DOCSLIB.ORG

Evaluating Parenting Coordination: Does It Really Work?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Evaluating Parenting Coordination: Does It Really Work? EVALUATING PARENTING COORDINATION: DOES IT REALLY WORK? Institute for Court Management ICM Fellows Program 2015-2016 Court Project Phase May 2016 Serpil Ergun Chief Magistrate Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Division of Domestic Relations Cleveland, Ohio ii This project and paper were prepared by the author in her personal capacity. The views and opinions expressed within the paper are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect the view of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, the Division of Domestic Relations, the Ohio Chapter of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, or the Ohio Association of Magistrates. iii Acknowledgments Undertakings like this never succeed without help and my indebtedness to the many others who assisted in bringing this project to fruition is enormous. My debt starts with gratefully acknowledging the research participants who were willing to candidly share their experience out of a genuine desire to make things better for families, and who understand that enduring solutions do not always lie within the courts. Special thanks to the judges of the Cuyahoga County Domestic Relations Court, the Hon. Cheryl S. Karner, the Hon. Leslie Ann Celebrezze, the Hon. Diane M. Palos, the Hon. Rosemary G. Gold, and the Hon. Francine Goldberg; Court Administrator James L. Viviani; and the National Center for State Courts’ Institute for Court Management for giving me the opportunity to undertake this research project. Above all, I am grateful to Judge Palos, a champion of judicial education and professional development, for her unconditional support. I deeply appreciate the contributions of my colleagues at the court who willingly gave their time to enrich this effort while carrying on with their own work: my fellow magistrates who offered their thoughts on this subject; staff attorney Sharon Ditko-Bevione who checked over each and every statistic and citation; Magistrate Eileen Gerity for her frank and stimulating comments, and for encouraging me to study this topic in the first place; my scheduler cum research assistant extraordinaire Christina Brown and scheduler Jessica Walsh for fielding phone calls; Magistrate Ann Weatherhead for her keen edits; Magistrate Marie Hartmann for last minute proofreading; Director Mark Felber for fielding all my program questions; and psychologist Dr. Frank Ezzo for providing needed guidance from time to time to a research novice. I owe you all. A thousand thank yous are not enough to express my heartfelt gratitude to my multi- talented friend, Magistrate James Tanner, who cheerfully brainstormed with me, collected data, iv created graphics, and left no stone unturned to present this information meaningfully, all while he was dreaming of retirement. You are a marvel. I also wish to acknowledge early parenting coordination groundbreakers Robert Wistner, who reached into the distant past to provide valuable background on parenting coordination in Ohio, and Robert Beckerman, for providing his unpublished manuscript written back when parenting coordination did not even have a name. I am most grateful to Sharla Johnston and the outstanding staff at the Cleveland Law Library. They were beyond gracious in helping me promptly find every single article and book I asked for, even after I promised I was through. My sincere appreciation to my project advisor, Deborah Smith, who held my hand through this, for her encouragement and thoughtful critiques to help refine my presentation. How lucky was I to have been assigned to you! I also thank the exceptional educators and staff at the National Center for State Courts – Dan Straub, John Meeks, Amy McDowell, Mary McQueen, Nicole Waters, Brian Ostrom, Dale Kasparek, Jesse Rutledge, and Tom Clarke – for opening my eyes to what high performance really means, and especially, challenging me to think about the purposes and responsibilities of courts in a new way. Mary, thank you for helping us keep in mind the beautiful ideal that is Magna Carta and the nobler side of justice. I cannot imagine going through this experience without the ICM Class of 2016 who came from all over the world and left as friends. Thank you to Toni Grainer who helped make a long three weeks away from home as comfortable as it could be. In the end, none of this would be possible without the support of my family who endured long absences and fended on their own while I indulged my obsession. Thank you from the v bottom of my heart to my husband, Doug Andrews, who picked up the slack and devoted his scarce time to provide invaluable comments; my daughters Mallory, Courtney, and Shelby who were amazed, and then again not so very surprised, that their mom chose to “go back to school”; and my sister, brother, and sister-in-law, Gulchin, Seda, and Marina, who understand what Mom and Dad taught us about the importance of being curious. vi vii Table of Contents Acknowledgments……….……………………………………………………………........ iii Table of Contents……………………………………………………………..…………… vii List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………… xii List of Tables………………………………………………………………………………. xiii Abstract………………………..…………………………………………………………… xv Introduction……………….……………………………………………………………….. 1 Literature Review…………………………………………………………………..……... 10 Effect of Parental Conflict on Children……………………………………………. 10 Meaning of “High Conflict”……………………………………………………….. 12 Rise of Alternatives to Traditional Court Process in Family Cases……………….. 16 Development of Parenting Coordination…………………………………………... 20 Features of Parenting Coordination………………………………………………... 24 The Spread of Parenting Coordination…………………………………………….. 29 Development of Parenting Coordination in Ohio………………………………….. 30 Research Support – Does the Data Support the Theory? …………………………. 35 Methods……………………………………………….……………………………………. 42 Changes in Court Usage…………………………………………………………… 42 Opinions of Parents, Attorneys, and Parenting Coordinators……………………… 48 Findings…………………………………………………………………………………….. 52 Changes in Court Usage Case Data………………………………………………... 52 Parenting Coordination Cases…………………………………………... 52 High Conflict Control Group Cases…………………………………….. 54 viii Comparison of Parenting Coordination and High Conflict Control Group Cases…………………………………………………………….. 56 Opinions of Parents, Attorneys, and Parenting Coordinators Data………………... 60 Parent Opinion Survey………………………………………………… 60 Attorney Opinion Survey……………………………………………… 69 Parenting Coordinator Opinion Survey……………………………….. 76 Conclusions and Recommendations………………...……………………………………. 91 Conclusion 1: Parenting coordination seems to be very effective in reducing litigation……………………………………………………………………………. 92 Recommendation 1.1: Cases in which parenting coordinators have been appointed should be closely followed to determine if litigation decreases and to identify if any decrease is attributable to parenting coordination or some other variable……………………………………. 93 Conclusion 2: Parenting coordination resolves disputes and prevents parental conflict from escalating into “legal” conflict but does not necessarily improve the co-parenting relationship.................................................................................... 903 Recommendation 2.1: Family law professionals should share a realistic view of what the parenting coordination process can accomplish given the nature of the parents’ relationship and willingness and capacity to cooperate………………………………………………………………... 95 Conclusion 3: Parents lack understanding about the proper role of a parenting coordinator.………………………………………………………………………… 95 Recommendation 3.1: The Court should ensure that parents are fully informed about the parenting coordination process and provide parents with standardized comprehensive information about parenting coordination…………………………………………………………….. 96 Conclusion 4: Parenting coordinators would benefit from learning opportunities tailored for the parenting coordinator role…………….…………………………... 96 Recommendation 4.1: The Court should work together with the legal community to provide continuing education designed specifically for parenting coordinators and opportunities for parenting coordinators to develop a community of practice………………………………………. 97 ix Conclusion 5: Family law professionals are unfamiliar with the role of the parenting coordinator………………………………………………………………. 97 Recommendation 5.1: Education and training about the parenting coordination process should be provided to judges, magistrates, attorneys, mediators, and custody evaluators…………………………… 98 Conclusion 6: There is a lack of professional diversity among parenting coordinators………………………………………………………………………... 98 Recommendation 6.1: The practice of parenting coordination should be promoted among mental health and conflict resolution professionals. 99 Conclusion 7: Court oversight is needed to support the legitimacy and success of parenting coordination……………………………………………………………... 99 Recommendation 7.1: Protocols should be instituted for making parenting coordination appointments and entering them in the case management system…………………………………………………….. 101 Recommendation 7.2: Parenting coordinators should be required to report regularly as to usage of parenting coordination, the progress made, and problems encountered………………………………………. 101 Recommendation 7.3: A procedure should be developed for distributing parenting coordinator appointments………………………. 101 Recommendation 7.4: Attorneys and parents should be informed of parenting coordinators participating in the Court’s program…………… 101 Conclusion 8: Issues related to parenting
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Parenting Coordination Sample Local Rule
    PARENTING COORDINATION SAMPLE LOCAL RULE Rule 1. Parenting Coordination. Introduction The County Court adopts Rule 1 effective _____________________. 1.01 Definitions As used in this rule: (A) Domestic abuse “Domestic abuse” means a pattern of abusive and controlling behavior that may include physical violence; coercion; threats; intimidation; isolation; or emotional, sexual, or economic abuse. (B) Domestic violence “Domestic violence” has the same meaning as in R.C. 3113.31(A)(1). (C) Parenting coordination “Parenting coordination” means a child-focused dispute resolution process ordered by the Court to assist parties in implementing a parental rights and responsibilities or companionship time order using assessment, education, case management, conflict management, coaching, or decision-making. “Parenting coordination” is not mediation subject to R.C. Chapter 2710, R.C. 3109.052, or Sup.R. 16 nor arbitration subject to R.C. Chapter 2711 or Sup.R. 15. (D) Parenting coordinator “Parenting coordinator” means an individual appointed by the Court to conduct parenting coordination. 1.02 Purpose This rule allows for the resolution of disputes related to parental rights and responsibilities or companionship time orders outside of court. 1.03 Scope The Court may appoint a parenting coordinator upon the filing of a parental rights and responsibilities or companionship time order. 1 1.04 Limitations of Parenting Coordinator A parent coordinator may not determine the following: (A) Whether to grant, modify, or terminate a protection order; (B) The terms and conditions of a protection order; (C) The penalty for violation of a protection order; (D) Changes in the designation of the primary residential parent or legal guardian; (E) Changes in the primary placement of a child.
    [Show full text]
  • Parenting Coordination for High-Conflict Separated Parents
    1 Parenting Coordination for High-Conflict Separated Parents Greg Kovacs, LMFT Upstate Marriage and Family Therapy, PLLC Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist Parenting Coordinator M.S., Marriage and Family Therapy, University of New Hampshire M.Phil.., Child and Family Studies, Syracuse University M.S., Data Analytics, University of Maryland Ph.D., Child and Family Studies, Syracuse University (est. 2021) ⚫ www.gregkovacs.com ⚫ https://www.facebook.com/upstatemft 2 3 Welcome Message At the UMFT Parenting Coordination Program we use the latest research on the effects of high-conflict divorce and separation on children to coordinate with parents, children, attorneys, courts, and other providers to create and enforce a comprehensive and effective coparenting plan Our Vision: We Will Empower Parents To Communicate, Negotiate, And The UMFT Resolve Differences To Help Their Children Thrive Parenting Our Philosophy: Building On The Foundations Of State-of- The-science Research, We Will Always Be Driven To Understand The Complexities Of Couple Coordination And Family Interactions To Help Parents Overcome Challenging Patterns Of Program Thought, Emotion, And Behavior 4 A Non-confidential, Child-centered Process For High-conflict Divorced Parents Parenting A Form Of Dispute Resolution For Parents In Which Mediation Would Be Inappropriate Or Coordination Ineffective Due To High Levels Of Conflict is . Hybrid Role Performed By An Impartial Third Party • High Rates of Litigation and Re-litigation • Parents are Overly Focused On Their Own Needs •
    [Show full text]
  • The Experiences of Parenting Coordinators Working with Couples Engaged in Intimate Partner Violence Ann M
    Walden University ScholarWorks Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Collection 2017 The experiences of parenting coordinators working with couples engaged in intimate partner violence Ann M. Ordway Walden University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations Part of the Counseling Psychology Commons This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Collection at ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Walden University College of Counselor Education & Supervision This is to certify that the doctoral dissertation by Ann Ordway has been found to be complete and satisfactory in all respects, and that any and all revisions required by the review committee have been made. Review Committee Dr. Mark Stauffer, Committee Chairperson, Counselor Education and Supervision Faculty Dr. Stacee Reicherzer, Committee Member, Counselor Education and Supervision Faculty Dr. Laura Haddock, University Reviewer, Counselor Education and Supervision Faculty Chief Academic Officer Eric Riedel, Ph.D. Walden University 2017 Abstract Experiences of Parenting Coordinators Working With Couples Engaged in Intimate Partner Violence by Ann M. Ordway MA/EdS, Seton Hall University, 2007 JD, Seton Hall University School of Law, 1990 BA, Seton Hall University, 1987 Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Counselor Education and Supervision Walden University April 2017 Abstract In families where parents present with intimate partner violence dynamics, courts routinely impose restraints restricting communications between those parents.
    [Show full text]
  • Oklahoma Statutes Title 43. Marriage and Family
    OKLAHOMA STATUTES TITLE 43. MARRIAGE AND FAMILY §43-1. Marriage defined. ............................................................................................................................... 8 §43-2. Consanguinity. .................................................................................................................................... 8 §43-3. Who may marry. ................................................................................................................................. 8 §43-3.1. Recognition of marriage between persons of same gender prohibited. ....................................... 10 §43-4. License required. ............................................................................................................................... 10 §43-5. Application - Fees - Issuance of license and certificate. ................................................................... 10 §43-5.1. Premarital counseling. ................................................................................................................... 11 §43-6. License - Contents. ............................................................................................................................ 12 §43-7. Solemnization of marriages. ............................................................................................................. 13 §43-7.1. Refusal to solemnize or recognize marriage by religious organization officials - Definitions. ....... 14 §43-8. Endorsement and return of license. ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1- in the United States District Court for the District Of
    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS KARIM N. JALLAD, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 16-2843 RONNIE M. BEACH and KATIE B. LECLUYSE, Defendants. MEMORANDUM & ORDER This matter comes before the court upon defendant Katie B. LeCluyse’s Motion to Dismiss For Failure to State a Claim pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) (Doc. 7) and defendant Ronnie M. Beach’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) (Doc. 9). I. Background On December 30, 2016, plaintiff Karim N. Jallad filed his complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming violations of various rights. The facts of plaintiff’s complaint involve the state court divorce proceedings between plaintiff and his former wife Cyntia Espada. Defendant LeCluyse, a therapist at Behavioral Health Specialists, was hired by plaintiff and Ms. Espada prior to their divorce, to help their minor daughter understand plaintiff’s frequent travel. Plaintiff’s work as a chemistry professor in Kuwait requires frequent travel. During the divorce proceedings, the state court appointed defendant Ronnie M. Beach to act as a parenting coordinator. Plaintiff brings four claims. Count I alleges that defendant Beach violated plaintiff’s fundamental and due process rights by deciding to: suspend plaintiff’s parenting schedule, eliminating two overnight visits with his daughter; -1- shorten plaintiff’s Skype sessions with his daughter to two 20-minute sessions per week; and allowing Ms. Espada to take their daughter to Puerto Rico for one week, and Dallas for five days.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Parenting Coordination
    Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Guidelines for Parenting Coordination © 2019 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Guidelines for Parenting Coordination Developed by The AFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination 2017-19 Foreword The Guidelines for Parenting Coordination (“Guidelines”) are the product of the interdisciplinary AFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination (“Task Force”). These Guidelines build on two previous AFCC task forces, which produced the report, “Parenting Coordination: Implementation Issues”1 and the first set of AFCC Guidelines for Parenting Coordination.2 It is noteworthy that, as the parenting coordination model has been implemented in various jurisdictions, there has been variation in the authority of a parenting coordinator (“PC”), the stage of the legal process when a PC is appointed, the various functions of a PC, the qualifications and training of a PC, and the best practices for the role. In 2017, then AFCC President Annette Burns recognized the need to update the 2005 Guidelines to reflect developments that had occurred worldwide since the Guidelines were first promulgated. She appointed the current Task Force on Parenting Coordination (“Task Force”). Task Force members met monthly via videoconference and in person at AFCC Conferences in Boston, Massachusetts (June 2017), Milwaukee, Wisconsin (November 2017), Washington, D.C. (June 2018) and Denver, Colorado (November 2018). While revising the 2005 Guidelines, the Task Force identified issues in need of exploration: use of technology in parenting coordination; parenting coordination when intimate partner violence (IPV) is an issue; diversity awareness and responsiveness; and, the evolution and impact of legal directives since the emergence of parenting coordination. To inform the process, two subcommittees were formed.
    [Show full text]
  • Section V., Parenting Coordination
    In the Indiana Supreme Court Cause No. 94S00-1602-MS-86 Order Amending Indiana Parenting Time Guidelines Under the authority vested in this Court to provide by rule for the procedure employed in all courts of this state and this Court’s inherent authority to supervise the administration of all courts of this state, Indiana Parenting Time Guidelines are amended by the adoption of Section V as follows (deletions shown by striking and new text shown by underlining): . SECTION V. PARENTING COORDINATION A. GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. Parenting coordination is a court ordered, child-focused dispute resolution process in which a Parenting Coordinator is appointed to assist high conflict parties by accessing and managing conflicts, redirecting the focus of the parties to the needs of the child, and educating the parties on how to make decisions that are in the best interest of the child. 2. A Parenting Coordinator is an individual appointed by a Court to conduct parenting coordination. 3. “High conflict parties” are parties who have had ongoing disagreements and conflict. The disagreements and conflict center on the parties’ inability to communicate and resolve issues regarding the care of the child, a parenting time schedule, or any other issues that have adversely affected the child. 4. Nothing in this guideline limits, supersedes, or divests the court of its exclusive jurisdiction to determine issues of parenting time, custody, and child support. 5. These guidelines apply to all Parenting Coordinator appointments made after the effective date of the adoption of these guidelines and do not modify an existing parenting coordination order.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Parenting Coordination
    Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Guidelines for Parenting Coordination © 2005 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Guidelines for Parenting Coordination Developed by The AFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination May 2005 Foreword The Guidelines for Parenting Coordination (“Guidelines”) are the product of the interdisciplinary AFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination (“Task Force”). First appointed in 2001 by Denise McColley, AFCC President 2001-02, the Task Force originally discussed creating model standards of practice. At that time, however, the Task Force agreed that the role was too new for a comprehensive set of standards. The Task Force instead investigated the issues inherent in the new role and described the manner in which jurisdictions in the United States that have used parenting coordination resolved those issues. The report of the Task Force’s (2001-2003) two- year study was published in April of 2003 as “Parenting Coordination: Implementation Issues.”1 The Task Force was reconstituted in 2003 by Hon. George Czutrin, AFCC President 2003-04. President Czutrin charged the Task Force with developing model standards of practice for parenting coordination for North America and named two Canadian members to the twelve-member task force. The Task Force continued investigating the use of the role in the United States and in Canada and drafted Model Standards for Parenting Coordination after much study, discussion and review of best practices in both the United States and Canada. AFCC posted the Model Standards on its website, afccnet.org, and the TaskForce members also widely distributed them for comments. The Task Force received many thoughtful and articulate comments which were carefully considered in making substantive and editorial changes based upon the feedback that was received.
    [Show full text]
  • Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Court of Common Pleas Family Court Division Stark County, Ohio
    Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Court of Common Pleas Family Court Division Stark County, Ohio STARK COUNTY FAMILY COURT LOCAL RULES OF COURT RULE 9. GENERAL RULE 10. COSTS RULE 11. SERVICE AND NOTICE RULE 12. PLEADINGS AND FILING REQUIREMENTS RULE 13. DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN RULE 14. CONDUCT OF HEARING AND TRIALS RULE 15. MOTIONS RULE 16. ALLOCATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES RULE 17. GUARDIAN AD LITEM RULE 18. CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT AGENCY (INCLUDING ORDERS WHICH MODIFY PRIOR ORDERS) RULE 19. JUVENILE CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN RULE 20. CIVIL PROTECTION ORDERS RULE 21. MEDIATION RULE 22. JUVENILE COMPETENCY PROCEEDINGS RULE 23 SPECIALIZED DOCKET (DRUG COURT) RULE 24. PARENTING COORDINATION RULE 25. ELECTRONICALLY PRODUCED TICKETS RULE 26. ELECTRONIC ACCESS TO COURT RECORDS Appendix RULES OF COURT RULE 9 GENERAL 9.01 Name of Division The Domestic Relations and Juvenile Court shall be severally identified as the Court of Common Pleas of Stark County, Ohio, Family Court Division 9.02 The Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure, the Superintendence Rules of the Supreme Court, and the Ohio Rules of Juvenile Procedure shall apply in all actions where applicable. The Rules of the General Division of the Stark County Court of Common Pleas shall apply to all proceedings before this Court, except to the extent that those General Division Rules conflict with these rules, or to the extent that the General Division Rules are inapplicable. RULE 10 COSTS 10.01 A deposit shall be required to secure court costs in all Family Court cases. 10.02 Waiver of Deposit: Waiver of Costs The Court may, by endorsement on the pleading, waive the deposit for costs, upon good cause shown and upon the filing with the Clerk of an affidavit, identifying assets and earnings of the party, together with a statement that counsel has received no fees.
    [Show full text]
  • This Is an Agreement for Parenting Coordination Services
    THIS IS AN AGREEMENT FOR PARENTING COORDINATION SERVICES BETWEEN: FN1 LN1 -and- FN2 LN2 -and- CANADIAN CO-PARENTING CENTRES, CCPC PRINCIPLES 1. The parents, FN1 LN1 and FN2 LN2, acknowledge that child(ren) will benefit from a meaningful relationship with both parents, that parental conflict will impact negatively on the child(ren)'s adjustment and development, and that every effort should be made to keep the child(ren) out of the parent's disputes. 2. Parenting coordination is a child-focused dispute resolution process and the parents agree to voluntarily enter into this Agreement, and to be bound by it, because of a desire to: a) de-escalate parental conflict; b) prioritize the child(ren)'s best interests; c) promote the child(ren)'s optimum adjustment; d) resolve issues/disputes in a timely and cost efficient manner; e) benefit from the direction of a qualified professional. APPOINTMENT OF THE PARENTING COORDINATOR 3. The parents/parties hereby retain the CANADIAN CO-PARENTING CENTRES to provide parenting coordination services, as defined by this agreement, and as described in Schedule "A" of this Agreement, and as generally understood in the professional literature and practice. The Canadian Co-Parenting Centre's primary representative will be FNPC LNPC (the parenting coordinator). (Canadian Co-Parenting Centres, CCPC, is a registered charitable organization and is hereafter referred to as the "Agency".) 4. No party is under any duress or undue influence of the other party and they are voluntarily entering into this Agreement. Each party has had the opportunity to obtain independent legal advice prior to signing this Agreement.
    [Show full text]
  • Domestic Relations Division Local Rules.Pdf
    DELAWARE COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE RANDALL D. FULLER, JUDGE Adopted April 10, 2017 Amended October 7, 2018 1 RULE 1 COMPLIANCE WITH OHIO RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE .......................................... 7 RULE 2 PLEADINGS, MOTIONS, AND ORDERS ............................................................................. 7 2.01 Form ......................................................................................................................................... 7 2.02 Initial filings and affidavits. ...................................................................................................... 8 2.03 Court exhibit file. ...................................................................................................................... 9 2.04 Mutual restraining order. .......................................................................................................... 9 2.05 Case management plan. .......................................................................................................... 10 2.06 Leave to plead. ........................................................................................................................ 10 2.07 Post-decree motions. ............................................................................................................... 11 2.08 Motions and orders. ................................................................................................................ 11 2.09 Notice of Intent to Relocate.
    [Show full text]
  • Superior Court of California, County of Marin
    MARIN COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT FOR COURT USE ONLY 3501 Civic Center Drive P.O. Box 4988 San Rafael, CA 94913-4988 In Re the Marriage of: PETITIONER: and RESPONDENT: STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING CASE NUMBER: APPOINTMENT OF PARENTING COORDINATOR PRINCIPLES 1. The parents acknowledge that their child(ren) will benefit from a meaningful relationship with both parents that continued parental conflict will generally negatively impact their child(ren)'s adjustment, and that every effort should be made to keep the child(ren) out of the middle of their parents' disputes and communications. 2. The parents agree voluntarily to enter into this Agreement because of a desire to: a. de-escalate parental conflict to which the child(ren) are exposed b. focus on their child(ren)'s needs and best interests c. promote their child(ren)'s optimum adjustment d. resolve issues and disputes between the parents concerning the clarification, implementation, modification and/or adaptation of the court-ordered parenting plan through the informal process described in this order in a timely and cost efficient manner without litigation e. benefit from the direction of a qualified professional chosen to serve as the Parenting Coordinator 3. Parenting Coordination is a child-focused dispute resolution process that combines parent education, dispute assessment, facilitated negotiations, conflict and communication management, and, when parents are unable to resolve their parenting disputes with the Parenting Coordinator's assistance, recommendations or decision making on issues that are specified in this Stipulation and Order. The ultimate goal is to help parents resolve disputed or difficult issues amicably and efficiently on their own, without having to involve the Parenting Coordinator or the adversarial process.
    [Show full text]