Family Court Review最新文献_第2页

Family justice innovations in Catalonia: Reforms, services, structural gaps and (Co)parenting coordination in high-conflict divorces 加泰罗尼亚的家庭司法创新：高冲突离婚中的改革、服务、结构性差距和（共同）养育协调

IF 0.7

Family Court Review Pub Date : 2026-10-19 Epub Date: 2026-10-13 DOI: 10.1111/fcre.70098

Connie Capdevila-Brophy, Nuria Vázquez-Orellana, Asunción Tejedor-Huerta, Regina Selva-Santoyo

{"title":"Family justice innovations in Catalonia: Reforms, services, structural gaps and (Co)parenting coordination in high-conflict divorces","authors":"Connie Capdevila-Brophy, Nuria Vázquez-Orellana, Asunción Tejedor-Huerta, Regina Selva-Santoyo","doi":"10.1111/fcre.70098","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.70098","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines how family justice in Catalonia has responded to high-conflict separation and divorce involving children within a context of recent institutional and legislative reform. Over the past decade, Catalan courts have increasingly relied on parenting coordination as an auxiliary judicial intervention to manage persistent coparenting conflict, despite the absence of explicit statutory regulation. Drawing on a jurisprudential analysis of Catalan case law and empirical data from a survey of parenting coordinators, this study analyzes the development, functions, and perceived effectiveness of parenting coordination within this evolving framework of family justice services. Findings indicate growing judicial reliance on parenting coordination and reported improvements in coparenting dynamics, alongside persistent challenges including family service delays, limited institutional coordination, and the need for clearer procedural regulation. This article concludes that although Catalonia has advanced toward a more interdisciplinary and child-centered model of family justice, further structural integration and formal regulation of parenting coordination will be necessary to consolidate reform and enhance the protection of children affected by high-conflict separations.","PeriodicalId":51627,"journal":{"name":"Family Court Review","volume":"64 4","pages":"713-732"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2026-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"149214650","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abandoned, neglected, abused, and stuck waiting: Rethinking special immigrant juvenile status 被遗弃、被忽视、被虐待、被困等待：重新思考特殊移民青少年的身份

IF 0.7

Family Court Review Pub Date : 2026-10-19 Epub Date: 2026-09-27 DOI: 10.1111/fcre.70104

Kira Giordano

引用次数: 0

Our harm, our voice: Why Title IX must mandate informal resolution to expand restorative justice access on campus 我们的伤害，我们的声音：为什么第九条必须强制通过非正式决议来扩大校园内的恢复性司法

IF 0.7

Family Court Review Pub Date : 2026-10-19 Epub Date: 2026-09-16 DOI: 10.1111/fcre.70105

Alexandra McAvoy

引用次数: 0

Parent child contact problems—Re-connecting the dots through a somatic lens 父母与孩子的接触问题——通过身体透镜重新连接这些点

IF 0.7

Family Court Review Pub Date : 2026-10-19 Epub Date: 2026-09-10 DOI: 10.1111/fcre.70101

Maureen Mueller

{"title":"Parent child contact problems—Re-connecting the dots through a somatic lens","authors":"Maureen Mueller","doi":"10.1111/fcre.70101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.70101","url":null,"abstract":"Parent child contact problems (PCCP) and parental alienation (PA) occupy much time for family law professionals especially as parents might use the term PA loosely, for the parent allegedly doing PA and the parent experiencing PA. Negotiating safety, connection and distance are fundamental to PCCP. Gardner's single-factor model, useful for observable behaviors, is bathed in blame, often obscuring where timely interventions may best be effective. This paper discusses how a somatic psychology lens contributes more depth to the multi-factor model and the vortex of resist-refuse dynamics and the alienated child's response. By understanding the body's Window of Tolerance, capacity, neuroception, the four automatic threat responses—fight, flight, freeze and fawn—empathic distress, burn out and the catastrophic cusp, we propose that a child's reflexive support of the favored parent could be fawning and indicate trauma bonding and co-dependence. Somatics holds that trauma is not in the event but the lack of empathic witnessing providing co-regulation; changing how responsibility is conceptualized. Further, somatics helps us to repair relational ruptures and return to the Green Zone of tolerance, flexibility and resilience. Understanding the biological basis of connection and rupture is valuable for family law professionals working with this population.","PeriodicalId":51627,"journal":{"name":"Family Court Review","volume":"64 4","pages":"767-786"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2026-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/fcre.70101","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"149214644","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Learning from down under: A call to create Australian style family relationship centers for separating families in the United States 向澳大利亚学习：呼吁为美国的离散家庭建立澳大利亚式的家庭关系中心

IF 0.7

Family Court Review Pub Date : 2026-10-19 Epub Date: 2026-09-13 DOI: 10.1111/fcre.70107

Andrew Schepard

{"title":"Learning from down under: A call to create Australian style family relationship centers for separating families in the United States","authors":"Andrew Schepard","doi":"10.1111/fcre.70107","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.70107","url":null,"abstract":"Australia's Family Relationship Centres (FRCs) are a bold innovation in dispute resolution for separating families. Beginning in 2006, the Australian Government created 65 FRCs which provide free or low-cost mediation, triage, information, counseling and education designed to reduce conflict and stabilize relationships between separating parents and between separating parents and children. FRCs are based in the communities they serve in a location separate from the courthouse. Australia created the FRCs at approximately the same time it enacted a presumptive mandate that separating parents attempt mediation before filing an application to the court concerning their children. Empirical evaluations of FRCs establish they are achieving their goals. FRCs and the mediation mandate have changed the culture in Australia surrounding dispute resolution for separating families from thinking of their disputes as a legal problem to thinking of them as the product of relationship issues. This article argues that creation of FRCs in the United States combined with a mediation mandate would have a similar positive impact on separating parents, children, courts and communities here and makes suggestions for how such a project could be organized and funded.","PeriodicalId":51627,"journal":{"name":"Family Court Review","volume":"64 4","pages":"802-813"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2026-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"149214651","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

In whose interests?: What empirical research reveals – And does not reveal – About how family lawyers manage role conflicts in parental separation cases 为了谁的利益？实证研究揭示了什么——以及没有揭示什么——关于家庭律师如何处理父母分居案件中的角色冲突

IF 0.7

Family Court Review Pub Date : 2026-10-19 Epub Date: 2026-09-20 DOI: 10.1111/fcre.70095

Esther Podbevšek

{"title":"In whose interests?: What empirical research reveals – And does not reveal – About how family lawyers manage role conflicts in parental separation cases","authors":"Esther Podbevšek","doi":"10.1111/fcre.70095","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.70095","url":null,"abstract":"Family lawyers representing parent-clients in separation proceedings are confronted with a professional role conflict: the obligation to represent the interests of their client, while simultaneously acting in the interests of any children involved. This article presents a systematic literature review examining how empirical research has addressed this tension and how the role of family lawyers is perceived by children, parents, and lawyers. The review reveals that no existing empirical studies directly investigate how family lawyers manage this role conflict in practice. Moreover, children's own perceptions of the family lawyer's role remain largely absent from empirical inquiry. By highlighting these gaps, the article argues that current empirical research provides an incomplete account of how family lawyers understand and navigate the tension between parent-client advocacy and child-centered considerations in practice. In light of this absence, the review draws on three related bodies of empirical research: studies concerning family lawyers and the “best interests of the child,” literature including the perceptions of children and parents on the lawyer's role, and research on lawyers' role orientations and the tensions they identify. By synthesizing the existing empirical research, the article proposes a cautious, interpretive account of how family lawyers may navigate the professional role conflict. While these inferences provide some preliminary insight, they remain provisional due to the lack of direct empirical analysis. The article concludes that there is a gap in the research and pleads for research that directly examines how family lawyers manage the professional dilemma in parental separation cases, specifically in a manner that includes the perspectives of children.","PeriodicalId":51627,"journal":{"name":"Family Court Review","volume":"64 4","pages":"668-680"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2026-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/fcre.70095","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"149214730","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

July editorial note 七月社论说明

IF 0.7

Family Court Review Pub Date : 2026-07-31 DOI: 10.1111/fcre.70090

Barbara A. Babb, Michael A. Saini

引用次数: 0

It's time to uncover the truth: Closed adoption states' inconsistencies and how it is hurting adopted children 是时候揭露真相了：封闭收养州的矛盾之处，以及它是如何伤害被收养的孩子的

IF 0.7

Family Court Review Pub Date : 2026-07-31 Epub Date: 2026-07-09 DOI: 10.1111/fcre.70088

Jennifer Epstein

引用次数: 0

Preliminary evaluation of the BeH20 co-parenting program using a multiple baseline experimental design 使用多基线实验设计对BeH20共同养育计划进行初步评估

IF 0.7

Family Court Review Pub Date : 2026-07-31 Epub Date: 2026-07-06 DOI: 10.1111/fcre.70085

Rebecca Hoppe, Disha Kotecha, Karey L. O'Hara, Trina Nudson

{"title":"Preliminary evaluation of the BeH20 co-parenting program using a multiple baseline experimental design","authors":"Rebecca Hoppe, Disha Kotecha, Karey L. O'Hara, Trina Nudson","doi":"10.1111/fcre.70085","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.70085","url":null,"abstract":"This study evaluated BeH20, a community-embedded co-parenting program for divorced and separated parents experiencing high interparental conflict, using two complementary designs. In Study 1, 102 parents completed a one-time post-only survey, rating perceived changes in their co-parenting quality, program components, overall satisfaction, and likelihood of recommending BeH20. Results showed a large, significant improvement in perceived co-parenting quality, strong agreement that the program offered practical communication strategies, businesslike conflict-resolution techniques, guidance on separating marital vs. co-parenting roles, and support for a child's relationship with both parents, as well as high overall satisfaction and recommendation likelihood. In Study 2, 11 parents participated in a multiple-baseline, single-case experimental design, providing 462 daily observations of co-parenting (respect, animosity) and nonreactivity, and 519 observations of conflict tactics (constructive vs. destructive) across baseline, intervention, and follow-up. Findings revealed a significant reduction in animosity during the intervention phase. Together, these results offer preliminary evidence that BeH20 is both highly acceptable and effective at targeting a key mechanism of change—reducing animosity between co-parents—and demonstrate the feasibility of conducting rigorous, university–community evaluations of community-embedded programs. Future work should extend these partnerships to explore additional mechanisms of change and streamline data collection processes for scalable implementation.","PeriodicalId":51627,"journal":{"name":"Family Court Review","volume":"64 3","pages":"551-572"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2026-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/fcre.70085","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148647668","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

A quasi-experimental trial of two court-based parent education programs for high-conflict separated/divorcing families 两个基于法院的高冲突分居/离婚家庭家长教育项目的准实验性试验

IF 0.7

Family Court Review Pub Date : 2026-07-31 Epub Date: 2026-07-09 DOI: 10.1111/fcre.70089

Karey L. O'Hara, Trevor Morris, Avani Maddipatla, Judge Bruce R. Cohen, Alicia Davis

{"title":"A quasi-experimental trial of two court-based parent education programs for high-conflict separated/divorcing families","authors":"Karey L. O'Hara, Trevor Morris, Avani Maddipatla, Judge Bruce R. Cohen, Alicia Davis","doi":"10.1111/fcre.70089","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.70089","url":null,"abstract":"This study evaluated two court-mandated parent education programs utilized in Maricopa County, Arizona— Families in Transition (FIT) and Parent Conflict Resolution (PCR)—for high-conflict separated/divorcing parents. Between December 2022 and June 2023, 214 parents were assigned to FIT or PCR. They were assessed on interparental conflict, emotion regulation, and child outcomes at baseline and one month later, on program acceptability, feasibility, appropriateness, and usability at posttest. In December 2024, researchers reviewed court records to examine attorneys' fees, hearings, parenting issues, and new filings over time. A marginal group-by-time interaction (p = 0.07) emerged for parent-reported interparental conflict, with only FIT participants reporting a significant reduction from pretest to follow-up. Neither group showed changes in emotion regulation or child outcomes. A significant interaction (p < 0.01) indicated fewer hearings, new issues, and parenting-related disputes for FIT participants over the 18–24 months after program participation compared to before the program. Both programs were highly rated as to acceptability, feasibility, appropriateness, or usability. Most parents preferred online delivery, and qualitative feedback suggested areas for improvement alongside positive experiences. Overall, both programs were well-received, but only FIT demonstrated meaningful reductions in interparental and legal conflict.","PeriodicalId":51627,"journal":{"name":"Family Court Review","volume":"64 3","pages":"573-598"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2026-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148647908","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0