CHILD‐FOCUSED AND CHILD‐INCLUSIVE DIVORCE MEDIATION: COMPARATIVE OUTCOMES FROM A PROSPECTIVE STUDY OF POSTSEPARATION ADJUSTMENT

This study compared outcomes over 1 year for two groups of separated parents, who attended two different forms of brief therapeutic mediation for entrenched parenting disputes. The two interventions each targeted psychological resolution of parental conflict, enhanced parental reflective function, and associated reduction of distress for their children. The child‐focused (CF) intervention actively supported parents to consider the needs of their children, but without any direct involvement of the children, while the child‐inclusive (CI) intervention incorporated separate consultation by a specialist with the children in each family, and consideration of their concerns with parents in the mediation forum. Repeated measures at baseline, 3 months, and 1 year postintervention explored changes over time and across treatments in conflict management, subjective distress, and relationship quality for all family members. Enduring reduction in levels of conflict and improved management of disputes, as reported by parents and children, occurred for both treatment groups in the year after mediation. The CI intervention had several impacts not evident in the other treatment group, related to relationship improvements and psychological well‐being. These effects were strongest for fathers and children. Agreements reached by the CI group were significantly more durable, and the parents in this group were half as likely to instigate new litigation over parenting matters in the year after mediation as were the CF parents. The article explores the potential of CI divorce mediation to not only safely include many children in family law matters related to them, but also to promote their developmental recovery from high‐conflict separation, through enhanced emotional availability of their parents.     

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.     

Effectiveness of Functional Family Therapy for Mandated Versus Non‐Mandated Youth

This study compares the outcomes for youth mandated to participate in Functional Family Therapy (FFT) to those whose participation was referred but voluntary. FFT is a short‐term intervention for delinquents and status offenders, along with their parents. The study sample consists of 120 cases: 70 youth and parents who were mandated by the Family Court to participate in FFT and 50 youth and their parents who were referred to FFT by other agencies. The sample is diverse in terms of gender, race and ethnicity. The outcome variables consist of a set of scales obtained from the Strengths and Needs Assessment (SNA). Changes in life domain functioning, child strengths, acculturation, caregivers' strengths, caregivers' needs, child behavioral emotional needs, and child risk behaviors are assessed. The analysis indicates that both groups improved across all domains. Overall, being mandated to participate in FFT does not predict greater improvements in outcomes. The findings suggest that status offenders and minor delinquents who participated in FFT could be processed less formally without foregoing the therapy outcomes.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Toward Better Outcomes for Families Through Innovative Dispute Resolution Programs in England

This article explores and shares the learning from two of Cafcass’ innovative dispute resolution pilot programs. The programs aim to improve outcomes for families against the backdrop of rising private law demand in England, while keeping the child at the center. The Positive co‐Parenting Programme pilot provides a structured intervention to reduce conflict and promote timely resolution for children and families in complex cases. The Support with Making Child Arrangements pilot explores whether the provision of a package of support to parents ahead of the first court hearing can help them come to safe agreements about their children without the need for court intervention.     

A New Index for the MMPI‐2 Test for Detecting Dissimulation in Forensic Evaluations: A Pilot Study

This pilot study is the starting point of a potentially broad research project aimed at identifying new strategies for assessing malingering during forensic evaluations. The forensic group was comprised of 67 males who were seeking some sort of certification (e.g., adoption, child custody, driver's license, issuance of gun permits, etc.); the nonforensic group was comprised of 62 healthy male volunteers. Each participant was administered the MMPI‐2. Statistical analyses were conducted on obtained scores of 48 MMPI‐2 scales. In the first step, parametric statistics were adopted to identify the best combination of MMPI‐2 scales that differentiated the two groups of participants. In the second step, frequency‐based, nonparametric methods were used for diagnostic purposes. Results: A model that utilized the best three predictors (“7‐Pt”, “L,” and “1‐Hs”) was developed and used to calculate the Forensic Evaluation Dissimulation Index (FEDI), which features satisfactory diagnostic accuracy (0.9), sensitivity (0.82), specificity (0.81), and likelihood ratio indices (LR+ = 4.32; LR? = 0.22).     

Reunification in Intrafamilial Child Abuse Cases: A Model for Intervention

In response to a growing number of requests to help reunify parents and children separated by allegations of child abuse, we developed a model for intervention informed by clinical experience, feedback from clients and professionals, and insights from a growing body of interdisciplinary literature. This article presents a retrospective analysis of 29 intrafamilial cases describing the intervention, outcomes, and problems presented by these challenging situations. The safety and protection of the child was the paramount consideration in determining success, whether or not reunification was achieved. Using informal follow‐up data, 24 of the 29 cases were categorized as successful, 21 resulted in full or partial reunification, and 3 cases resulted in the voluntary or court‐ordered withdrawal of an accused father believed to pose a risk to the child. In 5 cases, the nonaccused parent thwarted efforts at reunification, and the case returned to the court of relevant jurisdiction.     

Predictors of Initial Court Agreement and 1‐Year Relitigation in Title IV‐D Contested Paternity Cases

We examined potential predictors of initial court agreement and 1‐year relitigation in a sample of contested paternity cases involving unmarried parents coming to court to establish paternity, child support, and other issues. Cases participated in an RCT of a parent program and of a waiting period between establishment of paternity and court hearing. We controlled for RCT study factors and used baseline assessment data to predict likelihood of reaching full agreement in the initial court hearing and relitigation in the following year. Findings suggest that cases in which parents get along better outside of court are more likely to reach agreement and less likely to return to court. Additionally, particular parent demographics predict lower likelihood of reaching initial agreement (e.g., parents are non‐White, father earns below $10,000 yearly), more relitigation (e.g., parents are non‐White, mother earns above $10,000 yearly, father has children with others), and less relitigation (e.g., father earns above $10,000 yearly). Child demographics and most parent relationship characteristics did not predict outcomes. We discuss findings and offer suggestions for court interventions.     

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.     

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.     

Why Medical Child Support is Important—and Complex

Courts resolving child support cases involving separated, divorced, and non‐marital children are charged with defining responsibility for health care coverage for the children under that order. This article explores historical and current medical child support requirements under Title IV‐D of the Social Security Act—the national child support enforcement (“IV‐D”) program. It analyzes legal requirements and policy recommendations, and provides a practical tool judges may use to determine whether health care coverage available to either or both parents is appropriate—that is, comprehensive, accessible, and affordable.     

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.

     

Book Review: How Mediation Works: Theory,Research, and Practice by Stephen B. Goldberg,Jeanne M. Brett,Beatrice Blohorn‐Brenneur,With Nancy H. Rogers

This is a book review of How Mediation Works: Theory, Research, and Practice by Stephen B. Goldberg, Jeanne M. Brett, Beatrice Blohorn‐Brenneur, with Nancy H. Rogers. How Mediation Works is intended for a wide range of audiences: practicing mediators; aspiring mediators; those who may refer cases to mediation; participants in mediation, including parties and attorneys; managers who facilitate disputes; and those interested in mediation without a specific plan to engage in the practice (who the authors call “mediation learners”). The book is a well‐written, thoughtful, easy‐to‐read, organized, and concise overview of mediation practice. The book is divided into six chapters: (1) conflicts, disputes, and their resolution; (2) dispute resolution processes; (3) the roles of the mediator and the disputing parties at each step of the mediation process; (4) dealing with difficulties; (5) mediation and the law; and (6) suggestions for aspiring mediators. Though not an authority for family law mediation, the book provides many insightful observations and suggestions that would be instructive and helpful to any mediator or individual with an interest in mediation.     

Injury‐Related Healthcare Use and Risk of Filicide Victimization: A Population‐Based Case–Control Study

Research on child‐related risk factors for filicide is scant. We investigated whether prior healthcare use for injury (including poisoning) influences filicide risk. Victims (0–14 years; n = 71) were identified in a national autopsy database for the years 1994–2012 and compared to matched, general population controls (n = 355). Healthcare use data were retrieved from a national patient registry. Risks were estimated using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For females, prior inpatient care for injury conferred a statistically significant sevenfold risk (OR = 6.67 [95% CI: 1.49–29.79]), and any prior injury‐related healthcare use conferred a statistically significant fourfold risk (OR = 3.57 [95% CI: 1.13–11.25]), of filicide victimization. No statistically significant risks were found for males. Healthcare personnel should be aware that children treated for injuries, especially females, may be at an elevated risk of filicide victimization. Nevertheless, the filicide base rate remains low, and parents may be stigmatized by unfounded alerts; thus, prudent reflection should precede reports to the authorities.     

HIGH‐CONFLICT CONTACT DISPUTES: EVIDENCE OF THE EXTREME UNRELIABILITY OF SOME CHILDREN'S ASCERTAINABLE WISHES AND FEELINGS

This article challenges an increasing orthodoxy regarding the weight which courts might place upon the expressed views of children in a specific situation—high‐conflict contact disputes. I am a child psychiatrist who acts as an expert witness within the family courts of England & Wales. I have conducted a statistical analysis of cases in which I have conducted assessments of children caught in such disputes between their separated parents. Fifty‐eight children met the criteria for inclusion in the study—the child's consistent opposition to contact with the non resident parent (NRP), despite the court having determined that there was no good reason to constrain contact. My assessment routinely included attempted observation of the child at a visit with the NRP. Despite their stated views most children had a positive experience in those visits that took place, and despite the fact that most had not seen the NRP for a long time. Overall there was a statistical association between increased resistance to contact and the greater age of the child and the longer the time during which no contact had occurred. However, the responses of children and young people were unpredictable and it was impossible to conclude that apparent maturity or intelligence was a guide to the reliability of their expressed resistance. The possible reasons for this unreliability are discussed. I emphasize that my sample of children is unusual as many of the cases had involved serious, though unfounded, allegations of abuse. In addition most of the children showed indications of having become “alienated” from the NRP. I conclude that courts might exercise caution when evaluating the views of children and young people in this situation, and emphasises that assessors should consider including at least one observation of the child at a prolonged visit to the NRP. Because of the new orthodoxy some parents may be tempted to misuse their child's right to a “voice” in court in order to achieve their own ends. Practitioners who advise courts may need to be more aware of these difficulties.     

ROCK‐PAPER‐SCISSORS: PLAYING THE ODDS WITH THE LAW OF CHILD RELOCATION

This article offers for inspection the proposition that the adversarial evidence‐based litigation process is unsuitable for resolving custody cases in general and relocation cases in particular. It analyzes the leading cases from New York, Massachusetts, California, England, Canada, and Australia. It reaches a conclusion that no jurisdiction has devised a legal standard or formula that enables a judge to predict the future best interest of a child if that child is allowed to relocate with one parent away from the other. For this reason, the court has a duty to offer as sophisticated and friendly a settlement process and atmosphere as possible. However, knowing that judges will still be required to resolve these difficult cases because they often seem impervious to settlement, the article offers thirty‐six factors that a court should consider in all move‐away cases. By relying on each of these factors that is relevant to the case, the parents will have an understanding of why the decision was made the way it was and it will also allow for effective appellate review.     

A Coordinated Approach to Improving Outcomes for Substance‐Abusing Families in Juvenile Dependency Court

This paper describes a coordinated approach to providing enhanced services for substance‐abusing families in the juvenile dependency court. The enhanced services consisted of an interagency collaborative model including the Department of Social Services, Court Appointed Special Advocates, Public Health Nurses, and Family Support Specialists. The purpose of the intervention was to increase the likelihood of family reunification. Families were randomly assigned to either the enhanced services (N=48) or to a regular services group (N=41). Variables included social background factors, data related to court hearings and court orders, and final court outcomes regarding placement and custody. Significant factors predicting final placement of the child were completion of court ordered programs, a stable home, and mothers' cooperation and motivation. Families who received the enhanced services had significantly higher rates of reunification of children with parents.