Catching Them Before Too Much Damage is Done: Early Intervention with Resistance‐Refusal Dynamics

Children often need help before their parents are ready to stop fighting. Children at the center of high‐conflict disputes, particularly those who resist contact with a parent, face extraordinary risks of maladjustment. Years of investigation and litigation may precede any meaningful attempt at intervention, based on the questionable belief that all elements of causality (or blame) must be established before any effective treatment can occur. Children's functioning may continue to deteriorate during this time, undermining their future adjustment and reducing the chance of successful intervention later. We illustrate the application of the coping‐focused, multisystemic Child Centered Conjoint Therapy model to assisting these families. Methods to assist children without compromising external investigations are discussed.     

An Interdisciplinary Case Management Protocol for Child Resistance or Refusal Dynamics†

High‐conflict parental separation cases associated with child's estrangement or contact refusal take an unusually large amount of court time and generate high emotional costs for parents and children. This paper reports on a study of a research‐based pilot project and protocol, called the Parenting Conflict Resolution (PCR), which is intended to reduce parental conflict, improve interparental communication, and support or restore the parent–child relationship. The protocol was developed at the Superior Court in Quebec City (Canada), and involves single judge case management, and lawyers' commitment to have the child's best interests as their primary consideration and to guide their clients to trust the process. The assigned judge and lawyers have the ongoing involvement of a mandated psychotherapist, taking a family systems approach with the case. The PCR also requires the parents to participate in a psycho‐educational, introspective group program to work on co‐parenting and communication skills. Ongoing communication between the professionals involved in the PCR is required to ensure cohesion and accountability. This pilot project was implemented with 10 high‐conflict families, 6 of which presented with the child's resistance or refusal to see one parent. A qualitative data study was undertaken into the experiences of all the participants. The most salient result is the resumption of parent–child contact in all six contact refusal cases. Discussion highlights key elements to successfully address these cases: (a) interdisciplinary program delivery, (b) systemic understanding of the contact problems, (c) focus on the child's best interest, (d) single judge assigned to the case, (e) lawyers' support of the parents' participation, and (f) psychotherapist reporting to the court.     

侵占罪:一个被误解已久的立法范例

我国《刑法》规定的侵占罪是一个被误解已久的完美立法,借鉴国外的侵占罪立法及理论误导了对我国侵占罪的理解,应还原其饱含谦抑理念的内部结构和适用机制。我国《刑法》第270条第1款是委托物侵占和脱离占有物侵占的一体化规定。该条第2款通过例示的方式(遗忘物、埋藏物)规定了脱离占有物侵占的刑罚,它既非法律拟制也不是注意规定,而是一个单纯的刑罚条款。将“拒不退还(拒不归还)”视为一个独立的要素限缩了侵占罪的成立,更符合该罪为轻罪的定位。没有必要修正亲告罪的规定,纯正亲告罪的设定关闭了追诉侵占国家财产的通道。我国的侵占罪巧妙地将谦抑理念和类型区分融入一个法条,更兼顾了国家所有与个人占有之间的利益平衡。侵占罪的双重限制为其他救济措施的运行提供了充足空间,是一个将社会综合治理理念融入法条的典范。     

试析侵占罪中财产关系变动的本质

侵占罪在司法实务中虽较为常见,但其认定却往往存在着分歧,主要体现在与盗窃、诈骗等相关犯罪的区分问题上。其中争论的核心主要集中在侵占行为财产关系变动的本质,具体而言就是对侵占行为实施的前提和＂非法所有＂行为的界定。由于侵占罪财产关系变动的方式与其他犯罪有很大差别,所以只要对其财产关系变动的本质加以明确,就能更好地界定各个侵财型犯罪。     

“坦白从宽、抗拒从严”应当坚持

“坦白从宽、抗拒从严”是一项十分重要的刑事政策。几十年来 ,在贯彻中收到了明显的实效。目前 ,在讨论赋予犯罪嫌疑人、被告人沉默权时 ,有的学者认为应当废除这一刑事政策。该文认为 ,“坦白从宽、抗拒从严”的刑事政策还应当继续贯彻 ,并且在理论与实践的结合上 ,进行了深入探讨。