DOCSLIB.ORG

2019 Guardian Ad Litem Training and Update Friday, January 25, 2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2019 Guardian Ad Litem Training and Update Friday, January 25, 2019 2019 Guardian ad Litem Training and Update 19-02 Friday, January 25, 2019 presented by The South Carolina Bar Continuing Legal Education Division http://www.scbar.org/CLE SC Supreme Court Commission on CLE Course No. 190693 In the Best Interest of the Child: 2019 Guardian ad Litem Training and Update SPEAKER BIOGRAPHIES (by order of presentation) Julianne M. Stokes Stoker & Haselden, LLC (course planner) Julianne Meggs Stokes graduated with honors from Presbyterian College in 2003, earning a B.S. in Political Science. She received her J.D. from Mercer University’s Walter F. George School of Law in 2006. Mrs. Stokes was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 2006 and has practiced almost exclusively in the Family Courts of South Carolina since that time. She deals on a daily basis with issues such as divorce, equitable distribution of assets and liabilities, alimony, and time-sharing and support of children. She also represents clients in high-asset, complex marital and family law cases, drafting and enforcing prenuptial agreements, modification of alimony or child support payments, modification of custody, and parental relocation cases. In addition to her very active litigation practice, Mrs. Stokes is also a certified Family Court Mediator and acts as a Guardian ad Litem in private custody matters. Mrs. Stokes is a member of the South Carolina Bar (Family Law Section), Charleston County Bar, and the South Carolina Women Lawyers Association. She is also a member of the South Carolina Bar Resolution of Fee Disputes Board. Mrs. Stokes is married to her college sweetheart, Joshua P. Stokes, who is also a local attorney. They have two rambunctious sons and welcomed a daughter in 2015. Leslie Fisk South Carolina Legal Services Leslie Ragsdale Fisk completed her undergraduate degree at Baylor University and her law degree at West Virginia University School of Law. She has worked for South Carolina Legal Services for eleven years; including four years in the Spartanburg Office and seven years in the Greenwood Office. She previously held the position of Lead Domestic Violence Attorney, then was the Family Law Unit Head from 2015-2018. In 2018, she became the Managing Attorney of the Greenwood Office. Leslie chaired the Young Lawyer Division Cinderella Project for Greenwood County in 2014 and 2015 and serves on the South Carolina Bar’s Wellness Committee and the Self Represented Litigants committee. Leslie was a member of Governor Haley’s Domestic Violence Task Force. She graduated from the Bar’s Leadership Academy in 2014 and tied for SCLS Attorney of the Year for 2014. Leslie was the 8th Judicial Circuit nominee for the S.C. Bar’s Young Lawyer of the Year for 2015. She is a volunteer mediator at the Upstate Mediation Center and enjoys providing presentations for Continuing Legal Education and for community groups on issues related to family law and domestic violence. Michele Dahl Sturkie Sturkie Law, LLC Michele is originally from Reading, Pennsylvania, and graduated from Cabrini College in Radnor, Pennsylvania in 1988 with a B.A. in History, and minors in Mathematics and Political Science. She received her certificate in Paralegal Studies with a concentration in litigation from the Philadelphia Institute in 1989. Michele worked for almost ten years as a litigation paralegal for the U.S. Army, the State of Utah, and at private law firms in Utah and South Carolina before attending law school at the University of South Carolina. She received her J.D. from the University of South Carolina in 2002, where she received the Harvey L. Golden Domestic Relations Student of the Year Award in 2001from the South Carolina Chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. In 2003, Michele received a Pro Bono Service Award in 2003 from the South Carolina Bar. She practiced with McDougall & Self, LLP mainly in the Florence office from October 2002 until March 2010, then was a partner with McGowan Rogers Stewart Hiller & Krize from March 2010 until March 2016. On March 1, 2016, Michele opened Sturkie Law, LLC in Florence, South Carolina. Michele is a member of the South Carolina Bar, the South Carolina Women's Bar Association, and the Florence County Bar. Since she became a lawyer, her practice has been in Family Court with domestic relations cases, including serving as some Guardian ad litem in private custody matters. Michele became a Certified Family Court Mediator in July 2016. Michele practiced under the name "Michele R. Krize" until December 2016, when she married Wayne Sturkie. Almand J. Barron Th Law Offices of Shea & Barron Almand Barron graduated from the University of South Carolina in 1993 with a Bachelor of Arts degree. Almand received her Juris Doctor from the University of South Carolina and was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1998. She has practiced solely in the area of Family Law since her admission to the Bar and also serves as a Guardian ad Litem for children in Family Court matters. Almand is a member of the South Carolina Women Lawyer’s Association, and the Richland and Lexington County Bar Associations. She is also a Fellow in the South Carolina Chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. She is Board Certified in Family Law by the National Board of Trial Advocacy. John Means A’Hern (Jay) The A’Hern Law Firm, LLC Jay attended Dreher High School in Columbia and the Emory University in Atlanta before graduating from the University of South Carolina School of Law in 2005. He has done Guardian ad litem work since 2006, and for approximately the last ten years his main focus has been serving as a GAL in contested family court cases. Leslie Armstrong Sahn Law Firm, LLC Leslie A. Armstrong, Esq. is licensed South Carolina and North Carolina attorney, a Licensed Professional Counselor Intern, (LPC/I), a National Certified Counselor (NCC), and a South Carolina Certified Family Court Mediator. She is a 2007 graduate of Furman University where she earned her undergraduate degree in psychology and a 2011 graduate of the University of South Carolina School of Law where she obtained her Juris Doctor and served on the editorial board of the South Carolina Law Review. After law school, Mrs. Armstrong then went on to pursue a Master of Arts in Counseling with a mental health concentration which she received from Wake Forest University in 2016. She is currently a partner at Sahn Law Firm, LLC and is now in the process of launching her solo practice where she practices exclusively in family law, also including mediation, guardian ad litem work, working with families affected by parental alienation, and developing professional education programs designed for mental health and legal professionals which focus on topics relevant to the interfacing of these professional communities in serving families undergoing high- conflict divorce/separation cases. Ms. Armstrong also works for Changing Families, Inc., a 501 (c) 3 organization dedicated to educating members of the community who are confronting the challenges of building step, and blended families, and mediates family law cases as a member of the Mediation and Meeting Center of Charleston (MMCC). Ms. Armstrong is an active member of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC), and has attended specialized training through this organization in the field of parental alienation. She has also been trained by Dr. Amy Baker as a provider of Restoring Family Connections, a program for reunifying adult children of alienation with their parents. She is a member of the Parental Alienation Study Group (PASG), and recently attended the PASG Nordic conference in Stockholm where she also received training in the Family Bridges (FBAC) reunification program. (Note: I currently practice as the family law partner at Sahn Law Firm, LLC, but I have also launched a solo practice, Armstrong Family Law, LLC in conjunction with finishing out my cases with Sahn Law Firm. Armstrong Family Law will be my new practice going forward – you can include one or both of these in my bio as you feel is appropriate. Helen Elliot Wheeler The Center for Families, LLC Helen Wheeler is a graduate (With Distinction) from The Citadel with a Master’s Degree in Clinical Counseling. She has been a Licensed Professional Counselor (LPC) since 2001 and is a Licensed Professional Counselor Supervisor preparing and supervising future counselors. In addition, she is an Adjunct Professor in the Graduate Counseling Program at Webster University. Ms. Wheeler’s private counseling practice specializes in family counseling with emphasis on high conflict co- parenting, marriage counseling, children counseling and reunification/clarification issues. The Center for Families is a teaching facility cooperating with many graduate schools. She is also a 20- year veteran Certified Public School Teacher. Ms Wheeler is a Certified Family Court Mediator and was a Guardian ad Litem for DSS. She has received specialized training in working with high conflict divorcing couples and is a Nationally Certified Parent Coordinator. She has been qualified as an expert in the Ninth and First Judicial Districts in working with high conflict divorcing couples, the impact of high conflict divorce on children, as well as child development, family counseling, and parent coordination, among others. She is a member of the Association of Mental Health Counselors of America (AMCHA) who has named her a Diplomate in Marriage and Family Counseling and the local South Carolina Association of Licensed Professional Counselors (SCALPC) She is also a member of Association of Family Conciliation Courts (AFCC), America Association of Christian Counselors, (AACC) and the Parental Alienation Study Group (PASG). She has presented CLE activities for the SC Bar (“Dealing with High Conflict Clients”) and the statewide GAL CLE (“Alternative Dispute Resolution: Parent Coordination” and “Visitation Refusal: Is It Parental Alienation?”) She has presented on several occasions for the Family Court Bar of Charleston and Dorchester Counties (“Dealing with Difficult Clients”, “What do Parents Need to Know About Mediation?” “Understanding Visitation Refusal in Terms of Parental Alienation” [for Charleston area GALs]).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Shared Parenting Laws: Mistakes of Pooling? Margaret F
    Notre Dame Law School NDLScholarship Journal Articles Publications 2014 Shared Parenting Laws: Mistakes of Pooling? Margaret F. Brinig Notre Dame Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship Part of the Family Law Commons Recommended Citation Margaret F. Brinig, Shared Parenting Laws: Mistakes of Pooling?, Notre Dame Legal Studies Paper No. 1426 (August 14, 2014). Available at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/1116 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Publications at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Shared Parenting Laws: Mistakes of Pooling? Margaret F. Brinig, Notre Dame Law School In their recent paper “Anti-Herding Regulation,” forthcoming in the Harvard Business Review,1 Ian Ayres and Joshua Mitts argue that many well-intentioned public policy regulations potentially harm rather than help situations. That is, because the rules seek to pool—or herd—groups of people, treating them as equal, they miss or mask important differences among the regulated, thus magnifying systematic risk. Anti- herding regulation, on the other hand, can produce socially beneficial information, in their words steering “both private and public actors toward better evidence-based outcomes.” Left to their own, or with various carrot-and-stick incentives, some groups, anyway, would instead fare better if allowed to separate or diverge. Ayres and Mitts buttress their case with examples from engineering (bridges collapsing because soldiers crossed them in cadences matched to the structures’ oscillations), finance (mandating only low percentages down for real estate purchasers), biodiversity and ecosystem stability, and genetic variation itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Men at Risk the Physical, Mental and Social Health of Men in Massachusetts
    2011 MASSACHUSETTS FAMILY IMPACT SEMINAR MASSMEN Men at risk The Physical, Mental and Social Health of Men in Massachusetts CU Men at Risk 11.indd 1 3/24/11 5:58 PM Men at risk The Physical, Mental and Social Health of Men in Massachusetts 2011 MASSACHUSETTS FAMILY IMPACT SEMINAR BRIEFING REPORT CONTRIBUTORS: • James R. Mahalik, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Counseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology, Boston College • Michael E. Addis, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Psychology, Clark University • Emily M. Douglas, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, School of Social Work, Bridgewater State University • Denise A. Hines, Ph.D., Director, Family Impact Seminars, Clark University • Christopher S. Reigeluth, Doctoral Student, Department of Psychology, Clark University The Massachusetts Family Impact Seminars are a project of: The Mosakowski Institute for Public Enterprise Clark University 950 Main St. Worcester, MA 01610 http://www.clarku.edu/research/mosakowskiinstitute/ 508-421-3872 Director: James R. Gomes CU Men at Risk 11.indd 1 3/24/11 5:58 PM 2011 MASSACHUSETTS FAMILY IMPACT SEMINAR TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose and Presenters . 3 Executive Summary . 4 A Checklist for Assessing the Impact of Policies on Families . 7 Acknowledgements . 10 The Status of Men’s Physical Health: A Cause for Concern for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts . 11 By James R. Mahalik, Ph.D., with the assistance of Denise A. Hines, Ph.D. Men’s Mental Health in Massachusetts: Stigma, Substance Abuse, Suicide and Unemployment . 18 By Michael E. Addis, Ph.D., with the assistance of Christopher S. Reigeluth Men’s Social Health within Families and Intimate Relationships . 26 By Emily M.
    [Show full text]
  • Mental Health Professionals' Practice of Reintegration Therapy for Parent-Child Contact Disputes Post-Separation
    Mental health professionals’ practice of reintegration therapy for parent-child contact disputes post-separation: A phenomenological study by Shely Polak A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work University of Toronto © Copyright by Shely Polak (2017) Mental health professionals’ practice of reintegration therapy for parent-child contact disputes post-separation: A phenomenological study Shely Polak Doctor of Philosophy Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work University of Toronto 2017 Abstract Over the last decade, family courts have seen an increase in the number of parent-child contact problems and allegations of alienation. Children resisting or refusing contact with a parent post-separation pose considerable challenges to the mental health professionals tasked to work with them. Reintegration therapy (RT) has recently evolved to help ameliorate parent-child contact issues and alienation. However, little is known about what consensus exists on RT, or how it is defined and delivered by mental health practitioners. Limited evidence exists on treatment models, or evaluations of RT, and no standards or practice guidelines are available for the treatment of parent-child contact issues. The purpose of this study was to: 1) Explore how RT is defined and practiced among experienced mental health professionals in Canada and the United States; 2) identify underlying theory informing practitioners’ understanding of the issues and on clinical practice in RT; and 3) use findings for practice recommendations to advance knowledge for clinical practice with this population. To this end a hermeneutic, phenomenological design was chosen to elicit thick descriptions for a phenomenological analysis and theme development.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae Petr Mrázek
    Curriculum Vitae Petr Mrázek Attorney at Law and owner/partner at Associated Law Firm Vítek & Mrázek in Prague and member of the Czech Bar Association. Country expert for the Czech Republic of The International Distribution Institute (IDI) for commercial agency and distribution. Address: Petr Mrázek Associated Law Office Vítek & Mrázek Pod Klaudiánkou 271/4a 147 00 Prague 4 Czech Republic Education Graduated from the Law School of Charles University in Prague, 1986. Postgraduate degree – doctorate (JUDr.), 1987 UK study programme organised by the Queen Mary and Westfield College in London, 1991 (LLM lectures and seminars focused on international trade law and company law and a short-term attachment at international law firm Freshfields). Special course on Business Mediation (60 hours – Project of Czech and Brussels Bar Association, 2012). Foreign languages: Czech, Slovak and English Professional experience Attorney at law and owner/partner at Associated Law Firm Vítek & Mrázek in Prague, 1994. Arbitrator of the Arbitration Court attached to the Czech Chamber of Commerce and the Agricultural Chamber of the Czech Republic in Prague. Arbitrator of the Arbitration Court at the Czech and Moravian Commodity Stock Exchange of Kladno. Registered mediator on the list of mediators of Ministry of Justice. Past experience - In-house lawyer - the Deputy Head of Legal Department in the major Czech Export Import company Practise areas Commercial law including international trade law and international transportation, with focus on agency and distribution
    [Show full text]
  • Teaching Franchise Law in Law Schools: a Role for Experienced Franchise Lawyers David C
    Teaching Franchise Law in Law Schools: A Role for Experienced Franchise Lawyers David C. Gurnick and Alexander M. Meiklejohn The authors of this article write to encourage experienced franchise law- yers to propose franchise law courses to law schools and, if the proposals are successful, to teach the courses as adjunct professors. Both authors have taught franchise law, and both are happy to consult with any lawyer considering becoming an adjunct professor who has questions concern- Mr. Gurnick Mr. Meiklejohn ing the proposal process or the design or teaching of the course. Part I of this article describes the role that adjunct professors have per- formed in law schools for decades and reasons for a school administration to have an adjunct teach franchise law. Part II highlights reasons that a law- yer can cite to persuade a law school that does not offer a course on franchise law to do so. Part III describes recent developments in legal education that affect law schools’ interest in adding new courses and hiring new adjuncts— developments that may pose challenges but also offer opportunities for aspir- ing adjunct professors of franchise law. Part IV explains how the Forum’s casebook, published in 2013, can be used in proposing, designing, and teach- ing a franchise-law course. I. Adjunct Professors and Franchise Law For decades, law schools have employed adjunct professors to teach courses after the first year. An adjunct may be well versed in a substantive legal area that is outside the areas of expertise of the school’s full-time faculty members.
    [Show full text]
  • Requirements for Legal Aid Providers in EU Countries
    NO. COUNTRY LEGAL AID PROVIDERS 1. Lithuania Primary legal aid is provided by staff (jurists) of the municipality administration or lawyers (lawyers’ assistances) or public agencies contracted by municipalities. Secondary legal aid is provided based on the decision of SGLAS or the decision of pre-trial investigation officer prosecutor or court. It is provided: • By lawyers continuously providing legal aid; • By lawyers providing legal aid in case of necessity (in particular case to lawyer’s assistant who is under his/her supervision). • By lawyers providing legal aid on ad hoc basis. For the provision of secondary legal aid SGLAS concludes services’ agreements with the lawyers providing secondary legal aid continuously, in case of necessity or on ad hoc basis. The requirements to become a lawyer are set in the Law on the Bar (Art. 7). A natural person can be recognized as a lawyer, if he/she fulfils the following criteria: • is citizen of the Republic of Lithuania or the EU Member State; • holds a university degree in law: Bachelor of Laws and Master of Laws degrees or the professional qualification degree (one-stage university degree); • has at least five years of work experience in the field of law, or not less than two years’ experience working as an assistant of the lawyer. The work experience in the field of law is considered according the Regulation of the Lithuanian Government, approving list of legal positions. The work experience in the field of law is counted from the date when a person has obtained a Bachelor or Master of Laws,
    [Show full text]
  • BACK to the BEST INTERESTS of the CHILD 2Nd Edition
    POLICY MONOGRAPH BACK TO THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD 2nd Edition TOWARDS A REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION OF JOINT RESIDENCE Yuri Joakimidis BACK TO THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD TOWARDS A REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION OF JOINT RESIDENCE Although the dispute is symbolized by a 'versus' which signifies two adverse parties at opposite poles of a line, there is in fact a third party whose interests and rights make of the line a triangle. That person, the child who is not an official party to the lawsuit but whose well- being is in the eye of the controversy, has a right to shared parenting when both are equally suited to provide it. Inherent in the express public policy is a recognition of the child's right to equal access and opportunity with both parents, the right to be guided and nurtured by both parents, the right to have major decisions made by the application of both parents' wisdom, judgement and experience. The child does not forfeit these rights when the parents divorce." Presiding Judge Dorothy T. Beasley, Georgia Court of Appeals, "In the Interest of A.R.B., a Child," July 2, 1993 A PAPER COMPILED BY THE JOINT PARENTING ASSOCIATION Table of Contents Executive Summary................................................................................................... 5 Overview.................................................................................................................... 7 The Solomon Parable ................................................................................................ 8 The Hearing............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Meeting Agenda.Indd
    SEABOTA 2021 Annual Conference Henderson Beach Resort & Spa, Destin, Florida Meeting Agenda Friday, September 17 8:30 am - 8:35 am Conference Overview and Welcome S. Lester, Tate, III, President September 17 -18, 2021 8:35 am - 8:50 am Introductions of Attendees S. Lester Tate, III, President Thank you to our sponsor: 8:50 am - 9:20 am Trial By Jury Justice John Ellington Georgia Supreme Court 9:20 am - 9:50 am Some Thoughts on the Future . of Jury Trials Justice John Cannon Few South Carolina Supreme Court 9:50 am - 10:05 am Panel Q&A with Justice John Ellington and Justice John Cannon Few Moderated by S. Lester, Tate III 10:05 am - 10:15 am Coff ee Break The Foundation of ABOTA has applied for 10:15 am - 10:45 am Who Killed the Swains?: Dennis Perry’s CLE in all SEABOTA states: 20-year fi ght for Justice Joshua Sharpe CLE Approvals The Atlanta Journal-Constitution • Alabama 4.1 general credit hours • Arkansas 4 general credit hours 10:45 am - 10:55 am National Report • Georgia 4 general credit hours Grace Weatherly, National President • Kentucky 4 general credit hours • Louisiana 4 general credit hours 10:55 am - 11:05 am Foundation Report • Mississippi 4.1 general credit hours Douglas M. DeGrave, Foundation President • North Carolina 4 general credit hours • South Carolina 4.08 general credit hours 11:05 am - 12:15 pm Break • Tennessee 5.33 general credit hours • Virginia 2.5 general credit hours 12:15 pm - 1:15 pm Bourbon Justice: How Whiskey Shaped American Law with Brian F.
    [Show full text]
  • Scandic Helsinki Airport
    Scandic Helsinki Airport - 150 rooms (8 accessible) - 9 meeting rooms for up to 36 people - Restaurant and bar - Sauna Always at Scandic - Large breakfast buffet - Free Wi-Fi - Gym - 24 hour shop - High accessibility, so that everyone feels welcome - Over 5000 digital newspapers and magazines - Online check out For more info scandichotels.com/helsinkiairport WELCOME TO SCANDIC HELSINKI AIRPORT Inspiroiva hotelli kaikilla mukavuuksilla, Helsinki-Vantaan lento- An inspiring hotel that caters to your every need at the Helsinki asemalla aivan terminaali 2:n vieressä, jonne saavut katettua Airport . The hotel is located next to Terminal 2 and can be easily jalkakäytävää pitkin. Hotelli avattiin maaliskuussa 2018 ja se on reached through a covered walkway. The hotel will open in March täydellinen valinta kun haluat nukkua paremmin ja hyödyntää 2018 and is the perfect place to stay and meet. kätevän tapaamispaikan. The stylish and modern rooms and extensive room selection cater Tyylikkäät ja modernit huoneet sekä kattava huonevalikoima for all needs. In the airy and spacious atrium lobby you can enjoy tarjoavat vaihto ehtoja jokaiseen tarpeeseen. Avarassa ja valoisassa delicacies from the restaurant, and the bar serves refreshing drinks atrium-aulassa nautit ravintolan herkkuja ja baarin puolella on and snacks around the clock. tarjolla virkistäviä juomia sekä purtavaa kellon ympäri. There are 9 flexible and modern meeting rooms, as well as a Perinteisten kokoustilojen sijaan hotellissa on 9 ainutlaatuista spacious atrium lobby for comfortable breaks. The inspiring ja inspiroivaa tilaa luoville kokouksille ja tapaamisille sekä avara premises are perfect for business meetings, interviews or motivating atrium-aula yhteisiin hetkiin. Tilat sopivat täydellisesti liike- conferences.
    [Show full text]
  • 28Th Annual Criminal Practice in South Carolina Friday, February 22, 2019
    28th Annual Criminal Practice in South Carolina Friday, February 22, 2019 presented by The South Carolina Bar Continuing Legal Education Division http://www.scbar.org/CLE SC Supreme Court Commission on CLE Course No. 190837 Table of Contents Agenda ................................................................................................................................................. 3 Faculty Bios ......................................................................................................................................... 5 State Criminal Practice: Significant Developments in 2018 ..........................................................15 Federal Criminal Practice : Significant Developments in 2018 .....................................................32 Legislative Review and Preview: Significant 2018 Legislation, Pre-Filed Bills for 2019, and Rule Changes ...............................................................................................................................................37 Amie Clifford, Tommy Pope Expungements Primer .......................................................................................................................61 Adam Whitsett Developments and Issues in Juveniles Justice .................................................................................84 L. Eden Hendrick Keeping Up with Trends and Issues in Criminal Defense ............................................................104 Christopher Adams PCR-Proofing Your Case ................................................................................................................112
    [Show full text]
  • Arguments for an Equal Parental Responsibility Presumption in Contested Child Custody
    The American Journal of Family Therapy, 40:33–55, 2012 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 0192-6187 print / 1521-0383 online DOI: 10.1080/01926187.2011.575344 Arguments for an Equal Parental Responsibility Presumption in Contested Child Custody EDWARD KRUK School of Social Work, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada Sixteen arguments in support of an equal parental responsibility presumption in contested child custody are presented from a child- focused perspective, and clinical and empirical evidence in support of each argument is contrasted to the conflicting evidence. These arguments are made in support of the model equal parental re- sponsibility presumption outlined in Volume 39, Number 5, of The American Journal of Family Therapy. We state our case for the equal parental responsibility presumption out- lined in Volume 39, Number 5, of The American Journal of Family Therapy, in “A Model Equal Parental Responsibility Presumption in Contested Child Custody.” Given the drawbacks of the “best interests of the child” (BIOC) standard and the harms attendant to the sole custody model detailed in the earlier article, we consider that each of the sixteen arguments below is sufficient to adopt equal parental responsibility (EPR) as a viable alternative; combined, they are a powerful testament to the urgent need for law reform in the direction of equal parenting. The research studies cited in support of each argument have, for the most part, utilized large and representative samples, and overcome most of the methodological limitations of earlier research. SIXTEEN ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF EQUAL PARENTAL Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:03 10 January 2012 RESPONSIBILITY 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Science and Parenting Plans for Young Children: a Consensus Report
    Psychology, Public Policy, and Law © 2014 American Psychological Association 2014, Vol. 20, No. 1, 46–67 1076-8971/14/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/law0000005 Social Science and Parenting Plans for Young Children: A Consensus Report Richard A. Warshak University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, with the endorsement of the researchers and practitioners listed in the Appendix Two central issues addressed in this article are the extent to which young children’s time should be spent predominantly in the care of the same parent or divided more evenly between both parents, and whether children under the age of 4 should sleep in the same home every night or spend overnights in both parents’ homes. A broad consensus of accomplished researchers and practitioners agree that, in normal circumstances, the evidence supports shared residential arrangements for children under 4 years of age whose parents live apart from each other. Because of the well-documented vulnerability of father–child relationships among never-married and divorced parents, the studies that identify overnights as a protective factor associated with increased father commitment to child rearing and reduced incidence of father drop-out, and the absence of studies that demonstrate any net risk of overnights, policymakers and decision makers should recognize that depriving young children of overnights with their fathers could compromise the quality of developing father-child relationships. Sufficient evidence does not exist to support postponing the introduction of regular and frequent involvement, including overnights, of both parents with their babies and toddlers. The theoretical and practical considerations favoring overnights for most young children are more compelling than concerns that overnights might jeopardize children’s development.
    [Show full text]