Mediation or Any Other Alternative

¶ … mediation or any other alternative dispute resolution method is appropriate in stances of child abuse and neglect. In recent years, mediation has been used to help resolve issues in cases of child abuse or neglect. This type of mediation is often referred to as child protection or dependency mediation. Mediation is used at virtually every stage of litigation in these cases, including prior to adjudication, review, permanency planning, and termination of parental rights hearings (Lande, J., p. 1). Since the 1990s child mediation programs are operative in Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Ohio, and Texas, California, Connecticut, Florida, and Ohio (see Lande ibid). Evaluations of five child protection mediation programs in California (Thoennes, N. & Pearson, J. (November 1995) and five such programs in Texas (New Mexico Children's Court Mediation Manual: Program Profile and Best Practices (June 2006) produced the following positive result: results: Mediations result in full or partial agreement in at least 70% of cases; participants strongly believe that mediation saves time and money; although mediation is effective at all stages of litigation, it is especially productive earlier in the litigation; participants are generally quite satisfied with mediation, generally preferring it to judicial hearings. In my opinion, child mediation programs are very often more advantageous for all participants than an adversarial procedure in court. Child protection mediation programs have different practices as to whether children should be invited to mediation, if they are mature enough and their participation would be helpful (see Lande, J., p. 3) The New Mexico survey (p. 15) comes to the result that children when appropriate should participate in the mediation. California has specials "Rules of Court" establishing mandatory standards of practice and administration for court-connected dependency mediation services intended to ensure fairness, accountability, and a high quality of service to children and families and to improve the safety, confidentiality, and consistency of dependency mediation programs statewide. According to these rules the child has a right to participate in the dependency mediation process accompanied by his or her attorney. If the child makes an informed choice not to participate, then the child's attorney may participate. If the child is unable to make an informed choice, then the child's attorney may participate (see 2001 California Rules of Court: Rule 5.518). Therefore, in my opinion, children themselves should be involved in the mediation proceeding if they are mature enough and their participation would be of help.

Essay # 3 Question: In my opinion, the problem of an "integrated court system" would be that courts and judges alike are already chronically overloaded with work. A single presiding judge would need expertise in various fields of law. I think these judges in realty are not too easily to found. It would require them to undergo e a special legal education in various areas of law. I would imagine that traditional students are happy if they leave university with one area of expertise. It certainly would extend their study of law making it even more expensive and burdensome than it is today. Universities also would need to offer special programs for their law students to gain expertise in various areas that -- from an academic point-of-view - are sometimes not very much connected to each other. On the other hand, the integrated court system would have the advantage that it responds to a historic problem in the court system, where domestic violence victims and their families traditionally had to appear before multiple judges, often located in different parts of the county, to address their legal issue (see New York State: Problem-Solving Courts, p. 1). A single presiding judge in an "Integrated Family Court" would be cross-trained to handle all matters -- civil and criminal -- relating to a family. By concentrating responsibility with a single judge, the court would speed decision-making, eliminate the potential for conflicting court orders in the same case, gain greater access to information from a wide spectrum of stakeholders (e.g., civil and criminal attorneys, law enforcement and probation), improve efficiency by handling both civil and criminal matters in a single proceeding and render additional services for victims, such as crises counseling, housing, and job training (see Integrated Domestic Violence Courts (2011, p. 1). In my opinion, the disadvantages of the system are outweighed by its advantages because in addition these courts facilitate access to enhanced services for litigants and help to ensure offender accountability (see New York State: Problem-Solving Courts, p. 1).

Question # 5: The juvenile delinquency process varies from state to state. For example, in Minnesota juvenile delinquency matters include any felony, gross misdemeanor, misdemeanor, and petty misdemeanor offenses allegedly committed by a person less than eighteen (18) years old. Its details vary by State. It starts with a petition or citation stating of the alleged charge. Juvenile and Parents receive a summons. Felony charges require fingerprinting. At the time of the first court appearance, the parent/guardian may apply for the services of a court-appointed attorney. If the charge is proven in court, the court may make a finding of delinquency and the child may be adjudicated as "delinquent" / (Basics on Juvenile Delinquency, p. 1). Generally, there is limited access to juvenile delinquency cases o protect the child. (Basics on Juvenile Delinquency, p. 2). There are many participants and procedures in delinquency matters: The delinquent juvenile, his family/guardian, the delinquent's public or private attorney, the judge, in some cases a jury, the state prosecutor's and the community's interests in restorative judgment in punishment and prevention social workers giving help to the victim who needs to be restituted, schools, schoolmates. The juvenile delinquency system has been the target of severe criticism in reaction to increased violent and serious criminality (See Balanced and Restorative Justice for Juveniles, p. 7). Nevertheless, I would say it is overall successful. Kendall reports in a 2007 publication of the American Bar Association (p. 5) about promising factors that New York law requires to look on the families involved. E New approach allows initial offenses community programs that enable the families to prevent future parent-teen conflicts without intervention or court involvement. I think that families are important factors in preventing future juvenile delinquency. In addition, the New York includes documented agency efforts to enroll the youth and d the family in appropriate, individualized community services. The success of the New York program caused Florida to follow with similar measures. Both states are now promoting pre-court services for alleged juvenile defenders.