Helping Babies from the Bench Judg e Do ug la s F . Jo hnso n T - PDF document

Na tio na l Co unc il o f Juve nile a nd F a mily Co urt Judg e s Helping Babies from the Bench Judg e Do ug la s F . Jo hnso n T he Se pa ra te Juve nile Co urt o f Do ug la s Co unty, NE 2 nd NYCI K e a rne y, NE June 2018 Why Birth To Five? � 1 in 5 fo ste r c a re pla c e me nts a re infa nts. � Onc e in c a re , the y re ma in twic e a s lo ng a s o lde r c hildre n. � Ba b ie s unde r a g e 1 ma ke up 25% o f the c hildre n in the c hild we lfa re syste m. � 76% o f c hild a b use fa ta litie s o c c ur to c hildre n unde r a g e 4. � Multiple fo ste r pla c e me nts. � De ve lo pme nta l De la ys &/ o r Da ma g e . � WHY NOT he lp the yo ung e st o f the yo ung ?

Solution Seeking Courts The judge models civility, respect, dignity and requires others to do the same. Emergency Room Response: Act with a sense of urgency for the child & parent --as if this family is your own! Front load services : Pra g ma tic , time ly, e ffe c tive re spo nse to a b use & ne g le c t. Affirmation with accountability mo tiva te s pa re nta l impro ve me nt/ re so lutio n o f pe rma ne nc y. Alternative Dispute Resolution : Pre -He a ring Co nfe re nc e , F a mily Gro up Co nfe re nc e , Me dia tio n. Full parental participation from day one. “ Parents and children help each other to grow. In raising their children, parents are also raising themselves. Child rearing gives parents the chance to redo their own childhood and to improve on it.” Alic ia F . L ie b e rma n, E mo tio na l L ife o f the T o ddle r.

Traumatic Relationships CAN Be Repaired! � Yo ung c hildre n me nta l he a lth a sse ssme nts a nd tre a tme nt: � Child Pa re nt Psyc ho the ra py � Circ le o f Se c urity � Pa re nt Child I nte ra c tive T he ra py Child Abuse Prevention & Treatment Act (CAPTA) � Se c tio n 106(b )(2)(B)(xxi) re q uire s tha t Sta te s ha ve pro visio ns a nd pro c e dure s fo r the re fe rra l o f c hildre n unde r the a g e o f thre e who a re invo lve d in sub sta ntia te d c a se s o f c hild a b use o r ne g le c t to e a rly inte rve ntio n se rvic e s funds b y Pa rt C o f the I ndividua l with Disa b ilitie s Ac t (I DE A).

IDEA 2004 � Pa rt C, Se c tio n 637(a )(6)(A & B)(Sta te Applic a tio n a nd Assura nc e s) re q uire s sta te s pa rtic ipa ting in Pa rt C to re fe r fo r e a rly inte rve ntio n se rvic e s a n c hild unde r the a g e o f 3 who is invo lve d in a sub sta ntia te d c a se o f c hild a b use o r ne g le c t; o r is ide ntifie d a s a ffe c te d b y ille g a l sub sta nc e a b use , o r withdra wa l sympto ms re sulting fro m pre na ta l drug e xpo sure . Nebraska � E a rly De ve lo pme nt Ne two rk. � I ndividua lize d F a mily Se rvic e Pla n.

Key Elements of a Solution Seeking Court Intense Judicial Oversight. Front-Load Reasonable Efforts Services. Intense Case Management. Goals for Children � All e a rly de ve lo pme nt ne e ds a re me t. � Sto p fo ste r c a re drift: Pe rma ne nc y fro m Da y One . � Ac hie ve a time ly, sa fe , se c ure , pe rma ne nt ho me A: 12 Month PPH or sooner. c o nsiste nt with ASF � Best interests and safety: nurturing caregiver to meet this child’s needs.

Goals for Parents 90% abuse/neglect cases: Substance abuse and mental health. Ac tive pa rtic ipa tio n & re spo nsib ility. Ade q ua te pa re nting skills, de mo nstra te the a b ility to pro vide a sa fe , he a lthy fa mily e nviro nme nt fo r the ir c hildre n = re unific a tio n. Due pro c e ss & fa ir he a ring s. Key Elements � F o c us o n ho listic c hild/ pa re nt we ll-b e ing . � F re q ue nt & me a ning ful fa mily time with sa fe ty pla n. � Pa re nts a nd c hildre n re side to g e the r a s so o n a s sa fe ly po ssib le .

I na b ility to Co mply I s DI F F E RE NT tha n “No n-Co mplia nc e ” Go o d I nitia l & Ong o ing Asse ssme nt I s E sse ntia l to Disting uishing the Diffe re nc e

Enhanced Resource Guidelines : Improving Court Practice in Child Abuse & Neglect Cases Enhanced Resource Guidelines THE PROTECTIVE CUSTODY HEARING � T he mo st impo rta nt he a ring is the first he a ring . � Se ts the fo unda tio n fo r a ll sub se q ue nt he a ring . � I f yo u g e t it rig ht a t the first he a ring , yo u wo n’ t ha ve to a ddre ss pro b le ms do wn the ro a d tha t c a use unne c e ssa ry de la ys in pe rma ne nc y.

The Pre-Hearing Conference : F o unda tio n fo r a Go o d Pro te c tive Custo dy He a ring Rationale NCJF CJ’ s E nha nc e d Re so urc e Guide line s: � T he PHC sho uld b e tho ro ug h a nd me a ning ful. � T he PHC sho uld mo ve litig a tio n fo rwa rd q uic kly a nd re duc e its fre q ue nc y. . � T he PHC sho uld se t the to ne fo r a so lutio n- se e king a tmo sphe re !

A good Pre-Hearing Conference does all of this… …a nd is a fo rm o f Alte rna tive Dispute Re so lutio n The PHC Mediator ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS: � Me dia te s Pre -He a ring Co nfe re nc e to le a d to mutua l unde rsta nding & a g re e me nt o n issue s. � Applie s g o o d judg me nt a nd a na lytic a l skills. � Mo de ls re spe c t, c ivility, dig nity. � Is neutral and takes pressure off others by leading the problem solving conversation.

Knowledge � Co urt o rg a niza tio n, pro c e dure , o pe ra tio ns, rule s. � Child ne g le c t & a b use issue s. � T ime ma na g e me nt. Skills � Me dia tio n, fa c ilita tio n, hig h c o nflic t re so lutio n, ne utra lity. � E ffe c tive c o mmunic a tio n. � Professional interaction with the stakeholders in high-pressure situations. � Go o d judg me nt a nd pro b le m so lving skills.

Preparation � Re a d pe titio n, a ffida vit, a nd CPS info rma tio n. � Pre pa re fo rm to b e g ive n to the judg e . PHC Agenda ntro duc tio n--ide a lly b y the Judge : � I Your family is important. Set the Problem Solving Tone. State Goals of the PHC. State Ground Rules.

Agenda � Disc uss pro c e dura l q ue stio ns (ta king c a re o f b usine ss): � Problem solving process. � Off the record. � I ntro duc tio ns a nd re la tio nship to c hild(re n)/ sig n-in she e t. � No admission against interest via statements, agreements, or participation in services—confidential (NRS 43-247.01 2016). Address 5 Issues 1) I de ntify Pa re nts—b irth c e rt./ pa te rnity. 2) I ndia n Child We lfa re Ac t. 3) Pla c e me nt o f Childre n: “Ca n the c hild sa fe ly re turn ho me ? I f no t, why no t? ” “Re la tive pla c e me nt? ” 4) F a mily time . 5) Re a so na b le e ffo rts se rvic e s-c hild & pa re nt. It’s the Law!

Roadblocks! � Se tting the to ne . � “We do n’ t kno w e no ug h . . .” � Ma na g ing stra ine d re la tio nships. � “T his wo n’ t wo rk. T he pa re nts a re upse t!” � De fe nse Atto rne ys who ha ve n’ t me t the ir c lie nt . . . � “But, the re ’ s a T PR file d!!” � Check list compliance vs. meaningful best practice. Always Ask: Ho w a re the c hildre n do ing ? Ho w a re the pa re nts do ing ? Wha t c a n we / yo u do to ma ke it b e tte r? Wha t spe c ia l thing s do yo ur c hildre n ne e d? --Stuffe d a nima l? --PJs? --Spe c ia l b la nke t? --Be dtime sto ry? --F a vo rite so ng ?

Take time to explore relative placements! Roadblocks & “hot-button” issues � Sho rt time fra me . � T e nde nc y fo r na ysa ye rs to unde rmine , re luc ta ntly pa rtic ipa te , o r pre fe r to ha ve a n info rma l disc ussio n witho ut pa re nts. � Ove rwhe lming pa re nts with uninte llig ib le c a se pla n ta sks—so k.i.s.s.!

Roadblocks & “hot-button” issues � Me dia to r re c o rds a g re e me nts a nd c o nfirms a ll a g re e me nts with pa rtic ipa nts. � A c risis is the b e st o ppo rtunity fo r pa re nta l “b uy in” tha t la sts a nd wo rks b e tte r tha n a ny c o urt o rde r. Closing � Ask fo r o the r q ue stio ns & issue s—tie do wn lo o se e nds � Ask pa rtie s to sig n c a se pla n � T ha nk pa rtic ipa nts a nd te ll b a iliff PHC ha s b e e n c o mple te d � No w g o do the Pro te c tive Custo dy He a ring

Protective Custody Hearing � An info rme d judic ia l de c isio n c o nc e rning whe the r o r no t a c hild c a n b e sa fe ly re turne d ho me pe nding a djudic a tio n � Da y o ne pa re nta l pa rtic ipa tio n—a vo id ha llwa y “pro fe ssio na l” c hitc ha ts � E a rly ide ntific a tio n o f pa re nta l stre ng ths, re la tive suppo rt, a nd time ly re a so na b le e ffo rts se rvic e s Protective Custody Hearing Re q uire d Judic ia l F inding s: 1. Re a so na b le e ffo rts to (a ) pre ve nt re mo va l (b ) re unify: spe c ific fa c ts b a se d o n the e vide nc e . 2. Co ntra ry to the we lfa re , sa fe ty, a nd b e st inte re sts: spe c ific fa c ts b a se d o n the e vide nc e .