The Resource Center for Separating and Divorcing Families: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on A Collaborative and Child‐Focused Approach to Alternative Dispute Resolution

The Resource Center for Separating and Divorcing Families (RCSDF) is a teaching model for providing interdisciplinary services to separating and divorcing families. The model was developed by the Honoring Families Initiative at the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System at the University of Denver. Services are provided by graduate and law students at the University of Denver, working side‐by‐side with a supervising licensed attorney, psychologist, and social worker. The experiential and interdisciplinary model of teaching and providing direct client services is the first of its kind in the United States. RCSDF students and staff seek to empower parents to make positive decisions about their family's future in a supportive and educational environment.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• The current system of preparing graduate and law students for careers in family law is in need of improvement. This article provides information for educators and the family law community about the impact of interdisciplinary and experiential learning for students.
• Parents going through the transition of separation or divorce experience psychological and financial stressors that can create serious behavioral and adjustment issues for their children. The RCSDF works in a holistic manner with parents and children to minimize the levels of stress and anxiety during the transition.

     

Money as Punishment: Neoliberal Budgetary Politics and the Fine

ABSTRACT

In August of 2014, a young Indigenous woman, known as Ms. Dhu, died in the lock-up of the South Hedland Police Station after being detained for unpaid fines totalling $3622. Her death drew attention to the fact that fine defaulters – most of whom are Indigenous and female – are once again being imprisoned at astonishing rates in Western Australia, after the practice was more or less discontinued elsewhere. What does the nexus between the fine, incarceration and forced labour tell us about the relationship between money and penality in contemporary neoliberal/neoconservative states? Pointing to the combined influence of the Chicago and Virginia schools of neoliberalism on Australian public policy, I suggest that the recent expansion of monetary sanctions must be understood as a way of transferring the debt burdens of the state downwards, onto those classified as excessive ‘users’ of public services. Not only does the fine blur the boundaries between civil and criminal law, it also harnesses punishment to the fiscal imperatives of an increasingly austere, deficit-averse state.     

Legislators as Lobbyists

Public policy is produced by elected and unelected officials and through the interactions of branches of government. We consider how such interactions affect policy implementation and representation. We argue that legislators try to influence bureaucratic decisions through direct communication with federal agencies, and that such contact is effective and has consequences for policy outcomes. We provide empirical evidence of this argument using original data about direct communication between members of Congress and the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) along with decisions made by the DOL regarding trade and redistributive policies. We find that direct contacts influence DOL decisions, and the agency is more likely to reverse previous decisions when requested to do so by legislators. Our results challenge key assumptions and findings in the previous literature and have important implications for interbranch relations and informal means of control over the implementation of national policy.