Unified Family Court Research Articles

The American Bar Association and Unified Family Courts: Introduction to a Survey

The American Bar Association and Unified Family Courts: Introduction to a Survey

A Survey of Unified Family Courts: An Assessment of Different Jurisdictional Models

A Survey of Unified Family Courts: An Assessment of Different Jurisdictional Models

UNIFIED FAMILY COURTS

Much has been written about the potential success of unified family courts. Unified family court proponents share great optimism and enthusiasm for what they see as a solution to several of the problems facing court systems today. This enthusiasm should be applauded. As with any reform, however, unified family court advocates must stop to consider the possible drawbacks to the system that they propose; otherwise, they might end up with a system that is the same or worse than the one that they were attempting to fix. This article highlights several of the potential problems with unified family courts. It is not a condemnation of unified family courts per se; it is simply a suggestion that reformers proceed with their eyes open, taking time to consider the potential drawbacks of the unified family court system before using valuable resources for its implementation.

SOCIAL JUSTICE AND FAMILY COURT REFORM

Creating a unified family court, or any type of family court reform, may have only a minimal impact if it simply changes the structure of how judges do business rather than addresses the structure of the child welfare system itself. The authors argue that family court reform must place social justice at its center. First, they discuss profound flaws in the child welfare system that make poor and minority families especially vulnerable to coercive state intervention. Second, they describe two approaches to child welfare cases–family systems theory and therapeutic justice–that can help to guide reform efforts directed at addressing these structural flaws. Finally, they suggest ways in which family law scholarship can assist in creating a social justice agenda for family court reform.

MAKING FAMILIES AND CHILDREN A HIGH PRIORITY IN THE COURTS

This article describes the California Administrative Office of the Court's (AOC's) Center for Families, Children & the Courts (CFCC). CFCC is an interdisciplinary unit that brings together all of the AOC's work on statewide policies and practices related to families and children in the court system. CFCC thus models the unified family court model within the state AOC. CFCC's projects and activities are described to show the effectiveness of its multidisciplinary and collaborative approach in addressing complex policy and practice issues. It is hoped that readers may discover aspects of CFCC's work that could be adapted to their own jurisdiction or practice.

DEVELOPING A UNIFIED FAMILY COURT IN ONTARIO

In Ontario, the Family Courts is a branch of the Superior Court of Justice. The author outlines the Canadian concept of a unified family court and the constitutional problems pecular to its initial establishment in Ontario in 1977, as well as its limited expansion in 1995. The courts is now on the verge of another expansion, which will be quite considerable. Also discussed is the need, in a unified family court, for a judiciary that specializes in family law cases, mediation teams and family law information centers in each court site, and most importantly, liaison and resource committees to support the work of the court.

Families in court: will a family court do it better?

Family-related case filings in the civil courts, including juvenile matters, exceed 7,000,000 filings annually. These cases typically are handled in several different trial courts. Reform proposals would create a unified family court, with broad jurisdiction over child and family matters. Family court proponents anticipate benefits of greater judicial continuity with a family, better informed jurists and judicial decisions, more client comfort, and better coordinated intervention services. This article reviews present court handling of family-related cases and proceeds to describe family court developments in the states. It then presents each of the potential benefits, discussing the problems they're intended to overcome and the approaches courts are using or might use to achieve these benefits. The author supports the family court direction, while recognizing the paucity of family court evaluation. More assessment is encouraged. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Language: en

Judicial case management and the custody and access assessment: melding the approaches.

The presence of the Unified Family Court, with procedures emphasizing judicial case management and settlement in custody disputes, provided an opportunity to combine these practices with those of a university hospital-based family court clinic experienced in the provision of custody assessments. Specifically, a process integrating the clinical custody assessment with the work of counsel and court procedures was developed. This format, incorporating the preparation of a clinical settlement conference brief, was then evaluated with emphasis on time management, outcome in relation to settlement or trial, and the effect of clinical assessment at critical points in the combined endeavour. Seventy-two judicial referrals conducted using this format were reviewed. To assess efficiency, we determined time intervals to various points in the process and compared them to previous local practice. Settlement rates, recorded incrementally to mark each component's contribution, were compared with rates noted in the literature. Assessment functions were identified according to the point of resolution of the dispute and in a manner to facilitate comparison with previously published work. The format resulted in 50% of cases settling without trial in under 5 months, a minimum settlement rate of 50%, and confirmed the ability of clinical assessment to contribute flexibly to dispute resolution in several conciliation venues and at trial. Combining legal and mental health efforts can results in more efficient use of resources and a substantial diversion of cases from continuing litigation. While altering the process of clinical assessments enhances such findings, further work is required to assure appropriate selection criteria for various intervention formats.

The Future of the Juvenile Court: Promising New Directions

The juvenile court of the future will be a viable, but changed, institution largely because of society's need to hold parents accountable for their children's well-being and youths accountable for their actions. The author describes three current trends in juvenile court which will continue to impact the court in the future. First, more jurisdictions will refine and streamline their court structures, either through better coordination or by creating unified family courts. This will result in better handling and supervision of multiple cases involving the same family. Second, the use of a wide variety of alternative dispute resolution techniques will grow, and the court will assume a monitoring and oversight function over these mediated agreements. Third, private and voluntary efforts will be utilized to assist the court in providing services to children and families, as well as to mobilize community-wide efforts on behalf of children. Ideally, the juvenile court of the future will place itself squarely in the community and work with others concerned about the well-being of children and families to provide an appropriate and meaningful response to each child who comes within the court's purview.

Symposium: Editor's Note

I am honored to guest edit this second Family Law Quarterly Symposium on Unified Family Courts. I have supported and contributed to the American Bar Association's efforts to create and strengthen unified family courts for many years and in many capacities?as a speaker on the Unified Family Courts Presidential Showcase Panel at the ABA Annual Meeting in New Orleans in 1994; as the Family Law Section's Liaison to the Standing Committee on Substance Abuse and as Co-Chair of its Unified Family Courts Committee from 1997 until 2000; as a member of the Planning Committee for the 1998 ABA Unified Family Court Summit and as a speaker at the Summit; as a contributing author to the first Family Law Quarterly Symposium on Unified Family Courts; and currently as a member of the ABA's Unified Family Court Coordinating Council. The articles in this Symposium issue address the subject of unified family courts from both a national and an international perspective, as well as offer creative approaches to resolve existing problems within family law adjudicatory systems. I have written and spoken extensively about the need to create unified family courts, providing both an interdisciplinary framework and a blueprint to establish those courts.1 Unified family courts by my definition consist of the following components: 1) a specialized court structure that is either a separate court or a division of an existing court and that is established at the same level and receives the same resources and

The case for the Unified Family Court

SUMMAR. Arguments for a court dealing extensively with family matters have been gaining ground in many countries. Some judicial systems have advanced more than others and in this article the background and development of a Unified Family Court in Hamilton, Ontario are described. The author argues strongly for an extension of this approach as a means of providing speedy and sensitive justice to children and families in dispute.

PRE‐TRIAL CONFERENCES IN FAMILY DISPUTES**

Family Court ReviewVolume 24, Issue 2 p. 51-58 PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCES IN FAMILY DISPUTES** A.C. Hamilton, A.C. Hamilton A.C. Hamilton, Associate Chief Justice, Family Division, Court of Queen's Bench, 408 York Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3C OP9, CanadaSearch for more papers by this author A.C. Hamilton, A.C. Hamilton A.C. Hamilton, Associate Chief Justice, Family Division, Court of Queen's Bench, 408 York Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3C OP9, CanadaSearch for more papers by this author First published: December 1986 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.174-1617.1986.tb00145.xCitations: 1 ** This paper was presented at the Eastern Unified Family Courts and Conciliation Conference, St. Johns, Newfoundland, Canada on October 22, 1985. 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 Volume24, Issue2December 1986Pages 51-58 RelatedInformation

A Conceptual Analysis of Unified Family Courts: A Canadian Perspective

Family Court ReviewVolume 20, Issue 1 p. 52-57 A Conceptual Analysis of Unified Family Courts: A Canadian Perspective Julien D. Payne, Julien D. Payne Julien D. Payne, LL.D. is a Professor of Law, University of Ottowa, Faculty of Law, Common Law Section, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada KIN 6N5.Search for more papers by this author Julien D. Payne, Julien D. Payne Julien D. Payne, LL.D. is a Professor of Law, University of Ottowa, Faculty of Law, Common Law Section, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada KIN 6N5.Search for more papers by this author First published: June 1982 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.174-1617.1982.tb00081.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 Volume20, Issue1June 1982Pages 52-57 RelatedInformation