A Rigorous Quasi‐Experimental Design to Evaluate the Causal Effect of a Mandatory Divorce Education Program

All couples with minor children who filed for divorce within a specific 6‐week period (N = 191 couples) in one jurisdiction were ordered to attend a divorce education program. The control group included about 20 couples randomly selected from each of six 6‐week intervals before and six 6‐week intervals after the treatment interval (N = 243 couples). Archival records were searched for variables such as legal and residential custody award, visitation percentage, and relitigation. The impact of the program was assessed by evaluating, for each variable, whether the data for program interval departed from the straight (regression) line drawn through all the control group intervals. Only the visitation time award significantly differed: 27.75% for treatment couples and 22.46% for control couples. Analyses show that the father's attendance at the program primarily accounts for the difference.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• There are considerable methodological weaknesses in most of the existing evaluations of divorcing parent education programs.
• Stronger, more scientifically rigorous—and thus persuasive—designs are possible in court settings, such as the regression discontinuity quasi‐experimental design we feature here.
• Archival records, such as various court filings, are a rich and relatively untapped source of data.
• Being mandated to attend a single 2‐hour divorcing parent education class caused an increase in the visitation time award in divorce decrees.
• There is a disconnect between being mandated by a judge to attend a program and actual attendance.

     

Cognitive‐Behavioral Methods in High‐Conflict Divorce: Systematic Desensitization Adapted to Parent–Child Reunification Interventions

Children who are triangulated into their parents' conflicts can become polarized, aligning with one parent and rejecting the other. In response, courts often order families to engage mental health professionals to provide reunification interventions. This article adapts empirically established systematic desensitization and flooding procedures most commonly used to treat phobic children as possible components of a larger family systems invention designed to help the polarized child develop a healthy relationship with both parents. Strengths and weaknesses of these procedures are discussed and illustrated with case material.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• Family law and psychology agree that children should have the opportunity to enjoy a healthy relationship with both parents
• Adult conflict can polarize a child's relationships, including rejection of one parent
• Existing clinical and forensic “reunification” strategies often prove inadequate
• Reliable and valid cognitive behavioral methods can be adopted to facilitate this process
• A cognitive‐behavioral “exposure‐based” reunification protocol is discussed

     

Unbundled Services to Enhance Peacemaking for Divorcing Families

Unbundling, also known as limited‐scope representation, has been adopted by judges, the organized legal profession, and divorcing parties. Unbundling is a legal access approach to better and more affordably serve unrepresented divorce litigants as well as to assist overburdened and underfunded courts. This article will focus on another critical benefit of unbundling: the ability of divorcing professionals to provide information and support to divorcing families to help reduce family conflicts. This article shall discuss four unbundled peacemaking roles that lawyers can play: (1) Collaborative Lawyer; (2) Lawyer Coach for Self‐Represented Litigants; (3) Lawyer for Mediation Participants; and (4) Preventive Legal Health Care Provider.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Overview of limited‐scope lawyering roles
• Impact of unbundled representation on peacemaking
• Best practices of noncourt lawyering

     

The Interdisciplinary Settlement Conference: A Grassroots Alternative for Resolving High‐Conflict Parenting Disputes in Lean Times

This article describes a court‐connected alternative dispute resolution program, the Interdisciplinary Settlement Conference. The key feature of this program is the participation of two volunteer panelists, one a family law attorney and the other a mental health professional experienced in parenting disputes, who assist the judicial officer in working with the parties and their attorneys (if any) to reach a resolution of their parenting dispute. Significantly, in addition to addressing the parties’ legal issues, the panelists also address the parties’ psychological and emotional issues relevant to the dispute on an as‐needed basis. Findings from six years of experience with the program are discussed, including evidence of high satisfaction with the program, a high rate of settlement, a decrease in relitigation, and a concomitant savings of scarce judicial resources.     

一物二卖的救济与防范

对于一物二卖 ,债权法只能提供事后救济 ,而且其他债权人的特定利益难以实现。在制定物权法时 ,有必要借鉴外国立法例并根据我国的实际加以修正 ,设立可以对一物二卖起到一定防范作用的预登记制度、转交付制度、优先权制度 ,进而构建我国对一物二卖救济与防范的完整法律体系。     

Anti‐Communism,Communism, and Anti‐Interventionism in Narratives Surrounding the Student Massacre on Tlatelolco Square (Mexico, 1968)

Shortly before the Mexico Olympics, on 2 October 1968, student demonstrators were shot by the military on Tlatelolco Square in Mexico City, thus ending the local student movement and its mass protests. This paper explores the government's use of anti‐communism to ideologically justify this massacre in the context of the Cold War. The student movement was presented as a foreign, communist intervention that threatened Mexico's sovereignty. The paper analyses the weaknesses and contradictions of this official narrative by contrasting public and confidential reports. Finally, the marginal role of communism in the movement and its internal divisions are also outlined.     

To P or not to P? The Usefulness of P‐values in Quantitative Political Science Research

This contribution gives a short overview over the mechanics of significance testing in inferential statistics, in particular linear models, and tries to put the discussion about the usefulness of p‐values into a broader perspective of scientific practise. This discussion needs to be embedded into the larger debate about the credibility crises faced by empirical social science research. In particular, it seems of utmost importance to discuss what the profession as a whole, journals, publishers, as well as editors can do to encourage better research practise that generates reliable and useful empirical findings.     

Co‐enforcing Labor standards: the unique contributions of state and worker organizations in Argentina and the United States

Labor inspection is a central response to the tremendous gap between formal regulations and outcomes for workers throughout the world. Scholarly and policy debates on labor regulation have focused on improving the targeting of enforcement, changing strategies of street‐level agents, and creating private alternatives to state regulation. This paper argues that these proposals, while important, fail to systematically incorporate the potential contributions of worker organizations and, as a result, overlook opportunities for co‐enforcing labor standards, a key element of labor inspection. By contrast, we develop a framework to analyze the relationships between worker organizations and state regulators that underpin co‐enforcement. We ground this framework empirically in comparative cases, set in Argentina and the United States, presenting two cases of co‐enforcement in highly different institutional contexts. In so doing, we seek to illuminate key attributes of labor inspection and guide attempts to enhance enforcement by forging partnerships between regulators and worker organizations.     

INITIAL DEVELOPMENT OF A PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL FOR JUDICIAL DECISION MAKING IN CONTINUING RESTRAINING ORDERS

Probate and family court judges are increasingly called upon to make rapid decisions regarding the continuance of restraining orders. These decisions are often made without the benefit of adequate background information or an awareness of which psychological and behavioral factors are most relevant. This action‐oriented research project develops a model that brings psychosocial factors to consideration for judges making decisions regarding the continuance of restraining orders. While further evaluation of the model is needed, the project's unique methodology highlights the value of interdisciplinary collaboration, multiple methods of inquiry, and the consideration of real‐world needs and constraints in developing decision‐making tools.