CHILDREN'S AND PARENTS’ PERCEPTIONS ON CHILDREN'S PARTICIPATION IN DECISION MAKING AFTER PARENTAL SEPARATION AND DIVORCE*

This article outlines the views of children and parents involved in family law disputes, about the need for and appropriateness of children's participation in decisions regarding residence and contact arrangements. Ninety parents and 47 children (ranging in age from 6 to 18 years) who had been through parental separation, were interviewed. Both parents and children had a range of views about the general appropriateness and fairness of children being involved, but the great majority, particularly of parents, thought that children should have a say in these matters. Core findings of the study include the considerable influence that older children had over the arrangements either in the aftermath of the separation or in making further changes over time, and the higher stated need of children who had experienced violence, abuse, or high levels of conflict to be heard than those in less problematic and noncontested matters. Parents involved in contested proceedings supported the participation of children at a younger age than those who were not. There was a reasonable degree of agreement between parents and children about the need for children to be acknowledged and the value of their views being heard in the decision‐making process. Parents, however, expressed concern about the pressure and manipulation that children can face and exert in this process, whereas children were generally more concerned about the fairness of the outcomes, and maintaining their relationships with their parents and siblings.     

The Development and Evaluation of Radiological Decontamination Procedures for Documents,Document Inks,and Latent Fingermarks on Porous Surfaces*†

Abstract: Criminal acts such as an attack utilizing a radiological dispersal device (RDD or dirty bomb), the manufacture of such a device, or the illicit trafficking of radioactive materials would warrant a criminal investigation. This could involve the collection, transportation, and analysis of radiologically contaminated trace evidence. But are law enforcement agencies and forensic scientists capable of dealing with this? This research investigates the decontamination efficacy of two decontamination techniques (chemical and physical) designed for the removal of radiological material from documents of forensic importance. The impact that these procedures have on the development of latent fingermarks and the forensic analysis of the inks on these documents is also studied. It was found that slight changes in the color and chemical composition of a variety of document inks and a destruction of fingermark ridges occurred after chemical decontamination. Physical decontamination had no impact on these parameters.     

The Recovery of Latent Fingermarks from Evidence Exposed to Ionizing Radiation*

Abstract: Continual reports of illicit trafficking incidents involving radioactive materials have prompted authorities to consider the likelihood of forensic evidence being exposed to radiation. In this study, we investigated the ability to recover latent fingermark evidence from a variety of substrates that were exposed to ionizing radiation. Fingermarks deposited on common surfaces, including aluminum, glass, office paper, and plastic, were exposed to doses ranging from 1 to 1000 kGy, in an effort to simulate realistic situations where evidence is exposed to significant doses of radiation from sources used in a criminal act. The fingermarks were processed using routine fingermark detection techniques. With the exception of glass and aluminum substrates, radiolysis had a considerable effect on the quality of the developed fingermarks. The damage to ridge characteristics can, in part, be attributed to chemical interactions between the substrate and the components of the fingermark secretions that react with the detection reagents.     

Reforming Relocation Law: A Reply to Prof. Thompson

This article provides a response to Prof. Thomson's critique, noting many points of agreement and also the broader consensus that is emerging among experts in the field. The research evidence, and the wider body of knowledge on children's well‐being generally, supports the proposition that relocation is a risk factor for children after parental separation but provides no support for a general presumption either in favor of, nor against, relocation. Nor should it be assumed that the interests of children are the same as those of their primary caregiver. We defend our three questions arguing the need in an adult‐centric debate to focus resolutely on children's interests rather than on adult rights. Both Prof. Thompson's approach and our own involve guided decision making with the child's best interests as the paramount consideration—his through weak presumptions based upon research about how judges respond to relocation issues and ours through focused questions based on research on how parents and children respond to relocations issues. We do not consider that codifying the existing practices of the courts represents real reform. We identify various risks involved in using presumptions, but note that, in jurisdictions with limited publicly funded resources for individual case assessment, presumptions, burdens or guidelines may be needed to offer rough justice to impecunious parents.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• Notes points of emerging agreement on relocation within the research community
• Explores the differences between the use of presumptions and focused questions and highlights the role of empirical research of the lived experience of children and families postrelocation disputes
• Identifies how the level of public resourcing for the family law system may impact upon decisions about the substance of the law concerning relocation