Iaals' Honoring Families Initiative: Courts and Communities Helping Families in Transition Arising from Separation or Divorce

Kourlis, Rebecca Love; Taylor, Melinda E.; Schepard, Andrew; Pruett, Marsha Kline

doi:10.1111/fcre.12032

Cited by 26 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is consistent with Kourlis, Taylor, Schepard, and Pruett's (2013) finding in Australia. This is consistent with Kourlis, Taylor, Schepard, and Pruett's (2013) finding in Australia.…”

Section: Lessons Learned From Implementation Partnershipssupporting

confidence: 92%

“…54 No. Kourlis, Taylor, Schepard, and Pruett (2013) identified that helping parents through the transition of separation and divorce and supporting unmarried parents requires the skills of multimodal and systemically integrated professionals. According to McLanahan (2004), the shifts associated with the second demographic transition has led to two different trajectories for women with differential implications for children.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In 1998, Rottman, Efkeman, and Casey identified that many judges have "taken the lead in developing programs that merge court and community resources to respond effectively to the problems of individuals and communities" (p. 39). According to Kourlis et al (2013): It is possible to envision a hybrid model of service delivery that splits responsibilities between courts and community agencies. The court's role is to connect families to social service agencies and community resources that address their needs and can build their capacity to function autonomously.…”

Section: Court-community Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Co‐Parent Court: A Problem‐Solving, Community‐Based Model for Serving Low‐Income Unmarried Co‐Parents

Ruhland¹,

Hardman

Becher

et al. 2016

Family Court Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Hennepin County Co‐Parent Court Project was a 3‐year demonstration project for unmarried co‐parents. The goal of the project was to remove barriers to co‐parenting in low‐income, unmarried parents. The Co‐Parent Court Project encompassed a number of services, including educational workshops, individual case management, parenting plans, legal mediation, and, if needed, supports and treatment for domestic violence. There are published articles that highlight the participant outcomes of the Co‐Parent Project. This article, however, focuses on the background for why this project was developed, components of this project, and lessons learned from implementation.

show abstract

“…This is consistent with Kourlis, Taylor, Schepard, and Pruett's (2013) finding in Australia. This is consistent with Kourlis, Taylor, Schepard, and Pruett's (2013) finding in Australia.…”

Section: Lessons Learned From Implementation Partnershipssupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Court-community Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Co‐Parent Court: A Problem‐Solving, Community‐Based Model for Serving Low‐Income Unmarried Co‐Parents

Ruhland¹,

Hardman

Becher

et al. 2016

Family Court Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is a voluminous literature on the benefits of third-party dispute resolution processes like mediation and facilitation (see summary in Kourlis, Taylor, Schepard, & Pruett, 2013), but its effectiveness among unique subpopulations, including unmarried parents in the child support system, has not been extensively evaluated. The limited evidence available, however, suggests that unmarried parents in the child support system also benefit from third-party dispute resolution processes.…”

Section: Mediation and Facilitation By A Neutral Third Partymentioning

confidence: 99%

Establishing Parenting Time in Child Support Cases: New Opportunities and Challenges

Pearson¹

2015

Family Court Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite dramatic increases in collections, child support frequently fails to be the linchpin to family self‐sufficiency that it could be, and many researchers, advocates and policymakers have concluded that future progress in collections will require making the child support system more fair and responsive to its growing poor, never‐married caseload. High on the list of suggested reforms is paying more attention to involving poor fathers in the lives of their children. Since the inception of the child support program in 1975, parenting time and child support have been legally distinct issues and activities pertaining to parenting time have not qualified for the 66 percent of funding that the federal government provides to fund the child support program. As a result, few child support programs address parenting time when they establish or enforce child support orders. Public Law 113–183 (2014) includes a provision to encourage the establishment of safe parenting time arrangements in new child support orders, although the activity is voluntary and no new funding is provided. This article describes the treatment of parenting time in the child support program and the approaches that some states and local jurisdictions have adopted to develop and incorporate parenting time responsibilities with family violence safeguards in new child support orders. This includes the use of standard parenting time schedules, self‐help resources, mediation or facilitation with a neutral third party, and comprehensive programs that attempt to address multiple barriers. Parenting time and child support are legally distinct issues and courts typically order child support for parents of children born out‐of‐wedlock without simultaneously ordering parenting time arrangements. Research shows that addressing parenting time improves parent‐child contact and child support payments and that positive paternal engagement improves child outcomes. A few state and local child support agencies address parenting time using standard parenting time schedules, self‐help resources for parents, mediation or facilitation with a neutral third‐party; and comprehensive programs that address multiple barriers. Developing a safe, structured approach to parenting time for the child support population will require coordination among courts, domestic violence programs and child support agencies, and allowing these activities to qualify for federal matching funds.

show abstract

“…With the proposed exception of de minimis costs associated with the inclusion of a parenting time provision entered as part of a child support order (OCSE, 2014), child support agencies may not obtain FFP for activities pertaining to parenting time. This unfunded congressional aspiration coincides with severe cuts to many state court budgets and the consequent dismantling of existing parenting services for separating and divorcing parents (Kourlis, Taylor, Schepard, & Pruett, 2013) that would otherwise be the natural entities to serve the new, unmarried parents in the child support system. More to the point, while Public Law 113-183, enacted in September 2014, includes a provision (Section 303) that creates the goal of establishing voluntary parenting time arrangements accompanied by strong family violence safeguards in child support orders, it offers no funding or access to FFP.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Parenting Time and Co‐Parenting for Unmarried Parents

Pearson¹

2015

Family Court Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Iaals' Honoring Families Initiative: Courts and Communities Helping Families in Transition Arising from Separation or Divorce

Cited by 26 publications

References 37 publications

Co‐Parent Court: A Problem‐Solving, Community‐Based Model for Serving Low‐Income Unmarried Co‐Parents

Co‐Parent Court: A Problem‐Solving, Community‐Based Model for Serving Low‐Income Unmarried Co‐Parents

Establishing Parenting Time in Child Support Cases: New Opportunities and Challenges

Parenting Time and Co‐Parenting for Unmarried Parents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About