The European Parliament and the Commission Crisis: A New Assertiveness?

This article examines two claims made about the "Commission crisis" of 1999: first, that the accountability of the Commission to the European Parliament (EP) was significantly increased; and, second, that the model of parliamentary government in the European Union (EU) was advanced by events in 1999. In analyzing the crisis and its consequences, this article focuses upon the powers of dismissal and appointment, and what these powers reveal about the capacity of the EP both to hold the Commission responsible for its collective and individual actions and to influence its policy agenda. If a parliamentary model is to develop in the EU, the negative parliamentary powers of censure and dismissal have to be balanced by the positive powers of appointment and enhanced executive responsiveness. On both counts—dismissal and appointment—the 1999 "Commission crisis" did not point to the clear and unambiguous dawning of a "genuine European parliamentary democracy."     

The New Zealand Model of Family Group Conferencing

The Family Group Conference (FGC) originated in New Zealand where it is the foundation stone of the Youth Justice system introduced in 1989. A significant feature of that system is the way in which it enables restorative justice principles to be implemented in an integrated manner in a statutory framework supervised by the courts and applicable to all young offenders throughout New Zealand. FGCs are used both as a diversionary technique (pre-adjudication) and at a (post-adjudication) pre-sentencing stage. In addition this type of model is now being applied in a voluntary way but on a small scale with adults. A significant feature of the FGC model is its greater use of community-based solutions with a consequent reduction in the number of young persons in state institutions.     

Why Medical Child Support is Important—and Complex

Courts resolving child support cases involving separated, divorced, and non‐marital children are charged with defining responsibility for health care coverage for the children under that order. This article explores historical and current medical child support requirements under Title IV‐D of the Social Security Act—the national child support enforcement (“IV‐D”) program. It analyzes legal requirements and policy recommendations, and provides a practical tool judges may use to determine whether health care coverage available to either or both parents is appropriate—that is, comprehensive, accessible, and affordable.     

A Judicial‐Mental Health Partnership to Heal Young Children in Juvenile Court

In this article, we describe the background and issues to be addressed related to dependent children in juvenile court. In an important effort to systematically examine developmental functioning and treatment needs in maltreated and violence‐exposed young children, the Prevention and Evaluation of Early Neglect and Trauma (PREVENT) initiative of the Dependency Court Intervention Program for Family Violence, a national demonstration project in the Miami‐Dade Juvenile Court, developed a program to evaluate all infants, toddlers, and preschoolers who are adjudicated dependent by the court. The goal of the intervention is to raise awareness of the needs of infants and toddlers in juvenile court and to work toward healing the child. The PREVENT program involved the evolution of a judicial‐mental health partnership designed to assist the court in making more informed decisions about the best interest of the child by adding scientific knowledge about development, prevention, intervention, evaluation, and treatment. The outcome of the partnership and multidisciplinary approach is illustrated through presenting a case vignette of a mother and baby showing the challenges and strengths of intervention. Finally, we consider overall outcomes of the intervention and directions for the future.     

MEDIATION IN CHILD PROTECTION IN BRITISH COLUMBIA

The child protection mediation or case conference–implemented under the new Child, Family, and Community Services Act–is a mandatory conference in British Columbia that attempts to provide a plan of care for the apprehended child or children through a combined cooperative effort of parents, social workers, their respective counsel, parties that have an interest in the child's welfare, and the mediation judge. It is also a process that undertakes to counter the adversarial effects of trial where the potential for conflict is great and seeks to achieve the spirit of building solutions through cooperation for the continued care of the child. A year later, the results look encouraging, as two thirds of cases settle and, in British Columbia, unlike any other province, the case conference is made available in every community where court is held.