LEGISLATING FOR SHARED PARENTING: EXPLORING SOME UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS

In 2006, the Australian parliament introduced new family law legislation about substantively shared overnight parenting arrangements between divorced couples. Other countries and state legislatures are currently debating the merits of similar legislation. A largely unquestionable premise underpins this reform, namely that the majority of children from separated families demonstrably benefit from the ongoing, warm and available involvement of both parents, in a climate of well-managed interparental conflict. The Australian legislation moves beyond encouragement of shared parenting in divorce cases with adequately functioning parents; it extends into grey areas which, to date, remain poorly serviced by credible research, including its application to children of all ages and to parents experiencing significant levels of ongoing conflict. Drawing on data from a longitudinal high-conflict divorce sample, this article challenges three assumptions that underpin a legislative preference for shared parenting, that shared parenting is viable and sustainable for divorced parents in conflict, that shared care enables improved cooperation between parents, and that as a result children will be less affected by their parents' conflict. The article further explores the influence of the mediation process on the choice and durability of shared parenting arrangements.     

PARENTS BEYOND CONFLICT

This article describes a parent education program for high-conflict families in the Multnomah Country Circuit Court, Portland, Oregon. The method emphasized an educational approach teaching conflict resolution skills. This course was rooted in the tenets of cognitive restructuring: if parents think differently about the other parent and their shared task of raising their children, they will feel differently, and they will act differently. The authors beleived many of the difficulties between parents were caused by the negative perception of the other parent created during the spousal relationship. They also believed the key to successful co-parenting is to reframe these perceptions emphasizing cooperation and joint problem-solving. Furthermore, they believed as the cooperation and joint problem-solving improvement would have a positive, reinforcing effect. Finally, the authors believed parents must learn to separate conflict in the spousal role from conflict in the parenting role.     

DEFINING PARENTING COORDINATION WITH STATE LAWS

Parenting coordination is a new trend in defining ADR interventions to help reduce parenting conflicts between court‐involved parents. This writing identifies core elements of parenting coordination as defined by various current state statutes and the AFCC Guidelines for Parenting Coordination. Exploration of the formalization of parenting coordination provides heuristic reading for those initiating statutory regulations in other states as well as the possibility for development of a uniform law.     

Family‐Centered Practice in Adult Treatment Courts: What Can We Learn from the Family Treatment Court Best Practice Standards?

Estimates suggest that upwards of 50% of participants in adult treatment courts (ATC) are parents. Previous studies point to negative impacts of unmet parenting needs on substance use treatment and criminal justice outcomes, and that family‐centered practices such as parenting classes substantially reduce recidivism among ATC participants. Judges and team members interested in adopting family‐centered practices in their ATC program may be unsure where to begin. One recent source of information regarding evidence‐based, family‐centered practices in treatment court settings is the Family Treatment Court (FTC) Best Practice Standards. The FTC Standards suggest adopting a family‐centered mission, expanding partnerships with child‐ and family‐serving agencies, discussing parenting and family roles during hearings, implementing family‐centered case management, and considering the effect of therapeutic responses on children and families. Building on the ATC Standards, the flexibility inherent in voluntary court programs, and existing community partnerships creates a pathway toward family‐centered practice in criminal settings.     

Judicial decision-making in family court involving children with autism spectrum disorder

The prevalence of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in children and adolescents has increased over the past decade. Consequently, the courts and experts are more likely to be exposed to these children whose needs are highly heterogeneous. The present study aims to document judicial decision-making about children with autism spectrum as well as the parenting recommendations made by experts involved in these cases. There were 104 court decisions reviewed in Quebec over the past ten years. The results show that 85.6% of the decisions included a child custody assessment and that judges are more likely to order primary care to mother (56%). However, shared parenting (27%) and primary care to the father (17%) were also ordered in disputes involving an autistic child. Bivariate analyses revealed that challenges with parental monitoring and supervision were associated with court-ordered parenting arrangements. The present study revealed that a child custody assessment as well as father custody are more often observed than in the general population. This study highlights the need for further research to shed light on the best interests of children with ASD following the separation of their parents.     

Court‐Based Interventions in Spain for Families in Divorce Transition: Challenges in the Implementation of (Co)‐Parenting Coordination

Families facing separation or divorce in Spain encounter a number of obstacles, including a primarily adversarial and slow justice system, nonspecialized courts and judges, and a lack of resources to help them through the process. Recent legislation at the regional level (autonomous communities) is moving toward emphasizing shared parental responsibility and introducing parenting plans, while at the national level, legislation advances slowly. One of the main challenges professionals are facing in high‐conflict couple separation is protecting children from the effects of being in the middle of their parents’ conflict. Traditional psychological, legal, and social services are insufficient to support parents and protect their children from interparental hostile conflict—which can be exacerbated by litigation, professional intervention, domestic violence, or addiction. This article illustrates, through a case study, the implementation of parenting coordination in Spain. Different jurisdictions in Spain are slowly implementing (co‐)parenting coordination, an in‐depth intervention designed to support these families. The objective is to help families focus on children's needs and follow the court‐approved parenting plans or court orders, reduce relitigation, and improve parental communication and conflict resolution skills. This article analyzes different aspects and challenges relating to the implementation of parenting coordination in Spain. Recommendations are then made to address them.     

FATHERHOOD IN THE CHILD SUPPORT SYSTEM: AN INNOVATIVE PROBLEM‐SOLVING APPROACH TO AN OLD PROBLEM1

The article is a summary of the development of the District of Columbia Superior Court's Fathering Court Initiative. The Fathering Court Initiative is a problem‐solving court that has developed an innovative approach to child support cases that involves noncustodial parents returning from a period of incarceration. The program is designed to operate as a court based partnership between government and private sector organizations that match resources with family needs to promote responsible co‐parenting.     

Divorce, Custody, and Spousal Violence: A Random Sample of Circuit Court Docket Records

The fastest growing marital status category in America is divorced, with the number of divorced individuals quadrupling between 1970 and 1996. The majority of children in divorced families live with a single parent and often lose contact with the noncustodial parent. A recent review of the literature suggests that many noncustodial fathers fail to keep contact with their children and become delinquent in child support payments because of their dissatisfaction with the custody arrangement. However, there has been little examination of how custody arrangements are typically determined or settled. In addition, divorces that involve spousal violence bring further complications to child custody, visitation, and child support decisions. This study included a 20% random sample of court records for all divorces settled in one county judicial circuit court during 1998. The purpose of this study was to examine characteristics of divorcing adults as well as characteristics of child custody arrangements, visitation, and child support decisions. Contrary to popular belief, findings from this study indicate that divorce actions were almost always settled through agreement of the divorcing parties rather than by adjudication. About 38% of the couples had children in common and between 78 and 92% of cases were settled through agreement, which suggests that fathers are in fact agreeing to the custody arrangement, rather than being forced into it. About one in five records overall noted spousal violence, and there was no significant difference in settlement methods for couples with or without spousal violence. Cases with children and spousal violence were significantly more likely to have also mentioned substance use and postdecree activity. This study suggests a need for more focused attention on divorce cases with spousal violence to reduce postdecree court involvement and safety of children and adult victims, as well as further study into what causes noncustodial parents to lose contact with their children.     

New AFCC Guidelines for Parenting Coordination (2019)

In 2017, AFCC President Annette Burns (2017–18) commissioned a Task Force, led by Dr. Debra Carter, to review the many changes and developments in parenting coordination that had occurred across the United States, in Canada, and across the world in the approximately 12 years since the 2005 Parenting Coordination Guidelines were released. Though primarily commissioned to update and revise the 2005 Guidelines, the Task Force also identified emerging issues in need of exploration – the use of technology in parenting coordination, parenting coordination as an intervention when intimate partner violence is a component of the dynamic, the importance of multicultural awareness and responsiveness, and the overall impact of the statutes, rules, and regulations that had evolved in significantly varying forms since parenting coordination first presented as an intervention for court‐involved families. The work of the Task Force, including the new (2019) Guidelines for Parenting Coordination, is presented.     

AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OF SUPERVISED ACCESS AND CUSTODY EXCHANGE SERVICES

An exploratory outcome study to investigate the ability of a supervised access and custody exchange center to function as a safe visitation enforcement mechanism of the court was accomplished as part of a larger study investigating child well-being. During a 6-month period of program participation, frequency and consistency of noncustodial parents' access to children dramatically increased and interparental conflict significantly decreased, demonstrating that supervised visitation and custody exchange centers that function in partnership with family court during interim court processes can address the unmet needs of family court and high-conflict domestic disputant as well.     

Violent Couples: Coping and Communication Skills

Twelve married couples court-ordered to attend a violence reduction treatment program completed self-report measures of anger, social problem-solving skills, and strategies employed for dealing with high-conflict situations. They were subsequently videotaped while discussing 3 different scenarios. Three raters independently coded the videotapes for the use of effective and ineffective communication strategies used by the participants. Aggregate reliability estimates were acceptable. No gender-based differences were found on the self-report measures or the communication skill ratings. When couples discussed low-conflict situations use of effective skills exceeded use of ineffective skills, and when couples discussed high-conflict problems use of ineffective skills exceeded use of effective skills. Implications for treatment of spousal assault are presented.     

Improving court-appearance rates through court-date reminder phone calls

Without a defendant’s appearance in court, the adjudication of criminal charges cannot proceed. The low defendant court appearance rates of Lafayette Parish, Louisiana were identified as a high priority to address. A pilot project was implemented, in which, Lafayette Parish Sheriff’s Office (LPSO) Information Officers would call defendants approximately 5–9 days before their pretrial court appearance. This process began in September 2014. LPSO staff attempted to call all non-incarcerated or diverted defendants with known contact information. LPSO staff documented when calls were made and the type of response (spoke to defendant, left a voicemail, no answer, inoperable phone or spoke to friend or family member). Calls were made to defendants with court appearances in arraignment hearings, misdemeanor pretrial and trial, felony pretrial and traffic court. Court appearance rates for all court hearings increased from 48 to 62%.     

ONE CASE–ONE SPECIALIZED JUDGE: WHY COURTS HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO MANAGE ALIENATION AND OTHER HIGH-CONFLICT CASES

This article challenges the traditional approach to alienation and other high-conflict cases in which many different generalist judges deal with the case. The objectives of the judicial process, dealing with cases in a just, timely, and affordable way that instils confidence in the public and litigants, cannot be met unless high-conflict cases are actively managed by one specialist family law judge. Allowing parents in high-conflict cases to decide when and how often their case should come before the court exacerbates the negative effects of the litigation on children. This article concludes that, unless the litigation is properly managed by specialist judges, the justice system unintentionally causes harm to children.     

PARENTS BEYOND CONFLICT WORKSHOP

This article reviews a program designed in response to high-conflict parents who have protracted family law cases and have been referred to dependency court due to child abuse allegations.     

INTEREST IN MARITAL RECONCILIATION AMONG DIVORCING PARENTS

This study offers the first research data on the interest of divorcing parents in marital reconciliation. A sample of 2,484 divorcing parents was surveyed after taking required parenting classes. They were asked about whether they believed their marriage could still be saved with hard work, and about their interest in reconciliation services. About 1 in 4 individual parents indicated some belief that their marriage could still be saved, and in about 1 in 9 matched couples both partners did. As for interest in reconciliation services, about 3 in 10 individuals indicated potential interest. In a sub‐sample of 329 matched couples, about 1 in 3 couples had one partner interested but not the other, and in 1 in 10 couples both partners were interested in reconciliation services. Findings were consistent across most demographic and marital factors. The only strong predictors of reconciliation interest were gender, with males being more interested than females, and initiator status, with far greater interest among those whose partner initiated the divorce. These findings are discussed in terms of attachment theory and future prospects of divorce services.     

The emperor has no clothes: A systemic view of the status and future of child custody evaluation (CCE)

For all of the time, effort, and money invested in child custody evaluation (CCE) and for all of evaluators' emphases on collecting empirically sound data, CCE is not itself an empirically robust process. The reliability, validity, efficacy, and efficiency of CCE has never yet been adequately demonstrated. The science has yet even to define and measure the variables that constitute a healthy family, much less how one is to measure and recommend changes for conflicted systems in the midst of tectonic transitions. This article proposes five ways in which family law professionals and the culture at large should work to better serve the needs of our children: (1) the establishment of proactive parenting and co-parenting education intended to diminish the frequency and magnitude of family conflict and improve the quality of child and family functioning; (2) the introduction of organized incentives that motivate healthy parenting and co-parenting practices as opposed to negative consequences that do too-little, too-late; (3) a greater emphasis on social equity, cultural humility, and universal professional training; (4) the creation of ethical guidelines that disconnect continuing conflict from professional income; and (5) outcome research that feeds back into the evolution of these and related processes.     

照本宣科还是娓娓道来——公诉人当庭宣读起诉书制度之反思与重构

公诉人当庭宣读起诉书是我国刑事诉讼审判的必经程序，在大陆法系传统的国家或地区也颇为常见，而这一制度未必能达到预想的效果，反而会产生诉讼效率低下、庭审效果不佳、无法与法庭辩论形成呼应等弊端。作为控方证明行为体系中的开场行为，改革思路应当是将公诉人当庭宣读起诉书改造为为公诉证明构造清晰提纲的开庭陈述。     

Parenting Coordination and Confidentiality: A (Not‐so) Delicate Balance

This article describes the current state and range of information protection in the growing number of states and Canadian provinces that employ parenting coordination in an effort to reduce repeat custody litigation. The predominant approach—in which what is revealed during the process is not confidential—is analyzed in terms of its compatibility with the parenting coordinator's multiple tasks of educating parents, seeking to facilitate agreements, and, if necessary, providing the court with a report, a recommended decision, or an arbitrated result. Using a case scenario with multiple parts, the article then examines such confidentiality schemes in practice by providing an action‐oriented series of questions that illustrate how much of this topic must be resolved through a parenting coordinator's exercise of discretion in the absence of rule clarity. The article then raises a number of policy questions about whether current parenting coordination confidentiality norms strike the optimal or even the correct balance on information protection and concludes by identifying several policy options that might address these questions.