ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS WHITE PAPER GUIDELINES FOR COURT‐INVOLVED THERAPY: A BEST PRACTICE APPROACH FOR MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS

This article was written by the Honorable Linda S. Fidnick and Kelly. A. Koch, Esq. Judge Fidnick is an Associate Justice with the Hampshire Probate and Family Court. Prior to her appointment to the bench in 2008, Judge Fidnick was a partner in the Amherst law firm of Burres, Fidnick & Booth LLP, where she concentrated her practice in all areas of family law. Judge Fidnick is a graduate of Smith College and the University of Connecticut Law School, and she has been a member of the Massachusetts Bar for over thirty years. Judge Fidnick is past president of the Massachusetts chapter of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) and currently serves on the national board of directors of AFCC. Judge Fidnick and Matthew Sullivan, Ph.D. are the co‐chairs of the AFCC Task Force on Court‐Involved Therapists. Attorney Koch is a graduate of Brandeis University and WesternNew England College School of Law. She served as a law clerk to the Justices of the Massachusetts Probate and Family Court and is presently an associate attorney with the Springfield, Massachusetts firm of Bulkley, Richardson and Gelinas. Matthew J. Sullivan, Ph.D. is a psychologist in private practice in California who has written articles, presented and done trainings at numerous national and international venues on interventions in high conflict divorce, Parenting Coordination and child alienation in family law cases. He currently serves on the Board of Directors at AFCC. Lyn R. Greenberg, Ph.D. is a family forensic psychologist practicing in Los Angeles, California. She serves as the reporter for the AFCC Court‐Involved Therapist Task Force and Co‐Chairs the Family Forensic Special Interest Group of Div. 43. She Co‐Chaired the APA‐ABA Working Group on Representation and Advocacy for Children. The AFCC Task Force on Court‐Involved Therapists was given the charge of defining guidelines for the professional practice of therapists working with court‐involved families. A draft of the Guidelines was presented for Comments in March 2010 and all comments were submitted to the Task Force Reporter, Lyn R. Greenberg, Ph.D. on May 1, 2010.     

A BETTER BEGINNING: FAMILY LAW IN THE FIRST YEAR OF LAW SCHOOL

The American Bar Association's Section of Legal Education and Admission to the Bar's Standards Review Committee has focused law schools' efforts to modify their curriculum with an appeal to focus on outcomes and assessments. A cornerstone of the outcomes and assessments discussion is skills training. The committee's call for more skills training has prompted family law faculty to consider innovative methods to bring that training into substantive courses or to bring the substantive curriculum into a skills course. This essay discusses how law faculty are incorporating family law doctrines into first‐year legal research and writing courses.     

THE POTENTIAL OF THE FAMILY LAW EDUCATION REFORM PROJECT FOR FAMILY LAWYERS1

Family lawyers are major beneficiaries of the reforms set out in the Family Law Education Reform Project (FLER) Report. This commentary from a veteran family law practitioner explores the needs of the family law bar for the training of law students in practical, interdisciplinary, client‐centered lawyering that goes beyond the traditional case method. I trace many of the current innovations evolving in family law practice and how FLER reforms will not only benefit law schools but also have a major impact in the courts and private practice sector.     

MEDIATION AND THE PROCESS OF FAMILY LAW REFORM

The family law system needs fixing. The real question is how to go about fixing it. The concept of mediation and its process should be vital in the rethinking and restructuring of the system. This article discusses how mediation can be used in policy-making to get all the stakeholders in the family law system to creatively and non-judgmentally work toward reform. The author contends that increased legal access and speedy low-cost dispute resolution should be at the top of the reform agenda. Courts and professional offices are valued for their consumer-friendliness, stressing nonadversarial settings and cleint education. Unbundling is urged to be not only accepted but also promoted as a practice to meet the legal needs of families. The article concludes with the argument that effective reform should incorporate the principles of mediation, and the reform process should take advantage of models of consumer friendliness from both the public and private sectors .