Family dispute resolution: collaboration across disciplines yields results
Amy G. Applegate is clinical professor of law and director of the Family and Children Mediation Clinic at the Indiana University School of Law—Bloomington. She reports on a recent IUB conference on family dispute resolution.
One of the most exciting aspects of teaching in a great research university like Indiana University is the opportunity to combine practice with research. The Family and Children Mediation Clinic at the IU School of Law-Bloomington and the Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences have been doing just that in our collaboration over the past year -- looking for ways to help families resolve conflict with a focus on their children's best interest.
In November 2007, my colleagues Amy Holtzworth-Munroe, Brian D'Onofrio and Jack Bates, faculty members in the Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, and I hosted a two-day conference, "For the Sake of the Children: Advances in Family Dispute Resolution," that was co-sponsored by the Law School and the Psychology Department. The public part of the conference took place on the afternoon of Nov. 15, when IU professors, students and alumni, as well as attorneys, social workers, psychologists and members of the general public packed the Moot Court Room at the Law School to attend a forum that included two nationally prominent experts in the alternative dispute resolution field.
University of Virginia psychology professor Robert Emery explained how divorcing couples experience grief differently, and reported on his research demonstrating the long-term benefits of mediation for divorcing families. Emery's research shows that non-custodial parents who mediated were more likely to maintain positive relationships with their children than non-custodial parents who didn't mediate. Emery reported that the differences were dramatic and lasted for at least 12 years.
Andrew Schepard, professor of law at Hofstra University, said the legal system can and should move to policies and practices that make it more likely for divorcing couples to resolve their disputes in a way that doesn't cause lasting harm to their children. He advocated for judges to require divorce lawyers to discuss alternative dispute resolution with their clients, and for the revision of attorney ethics rules to include an ethical duty to the well-being of children in divorce cases.
The public forum concluded with a panel of local judges moderated by William Fee, judge of Steuben County Superior Court and president of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC). Judges E. Michael Hoff, Frances G. Hill, David L. Welch, Teresa D. Harper and Commissioner Brett Raper from the Monroe Circuit Court and Judge Frank M. Nardi from the Owen Circuit Court addressed some of their concerns about high-conflict family law cases, including the detrimental effect on children, lack of resources for parents and their children, difficulties in managing cases with parties who do not have attorneys, and attorneys who encourage unnecessary litigation.
This public forum was only a small part of a larger working conference. Professors Holtzworth-Munroe, D'Onofrio, Bates, and I assembled a group of 12 outstanding scholars in the legal, psychology and policy arenas from around the country and the world. Most of the conference was a round-table discussion at the Law School, with presentations by, and brainstorming sessions with, experts from California, Arizona, Maryland, New York, Virginia, Indiana, and even Australia. These experts shared research and practice concerns to help us in developing better interventions for families in conflict. As with the public forum, we packed the Law School faculty conference room for the working conference.
From the legal and policy perspective, Jay Folberg, professor emeritus, University of San Francisco, presented on the "History of Alternative Dispute Resolution from the Legal Perspective;" Andrew Schepard, professor of law and director, Center for Children, Families and the Law, Hofstra Law, and Peter Salem, executive director of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC), presented on "Therapeutic Justice, Triage, and the Multi-Door Family Courthouse: Fitting the Intervention to the Family and the Fuss;" Jana Singer, professor of law, University of Maryland School of Law, presented on "Legal and Ethical Concerns in Dispute Resolution and the Post-divorce Family;" and Ed Seidman, senior vice president, William T. Grant Foundation, presented on "Family Dispute Resolution as a Locus for Social Setting Research." I also presented on the background, structure, history, and challenges in my family mediation program at the Law School, through which my law students become registered domestic relations mediators and provide pro bono mediation services to indigent and low-income parents in disputed custody, parenting-time, and other family law cases.
From the social science perspective, Robert Emery, professor of psychology and director, Center for Children, Families, and the Law, University of Virginia, presented on "Helping Kids to be Kids, Not Children of Divorce: How Parents and Professionals Can Handle Divorce Differently;" Sharlene Wolchik, professor, Arizona State University, presented on "The New Beginnings Program for Divorced Mothers: Moving from Efficacy to Effectiveness;" Sandy Braver, professor, Arizona State University, presented on "The Dads for Life Program: Increasing Children's Well Being by Improving the Father-Child Relationship and Decreasing Parental Conflict;" Jenn McIntosh, clinical director; Family Transitions, North Carlton, Australia and adjunct associate professor, La Trobe University, presented on "Child-Informed Mediation: Learnings from Two Prospective Studies in Community and Court Based Mediation;" Connie Beck, assistant professor, University of Arizona, presented on "Domestic Violence Assessment, Screening, and Accommodations: Implications for Divorce Mediation;" and Paulette Carson, MSW, LCSW, Indianapolis, Indiana, presented on "Parenting Coordination and Current Local Dispute Resolution Trends."
In addition, Professor D'Onofrio presented on "Tthe Impact of Divorce on Children: Convergent Findings from Social Science Research;" Professor Holtzworth-Munroe presented on "Intimate Partner Violence: Overview of the Problem and Implications for Divorce Mediation;" and Professor Bates presented on "Childhood and Adolescent Psychopathology and Behavioral Disorders: Family Processes and Outcomes to Consider When Studying Divorce Mediation."
In addition to our scholar experts, we had a remarkable level of participation by and interest from our local family law judges, a number of whom not only participated on the judges' panel in the public forum, but also attended a significant part of the working conference. They listened, asked insightful questions, and offered good guidance in our discussions.
Another wonderful aspect of the conference was the level of student participation and engagement in the conference, among clinical psychology and education graduate students, as well as law students. Some of my clinic students are concurrently taking a seminar at the Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, and they are benefiting from this opportunity to collaborate with the psychology professors and graduate students. I believe the feeling is mutual.
I am pleased to report that the collaboration between the Law School and the Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences is expanding through our work together and experience at the conference. The Psychology Department is initiating a new program called the Collaborative Parenting after Separation Program (CPAS). CPAS is a 12-week group skills-based program designed to assist separating or divorcing couples with becoming successful co-parents. Program leaders, including psychology professors and graduate students, will work with parents to reduce parental conflict and to teach parenting skills to improve parents' relationship with their children. We expect that some of the couples in my mediation program will be referred to the CPAS program and some of the couples in the CPAS program will be referred to mediation in my program.
In addition, I have been reviewing historical information about my clinic. I am now being assisted by graduate students from the Department of Psychology in reviewing my program. We are also considering ways to expand the review of important aspects of the program, with a view to improving an already successful program.
We are also making plans for Professors Holtzworth-Munroe and D'Onofrio, and their students, to conduct some domestic violence research in the context of my clinic's mediation practice. We are working with Professor Beck from Arizona to set up an appropriate research program, considering research goals as well as the needs and interests of our parties and student mediators. Our goal is to eventually review and reconsider how we screen for domestic violence in our mediation cases, and how we use that information in the mediation process.
We are also exploring the possibility of working with Jenn McIntosh and mediators in Australia to add child-informed mediation practices into my mediation clinic -- this would involve psychology specialists (faculty and graduate students from the Psychology Department) conducting interviews of children in some families and bringing the children's voice into the mediation process.
Finally, Professor Holtzworth-Munroe will serve as the guest editor for the July 2009 edition of the Family Court Review. Professors Holtzworth-Munroe, D'Onofrio, and I, as well as the other participants in the conference, will be writing articles about our conference presentations, research, work, and the future.
