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. 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 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 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

6. 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 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

7. HIGH-CONFLICT ● Parents equally vocal about their differences and one another’s 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 partner’s parenting abilities 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

8. HIGH CONFLICT ● Unresolved feelings associated with the failed relationship which are directed into fighting over the children ABUSE ● Abusive partner’s 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 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

9. 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 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

10. HIGH CONFLICT ● Cycles of reaction and counter reaction, which further erode the possibility of trust ABUSE ● Repeated instances of manipulation and control, which further erode the abused partner’s capacity to trust the abuser 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

11. 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 partner’s dangerous, neglectful, or inappropriate behavior, yet ● Often desire to maintain contact to him or her. ● Sometimes distrustful of the abused parent’s capacity to meet their physical, social, and emotional needs. 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

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 • Victim’s 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 don’t 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

30. Brief Overview Of Five (5) Step Sequential Evaluation

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; • 11. High Volatility; • Relocation issues; and/or • 13. Visitation Refusal.

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 child’s life line, if necessary.

35. Disparaging Words Middle Man

36. SPECIALIZED PROTOCOLS AND PROCEDURESJaffe, 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 GAP:THE GUARDIAN’S 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 • Batter’s Intervention Program • DV Victim services • Programs for children • Alcohol/Addiction Counseling • Court monitoring/review hearings • Sole Custody • Denial of overnight visits • Restrain abusive parent’s communication with or proximity to the other parent Restrain abusive parent’s 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 parent’s 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 • Therapeutic Visitation • Parallel Parenting

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, Practitioner’s and parties.

45. CASE MANAGEMENT:A DIFFERENTIAL RESPONSE • Create an information network between the court, service providers, practitioner’s 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.L’s assessment in an attempt to facilitate an agreement/stipulation/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: