Family Court Judges Research Articles

Enhancing the Mental Health and Well‐Being of Infants, Children, and Youth in the Juvenile and Family Courts: A Judicial Challenge

ABSTRACTAt the invitation of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, judges from the 30 largest juvenile jurisdictions in the country and mental health professionals met for two days in Tampa, Florida, March 18–19, 2000. Their discussions over this two‐day period resulted in the first draft of this document. Meeting again in July in Snowbird, Utah, members of the group reviewed and revised the original document. This second revision was mailed to members of the group and to the officers and board of the National Council for their review. Comments from this second draft were incorporated into the final document as it appears in this issue of the Juvenile and Family Court Journal.The experience and expertise represented by this dedicated group of judges and mental health professionals is reflected in the contents of this paper. Each of the participants is actively engaged in the process of systemic change in the delivery of mental health services in their communities, each can recount both successes and failures in the process of creating this change, and each brings experience and insight to this forum.This position paper is intended for the use of judges, court administrators, and mental health professionals who work with youth in the juvenile courts of our country. It is intended as a basic framework for the development of community systems of care which will serve children, youth, and families experiencing mental health problems appropriately and well.

Private Settlement - Public Justice?

In this paper, the Principal Family Court Judge discusses the pros and cons of "court-annexed" mediation services. He notes some powerful constitutional arguments against such forms of mediation but eventually agrees with the stand taken by the Australian and New Zealand Council of Chief Justices in support of a fully serviced court-based system. This paper was delivered at the New Zealand Institute for Dispute Resolution Colloquium held on 29 June 1999.

Court Strategies Under ASFA To Help Subtance‐Using Families Recover

Juvenile and Family Court JournalVolume 51, Issue 1 p. 1-8 Court Strategies Under ASFA To Help Subtance-Using Families Recover BY JUDITH LARSEN J.D., BY JUDITH LARSEN J.D. Judith Larsen is a trial attorney whose practice primarily is in family and poverty law. For the past ten years she has studied the effects of drugs on families and examined the ways courts have responded to the crisis. As consultant to such groups as the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges and the American Bar Association Center on Children and the Law, she develops cross-disciplinary seminars that bring social and scientific issues into the legal field. Her writing includes a benchbook for judges on Drugs and Families, sponsored by the ABA and the National Council, and numerous articles and monographs on the same subject. She was educated at Columbia University in New York and Georgetown University Law Center. Her research was supported by the State Justice Institute through the Miami Juvenile Court; and the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment through the Family Drug Court Initiative at the George Washington University.Search for more papers by this author BY JUDITH LARSEN J.D., BY JUDITH LARSEN J.D. Judith Larsen is a trial attorney whose practice primarily is in family and poverty law. For the past ten years she has studied the effects of drugs on families and examined the ways courts have responded to the crisis. As consultant to such groups as the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges and the American Bar Association Center on Children and the Law, she develops cross-disciplinary seminars that bring social and scientific issues into the legal field. Her writing includes a benchbook for judges on Drugs and Families, sponsored by the ABA and the National Council, and numerous articles and monographs on the same subject. She was educated at Columbia University in New York and Georgetown University Law Center. Her research was supported by the State Justice Institute through the Miami Juvenile Court; and the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment through the Family Drug Court Initiative at the George Washington University.Search for more papers by this author First published: 14 July 2009 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-6988.2000.tb00013.xCitations: 4AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume51, Issue1January 2000Pages 1-8 RelatedInformation

SUPERVISED VISITATION A Profile of Providers

Surveys with 94 administrators of supervised visitation programs, 51 family court judges, and 40 administrators of child protective services agencies provide a national picture of supervised visitation services, their utility, and areas of unmet need. Although the programs are perceived to fill an important need, they struggle to survive financially, particularly those that handle family court cases. In addition, because many programs operate without adequate access to the assessment and treatment services that some families need, judges frequently want visitation supervisors to assist them in determining suitable custody and visitation arrangements, a role that supervised visitation programs do not feel is appropriate. Many different types of entities provide effective supervised visitation services; many different service formats work. Architects of new programs should fashion services that use local resources to maximum advantage.

The interpretation of New Zealand's statutory definition of mental disorder

The Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act 1992 (NZ) ushered in a new definition of mental disorder which shifted from diagnostic to phenomenological, containing more explicit severity criteria. Failure to understand that mental disorder under the Act was not the same as mental illness, combined with a more litigious environment, as well as structural changes in the mental hearth services resulted in failure of provision of compulsory care to many who needed it. The Act was seen as deficient. This resulted in the introduction of potentially draconian amending legislation into the New Zealand Parliament in 1994. Increasing understanding about interpretation of the Act and better cross‐disciplinary understanding among Family Court Judges, counsel for the patient and responsible clinicians has resulted in more stability of decisions of the extent of compulsory care. For instance, serious danger to others was initially interpreted very narrowly but now includes psychological and physical harm, and is not linked to a criminal standard. Further, the interpretation of the most ambiguous terms in the statutory definition (volition, cognition) has become more narrow and for the most part been applied to mental illness alone. With use, the original presumed limits to the definition of mental disorder have been extended. Debate must occur about the appropriate limits of such interpretation.

The Impact of an Educational Seminar for Divorcing Parents

Summary With a sustained large number of divorces in the U.S. over the last two decades, various educational interventions have been developed for families of divorce. Children Cope With Divorce is a parent education seminar that aims to provide divorcing parents with information and resources that will help them decrease the negative effects of the divorce process on their children. Within divorce proceedings, family court judges are important observers of the impact of such parent education seminars. A national survey of judges who have referred divorcing parents to the seminar was conducted. The survey method is discussed and the responding judges' views of the effectiveness of Children Cope With Divorce are presented.

Abolish the juvenile court?

Juvenile and Family Court JournalVolume 49, Issue 1 p. 51-58 Abolish the juvenile court? JUDGE LINDSAY G. ARTHUR, Corresponding Author JUDGE LINDSAY G. ARTHUR Judge for forty-three years, eighteen of them as Chief Judge of the state juvenile court sitting in Minneapolis. He has been widely published and has been outstandingly active with the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, serving as its president, the editor of its Juvenile and Family Law Digest, and currently serves as the Council's Senior Judicial Scholar. He has also served on juvenile and family related committees of the American Bar Association, the National Center for State Courts, the American Law Institute, and various local organizations. He has long been an advocate of individualized justice and of rehabilitation for the juvenile courts.1201 Yale Place #205 Minneapolis, MN 55403Search for more papers by this author JUDGE LINDSAY G. ARTHUR, Corresponding Author JUDGE LINDSAY G. ARTHUR Judge for forty-three years, eighteen of them as Chief Judge of the state juvenile court sitting in Minneapolis. He has been widely published and has been outstandingly active with the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, serving as its president, the editor of its Juvenile and Family Law Digest, and currently serves as the Council's Senior Judicial Scholar. He has also served on juvenile and family related committees of the American Bar Association, the National Center for State Courts, the American Law Institute, and various local organizations. He has long been an advocate of individualized justice and of rehabilitation for the juvenile courts.1201 Yale Place #205 Minneapolis, MN 55403Search for more papers by this author First published: 14 July 2009 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-6988.1998.tb01478.xCitations: 1AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume49, Issue1February 1998Pages 51-58 RelatedInformation

Utah legislation and systems change

ABSTRACTJuvenile and family court judges know bureaucratic delays pose serious harm to child development and that extended stays in foster care can result in juvenile delinquency. Utah judges and legislators together searched successfully for new ways to improve court systems and to better serve the children and families of their state.

Court improvement of foster care and adoption projects:Ncjfcj Survey Report

ABSTRACTOfficials from 48 states and the District of Columbia in 1994 accepted federal funding from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to help improve courts' handling of cases involving child abuse, neglect, foster care and adoption. Through a survey of participating states, members of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges have been analyzing common themes found in state Court Improvement of Foster Care and Adoption Projects. This article examines key survey results.

Overview of the Faith, Law, and Morality Project of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges and Forum Presentations

On Monday, November 27, 1995, twenty‐five judges, faith leaders, and community representatives converged on Lake Tahoe for the start of a bold experiment. Each of the participants had been formally invited to participate in a forum to discuss the important moral and ethical issues facing society today. Set in a retreat environment at Incline Village, Nevada, this forum would open a dialogue between judges, members of the faith community, and others about common issues and concerns.The participants' mission was to work in groups to draft a joint resolution – a call to action for judges, faith leaders and the community. Their work would be inspired by short reflections on faith, law and morality offered by fellow participants. The discussion format would alternate between small groups of six to seven each and the group as a whole. Most important would be the opportunity to listen; the diversity of individual viewpoints would enrich the participants' thinking on the fundamental yet complex interrelation between law and morality.How did it work? Exceedingly well.

The Adoption of African American Children by Whites: A Renewed Conflict

During the turbulent 1960s and the civil-rights movement, African Americans called for the reexamination of major institutional policies. One of the policy changes demanded by African American social workers was the cessation of Whites adopting African American children. The view of the fledgling Association of Black Social Workers was that such practices would result in cultural genocide. This view influenced policy as family-court judges and child advocates pursued same-race adoption with respect to African American children. Some child advocates called the policy of excluding Whites from adopting African American children imprudent and discriminatory, and in the 1980s, judges began to rule in favor of White parents who wanted to adopt Black children. Legislation was introduced and signed into law that makes it illegal for states or agencies receiving federal funding to consider race in the adoption of children. This shift in policy has enraged many African American social workers and resulted in major disagreements between them and individuals who advocate for transracial adoptions. The author explores the arguments of each side and suggests policy recommendations.

Une relation « dans l'intérêt de l'enfant » ? Le juge de la famille et les lieux d'accueil pour l'exercice du droit de visite

A Relationship in the Best Interest of the Child ? Family Court Judges and the Use of Meeting Places for the Exercise of Visiting Rights ; Family Contact Centres. To improve the understanding of the relations elaborated between judges and family contact centres, 18 family court judges have been interviewed. An analysis of these interviews reveals a two-fold paradox : In the first place, although the judges are very anxious to obtain information and have the authority to demand that family contact centres supply them with this information, in general they content themselves with obtaining less information than the amount desired. They thus respect the arguments of confidentiality put forward by the family contact centres. In the second place, even though the judges attach great authority to their decisions, they do not dispose of the legal means to compel the family contact centres to respect them. Nevertheless, they manage to achieve this without too much difficulty. The conclusion is that the collaboration between the judges and the family contact centres strengthens the authority of the judicial decision with the purpose of maintaining the Personal relationships of the child with both its parents.

Juge dominant ou juge démuni ? La redéfinition du rôle du juge en matière de divorce

Dominant or Diminished ? Redefining the Judge's Role in Divorce Proceedings. This article presents some thoughts on the role judges play in French divorce proceedings. It is based on an analysis of hearings held by family court judges in different courts in the Paris area. Through focusing on the mariner in which communication occurs during hearings, the analysis has lead to a distinction among courtroom situations. When the parties have reached agreement before the hearing, communication during the procedure is highly structured. The judge directs the entire process, taking the role of giving a solemn character to the decisions made by the divorcing couple. On the other hand, if issues are raised at the hearing, the style of communication changes in tone. All the participants use language borrowed from everyday usage. The interventions of the judge in these latter situations are in keeping with the task of searching for an agreement.

A Manual for Mediators

Juvenile and Family Court JournalVolume 46, Issue 2 p. 63-73 A Manual for Mediators Judge Lindsay G. Arthur, Corresponding Author Judge Lindsay G. Arthur Judge Lindsay G. Arthur has made a career of family law, serving on both Juvenile and Civil commitment, and the Domestic Relations benches a total of 27 years. He has written copiously and has worked extensively with local and national organizations concerned with these fields. He served a term as President of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges.11201 Yale Place, #205 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403Search for more papers by this author Judge Lindsay G. Arthur, Corresponding Author Judge Lindsay G. Arthur Judge Lindsay G. Arthur has made a career of family law, serving on both Juvenile and Civil commitment, and the Domestic Relations benches a total of 27 years. He has written copiously and has worked extensively with local and national organizations concerned with these fields. He served a term as President of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges.11201 Yale Place, #205 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403Search for more papers by this author First published: March 1995 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-6988.1995.tb00817.x AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Volume46, Issue2March 1995Pages 63-73 RelatedInformation

The Future of Juvenile Justice Administration: Evolution v. Revolution

Juvenile and Family Court JournalVolume 45, Issue 3 p. 51-63 The Future of Juvenile Justice Administration: Evolution v. Revolution Alvin W. Cohn D.Crim., Corresponding Author Alvin W. Cohn D.Crim. Alvin W. Cohn earned his D.Crim. from the University of California-Berkeley. He has 35 years of academic, professional, and administrative experience in the field of criminal justice administration and criminology. He specialized in the development of management and training programs, focusing on organizational theory, behavior, and development. He has served on the faculties of six universities and has been a frequent lecturer at programs of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, as well as numerous other organizations. He is currently editor of the National Juvenile Court Service Association's newsletter Rapport.President Administration of Justice Service, Inc. 15005 Westbury Road Rockville, MD 20853Search for more papers by this author Alvin W. Cohn D.Crim., Corresponding Author Alvin W. Cohn D.Crim. Alvin W. Cohn earned his D.Crim. from the University of California-Berkeley. He has 35 years of academic, professional, and administrative experience in the field of criminal justice administration and criminology. He specialized in the development of management and training programs, focusing on organizational theory, behavior, and development. He has served on the faculties of six universities and has been a frequent lecturer at programs of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, as well as numerous other organizations. He is currently editor of the National Juvenile Court Service Association's newsletter Rapport.President Administration of Justice Service, Inc. 15005 Westbury Road Rockville, MD 20853Search for more papers by this author First published: August 1994 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-6988.1994.tb01472.xCitations: 2 AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume45, Issue3August 1994Pages 51-63 RelatedInformation

On the Challenge to the Family Court Judges in Juvenile Cases

On the Challenge to the Family Court Judges in Juvenile Cases

FAMILY COURT REFORM IN SIX PENNSYLVANIA COUNTIES

This article describes judicial behavior in local family court reform movements, vis‐à‐vis six case studies, as part of a larger study on the implementation of court‐connected custody mediation in Pennsylvania. Research findings provide new insight into the initiation of change by judges at the local court level. When motivated to do so, family court judges in Pennsylvania bring about local reform independently and expeditiously. Judges who desire alternative methods to litigation of custody disputes implement court change with few organizational constraints: They decide how and when reform is to be implemented, and they assign nonjudicial professionals to assist in reform implementation. Finally, judges establish their own criteria for assessing the success of change initiated. Throughout reform movements, judges take on a variety of roles in bringing about change—first as reform activists, then as leaders in reform movements, and finally, as advisors in reform implementation. These case studies reveal the diversity in judicial style when court change is implemented; at the same time, similar court goals and objectives are obtained.

Future Home Of The National Council Of Juvenile And Family Court Judges

Juvenile and Family Court JournalVolume 38, Issue 2 p. i-i Future Home Of The National Council Of Juvenile And Family Court Judges First published: May 1987 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-6988.1987.tb01429.xAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume38, Issue2May 1987Pages i-i RelatedInformation

Family Court Mediation: New Zealand Practices and Perspectives

Family separation is increasingly being dealt with by counsellors trained in the skills of mediation, along with skills of counselling and therapy. Other professionals also offer mediation services. In New Zealand, special provisions exist in the Family Court system to minimise the trauma for families by using mediation services, with the special opportunity for a couple to enter a Mediation Conference chaired by a Family Court Judge. It is argued that mediation is different from counselling and therapy, but that mediation requires many of the skills of counselling. This has particular consequences for training and for multidisciplinary teamwork.

The Juvenile Serious Habitual Offender/Drug Involved Program: A Means to Implement Recommendations of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges

The Juvenile Serious Habitual Offender/Drug Involved Program: A Means to Implement Recommendations of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges