AFCC Think Tanks: Promoting Dialogue on Difficult Issues in Family Law*

Salem, Peter

doi:10.1111/fcre.12406

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The potential for any degree of reconciliation or increased understanding, though, requires professionals and advocates being in the same “space” to experience events together, hear the different perspectives and fully appreciate the areas of agreement. We concur with the sentiment that often the real challenge is getting people with strongly opposing views together at all (Salem, ). Until professionals agree to be in the same “space”‐ to play in the same sandbox through professional activities and dialogue‐ we will continue to struggle to bridge the schism and thereby increase risk to child and family outcomes.…”

Section: Addressing Controversy and Improving Professional Collaborationsupporting

confidence: 78%

“…Cross‐disciplinary training programs can provide the scaffolding for having the shared experiences and can help professionals to practice in a coordinated and collaborative way when each takes on a different role with the same family. Think tanks and symposia with professionals and researchers from a range of perspectives can help to bridge gaps and form common approaches, though some are more successful than others (Salem, ).…”

Section: Education and Standards For Professionalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Concepts, Controversies And Conundrums Of “Alienation:” Lessons Learned In A Decade And Reflections On Challenges Ahead

Fidler¹,

Bala²

2020

Family Court Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There have been significant advances in understandings and practice related parent-child contact problems (PCCPs), with a growing consensus about some issues and continuing controversy about others. It is widely acknowledged that PCCP cases are most fruitfully understood from a multi-factorial perspective. While some cases may be totally the "fault" of one parent (a parent perpetrating violence or abuse, or a parent exhibiting alienating behavior), in many situations both parents bear some responsibility: focusing on a single cause is rarely helpful. Most professionals and researchers agree that the challenge in practice is to distinguish between false positives and false negatives for both alienation (or unjustified rejection) and realistic estrangement (justified rejection). There is continuing controversy over whether the concept of "alienation" should be used, especially in court proceedings, and a related disagreement about the extent to which family courts are now failing to respond adequately to cases of intimate partner violence (IPV) or child abuse when alienation is also raised. Continuing education, intentional exploration of alternative hypotheses, and active perspective-taking will contribute to effective professional involvement. Increased parent education and prevention can play an important role, although for the more severe PCCP cases the family courts system will continue to play a critical role. While more research must be done, given the complexity of issues, conclusive findings are unlikely in the near future. Legislators and family justice professionals must make decisions based on a thorough analysis of each family's circumstances in the context of our present knowledge, taking account of the limits of the law. They will often face the conundrum of making decisions in the face of uncertainty. Key Points For The Family Court Community:There have been significant advances in understandings and practice related to parent-child contact problems (PCCPs), with a growing consensus about some issues and continuing controversy about others.It is widely acknowledged that PCCPs cases are best understood and addressed by relying on a multi-factorial perspective, a family-systems approach and coordinated professional services.Attention to false positives and false negatives for both alienation (unjustified rejection) and for realistic estrangement (justified rejection) is necessary. For either of these types of contact problems and for cases involving elements of both, it may be in the child's best interest to remedy the strained parent-child relationship and for the child to maintain contact with both parents.Legal and mental health professionals involved in decision making, forensic and clinical assessments, and psychoeducational and clinical interventions face challenges in fact finding and correcting for ubiquitous cognitive biases. Continuing education, intentional exploration of alternative hypotheses, and active dialogue with openness to different perspectives will contribute to effective profess...

show abstract

Section: Addressing Controversy and Improving Professional Collaborationsupporting

confidence: 78%

Section: Education and Standards For Professionalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concepts, Controversies And Conundrums Of “Alienation:” Lessons Learned In A Decade And Reflections On Challenges Ahead

Fidler¹,

Bala²

2020

Family Court Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In England and Wales, practitioners cannot turn to any authorizing body for the resolution of disputes about knowledge, which in part accounts for the limited influence that empirical evidence has on the family justice system. Mechanisms for promoting dialogue on difficult issues in family law are far less well developed in the UK than those that have been pioneered by the AFCC (Salem, ). Practitioners stated that a new Observatory could play a key role in facilitating such dialogue and providing guidance for frontline practitioners: there are few existing forums developing a shared understanding of the current knowledge base—including how things are working from the perspective of the full range of stakeholders, including the parties themselves—so that any policy or practice guidance is based on firm foundations.…”

Section: Developing the New Observatorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Harnessing the Power of Data to Improve Family Justice: A New Nuffield Family Justice Observatory For England and Wales

Broadhurst¹,

Williams²

2019

Family Court Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A pilot Family Justice Observatory for England and Wales is being launched in Spring 2019. Its overarching aim is to address concerns about the limited and uncertain place of empirical evidence in the family justice system. The Observatory will focus on providing intelligence about how the system is working, especially through the accelerated use of electronic population level data on family justice cases. Drawing on collaborative relationships between data providers and users, as well as policy and practice colleagues, the Observatory will improve collective understanding of the needs of children and families and how they are met by the family justice system.

show abstract

Group Support Systems: Past, Present, and Future

Ackermann

2020

Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AFCC Think Tanks: Promoting Dialogue on Difficult Issues in Family Law*

Cited by 4 publications

References 35 publications

Concepts, Controversies And Conundrums Of “Alienation:” Lessons Learned In A Decade And Reflections On Challenges Ahead

Concepts, Controversies And Conundrums Of “Alienation:” Lessons Learned In A Decade And Reflections On Challenges Ahead

Harnessing the Power of Data to Improve Family Justice: A New Nuffield Family Justice Observatory For England and Wales

Group Support Systems: Past, Present, and Future

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About