We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Parenting Coordination and Confidentiality: A (Not‐so) Delicate Balance.
- Authors
Carter, Debra K.; Frenkel, Douglas N.
- Abstract
This article describes the current state and range of information protection in the growing number of states and Canadian provinces that employ parenting coordination in an effort to reduce repeat custody litigation. The predominant approach—in which what is revealed during the process is not confidential—is analyzed in terms of its compatibility with the parenting coordinator's multiple tasks of educating parents, seeking to facilitate agreements, and, if necessary, providing the court with a report, a recommended decision, or an arbitrated result. Using a case scenario with multiple parts, the article then examines such confidentiality schemes in practice by providing an action‐oriented series of questions that illustrate how much of this topic must be resolved through a parenting coordinator's exercise of discretion in the absence of rule clarity. The article then raises a number of policy questions about whether current parenting coordination confidentiality norms strike the optimal or even the correct balance on information protection and concludes by identifying several policy options that might address these questions. Key Points for the Family Court Community: Parenting coordination is practiced in an increasing number of states and Canadian provinces, but the role, functions, and governing authority across jurisdictions lack uniformity.In the great majority of the states that have adopted statutes or rules to govern parenting coordination, the process is a nonconfidential one.While a few states cloak the process in confidentiality in order to encourage (or require) the adoption of a facilitative approach to the role, such schemes differ in coverage and typically include numerous exceptions.Differing models of parenting coordination and lack of consensus regarding underlying theoretical concepts have led to confusion for practitioners and raise important questions for future researchers in establishing the efficacy of the process.
- Subjects
CONFIDENTIAL communications; PARENTING education; DISCRETION; CONSENSUS (Social sciences); CO-parents
- Publication
Family Court Review, 2020, Vol 58, Issue 1, p68
- ISSN
1531-2445
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.1111/fcre.12456