Dr Robert Andry Dr Patricia Brown Dr Gwenda Schreiber

1. Forensic Assessment Within a Children's Court Clinic Model of Practice Dr Robert Andry Dr Patricia Brown Dr Gwenda Schreiber Children’s Court Clinic, Victoria, Australia Children’s Court Clinic, New South Wales, Australia

2. Introduction & Overview Dr Robert Andry

3. The Victorian Children’s Court • Children’s Court set up Chicago in 1902 by Dr and Mrs Healy. • The Colony of South Australia Children’s Court established in 1902. • New South Wales in 1905. • Victoria in 1906. • The Victorian Government in the latter part of the 1940s set up a Children's Court Clinic within the Children's Court in Melbourne.

4. The Victorian Children’s Court • Clinic had a psychiatrist, a psychologist, a nursing sister, a social worker and a secretary. • Informally supported by university. • Days started with tests and interviewing parents. • Followed by in-depth interviews. • Report writing and colleague consultations, when necessary. • Little time for therapeutic work in the afternoons. • Bi- weekly trips to the Children’s Welfare Depot where the institutionalised offenders lived.

5. The Victorian Children’s Court • Gradually extended therapeutic activities (often with volunteers from the Brotherhood of St Laurence, the Church, keen students, etc). • I consider that it was my experience at the Children's Court Clinic which laid the foundations for my own book on DELINQUENCY AND PARENTAL PATHOLOGY, and; • My subsequent international career as an academic, prison administrator and UN Consultant. Dr Brown will now comprehensively pick up the story over the last 50 years.

6. The Changing Model of theVictorian Children’s Court Clinic Dr Patricia Brown Director of Victorian Children’s Court Clinic

7. The Victorian Children’s Court Clinic- 1960’s • 1965, a Psychiatric Clinic with a psychiatrist superintendent. • Psychologist – worked largely as a mental technician, giving a battery of tests - intellectual and educational - followed by a report to the psychiatrist. • Nurse - weighed the child, measured height and did a basic health check. • Social worker – gained information about housing, finances and a basic overview of the family's situation. • Psychiatrist - interviewed child and parents and wrote an amalgamated report for the Court. • Follow-up treatment - undertaken by psychiatrists and psychologists. Boundaries were regimented.

8. The Victorian Children’s Court Clinic- 1970’s • 1970’s remained a Psychiatric Clinic. • Psychiatrist superintendent commissioned each discipline - psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers and psychiatric nurses -to do assessments. • Each report was taken to a case meeting presided over by a psychiatrist. • An opinion was derived by consensus and then underwritten by the psychiatrist.

9. The Victorian Children’s Court Clinic- 1980’s • 1980's - the mandatory group discussion of each case abandoned. • The treatment function grew; all the disciplines offered treatment. • Early 1980's to 1991 – viewpoints put to Victorian Government reviewers questioned the psychiatric/medical model/team approach. • The Carney Committee suggested that the presenting problems did not warrant a psychiatric/team model of service. • Research done for Sir John Starke's Sentencing Committee indicated that Courts wanted more reports from psychiatrists and psychologists. • Psychologists’ reports were rated most highly in the Children’s Court.

10. The Victorian Children’s Court Clinic- Late 1980’s • A Victorian Supreme Court Judge refused to consider evidence when an opinion had been derived from a team meeting in an adult Court matter. • At issue is whose opinion is actually heard when it is collectively derived. • Professor Martin Kaplan, U.S. expert on organisational psychology and group interaction, was asked for his view on team meeting approaches to deriving opinions for the Court. • His advice was that they would be contraindicated, the opinions likely being weighted by those with the most status and power.

11. The Victorian Children’s Court Clinic- 1992: A considerable model change For the first time a psychologist was appointed as Director. • The psychiatric/medical model was abandoned and an independent practitioner model introduced. • Clinic was pared back to being largely an assessment facility for both criminal matters and protection matters. • Small core of clinical forensic psychologists became full-time staff. • Numbers of sessional experts, in the main psychologists, but also psychiatrists, were employed. • Matching of presenting problems in each case to the expertise of the clinician engaged.

12. The Victorian Children’s Court Clinic- The Justice Department of Victoria • Director oversees all reports before submission to Court. • The Court Clinic was placed under the Justice Department to do assessments only by Order of the Children's Court or County Appeals Court. • The Court Clinic is independent of any other agency, thus it is seen as an honest broker.

13. The Victorian Children’s Court Clinic- Today • There are now 40 sessional clinicians. • Assessments are comprehensive and all involve family. Detailed reports are submitted. Cross examination of the writer may ensue. • A capacity for short-term treatment has been retained. • It has become prestigious to work at the Court Clinic. As a result, the qualifications required of the clinicians engaged have risen. For example • Most psychologists have a relevant Ph.D., a clinical masters and 20 years of experience; • Those with clinical/forensic course work doctorates are coming on board. • The Clinic is a teaching facility and gives teaching input to universities.

14. The Victorian Children’s Court Clinic- Future • In recent years drug clinicians with doctoral training and experience in the drug field have been engaged full-time. • In 1997 the Australian Law Reform Commission and Equal Opportunity Commission recommended that the Children’s Court Clinic of Victoria be the prototype for other such clinics to be established in the different Australian States. • A number of States have expressed interest. • The New South Wales Justice Department studied the Victorian model in 2000 and, in 2001, began the New South Wales Children's Court Clinic. Its Director, Dr Gwenda Schreiber, now continues.

15. A New Children’s Court Clinic Dr Gwenda Schreiber Director of the New South Wales Children’s Court Clinic

16. New South Wales Children’s Court Clinic- Establishment • NSW Children’s Court Clinic established July 2001. • Part of NSW Attorney General’s Department. • Independent from all parties to the Court proceedings. • Provides reports to the Children’s Court in care and protection matters. • Expert assessment of the issues to be addressed that are listed in the Assessment Order. • Completed reports become the property of the Children’s Court.

17. New South Wales Children’s Court Clinic- Structure • Some variation in structure from the Victorian model, due to: • Greater geographical size of the state. • Nature of the Act. • Demands of stakeholders. • Clinicians appointed to the Clinic become part of the Authorised Clinician’s Scheme. • Meet identifiable criteria in terms of qualifications and experience. • Authorised Clinicians are predominantly psychologists.

18. New South Wales Children’s Court Clinic- Advisory Bodies • Children’s Court Clinic Professional Advisory Group (P.A.G) consists of senior clinicians, and oversees the appointment of Authorised Clinicians and quality of reports. • Children’s Court Clinic Advisory Committee (C.C.C.A.C) consists of representatives of the Children’s Court, the Department of Community Services, Legal Aid, the Health Department, the Multicultural and Aboriginal communities, and non-government welfare agencies, and oversees policy. Both are chaired by the Director of the Children’s Court Clinic.

19. New South Wales Children’s Court Clinic- Assessment Orders The Assessment Order clearly states: • The issues to be addressed, and, • Reasons for requesting assessment. The Children’s Court must take consider factors such as whether: • The information required can be obtained elsewhere. • The proposed assessment is necessary. • Whether it will cause unnecessary distress to the child/children.

20. New South Wales Children’s Court Clinic- Referral Referral is based on: • Match between the issues to be addressed and expertise of the clinician. • Geographical location of the client. Assessments are multimodal in approach and include: • Reading of background material • Interviews • Observations • Administration of assessment tools and tests The report is objective and includes precise recommendations for the Children’s Court.

21. New South Wales Children’s Court Clinic- Children’s Participation The Act emphasises that children and young people are to participate in decision-making. This means that: • Authorised Clinicians must be adept at interviewing children and obtaining their views, whilst, • Also having a sound understanding of how much weight should be accorded them. The Director of the Clinic vets all the reports prior to submission. It is mandatory to explain to those being interviewed that any part of the content of the interview may be included in the assessment report.

22. New South Wales Children’s Court Clinic- Parenting Capacity • Majority of reports centre on parental capacity. • The crux of the issue is how to balance the needs, safety, welfare and well being of the child against the rights of the family, and find the least intrusive option in the life of the child, that is consistent with protecting the child from harm. • Parenting competence involves assessment of: • The child’s development and safety needs. • Specific concerns of the child (such as disability). • Parent’s functioning and care giving skills. That is, the complex fit between the child’s needs and the ability of the parent to meet these.

23. New South Wales Children’s Court Clinic- Research & Training • American Psychological Association Committee on Professional Practice and Studies (1998) commented that Children’s Courts are increasing the demand for expert parenting capacity assessments, however, • Little specific research or training in assessing parenting capacity. • “Although clinical evaluations are a common in a child protection context, little empirical information exists about the characteristics of these evaluations in current practice.” Karen Budd (2001). • “…we found no studies directly examining the characteristics or usefulness of mental health evaluations of parents in child abuse or neglect cases”. Budd, Poindexter, Feliz, Naik-Polan (2001).

24. New South Wales Children’s Court Clinic- Summary Future research is needed to investigate the parameters of effective parenting to: Improve training and clinical guidance and aid in the assessment of parenting capacity, and Assist those of us responsible for Children’s Court Clinics to continue to provide the best possible service to children, families and Courts now and into the future.

25. References • American Psychological Association Committee on Professional Practice and Standards. (1998). Guidelines for Psychological Evaluations in Child Protection Matters. Washington DC, American Psychological Association. • Budd, K.S. (2001). Assessing Parenting Competence in Child Protection Cases: A Clinical Practice Model. Clinical Child & Family Psychology Review, 4, 1-17 • Budd, K.S., Poindexter, L.M., Felix, E.D., Naik-Polan, A.T., (2001). Clinical Assessment of Parents in Child Protection Cases: An Empirical Analysis. Law and Human Behaviour, 25, 93-108

26. Contact Details Victorian Children’s Court Clinic Web www.childrenscourt.vic.gov.au Email pat.brown@childrenscourt.vic.gov.au New South Wales Children’s Court Clinic Web www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/ccc Email childrens_court_clinic@agd.nsw.gov.au