though the “old conventional wisdom” explained delay as the product of too few resources and staff, the “new conventional wisdom” posits court efficiency is largely due to the cultural makeup of the court. Adapting the Court Culture Assessment Instrument developed by Dr. Ostrom and colleagues at the National Center for State Courts, this research study examines judicial perceptions of culture in the Kentucky Court of Justice general and family circuit court. Results indicate circuit courts are predominantly autonomous but desire to be more structured (hierarchical). In addition, bivariate analyses showed a significant, but weak, inverse relationship exists between perceptions of a predominantly hierarchical culture orientation and the presence of delay. In other words, judges who perceived their circuit to be predominantly hierarchical in nature were less likely to perceive delay as a problem.