More tips to help protect children in family court

Approximately 70% of parents appearing in family court are self-represented. This significantly makes advocating for a child more difficult. Padideh Jafari offered some helpful suggestions in her article, "Child advocacy: 5 legal tools to protect children before and during family court proceedings." Daily Journal, July 23.

I offer additional suggestions for the unrepresented parent:

Most county courts have a help center to assist parties in the completion of the required forms. Unfortunately, no legal advice is given here. Granted the lines for assistance are long but when there isn't money available for representation it is frequently better than contacting skeptical police with a claim of child abuse when they know that there is a family law case in the background.

Requesting an emergency screening in family court often prompts an investigation by a Family Court Services (FCS) professional -- typically a licensed mental health practitioner with expertise in child abuse and domestic violence -- into the abuse allegations and custody concerns. There is a very high relationship between domestic violence and child abuse and police officers are less likely to be aware of this connection. FCS employees are mandatory reporters who must report their findings to police and Child Protection Services when child abuse is suspected. Because they are viewed as more objective and potentially subject to cross examination, their findings are more likely to be taken seriously by authorities. A possible delay in obtaining a hearing is outweighed by the possibility of a better investigation. FCS will recommend temporary custody orders to the family court judge, which will be as fast as going through the child protection system. 

Entering the dependency system -- which addresses child abuse and neglect -- is not always immediate, but removal from a parent can happen quickly. If appropriate, Family Court Services (FCS) may recommend that the child be appointed an attorney, and in some counties, FCS advises both on the need for representation and the specific attorney to be appointed. In other jurisdictions the judge may decide both. The FCS appointment model, which the judge is free to accept or reject, minimizes the appearance of attorney favoritism -- which is helpful since parents frequently are unhappy with attorneys appointed to represent children and the removal process is a difficult one.

While parents are legally permitted to hire experts in custody cases, the reality is that few can afford to do so. Besides, FCS is certainly capable of making evaluations in most cases. 

A family law attorney system, like public defenders based on income, would help people of modest means get basic legal advice and guidance. This is especially true with child custody issues. This would improve outcomes for safer child custody orders and confidence in family courts. Canada, Australia and New Zealand are examples of this practice. While far from perfect, it is an excellent first step.