Evaluation of Topics in Utah's ONE‐HOUR Divorce Education Program

Divorce education programs are mandatory in most states. Despite the ongoing debate in the field regarding the appropriate duration of these programs, the goal of the current study was to identify the following five content areas in divorce education that may be most relevant for predicting favorable outcomes: (1) impact of divorce on children, (2) impact of divorce on family relationships, (3) financial responsibilities of divorcing parents for children, (4) benefits of positive coparenting, and (5) impact of domestic violence on children and family relationships. Using divorcing parents' self‐reported data (N = 3,275) from a one‐hour online divorce education program in Utah, we examined participants' post‐divorce intentions to treat each other respectfully, especially in front of the child(ren), and engage in positive coparental practices. The results showed that the program was effective in obtaining these objectives. We discuss these findings in depth and offer suggestions for future programs.     

Privadentiality: Developing a Coherent Framework for Establishing Communication Protections in Family and Child Protection Dispute Resolution Methods

The emergence of innovative family and child protection dispute resolution (DR) methods has resulted in a varying array of communication protections. Review of these communication protections in the United States reveals a lack of consistency and clarity within each form of DR, and no clear policy to guide the development of the different communication protections across the spectrum of DR methods. This article proposes a new term, privadentiality, to describe communication protections which may be provided for a wide range of DR methods and a framework for categorizing DR methods in order to develop more consistent and appropriate communication protections across the spectrum of DR. This article concludes with recommendations to improve party and professional understanding of DR communication protections; protect families from escalating conflict; promote the integrity of DR methods; and enable courts to appropriately review and, where appropriate, approve DR outcomes.     

Parenting Plans for Special Needs Children: Applying a Risk‐Assessment Model

Family courts are seeing an increasing number of separating or divorced families who have a special needs child. These cases present complex challenges for family law professionals charged with crafting parenting plans based on best interests standards. For many of these children, the typical developmentally based custodial arrangements may not be suitable, given the child's specific symptoms and treatment needs. We present a model for understanding how the general and specific needs of these children, as well as the demands on parents, can be assessed and understood in the context of divorce. This includes an analysis of risk and protective factors that inform timeshare and custodial recommendations and determinations. The risk assessment model is then applied to three of the most commonly occurring childhood neurodevelopmental and psychiatric disorders likely to be encountered in family court, namely, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, depressive disorders, and autistic spectrum disorders.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• There has been a dramatic rise in the population of children with neurodevelopmental, psychiatric, and medical syndromes whose parents are disputing custody in the family courts.
• Family law professionals of all disciplines should develop a fundamental knowledge base about the most commonly seen special needs children in family court, such as those with neurodevelopmental conditions like autistic spectrum disorder, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and severe depressive disorders (especially with teenagers), which may involve suicidal or self‐harming behaviors.
• Commonly recommended parenting plans may be inappropriate for many special needs children, as some function significantly below their chronological age and pose extreme behavioral challenges.
• A systematic analysis of risk and protective factors should inform timeshare arrangements and determinations with this varied population, including the safety of the child and severity of the disorder, parental commitment and availability to pursue medical, educational, and therapeutic services, the parental attunement and insightful about the problem, and the differential parenting skills of each parent.

     

Does Level of Intimate Partner Violence and Abuse Predict the Content of Family Mediation Agreements?

This study investigated whether reported levels of intimate partner violence (IPV) and/or abuse (IPV/A) victimization are related to reaching agreement and to the content of mediation agreements of parties seeking to resolve family‐ and child‐related issues. Whether or not parties reached agreement was analyzed for 105 cases at a law school mediation clinic. Agreement content was coded for the 71 cases that reached agreement. Levels of IPV and IPV/A were determined separately for males and females, using a standardized measure. Regression models were utilized to examine reports of IPV or IPV/A as predictors. Results indicated that mediation may help families with a reported history of IPV and IPV/A address a variety of concerns; levels of partner violence/abuse predicted numerous issues in mediation agreements, including arrangements regarding legal custody, parenting time, holidays, child exchanges, interparental communication, safety restrictions, counseling referrals, child support, financial arrangements, and other miscellaneous topics (e.g., relocation). However, some findings were consistent with concerns raised about the use of mediation with parties reporting IPV and IPV/A; for example, increasing levels of male‐perpetrated IPV/A predicted increased likelihood of making an agreement to share legal custody. Further research is needed to resolve the longstanding debate of whether divorce mediation is an effective and safe process for parties demonstrating IPV/A.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• This study adds to the debate of whether divorce mediation is an effective and safe process for parties demonstrating IPV/A.
• It examines whether reported levels of IPV and IPV/A victimization are related to reaching agreement and to the content of mediation agreements of parties seeking to resolve family‐ and child‐related issues.
• Results provide some evidence that mediation may help families with a reported history of IPV and IPV/A address a variety of concerns.
• However, some findings are consistent with concerns raised about the use of mediation with parties reporting IPV and IPV/A.
• Findings have implications for the practice of family mediation with parties reporting a history of IPV or IPV/A.

     

Designing Heart‐Based Systems to Encourage Forgiveness and Reconciliation in Divorcing Families

Conflicts in intimate relationships are often accidental, occasional, and unique; yet they are also systemic, repetitive, and alike. For this reason, they are amenable to systemic analysis and resolution by altering them at their chronic sources and applying the preventative methodology of conflict resolution systems design. The central difficulties with using traditional forms of conflict resolution systems design in marriages, couples, and families are that they do not effectively address the emotional meaning or significance of the conflict within the relationship; are not grounded in the heart; and do not address the intimate, relational aspects of intimate, affective conflicts. Marriages and families are deeply sensitive, highly complex emotional relationships that require systems design methodologies that are profoundly informed by the heart. This article proposes a heart‐based systems design approach that includes forgiveness and reconciliation for use in marriages and families, including those that end in divorce.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Conflicts in intimate relationships are accidental, occasional, and unique; yet they are also systemic, repetitive, and alike.
• Marriages and families are deeply sensitive, highly complex emotional relationships that require systems design methodologies that are profoundly informed by the heart.
• It is possible to create a heart-based systems design approach to marital, family and divorce conflicts that includes forgiveness and reconciliation.

     

Association for Conflict Resolution Guidelines for Eldercaring Coordinators

On November 6, 2014, the AFCC Board of Directors endorsed the Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR) Guidelines for Eldercaring Coordination, including ethical principles for Eldercaring Coordinators, training protocols, and court pilot project template. The collaboration between Task Forces created by ACR and the Florida Chapter of AFCC, composed of twenty U.S./Canadian and twenty Florida‐wide organizations, produced both an overarching guide to assist in the development of programs and a more detailed model addressing state/province‐specific needs and characteristics. Eldercaring coordination is a dispute resolution option specifically for high‐conflict cases involving the care, needs, and safety of elders.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• There are currently no dispute resolution options for parties involved in high‐conflict cases regarding the care, needs, and safety of an elder.
• The ACR Guidelines for Eldercaring Coordination address the discrepancies between dispute resolution options available for parents in conflict regarding their minor children and mature families with unresolved concerns about the care, needs, and safety of an elder.
• The ACR Guidelines for Eldercaring Coordination provide information regarding the ethical practice of eldercaring coordination including a specific definition, recommended qualifications, ethical practices, grievance procedures, training protocols, and a court pilot project template.
• The practice of eldercaring coordination will address the influx of court cases expected as baby boomers continue to age, reducing delays in court hearings, as parties will have the opportunity to resolve their concerns without continuous court attention.
• As of June 2015, five states began Pilot Projects on Eldercaring Coordination, which will be studied by an independent research group to enhance the progress of the process and to develop the best practices for initiating the programs elsewhere.