GUARDIAN AD LITEM:

1
GUARDIAN AD LITEM

• BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN HIGH-CONFLICT DIVORCE
  AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

2
PRESENTERS

• Honorable Judge Chester Harhut
• Danielle M. Ross, Esquire
• Ann Marie Termini, Ed.S., M.S., LPC
• Lackawanna County Family Court
• 45th Judicial District
• 200 Adams Avenue
• Scranton, PA 18503

3
BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN HIGH-CONFLICT DIVORCE
AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

• Objectives
• Examine the difference between conflict and abuse
  
• Introduce a differential case management approach
  that prioritizes families based on the severity
  of conflict and abuse
• Showcase a guardian ad litem program designed to
  investigate domestic violence and recommend
  appropriate interventions

4
SOURCE OF CONFUSION

• Term high-conflict used to describe more intense
  and protracted disputes that require court
  resources and include domestic violence cases
• Terms domestic violence, conflict and abuse used
  interchangeably, without clear definition or
  understanding of terms
• Domestic violence euphemized as conflict and
  others argue that any conflict interpreted as
  domestic violence

5
HIGH CONFLICT VERSUS ABUSEDalton, Carbon
Olesen. High Conflict Divorce, Violence, and
Abuse Implications for Custody and Visitation
Decisions, Juvenile and Family Court, Fall 2003,
pp 11-32

• DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
• Strategic, instrumental tactics and behaviors
  asserted by the batterer directed at or upon his
  intimate partner
• Designed to induce fear and maintain power and
  control in the relationship
• Induction of fear and threats to harm
• Views authority as right and privilege

• CONFLICT
• Mutual responsibility for disagreements, problems
  or antagonism
• Referred to by levels high-low
• Considered result of stress, health problems, or
  alcohol and drug use
• Situational

6
HIGH CONFLICT VERSUS ABUSEDalton, Carbon
Olesen. High Conflict Divorce, Violence, and
Abuse Implications for Custody and Visitation
Decisions, Juvenile and Family Court, Fall 2003,
pp 11-32

• HIGH CONFLICT
• ? Personality
• Disorders
• Resulting from
• unresolved
• childhood issues

• ABUSE
• ? Attitudes and
• behavior intended to
• apply inappropriate
• control in the
• relationship
• ? Symptoms of
• physical and/or
• emotional harm from
• exposure from abuse

7
HIGH CONFLICT VERSUS ABUSEDalton, Carbon
Olesen. High Conflict Divorce, Violence, and
Abuse Implications for Custody and Visitation
Decisions, Juvenile and Family Court, Fall 2003,
pp 11-32

• HIGH-CONFLICT
• ? Parents equally vocal about their differences
  and one anothers perceived parenting inadequacies

• ABUSE
• ? Abusive partner likely
• deny/minimize abuse
• ? Abused partner may
• have been or still may
• be, unwilling or afraid
• to disclose either
• abuse or concerns
• regarding partners
• parenting abilities

8
HIGH CONFLICT VERSUS ABUSEDalton, Carbon
Olesen. High Conflict Divorce, Violence, and
Abuse Implications for Custody and Visitation
Decisions, Juvenile and Family Court, Fall 2003,
pp 11-32

• HIGH CONFLICT
• ? Unresolved feelings
• associated with the
• failed relationship
• which are directed
• into fighting over
• the children

• ABUSE
• ? Abusive partners unresolved feelings
  regarding partner's desire to separate from the
  relationship trigger the abusive partner to
• fight for custody
• or generous access
• or
• use children to
• meet physical or
• emotional needs

9
HIGH CONFLICT VERSUS ABUSEDalton, Carbon
Olesen. High Conflict Divorce, Violence, and
Abuse Implications for Custody and Visitation
Decisions, Juvenile and Family Court, Fall 2003,
pp 11-32

• HIGH CONFLICT
• ? Mistrust of each parent for
• the other
• ? based on distorted and
• exaggerated negative view
• of each held by the other

• ABUSE
• ? Mistrust of the abusive partner
• by the victim, documented by
• ? past experience
• ? informed assessment
• of abuser's current
• intentions and likely
• future behavior
• ? Unfounded allegations about
• the victim made by the abusive
• parent
• ? based on his or her
• distorted and
• exaggerated negative
• view of the abused
• parent

10
HIGH CONFLICT VERSUS ABUSEDalton, Carbon
Olesen. High Conflict Divorce, Violence, and
Abuse Implications for Custody and Visitation
Decisions, Juvenile and Family Court, Fall 2003,
pp 11-32

• ABUSE
• ? Repeated instances of manipulation and
  control, which further erode the abused partners
  capacity to trust the abuser

• HIGH CONFLICT
• ? Cycles of reaction
• and counter
• reaction, which
• further erode the
• possibility of trust

11
HIGH CONFLICT VERSUS ABUSEDalton, Carbon
Olesen. High Conflict Divorce, Violence, and
Abuse Implications for Custody and Visitation
Decisions, Juvenile and Family Court, Fall 2003,
pp 11-32

• HIGH CONFLICT
• ? Pressure on the children
• to take sides, resulting
• in children, occasionally,
• relieving the pressure by
• pleasing one parent since
• they cannot please both

• ABUSE
• ? Children fearful of
• exposure to the abusive
• partners dangerous,
• neglectful, or
• inappropriate behavior, yet
• ? Often desire to maintain
• contact to him or her.
• ? Sometimes distrustful of the
• abused parents capacity to
• meet their physical, social,
• and emotional needs.

12
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE THE DETERMINATION OF CHILD
CUSTODY

• The National Council of Juvenile and Family Court
  Judges and the ABA recommend adopting a
  presumption
• Deny joint or sole custody
• to a parent with a history of DV
• - DV frequent shown to be harmful to children,
  whether
• abused physically or not.
• - Awarding batterers primary or joint custody
  should be
• viewed as being either detrimental to
  children or failing
• to satisfy their best interests.

13
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE THE DETERMINATION OF CHILD
CUSTODY

• The National Council of Juvenile and Family Court
  Judges and the ABA recommend adopting a
  presumption
• Deny joint or sole custody
• to a parent with a history of DV
• -Abusive parent realizes, after separation or
  divorce, that
• most effective way to hurt or destroy the
  other parent is
• through emotional or psychological abuse
  utilizing the
• family courts.
• -Joint custody and two equal parents
  cooperatively
• planning for their children's future is
  impossible for couple
• when there is family violence.
• -Shared custody may perpetuate the violence and
  abusive
• power and control in family relationships.

14
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE THE DETERMINATION OF CHILD
CUSTODY

• Centre for Children and Families in the Justice
  System
• Rebuttable Presumption
• Approximately one-third of US states
• Abusive spouse cannot have sole or joint
  custody
• of their children because of the potential
  harm
• (direct and indirect) to the children
• (Jaffe, Lemon Poisson, 2002).

15
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RELEVANT TO POSTSEPARTION
PARENTING ARRANGEMENTS

• MYTH Domestic Violence ends with separation
  for abused
• woman
• Fact Abused women often face continuing
  risks
• from their partner after separation.
• Separation is the most dangerous time for abused
  women
• - Approximately one-quarter of abuse victims,
  the
• violence became more severe compared to
• pre-separation violence (Statistics Canada,
  2001)

16
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RELEVANT TO POSTSEPARTION
PARENTING ARRANGEMENTS

• Fact Abused women often face continuing
• risks from their partner after
  separation.
• Physical abuse, stalking, and harassment
  continue
• as significant rates post-separation
• Access to children can be used by batterers as
  an
• opportunity to further abuse their former
• spouse.
• - One-quarter of the women reported that their
• lives were threatened during access
  (Leighton,
• 1989)

17
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RELEVANT TO POSTSEPARTION
PARENTING ARRANGEMENTS

• Fact Abused women often face continuing
• risks from their partner after
  separation
• Threats to obtain custody are commonly used by
• abusers as a weapon against the abuse victim
  to
• enhance his power and control post separation.
  
• - Research batterers are more likely to apply
  for
• custody and equally likely to be granted it
  in
• comparison to nonviolent fathers (Zorza,
  1995).

18
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RELEVANT TO POSTSEPARTION
PARENTING ARRANGEMENTS

• Significant overlap between spousal violence and
  child abuse
• Children exposed to domestic violence may suffer
  from significant emotional and behavioral
  problems related to this traumatic experience
• Perpetrators of spousal abuse are poor role
  models for children
• Abusive partners undermine the victim's parenting
  role
• Jaffe, Crooks, Claire Bala. Sept 2005.
• Making Appropriate Parenting Arrangement in
  Family Violence Cases
• Applying the Literature to identify Promising
  Practices

19
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RELEVANT TO POSTSEPARTION
PARENTING ARRANGEMENTS

• Diminished parenting capacities among victims
  often occurs
• Victims may need to reestablish their competence
  as parents
• learn how to nurture and protect themselves and
  their children
• Victims behavior under stress of the abusive
  relationship and during the aftermath of a
  stressful separation should not inappropriately
  prejudice the residential or access decisions

20
SIGNIFICANCE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OFTEN
OVERLOOKED BY COURTS AND FAMILY LAW PROFESSIONALS

• Where DV has been alleged, courts may not give
  credence or sufficient weight to a history of
  partner abuse in making decisions about child
  custody or visitation.
• Judges often disbelieve credible evidence of DV
  and discount its seriousness.
• Allegations often wrongly perceived as false
• Because they are made in a contentious
• environment
• Because of the misperception that litigating
• parents concoct violence charges to gain an
• advantage in court.

21
SIGNIFICANCE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OFTEN
OVERLOOKED BY COURTS AND FAMILY LAW PROFESSIONALS

• Most abused women have difficulty proving their
  abuse in family court proceedings because of
  insufficient corroborating evidence.
• Three quarters of abuse victims do not contact
  the police, independent evidence often required
  by the courts is lacking (Stats Canada, 1993).

22
SIGNIFICANCE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OFTEN
OVERLOOKED BY COURTS AND FAMILY LAW PROFESSIONALS

• Abuse survivors may present as angry, distrustful
  and suspicious with all professionals related to
  the court proceedings.
• ? Undermines their effectiveness in dealing
• with the court system
• ? May result in adverse inferences drawn
• about their attitudes, parenting skills
  and
• ability to promote a relationship with the
  
• other parent .
• (Jaffe Geffner, 1998).

23
PROBLEMS FOR VICTIMS CREATED BY CURRENT CUSTODY
DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM

• In situations of DV, a co-parenting relationship
  and impact of the ongoing conflict on children
  often represent a negative influence on children
• Battered spouses are advised to promote
  relationships and set aside past conflicts with
  their former spouses who may be of danger to them
  and their children
• If dont comply, deemed unfit or unfriendly
  parents and could lose custody to abusive
  parent

24
THE ROLE OF THE GUARDIAN AD LITEM

• DOMESTIC
• VIOLENCE
• CASES

25
The two core focuses of this change are . . .
26

• 1. Self-Settlement
• Provide a Life Line for the Child(ren)
• a Guardian Ad Litem

27
(No Transcript)
28
(No Transcript)
29
(No Transcript)
30
Brief Overview Of Five (5) Step Sequential
Evaluation
31
(No Transcript)
32
STEP 1
33
Types of Cases, Subject to Automatic Appointment

• C.Y.S. involvement
• 2. Parties with any mental health issues and/or
  allegations
• 3. Parties with substance abuse issues
• 4. Domestic Violence
• 5. Parent whom do not communicate
• 6. Pending and/or past PFA filings
• 7. Parties with supervised visits
• 8. Parties with pending criminal charges and/or
  investigations
• 9. Parties with domestic instability
• 10. Allegations of sexual and/or physical abuse

34
STEP 2
Building a relationship with the family

G.A.L. MEETS WITH PARTIES
G.A.L. MEETS WITH CHILD(REN)
Goal The G.A.L. is to serve as the childs life
line, if necessary.
35
Disparaging Words
Middle Man
36
SPECIALIZED PROTOCOLS AND PROCEDURES Jaffe, P.,
Johnston, J, Crooks, C Bala, N. (2008).
Custody Disputes Involving Allegations of
Domestic Violence Toward a Differentiated
Approach to Parenting Plans

• Prioritized Goals
• 1. Protect children directly from violence,
  abusive, and
• neglectful environments
• 2. Provide for safety and support the
  well-being of
• parents who are victims of abuse
• 3. Respect and empower victim parents to make
  their
• own decisions and direct their own lives
• 4. Hold perpetrators accountable for their past
  and
• future actions
• 5. Allow and promote the least restrictive plan
  for
• parent-child access that benefits the
  child, along
• with parents reciprocal rights

37
BRIDGING THE GAPTHE GUARDIANS ROLE

• Screening
• Intervention
• Case Management
• Enforcement

38
SCREENING A DIFFERENTIAL RESPONSE

• Collection of sufficient data
• Safety of the child and principal caregiver
• Presence and extent of violence/abusive behaviors
  in the parental relationship
• Meaning and impact of violence on the victim
• Meaning and impact of violence on each child
• Degree to which behaviors interfere with the
  parenting and child-well being
• Degree children drawn in as instruments of the
  abuse, and overlapping forms of maltreatment
• Identification of the extent to which court
  process is being used to extend power and control
  issues
• Ongoing risk assessment
• Use of experts

39
SCREENING A DIFFERENTIAL RESPONSE

• Pertinent Records
• Evaluations
• Police reports
• Child Abuse/Child Protective Reports
• Criminal records
• Records of court activity
• Court files
• Relevant Prior civil or criminal cases involving
  either party
• Medical, and dental records
• School records

40
SCREENING A DIFFERENTIAL RESPONSE

• Collateral Sources
• Family Members, friend and neighbors regular
  interaction with family
• Professionals with whom family has had ongoing
  associations
• Professionals who have become involved because of
  reported incidents

41
STEP 3
Based on the interviews conducted, the G.A.L.
will make an assessment as to what services, if
any, the parties need . . .
Procedural Note G.A.L. will get agreement
and/or Court Order, if necessary, by filing a
Petition.
42
INTERVENTION A DIFFERENTIAL RESPONSE

• Create custody and visitation orders that secure
  ongoing safety and well being of abused parent
  and child
• Prevent abusive parent using procedures as a
  means of controlling and abusing the other parent
• Structured agreements and schedules to avoid
  contact and negotiation
• Detailed orders readily enforceable and
  comprehensive
• Parenting plans appropriate to ensure healthy
  outcomes for children and parent-child
  relationships

43
INTERVENTION A DIFFERENTIAL RESPONSE

• Batters Intervention Program
• DV Victim services
• Programs for children
• Alcohol/Addiction Counseling
• Court monitoring/review hearings
• Sole Custody
• Denial of overnight visits
• Restrain abusive parents communication with or
  proximity to the other parent
• Restrain abusive parents communication with
  children except in context of authorized
  visitation
• Supervised Exchange
• Visitation
• Visits limited to a specific location or
  locations
• Restrictions on the presence of specific persons
  other than the parent while parent is with the
  children
• Prohibition on the abusive parents using alcohol
  or drugs during or within a specified time period
  prior to visits
• Supervised Visitation
• Appropriate levels of restriction
• Structured supervised setting
• Informally supervised by appropriate family
  members
• Ease restrictions over time if compliance

44
STEP 4
Information Network
In the best interest of the child(ren), the
G.A.L. orchestrates an information network
between the Court, Service Providers,
Practitioners and parties.
45
CASE MANAGEMENT A DIFFERENTIAL RESPONSE

• Create an information network between the court,
  service providers, practitioners and parties
• Determine access to services (barriers)
• Establish interagency cooperation and
  communication
• Monitoring safety and progress
• Overall community coordination of services
• Coordinate roles and provide checks and balances
  to interventions while ensuring accountability
  for violence, protecting civil rights of all
  parities

46
STEP 5
G.A.L. CONFERENCE
So, then, is it safe to assume we cannot reach an
agreement?
47
Process of G.A.L. Conference
Will take place at the Family Law Center

Purpose To discuss the information received
during Step 4 as well as the G.A.Ls assessment
in an attempt to facilitate an agreement/stipulati
on/settlement
Unlike Mediation, in the event an agreement is
not reached, the information obtained during this
process may/shall be included in the G.A.L.s
report to the Court.
48

• The G.A.L. Conference is the last chance the
  parties have to settle.
• In the event the parties do not settle at the
  G.A.L. Conference, a Hearing will definitely take
  place. Their will not be an opportunity to
  discuss the issues with the Judge and/or his
  staff on the day the hearing is scheduled.
• This is for three (3) reasons
• The parties and practitioners need to utilize the
  G.A.L. Conference as a pre-hearing settlement
  conference and take it seriously.
• Practitioners will know that if they make it to
  the Courthouse on the day their case is scheduled
  for a hearing, a hearing will take place. So,
  there will not be any question as to when
  witnesses need to be available, etc.
• As a matter of course, cases wind up settling
  minutes before the hearing, which ties up the
  Judges calendars and wastes time that could have
  been utilized for other important cases.

49
Outcome of G.A.L. Conference
Procedural Note Depending on outcome of G.A.L.
Conference, G.A.L. will obtain Order or case
scheduled for hearing.
50
COMMON INTEREST
51
ENFORCEMENT A DIFFERENTIAL RESPONSE

• Higher level of care and vigilance
• Monitor detailed court order
• Ensure compliance with the details of the order
• Protect custodial parents autonomy to make
  decisions based on the childrens best interests
• Guard against manipulation by the abusing parent

52
Future Filings . . .
53
Time Frame

• Each case will be assessed individually
• There will be certain cases concerning
  issues which require a fast
• track approach to the process, i.e.
  Relocation.
• Within ten (10) days after meeting with
  both parties and the
• minor child(ren), the G.A.L. will
  contact the practitioners to
• discuss which services she/he feels are
  necessary
• Within forty-five (45) days from the date
  the parties and/or
• minor child(ren) begin services, the
  G.A.L. will contact the
• practitioners and/or the parties to
  arrange for the G.A.L.
• Conference.
• The G.A.L. Conference will be scheduled no
  later than sixty (60)
• days from the date of the G.A.L.s
  appointment, unless the G.A.L.
• obtains Court approval.

54
End Result . . .

Families
whom 1. Take advantage of the services offered
by the Court 2. Come to their own
agreement and are best
suited to follow their agreement 3. Focus on
the best interest of their children 4. Are
healthy enough to raise healthy children
whom are resilient and have a chance.