Family Court Review最新文献

Discrimination against Indigenous peoples is ongoing and perpetuated by systemic structures such as Eurocentric educational systems that often require learners to suppress their Indigeneity and conform to the dominant culture. Previous attempts at incorporating Indigenous cultures and values into education have often perpetuated harmful and negative stereotypes to the detriment of Indigenous learners. Parenting education courses for separating or divorcing parents are designed to support emotional wellbeing and promote positive co-parenting relationships. While it is widely known that Indigenous worldviews vary from Western worldviews, there is little research on parenting education courses for Indigenous families and few culturally responsive programs designed for non-dominant cultures or offered in other languages. Walking in two worlds is a reality for Indigenous peoples; needing to conform to the dominant systems in society while also honoring their teachings and ways of being. This article describes how a parenting education course for Indigenous families was created by employing the principle of collaboration with full involvement of all participants resulting in a course that bridges the gap between two different worldviews.

For children in the United States, family instability following parental relationship dissolution is common and efforts to promote effective post-divorce co-parenting arrangements have grown substantially in recent decades. To help families navigate transitions through the divorce process, most states require divorcing parents to complete divorce education programming. In the present study we used pre-post data from three divorce education programs (n = 1026 parents) to explore programmatic effects on self-reported adjustment, intentions to co-parent, and likelihood to relitigate, and attempt to determine mechanisms that may account for or explain those programmatic effects. Overall, we found support that these programs are able to impact perceived adjustment and co-parenting intentions. Specifically, we documented small, but significant, increases in perceived adjustment and that post-program adjustment was associated with greater intentions to engage in supportive co-parenting with former spouses. Further, co-parenting intentions were shaped by how useful parents found the programs with greater perceived utility being associated with more positive co-parenting intentions. The relitigation outcomes, however, were not associated with post-program adjustment or perceived program utility. Instead, they were primarily associated with pre-program experiences such as the quality of co-parenting prior to the program and whether an order of protection was present between co-parents.

This article provides an overview of barriers faced by LGBTQ+ people with respect to Assisted Reproductive Treatment (ART). It proceeds in four parts and addresses four different identities who may be impacted differently. The article first addresses access to ART by gay and single men. It then focuses on the question of who is recognized as a parent legally and how that impacts ART. The article next addresses reciprocal intravenous fertilization (IVF) issues for lesbian couples. Finally, it focuses on access to ART for transmen and women. ART impacts the LGBTQ+ community in unique ways depending on many factors, and this article provides an overview of those factors and the importance of addressing all of them.

The majority of research on the impact of divorce on parents, children, and families focuses on what occurs after the divorce has been finalized. However, data derived from divorce education programs present opportunities for research on the experience of parents during the divorce process. Guided by the divorce-stress-adjustment model, this study sought to understand how the divorce process impacts parental well-being by examining some of the most pressing child-related concerns divorcing parents have while going through a divorce. Specifically, we looked at how the approach parents took to resolve child-related issues (i.e., internally, through outside intervention, or unresolved) was related to the perceived fairness of child custody arrangements, parental concerns regarding how divorce impacts children, financial concerns, and their overall well-being. Perceived fairness of the child custody arrangement, concerns regarding how divorce impacts children, and financial concerns were associated with parental well-being, and also served as an indirect path through which approaches to resolve child-related issues impacted parental well-being. Understanding what parents think and feel during the divorce process, and how those thoughts and feelings are related to the actual steps to getting a divorce, could help inform divorce education typically administered as part of divorce proceedings.

Gender-affirming care saves lives. Research indicates that social interventions such as name/pronoun changes and medical interventions such as hormone therapy directly benefit youth and adolescents and can be a protective factor for the maladaptive effects of gender dysphoria and the all-too-common associated depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation. This piece takes personal experiences supporting a sibling through their transition as well as the professional experiences garnered to comment on the impact of gender-affirming care on a more personal level.

In this commentary, we revisit the current state of research on parenting education programs for divorcing and separating parents and reflect on what scholars have recommended as priorities for future research. We then explore how the collection of articles in this special issue advance those priorities in meaningful ways. Topics addressed include recommendations for parenting education program content, parenting education to better meet families' needs, and measurement of program effectiveness. Implications for practitioners, family court professionals, and researchers are discussed.

Divorce education programs are often required for divorcing or separating parents with minor children to aid in emotional and practical adjustment. However, there is very little consensus between programs or the evaluation process of programs to demonstrate effectiveness or long-term outcomes. While some short-term evaluations have shown significant results, the identification of programs that demonstrate long-term effects on co-parenting relationships is still missing. Identifying what programs exist with long-term outcomes can help pinpoint what content or structure of programming is impactful on families in divorce transitions. To address this research gap, a systematic review of the literature was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines to identify what specific and existing divorce education programs have a follow-up report of a minimum of 3 months and demonstrate a reduction of co-parental conflict. Sixteen programs were identified that have at least a minimum 3-month parent follow-up report; only four of these programs demonstrated statistically significant reductions in co-parental conflict. A discussion and critique of the program evaluation articles are within this review.

This introduction details why there has been an emphasis placed on examining the value and efficacy of divorce and coparenting education programming. A set of articles is then described that, as a collection, provide insight into what is known and where we need to move forward as a field in the best interests of divorcing and separating parents and their children. We highlight seven original articles that provide foundations on this topic and synthesize consistent themes across these articles herein.

New York Domestic Relations Law Section 110, which outlines who can adopt, precludes married petitioners from adopting without their spouse joining in the adoption petition, even when all parties involved support the adoption, and it is in the child's best interests. Some judges have prioritized the child's best interests and granted adoptions in such cases, while others have rigidly construed the statute and denied them. Amending the statute so that anyone can adopt, regardless of marital status, if it is in the child's best interests would ensure the child's best interests are the judicial system's primary consideration in approving adoptions.

Families experiencing separation and divorce often find it difficult to provide emotional stability for children as the parents struggle with financial, parenting, and relationship decisions. The effect on children can be especially precarious. Adverse childhood experiences, or ACEs, are risk factors that potentially affect children for the rest of their lives. Parental separation and divorce are identified as adverse childhood experiences and the experiences of stress and loss, reduced parental effectiveness, and exposure to parental conflict, among other stressors, may explain some of the negative outcomes often observed in children following divorce. It is essential that public institutions, including courts, are informed about the risks and protective factors associated with ACEs and resolve to mitigate the effects for children and families whom they serve. Domestic Relations Courts are uniquely equipped to address the effects that parental separation and divorce have on children, given the courts' authority to govern the legal divorce and custody process. The Domestic Relations Court in Delaware, Ohio, is committed to assisting families navigate separation and divorce in a way that is in the best interests of all, especially the children. The Court has created four specific programs to help litigants navigate their emotions, create new narratives, and explore solutions to conflict outside of trial. These innovative programs go beyond traditional court practices to treat the spouses and parents as unique individuals, giving them ample opportunities to address traumatic events and be validated for their lived experience. The suite of services includes Settlement Weeks, Neutral Evaluation, Co-parent Coaching, and Brief Family Assessments. In the subsequent sections, we will delve into each program, exploring their promise for improving outcomes for the public, the litigants, and the court as a whole.