“…These seemingly modest goals may have been a reflection of the challenges we anticipated. Indeed, Professor Bernie Mayer (co‐facilitator for Wingspread and facilitator for Closing the Gap) and Professors Kelly Browe Olson and Nancy Ver Steegh (co‐editors of the FCR Wingspread special issue) believe that the real challenge is getting people with profoundly divergent views together at all (Mayer ; Olson & Ver Steegh, ). Professor Dalton, notes:In this charged atmosphere, it is easy for the different constituencies to take sides, for each side to accuse the other of bad faith, and for neither side to listen with an open mind to what the other has to say.…”
This article examines three think tanks sponsored by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, which convened representatives of different disciplines, often with differing perspectives, to address policy and practice dilemmas in family law and dispute resolution. This essay was initially commissioned by the Nuffield Foundation, London, UK, as an Insight Article for its Family Justice Observatory, which aims to improve the use of data and research evidence in the family justice system in England and Wales. The think tank process is described and analyzed, identifying factors that created challenges and those that led to success.
“…These seemingly modest goals may have been a reflection of the challenges we anticipated. Indeed, Professor Bernie Mayer (co‐facilitator for Wingspread and facilitator for Closing the Gap) and Professors Kelly Browe Olson and Nancy Ver Steegh (co‐editors of the FCR Wingspread special issue) believe that the real challenge is getting people with profoundly divergent views together at all (Mayer ; Olson & Ver Steegh, ). Professor Dalton, notes:In this charged atmosphere, it is easy for the different constituencies to take sides, for each side to accuse the other of bad faith, and for neither side to listen with an open mind to what the other has to say.…”
This article examines three think tanks sponsored by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, which convened representatives of different disciplines, often with differing perspectives, to address policy and practice dilemmas in family law and dispute resolution. This essay was initially commissioned by the Nuffield Foundation, London, UK, as an Insight Article for its Family Justice Observatory, which aims to improve the use of data and research evidence in the family justice system in England and Wales. The think tank process is described and analyzed, identifying factors that created challenges and those that led to success.
“…Recent research on different types of domestic violence (Holtzworth-Munroe et al, 2000;M. P. Johnson, 2008;Swan & Snow, 2002) has been used to suggest that more individualized guidelines for custody and visitation decisions could be beneficial (See Jaffe & Crooks, 2007;Jaffe, Johnston, Crooks, & Bala, 2008; special issues of Family Court Review; Olson & Ver Steegh, 2008;and Journal of Child Custody, 2009, Vol. 6).…”
Section: Differential Assessment and Recommendationsmentioning
This article reviews recent research on child custody evaluations in intimate partner violence (IPV) cases. Specifically, it covers assessment methods, evaluator selection, evaluator education, guidelines, differential assessment, and state policies. Special attention is given to new methods of bias reduction, the need to focus on coercive and controlling abuse, and the need to interpret psychological tests within a trauma framework. Recommendations are made in each area reviewed. KEYWORDS bias reduction, assessment methods, domestic violence, custody evaluator education, evidence-based, family court Recommendations for custody and visitation in cases involving intimate partner violence (IPV) need to be developed with extreme care. Victims and their children risk serious harm if sole or joint custody is awarded to a violent parent, or if that parent is not awarded custody but has poorly supervised visits
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
