a nationwide survey of programs for children of divorcing ... · a nationwide survey of programs...
TRANSCRIPT
A NATIONWIDE SURVEY OF PROGRAMS FOR CHILDRENOF DIVORCING AND SEPARATING PARENTS
Susan L. Pollet1
This article surveys programs for children of separation and divorce throughout the United States. It provides anoverview of their development and discusses some of the research which has been performed to measure theefficacy of them. It focuses on some specific programs, and it provides information about the types of programswhich are available in each state. Finally, it provides insights into the next steps for such efforts.
Keywords: children of divorce; divorce; separation; custody and visitation; educational programs; mental healthof childrenfcre_1271 523..543
“Grown-ups never understand anything for themselves, and it is tiresome for children to bealways and forever explaining things to them.”
—Antoine de Saint-Exupery, The Little Prince, 1943
INTRODUCTION
There is a “particular poignancy” in the plight of children of divorce. They are “helplessto correct a situation they didn’t create . . . [and] . . . the very people they need to turnto—their mother and father—are often too emotionally overwhelmed to help them.”2
Children’s voices need to be heard. Some children of divorce learn to reach out for support.Some “look within themselves and find an inner strength,”3 although guidance along the wayis needed. Through it all, they benefit from peer support, and education programs for themwith that element can be a winning strategy. According to the National Center for HealthStatistics, the divorce rate was 3.6 divorces per 1000 population in 2005 (forty-six reportingstates and Washington, DC).4 One out of every two children born today will have divorcedparents before they reach the age of 18, according to projections.5 Divorce statistics cannotbe taken lightly when considering interventions that can improve the lives of children goingthrough this painful transition time. There has been an abundance of research over the pasttwo decades on the impact of separation and divorce on children. As summarized by oneexpert,
although divergent views on child outcomes have recently received widespread media expo-sure, reliable empirical research indicates that the majority of children from divorced familiesfall within the average range of adjustment in the post-divorce years. Large numbers of studieshave shown, however, that groups of children whose parents are divorced have more adjust-ment, academic, conduct, and relationship problems as compared to children whose parentshave remained married. These studies evidence an increased risk for children of divorcingparents.6
Correspondence: [email protected]
FAMILY COURT REVIEW, Vol. 47 No. 3, July 2009 523–543© 2009 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts
Perhaps most compelling is that “[r]egardless of the long-term effects and positive ornegative adjustment to parental divorce, most children experience the divorce as an emo-tionally painful loss.”7
Programs for children of separation and divorce have proliferated throughout the UnitedStates in recent years. The programs serve as an intervention to minimize the risksassociated with divorce and aim to afford better outcomes for the children. The list ofprograms in Appendix A herein is not an exhaustive one as it contains programs which wewere able to learn about through online research or word of mouth after telephone inquiries.
By way of summary, the results of our research indicates that, overall, ten states (orspecific counties within a state) require a child of divorcing or separating parents to attendan educational program pursuant to legislation, court order, administrative order, admin-istrative family court memorandum, or local court or county rules.8 Ten states (or specificcounties within a state) may require a child of divorcing or separating parents, at thediscretion of a judge, to attend an educational program pursuant to legislation, court order,administrative order, administrative family court memorandum, or local court or countyrules.9 These programs range from court-sponsored to not-for-profit private programs.10
Three of the states, however, fall in both categories.11 Thirty-five states, however, do notrequire a child of divorcing or separating parents to attend an educational program.12 Lastly,Louisiana does require children in one county to attend a mandatory program, while allother counties have no such requirement, nor is it in the discretion of the judge.13 This trendof increasing availability of such programs comports with extensive literature, whichindicates that “perceived control over decisions is related to positive mental health.”14
Therefore, listening to children’s voices during divorce processes will help to bestowthat effect on children. This article will provide an overview of the development ofeducation programs for children of separation or divorce. The next part will discuss someof the research which has been performed to measure the effect of such programs. Thefollowing section will address a sampling of specific children’s programs. Next, there willbe a discussion of the results of our nationwide research regarding the programs in eachstate which target children of separation or divorce. In the final section, conclusions aboutthe next steps for this type of education will be discussed.
BACKGROUND OF EDUCATION FOR CHILDREN OFDIVORCING AND SEPARATING PARENTS
Research conducted as of September 10, 2007, revealed that there are parent educationprograms in forty-six states;15 however, the number of programs for the children of divorc-ing and separating parents “have developed slowly”16 and remain fewer in number.17
Short-term support groups for these children are both educational and therapeutic innature.18 They can be found in various contexts, including at the court, at public and privatehuman services agencies, and given at schools by teachers, school social workers and otherschool support staff during lunch or after hours.19 Goals for psycho-educational groupshave been arranged in the following six categories: “(a) facilitation of feelings, (b) devel-opment of coping skills, (c) adjustment to changes, (d) provision of information, (e)normalization of the experience, and (f) provision of support.”20 In a survey of 148 courtand community child programs, the survey found that “the typical program is communitybased . . . [has] one to two sessions of four to five and a half hours, focuses primarily onelementary age children, facilitates expression of feelings and development of coping
524 FAMILY COURT REVIEW
skills, and is conducted by a master’s level mental health professional.”21 At that time, a fewof the programs held four to six sessions and incorporated “drawing, discussion, reading,role-playing, newsletters and advice books to parents and other children experiencingdivorce.”22 Some programs entail parent participation in various forms. Since that time“[p]sychoeducational and counseling groups in schools and community agencies have beena popular and efficient method of providing treatment for children of divorce.”23 There aremany advantages to having programs in the schools; however, because of mandates, incertain circumstances, some community situations (e.g., mental health agencies) may bemore ideal.24
In a national survey conducted in 2001, 46 programs in 152 counties were identified asoffering court connected educational programs for children and another national survey offamily courts found that “children’s educational programs are the most frequently men-tioned for planned future program innovation.”25 In 2001, “[n]early all counties that had achildren’s program also had a program for parents; in some jurisdictions child programs arelinked to and integrated with parent programs, and in other cases they function indepen-dently. Like parent programs, most of the universal prevention efforts for children are briefin duration; on average, they meet for one to four sessions for a total of 4–5 1/2 hours.”26
This is reflected in our research, as well, in Appendix “A,” herein. While all of themandatory programs for children are court-connected, not all of the court-connectedprograms are mandatory.27
What these programs have in common is to help children “adapt to the changes andstresses associated with divorce, which include interparental conflict.”28 The goals mostoften articulated include helping children “identify and express their feelings, providingsupport, normalizing the experience of divorce, and developing coping skills.”29 Childrenare taught ways to deal with conflict and triangulation, which is when parents put thechildren in the middle of their conflicts. Some programs include information about the legalprocess to make it understandable.30 Thus, the essence of most of the programs is thatparticipating in a peer group in a supportive environment helps children to realize that“they are not alone,” and “normalizes their feelings and experiences.”31 That is what makesthese programs special. In fact, it has been stated that “where possible, group therapy fordealing with problems of children of divorce is the treatment of choice.”32 It is notsurprising, therefore, that a study from 2002 revealed that the program considered by thegreatest proportion of counties is one to help children of divorce, which has been borne outby the more recent proliferation of such programs.33
SELECTED RESEARCH ON PROGRAMS FOR CHILDREN OF DIVORCE
Commentators have noted that there is even less evaluation data on children’s programsthan on parent programs.34 Most evaluations of children’s programs consist of customersatisfaction surveys which the parents completed, although some programs also had thechildren complete simple evaluations.35 Moreover, even though children’s divorce groupsare frequently utilized in schools and agencies “the research regarding their efficacy ismixed.”36 It appears that “[g]roup size, focus, duration of sessions, and leadership experi-ence all impacted children of divorce group effectiveness.”37 Experts maintain that preven-tion programs for children of divorce should be “science-based.”38 But because there isgrowing evidence of the efficacy of such programs, arguments have been made that it is“appropriate to plan a research agenda to move evidence-based programs into existing
Pollet/A NATIONWIDE SURVEY OF PROGRAMS 525
community delivery systems,” including schools and family courts, and to make theprograms appropriate for delivery to an ethnically diverse population.39
There are two programs which have been evaluated extensively with control groups,while the other studies discussed herein are more “informal.” One is the Children’s SupportGroup (CSG) which is a community-based group intervention.40 The CSG program is “afourteen-week preventive intervention program designed to provide support and teachchildren skills and coping strategies to deal with family changes.”41 In a controlled studyconducted of that program, “[r]esults showed significant improvements in children’s clini-cal symptoms in the skills and support conditions. The combined skills and support groupsyielded the most immediate benefits, reducing children’s emotional and behavior problems,and improving their adjustment at home.”42
The other program, Children of Divorce Intervention Program (CODIP), is a twelve-session preventive school-based intervention program which includes, as its primary goals,“to create a supportive group environment in which children can freely share experiences,establish common bonds, clarify misconceptions, and acquire skills that enhance theircapacity to cope with the stressful changes that divorce often poses.”43 It has expanded toinclude four different versions for children of different ages: kindergarten and first grade,second and third grade, fourth through sixth grade, and seventh through eighth grade.44 Itseffectiveness has been documented through “controlled studies, tests of key ingredients,and a follow-up study documenting multiple benefits to children.”45 Pursuant to eightdifferent studies of CODIP showing benefits to “children’s healthy adjustment socially,emotionally, physically and academically,” the following results were documented:
• Teacher ratings of children’s improved classroom adjustment and school engage-ment, evidenced by lower rates of disruptive behavior and less withdrawn, anxiousbehavior in class. Every controlled study of the program showed improved coopera-tive behavior including ability to get along with peers, handle challenging situations,and engage appropriately in class activities.
• Parents report that program children, compared to non program children, were betteradjusted overall, better able to talk about their feelings and more open to commu-nication, less moody and evidenced more self-esteem.
• Children themselves reported improved self confidence, less anxiety and depressionand more confidence in their ability to successfully deal with family changes. Programchildren reported being better able to solve personal problems and “let go” of thosebeyond their control. A follow-up study done two years later showed that theseimprovements endured and even extended to health benefits. Program children hadsignificantly fewer visits to the school clinic and health office with physical symptomsafter attending the program than a control group of non program children.46
• The program’s success has been widely recognized including the receipt of a numberof awards, and the program has been disseminated to over 500 schools and otheragencies in the United States and around the world, including South Africa, Germany,Cyprus, Canada, Australia, and the Netherlands.47
In an interesting study which sought to assess the effect of utilizing music in a childrenof divorce group compared with a traditional child psychoeducational group, the resultsindicated that there was no additional impact for music, but that the participants didexperience a significant decrease in anxiety as a result of group participation and a decreasein their irrational beliefs.48
526 FAMILY COURT REVIEW
In another study, the authors evaluated the effect of the adjustment of seven to nineyear old children in a program called Kids’ Turn, a San Francisco Bay Area divorceeducation program, which is a six-week child-oriented educational program.49 The chil-dren participate with their parents in the program. It was reported that children’s adjust-ment significantly improved after completing the program, including less conflictbetween children and parents, and children’s improved ability to avoid participating in“conflict-laden situations within the post-divorce family.”50 It was noted, however, thatchildren, after the program, had “more reconciliation fantasies, greater awareness ofdistressing feelings regarding the divorce, and more sensitivity to being misunderstoodby their parents,” which led the authors to caution that some children may need evalu-ation and continued support.51
A small study was conducted of fifteen children of recently separated or divorcedparents who completed a “family systems intervention” with their custodial parent for thepurpose of reducing family conflict and improving classroom behavior.52 The purpose ofthe study was to examine the effects of this intervention program in reducing acting-outbehaviors of students referred for special education assessment due to behavioral difficul-ties where their parents had recently separated or divorced.53 The study found that after theprogram, there was significantly improved use of verbal reasoning, significantly reduceduse of verbal aggression when resolving family conflicts, and a significant improvement inclassroom behavior suggesting that the number of students placed into special education foracting out behaviors can be reduced.54
Another study often cited is one involving the New Beginnings Program, and was asix-year follow-up, randomized controlled trial of two prevention programs, including onewith a dual-component “mother plus child” program.55 The study found that the program“reduced symptoms of mental disorder; rates of diagnoses of mental disorder; levels ofexternalizing problems; marijuana, alcohol, and other drug use; and number of sexualpartners.”56 An older pilot study of the Rollercoasters Program, a well-known program,showed positive results but needed further study.57
A SAMPLING OF SPECIFIC CHILDREN’S PROGRAMS
As we have identified earlier, there are basically two streams of children’s divorce groupprograms: those offered through court-connected services or by government, and thoseoffered through programs outside of the court setting (e.g., family service programs, churchrelated counseling programs, and programs in schools).58
COURT-CONNECTED PROGRAMS
With regard to the court-connected programs, Jackson County, Missouri had an earlyprogram which implemented a children’s component to their mandatory divorce educationprogram.59 This has been heralded as a major change in the legal and judicial system.60 Itwas the vision of the judges and commissioners of the Family Court Division to provide amore “systemic, family-oriented approach,” recognizing that both the parents and childrenare affected by the divorce and will have to be helped to deal with the process.61 To that end,they developed a court rule which required parents seeking a “marital dissolution or apost-dissolution action involving child custody and/or visitation matters, and their children
Pollet/A NATIONWIDE SURVEY OF PROGRAMS 527
ages five to seventeen, to attend the education and awareness program.”62 The JacksonCounty Family Court had contracted with five providers “strategically” located throughoutthe County to provide the program.63 In this program the parent’s classes and the children’sclasses are held at the same time (two, two-hour classes); the program teaches “griefreactions to divorce, techniques for talking to parents about their concerns, some basic legalterms related to divorce, the fact that children are not to blame for divorce, and how toidentify and express their own reactions to divorce.”64
In Jefferson County, Colorado, a group of professionals developed a three-hour classoffered at the courthouse which consists of a child and adolescent component added tothe court-ordered parenting classes for divorcing parents.65 The curriculum added a skillscomponent, and based upon the ages of the group have different formats includingvideos, drawing exercises, role plays and interactive discussions. The parents and chil-dren attend classes separately, but simultaneously, and there is a final segment of theclass which consists of an interactive parent-child component.66 The program provides“direct support to children and adolescents, helps normalize the myriad feelings childrenand adolescents may experience, and recognizes a number of coping strategies. Addi-tionally, specific skills training in the areas of communication and problem solving areprovided.”67
In Hawaii, in certain circuits, parents who are divorcing, parents not married who filemotions disputing custody or visitation, and their minor children, ages six to seventeen,are required to attend the “Kids First” program.68 Kids First is described as a programdesigned to help parents understand the effects of separation and divorce on their chil-dren and to help children cope with changes in their families.69 Parents and their childrenview a movie, and then the children are grouped by age and led by trained facilitators.70
Parents have their own program. Teens “vent their rage” by writing an unsent “Letter toMy Parents,” and they create a mock trial and ask questions about their “legal rights andresponsibilities as young adults.”71 Younger children do a “Caring Circle” activity inwhich they identify people they can turn to for support when they are angry or sad, andthey have the opportunity to wear a judge’s robe and sit in the judge’s chair, which isconsidered a highlight for them.72
On November 19, 2007, the Sixth Judicial District Court judges in Iowa “began man-dating class attendance for all children ages six to sixteen whose parents file for divorce inLinn County” at the Kids First program.73 Like many of the other programs, the Kids Firstprogram uses a combination of age-appropriate role-plays, artwork, games and videoclips.74 The themes the program seeks to emphasize are the following: “Divorce is never thekids’ fault; They are not alone: Kids share similar experiences; Their feelings are normaland okay; It is important to express their feelings to parents and other adults in their supportnetwork; They have a right not to be in the middle of their parents’ fights and a right not totake sides; They can know what to expect from the legal process; There is hope that thingscan get better.”75
New York has some court-affiliated programs, one of which is “PEACE for Kids.” It isa joint project of Hofstra University College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and the HofstraUniversity Law School, and has a curriculum for children in kindergarten through eighthgrade in operation in the courts of Nassau County, NewYork.76 In Kings County, NewYork,a four-hour program for children is conducted at the Family Court building, and is calledthe “Children’s PACT program.”77 There is also a certified parent education program givenout of both of those courthouses as part of the New York State Parent Education andAwareness Program, but it is for parents only.78
528 FAMILY COURT REVIEW
PROGRAMS OUTSIDE OF THE COURT SETTING
The most studied preventive school-based program was previously mentioned herein,The Children of Divorce Intervention Program (CODIP). The program began in Rochester,New York in 1982 and has undergone continued evaluation and research; CODIP can be,and has been replicated and transported into a variety of settings.79 The CODIP program’sfounder and director is JoAnne Pedro-Carroll, Ph.D. The program “consists of a series offour procedure manuals tailored to the developmental needs of children based on gradelevel, the Daring Dinosaurs Board Game, and the Feeling Faces poster.”80 School personnelincorporate these resources into their peer support groups, where children learn to “appro-priately express their feelings about divorce, enhance their coping skills, clarify miscon-ceptions, and enhance their perceptions of self and family.”81 The efficacy of this programhas been discussed above.
Another program in New York is the Children of Divorce Program at New York-Presbyterian, Payne Whitney-Westchester in White Plains, New York. It is a ten-sessiongroup program with sessions for children and parent groups, running concurrently. Groupsare led by a co-therapy team of senior staff and faculty members trained in child develop-ment and divorce issues, and they are kept small. There are sessions for preschool,school-age, and early teenage children.82 Among the goals of the groups for children are“clarifying and problem-solving issues, such as loyalty conflicts and feelings of anxiety,sadness and anger. Children are also helped to develop coping strategies and assertivecommunication skills for divorce-related issues such as visitation, custody and reblendedfamilies.”83
THE RESULTS OF OUR NATIONWIDE SURVEY
The results of our nationwide survey show that education programs for children whoseparents are separating or divorcing are available in many counties across the United States.Through telephone conversations and e-mail, we spoke with child education directors,court personnel who are familiar with the programs, and the social workers and psycholo-gists who lead the various programs. In conducting the survey of available programs, weasked whether the program is required, and if so, whether there are any opt-out provisions,the cost of attendance, the specifics of the program curriculum, and whether the children’sprogram is simultaneous with the parent program. We compiled our research into the chartand key attached as Appendix A; however, this list is not an exhaustive one. As researchcontinues to demonstrate a need for child education programs, judges and educators areinitiating these programs, and thus new programs, are becoming available increasinglythroughout the United States. There are also many private programs run through the officesof local therapists and various entities. Research on the benefits of specific programs arestill sparse and therefore the programs listed in Appendix A are a list of available programswe were able to locate; they are not, in any way, an endorsement or a complete list of everyprogram throughout the United States.
As stated above, the results of our research set forth in Appendix A herein indicate that,overall, ten states (or specific counties within a state) require a child of divorcing orseparating parents to attend an educational program pursuant to legislation, court order,administrative order, administrative family court memorandum, or local court or countyrules. Ten states (or specific counties within a state) may require a child of divorcing or
Pollet/A NATIONWIDE SURVEY OF PROGRAMS 529
separating parents, at the discretion of a judge, to attend an educational program pursuantto legislation, court order, administrative order, administrative family court memorandum,or local court or county rules. These programs range from court-sponsored to not-for-profitprivate programs. Three of the states, however, fall in both categories. That is, Alabama,Mississippi, and Wyoming have certain counties that mandate a child of divorcing orseparating parents to attend an educational program, while other counties in each stateleave it at the discretion of the Judge. Thirty-five states, however, do not require a child ofdivorcing or separating parents to attend an educational program. In other words, while ajudge may refer a child to a voluntary program, there is no legislation in place that allowsthe judge the authority to mandate child attendance pursuant to a court order. These statesoften offer a myriad of voluntary programs that a child may attend if a parent chooses topursue this route for his or her child. Lastly, Louisiana requires children in one county toattend a mandatory program, while all other counties have no such requirement, nor is it inthe discretion of the judge.
For those states (or specific counties within a state) that ultimately require a child toattend a mandatory education program, some programs do offer opt-out provisions. Partiesmay be able to file a motion to waive attendance, which may be granted in the discretion ofthe judge. The cost of attendance for all of the programs currently in place range from nocost to $145. There are often multiple programs within a state but, at the time of thispublication, twenty-three states offer at least one program at no cost to the child. Inaddition, many other programs offer discounted rates and the possibility of a fee waiver.Regarding the curriculum, many states offer programs that last anywhere from severalhours to several weeks. Also, thirty-two states offer programs that run simultaneously witha parent education program.
Ultimately, while many states have yet to develop legislation, court orders, administra-tive orders, administrative family court memorandum, or local court or county rulesallowing a judge to mandate attendance pursuant to a court order, it appears that each statehas made efforts to provide children the opportunity to enroll in educational programs.These programs are doing so by providing classes with little to no fee, with wide-rangingcurriculums, and with the opportunity for parents to take a class simultaneously with theirchildren.
NEXT STEPS
Back in 1992, dedicated individuals in this field opined that one “relatively cost-freemeasure that the lawyers and legal system of each state can take that might help custodydisputes from becoming a judicially cognizable “‘dispute’ requiring resolution by adver-sarial procedure,” would be “supporting school-based intervention programs for childrenexperiencing parental divorce and custody problems.”84 A call was made then to have moreof such programs widely available, and a suggestion was made that where children ofdivorce intervention programs already exist in a community, a mandatory parent educationprogram “would be an excellent opportunity to advise parents of that fact and to encouragethem to let their children participate.”85 Taking that dream a step farther, the authorssuggested that assuming widespread availability of programs for children, parents shouldbe required to certify that their children have been enrolled in a school-based interventionprogram and that they themselves have attended parent education programs before adivorce is granted.86 Other experts have cited with approval the randomized experimental
530 FAMILY COURT REVIEW
evaluations, earlier discussed herein, which demonstrated the “efficacy of children’smultiple-session school-based coping programs to improve the mental health and adapta-tion of children of divorce.”87
The survey in 2002 with regard to prospects of expanding divorcing parent educationand child coping services reported that “[a]pproximately one third of the counties planningto make a change in their current services indicated that improving the quality of theirexisting services or adding programming for children and adolescents were the forms ofchange most desired.”88 The authors called for the testing of programs to determine whetherthey foster positive gains before implementation.89 There has been research which indicatesthat having court-affiliated educational programs for children, which have short-term andlimited interventions, may help children with their adjustment and can direct them toservices in the community if they need additional help,90 including intensive therapy. Manycommentators suggest, however, that more research needs to be done about which inter-ventions work best, and how they work.91
One expert summarizes the research, as follows:
. . . basic research on the processes by which interparental conflict leads to child maladjust-ment indicates that prevention programs for parents will be most effective in fostering chil-dren’s adaptation to divorce if they can reduce the level of destructive conflict that children areexposed to, foster good parent-child relationships, and keep children from being caught in themiddle of parental tensions and disagreements. Although parents bear primary responsibilityfor managing postdivorce conflict, programs for children also may be useful, particularly ifthey help children develop skills for coping with situations in which they are pressured to sidewith one parent against the other and help them to avoid feeling responsible for parentalproblems.92
CONCLUSION
It is clear that the need for programs for children of divorce exists, and, if developed inconformity with best practices, the programs prove to be helpful. The numbers of suchprograms continue to grow. Having programs connected to the court makes sense sincecourt affiliated parent education programs exist throughout the United States. Having anentity responsible for oversight of such programs, such as court administration, is essentialto ensure that no harm is being done to participants. Having education for both parents andchildren guarantees that all members of the family have access to the requisite knowledge,and a chance to practice the skills they have all learned. It is truly a family process.
Pollet/A NATIONWIDE SURVEY OF PROGRAMS 531
Sta
teS
tatu
te/C
ourt
Ru
leR
equ
ired
Att
enda
nce
Opt
-Ou
tP
rovi
sion
sC
ost
ofA
tten
dan
ceC
urr
icu
lum
Sim
ult
aneo
us
w/
Par
ent
Pro
gram
Web
site
/C
onta
ctIn
form
atio
n
Ala
bam
aJu
dge
may
requ
ire
chil
d
atte
ndan
cepu
rsua
ntto
Ala
bam
a
Cod
e(1
975)
Cha
pter
3,T
itle
30,
Sec
tion
30-3
-1;
How
ever
,ce
rtai
n
Cou
ntie
s(s
uch
asM
ontg
omer
y
and
Elm
ore
Cou
ntie
s)m
anda
te
atte
ndan
ce.
Fam
ilies
inT
rans
itio
nis
a
man
dato
ryco
urt
prog
ram
in
Mon
tgom
ery
Cou
nty
for
chil
dren
ages
6–16
Part
ies
may
file
am
otio
nto
wai
ve
atte
ndan
ce
$60
per
chil
d4
hour
prog
ram
Dis
cuss
ions
and
wor
kboo
ks
Yes
Pro
gram
spon
sore
dby
:Fa
mily
Gui
danc
eC
ente
rof
Ala
bam
a
2358
Fair
lane
Dri
ve,
Mon
tgom
ery,
Ala
bam
a36
116
334-
270-
4100
;
ww
w.f
amily
guid
ance
cent
er.o
rg
Ala
ska
Not
requ
ired
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Ari
zona
Judg
em
ayre
quir
ech
ild
atte
ndan
cepu
rsua
ntto
AR
S
25-3
51an
dco
urt
orde
r
Rol
lerc
oast
ers
(Int
egra
ted
Fam
ily
Cou
rt)
isa
cour
tpr
ogra
mfo
r
chil
dren
ages
5–12
that
targ
ets
high
confl
ict
pare
nts
and
thei
r
chil
dren
Pil
otpr
ogra
m(p
atte
rned
afte
r
Kid
sFi
rst
inM
aui)
wil
lbe
avai
labl
efo
rch
ildr
enag
es6–
17
Pil
otpr
ogra
m—
Info
rmat
ion
isno
t
yet
avai
labl
e
Rol
lerc
oast
ers—
none
Pil
otpr
ogra
m—
Info
rmat
ion
isno
t
yet
avai
labl
e
Rol
lerc
oast
ers—
Cur
ricu
lum
is
base
don
the
Rol
lerc
oast
ers
prog
ram
Pil
otpr
ogra
m—
info
rmat
ion
isno
t
yet
avai
labl
e
Yes
*App
lies
tobo
th
prog
ram
s
Rol
lerc
oast
ers—
Con
tact
the
Inte
grat
edFa
mily
Cou
rtin
Coc
onin
oC
ount
yat
(928
)
679-
7504
Pil
otpr
ogra
m—
Con
tact
the
Coc
onin
oS
uper
ior
Cou
rtat
(928
)
779-
6535
Ark
ansa
sN
otre
quir
edD
ivor
ceC
are
for
Kid
s(D
C4K
)
isa
priv
ate
fait
hba
sed
prog
ram
avai
labl
eth
roug
hlo
cal
chur
ches
Non
e$1
0–20
per
chil
d13
wee
kpr
ogra
m,
2ho
urs/
wee
k
Gam
es,
craf
ts,
role
play
ing,
disc
ussi
ons
and
wor
kboo
ks
Yes
Div
orce
Car
efo
rK
ids:
ww
w.d
c4k.
org
Cal
ifor
nia
Judg
em
ayre
quir
ech
ild
atte
ndan
cepu
rsua
ntto
Fam
ily
Cod
eS
ecti
on31
90
Kid
sF
irst
(Ora
nge
Cou
nty)
Kid
sT
urn
(San
Die
go)
Kid
sT
urn
(San
Fran
cisc
o)
*All
are
priv
ate,
nonp
rofi
t
prog
ram
sav
aila
ble
for
chil
dren
ages
4–17
.The
Judg
eha
s
disc
reti
onw
heth
erto
orde
ror
man
date
the
prog
ram
s.
Non
e
*App
lies
toal
lth
ree
prog
ram
s
Kid
sF
irst
(Ora
nge
Cou
nty)
—$3
00pe
rpa
rent
/$12
0
per
chil
d;
Kid
sT
urn
(San
Die
go)—
$200
per
pare
nt/c
hild
ren
are
free
;
Kid
sT
urn
(San
Fran
cisc
o)—
$110
-950
per
pare
nt/a
$15.
00fe
efo
rm
ater
ials
for
the
chil
dren
,to
bepa
idby
the
pare
nts.
Kid
sF
irst
(Ora
nge
Cou
nty)
—
8w
eek
prog
ram
—S
tori
es,
gam
es
and
disc
ussi
ons
Kid
sT
urn
(San
Die
go)—
4w
eek
prog
ram
—G
ames
,
artw
ork,
mus
ic,
stor
ies
and
play
-act
ing
Kid
sT
urn
(San
Fran
cisc
o)—
6w
eek
prog
ram
—C
urri
culu
mis
base
dup
onte
achi
ngth
ech
ildr
en
and
pare
nts
copi
ngsk
ills
.
Yes
*App
lies
toal
lth
ree
prog
ram
s
ww
w.k
idsfi
rsto
c.or
g
ww
w.k
idst
urns
d.or
g
ww
w.k
idst
urn.
org
Col
orad
oN
otre
quir
edT
heFa
mily
Edu
cati
onal
Div
orce
Cla
ssis
avo
lunt
ary
priv
ate
prog
ram
for
pare
nts
and
thei
r
chil
dren
ages
6–17
Non
e$2
5fo
rth
efi
rst
two
chil
dren
and
$15
for
each
addi
tion
alch
ild
3ho
urpr
ogra
m
Pre
sent
atio
ns,
disc
ussi
ons,
vide
os,
and
role
play
ing
Yes
Con
tact
Dou
glas
Han
zeat
(303
)
933-
9258
orK
aren
Jam
ieso
n-D
arr
at(3
03)
986-
1800
Con
nect
icut
Not
requ
ired
Ban
ana
Split
sis
avo
lunt
ary
priv
ate
prog
ram
avai
labl
eth
roug
h
the
Wil
ton
YM
CA
and
loca
l
scho
ols
for
scho
ol-a
ged
chil
dren
Non
eY
MC
A—
$65
per
chil
d
Cos
tw
ill
vary
depe
ndin
gon
loca
tion
;in
gene
ral
ther
eis
no
cost
whe
nof
fere
dth
roug
hth
e
chil
d’s
scho
ol.
YM
CA
—7
wee
kpr
ogra
m,
45
min
utes
/wee
k
Loc
alsc
hool
s—of
fere
ddu
ring
activ
ity/
free
peri
ods
*Cur
ricu
lum
isba
sed
onth
e
Ban
ana
Spl
its
prog
ram
No
Con
tact
the
Wil
ton
YM
CA
at
(203
)76
2-83
84;
Judi
cial
Bra
nch
Cou
rtS
uppo
rt
Ser
vice
sD
ivis
ion:
860-
721-
2100
Del
awar
eN
otre
quir
ed(a
sof
Janu
ary
1,
2008
)
Div
orce
Car
efo
rK
ids
(DC
4K)
isa
priv
ate
fait
hba
sed
prog
ram
avai
labl
eth
roug
hlo
cal
chur
ches
Non
eN
one
Gam
es,
craf
ts,
role
play
ing,
disc
ussi
ons
and
wor
kboo
ks
Yes
Div
orce
Car
efo
rK
ids:
ww
w.d
c4k.
org
532 FAMILY COURT REVIEW
Sta
teS
tatu
te/C
ourt
Ru
leR
equ
ired
Att
enda
nce
Opt
-Ou
tP
rovi
sion
sC
ost
ofA
tten
dan
ceC
urr
icu
lum
Sim
ult
aneo
us
w/
Par
ent
Pro
gram
Web
site
/C
onta
ctIn
form
atio
n
Dis
tric
tof
Col
umbi
a
Chi
ldat
tend
ance
ism
anda
tory
purs
uant
toA
dmin
istr
ativ
e
Ord
er07
-06
Pro
gram
for
Agr
eem
ent
and
Coo
pera
tion
inC
onte
sted
Cus
tody
Cas
es(P
AC
)is
api
lot
prog
ram
requ
ired
for
chil
dren
ages
7–14
N/A
N/A
31/
2ho
urpr
ogra
m
Chi
ldre
nar
een
cour
aged
tovo
ice
thei
rfe
elin
gs,
inad
diti
onto
lear
ning
copi
ngsk
ills
and
skil
ls
for
deal
ing
wit
hne
gativ
e
emot
ions
Yes
Con
tact
the
Dom
esti
cR
elat
ions
Bra
nch
ofth
eS
uper
ior
Cou
rtof
DC
at(2
02)
879-
1261
Flo
rida
Not
requ
ired
Sand
cast
les
isa
cour
tpr
ogra
m
for
pare
nts
and
thei
rch
ildr
enag
es
6–17
.
Kid
sKon
nect
isa
volu
ntar
y
scho
ol-b
ased
prog
ram
for
chil
dren
ages
5–12
.
Part
ies
may
file
am
otio
nto
wai
ve
atte
ndan
ce
Sand
cast
les—
$25-
35pe
rch
ild;
fee
wai
vers
for
indi
gent
;
Kid
sKon
nect
—no
ne
Sand
cast
les—
31/
2ho
ur
prog
ram
;R
ole
play
ing,
disc
ussi
ons
and
wor
kboo
ks
Kid
sKon
nect
—C
urri
culu
mhe
lps
chil
dren
deve
lop
the
copi
ngsk
ills
they
need
toov
erco
me
the
effe
cts
offa
mily
disr
upti
on.
Yes
*App
lies
tobo
th
prog
ram
s
Sand
cast
les—
Con
tact
Alv
aro
Dom
enec
hat
(305
)23
7-80
15
Kid
sKon
nect
—U
nju
Chu
ng-C
anin
eat
(407
)64
4-75
93
Geo
rgia
Not
requ
ired
Wha
tAbo
utM
eis
avo
lunt
ary
cour
tpr
ogra
mav
aila
ble
for
chil
dren
ages
5–12
Non
e$5
–10
per
chil
d;fe
ew
aive
rsfo
r
indi
gent
2ho
urpr
ogra
m
Cur
ricu
lum
help
sto
teac
h
chil
dren
how
toco
pew
ith
the
chan
ges
and
how
tobe
tter
com
mun
icat
ew
ith
thei
rpa
rent
s
No
http
://s
ca.c
obbc
ount
yga.
gov/
cour
t_pr
ogra
ms.
htm
#me
Haw
aii
Chi
ldat
tend
ance
ism
anda
tory
purs
uant
toa
Fam
ilyC
ourt
Mem
oran
dum
Kid
sF
irst
isa
man
dato
ryco
urt
prog
ram
inth
eFi
rst,
Sec
ond,
Thi
rdan
dFi
fth
Cir
cuit
sfo
r
pare
nts
and
thei
rch
ildr
en,
ages
6–17
Non
eC
ost
isin
clud
edin
the
divo
rce
fili
ngfe
e
21/
2ho
urpr
ogra
m
Vid
eo“T
heP
urpl
eFa
mily
,”ro
le
play
ing
and
wri
ting
Yes
Fam
ilyC
ourt
,S
econ
dC
ircu
it
2145
Mai
nS
tree
t,3r
dF
loor
Wai
luku
,H
I96
793
Pho
ne:
(808
)24
4-27
18di
rect
line
(808
)24
4-27
00m
ain
line
(808
)24
4-27
04fa
xli
ne
Idah
oC
hild
atte
ndan
ceis
man
dato
ry
purs
uant
to01
-11
Sec
ond
Am
ende
dA
dmin
istr
ativ
eO
rder
ince
rtai
nco
unti
esth
atof
fer
it
Chi
ldre
n’s
Pro
gram
isa
man
dato
ryco
urt
prog
ram
inth
e
5th
Dis
tric
tfo
rpa
rent
san
dth
eir
chil
dren
,ag
es6–
17
Non
eN
one
3ho
urpr
ogra
m
Gro
up1:
ages
6–10
;
Gro
up2:
ages
11–1
7
Yes
http
://w
ww
.co.
twin
-fal
ls.id
.us/
5thD
istr
ict2
/Med
iati
on/
Med
iati
on.h
tm
Illin
ois
Not
requ
ired
Kid
s’T
urn
isa
volu
ntar
y,pr
ivat
e
prog
ram
for
pare
nts
and
thei
r
chil
dren
,ag
es4–
17
Non
e$1
5pe
rch
ild
Four
sess
ions
,1.
5ho
urs/
sess
ion
Chi
ldre
nle
arn
skil
lsth
atw
ill
help
them
cope
wit
hch
ange
s
Yes
The
Chi
ldre
n’s
Foun
dati
on
403
S.
Sta
teS
t.
Blo
omin
gton
,IL
6170
1
(309
)83
4-52
34
ww
w.k
idst
urnb
loom
ingt
on.o
rg
Mol
lyC
hris
toph
er,
Pro
gram
Dir
ecto
r
Focu
son
Chi
ldre
n
(312
)60
3-15
89
Indi
ana
Chi
ldat
tend
ance
ism
anda
tory
purs
uant
toL
R76
-DR
-4(J
)
Sand
cast
les:
Reb
uild
ing
Aft
er
Div
orce
isa
man
dato
ryco
urt
prog
ram
inS
teub
enC
ount
yfo
r
chil
dren
,ag
es6–
17
Non
eN
one
21/
2ho
urpr
ogra
m
Dis
cuss
ions
,bo
okle
ts,
and
vide
os
Yes
Ang
ola
Nor
thea
ster
nC
ente
r:
(260
)66
5-94
94;
Ste
uben
Cou
nty
Cou
rt:
(260
)
668-
1000
Iow
aJu
dge
may
requ
ire
chil
d
atte
ndan
cepu
rsua
ntto
Iow
a
Cod
eA
nnot
ated
598.
15
Kid
sF
irst
(Lin
nC
ount
y)is
a
cour
tpr
ogra
mfo
rch
ildr
enag
es
6–16
Non
eN
one
21/
2ho
urpr
ogra
m
Art
wor
k,ga
mes
,di
scus
sion
s,
vide
osan
dro
lepl
ayin
g
No
ww
w.k
idsfi
rsti
owa.
org
Pollet/A NATIONWIDE SURVEY OF PROGRAMS 533
Sta
teS
tatu
te/C
ourt
Ru
leR
equ
ired
Att
enda
nce
Opt
-Ou
tP
rovi
sion
sC
ost
ofA
tten
dan
ceC
urr
icu
lum
Sim
ult
aneo
us
w/
Par
ent
Pro
gram
Web
site
/C
onta
ctIn
form
atio
n
Kan
sas
Not
requ
ired
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Ken
tuck
yC
hild
atte
ndan
ceis
man
dato
ry
purs
uant
tolo
cal
cour
tru
les
incl
udin
g:JF
RP
Rul
e70
5,
RF
FC
App
.5,
RM
FC
Rul
e80
2,
FF
CR
Rul
eV,
&R
LF
CR
ule
402
Fam
ilies
inT
rans
itio
nis
a
man
dato
ryco
urt
prog
ram
for
pare
nts
and
thei
rch
ildr
en,
ages
5–17
Part
ies
may
file
am
otio
n
tow
aive
atte
ndan
ce
$50
per
pare
nt/f
ree
for
the
chil
dren
6ho
urpr
ogra
m
Dis
cuss
ions
and
wor
kboo
ks
Yes
http
://c
ourt
s.ky
.gov
/
stat
epro
gram
s/
divo
rcee
duca
tion
Lou
isia
naC
hild
atte
ndan
ceis
man
dato
ry
inB
ossi
erPa
rais
h;H
owev
er,
chil
dat
tend
ance
isno
tre
quir
ed
else
whe
re.
Chi
ldre
nin
the
Mid
dle
isa
man
dato
ryco
urt
prog
ram
for
chil
dren
inB
ossi
erPa
rish
;
Rai
nbow
sis
avo
lunt
ary,
priv
ate
prog
ram
avai
labl
efo
rch
ildr
enin
elem
enta
rysc
hool
thro
ugh
high
scho
ol.
Non
eN
one
12-1
4se
ssio
ns,
30-6
0
min
utes
/ses
sion
Gam
es,
stor
yboo
ksan
d
jour
nali
ng
Gen
eral
lyno
;on
lyon
e
prog
ram
site
offe
rsa
sepa
rate
pare
ntgr
oup
held
atth
esa
me
tim
e.
ww
w.h
tdio
cese
.org
/fm
;
http
://w
ww
.htd
ioce
se.o
rg/f
m/
Cou
nsel
ingS
ervi
ces/
tabi
d/33
1/
Def
ault
.asp
x
Chi
ldre
nin
the
Mid
dle,
teac
her:
Joan
PA
lmon
d,E
xten
sion
Age
nt-
FC
S,
Web
ster
Ext
ensi
onS
ervi
ce
LS
UA
gCen
ter
1202
Hom
erR
oad
Min
den,
Lou
isia
na71
055
E-M
ail:
jalm
ond@
agce
nter
.lsu.
edu
Pho
ne:
318-
371-
1371
Mai
neN
otre
quir
edSe
para
tion
and
Div
orce
Supp
ort
Gro
ups
for
Chi
ldre
n
and
Ado
lesc
ents
isa
priv
ate
prog
ram
for
chil
dren
ages
6–18
Non
e$4
5-60
per
chil
d4–
6w
eek
prog
ram
Age
appr
opri
ate
activ
itie
sw
here
chil
dren
expl
ore
thei
rfe
elin
gs
and
lear
nco
ping
mec
hani
sms
No
ww
w.k
idsfi
rstc
ente
r.org
Mar
ylan
dN
otre
quir
edK
ids
Cou
nt(A
nne
Aru
ndel
Cou
nty)
isa
cour
tpr
ogra
mfo
r
chil
dren
ages
6–12
;
Rol
lerc
oast
ers
(St.
Mar
y’s
Cou
nty)
isa
cour
tpr
ogra
mfo
r
chil
dren
ages
5–12
;
Kid
Shar
e(W
orce
ster
Cou
nty)
is
aco
urt
prog
ram
avai
labl
efo
r
chil
dren
and
teen
s;
*Pro
gram
sal
soav
aila
ble
inth
e
foll
owin
gco
unti
es:A
lleg
any,
Gar
rett
,H
arfo
rd,
Ken
t,S
omer
set
and
Wic
omic
o
Rev
iew
edon
aca
seby
case
basi
sK
ids
Cou
nt—
free
;
Rol
lerc
oast
ers—
$70
per
chil
d;
Kid
Shar
e—fr
ee
Kid
sC
ount
—3
hour
prog
ram
Hel
psch
ildr
enun
ders
tand
the
proc
ess
ofdi
vorc
ean
dgi
ves
them
tool
sto
adap
tto
chan
ges
Rol
lerc
oast
ers—
6w
eek
prog
ram
,1
hour
/wee
k
Hel
psth
ech
ildr
enw
ith
the
deve
lopm
enta
lpr
oces
sdu
ring
a
tim
eof
adju
stm
ent
and
grie
f
Kid
Shar
e—2
hour
prog
ram
Hel
psch
ildr
enid
enti
fyfe
elin
gs,
solv
epr
oble
ms
and
gain
ase
nse
ofho
pe
No,
both
Kid
sC
ount
and
Rol
lerc
oast
ers
are
not
sim
ulta
neou
sw
ith
pare
ntpr
ogra
m
*Not
e—K
idS
hare
is
sim
ulta
neou
sw
ith
pare
ntpr
ogra
m
Fam
ilyA
dmin
istr
ativ
eO
ffice
of
the
Cou
rts:
(410
)26
0-15
80
Kid
sC
ount
Rep
rese
ntat
ive:
(410
)22
2-12
10
St.M
ary’
sFa
mily
Supp
ort
Coo
rdin
ator
,Lin
daG
rove
:
(301
)47
5-78
44ex
t41
10
Rol
lerc
oast
ers
Rep
rese
ntat
ive,
Sara
hSt
even
s:(3
01)
863-
6670
ext
867
Kid
Shar
e:(4
01)
632-
0056
;
http
://w
ww
.fam
ilydi
visi
on.o
rg/
kids
hare
.htm
l
Mas
sach
uset
tsN
otre
quir
edB
anan
aSp
lits
Supp
ort
Gro
upis
apr
ivat
epr
ogra
mav
aila
ble
for
chil
dren
inth
e2n
d-5t
hgr
ade,
thro
ugh
the
Dar
tmou
thY
outh
Com
mis
sion
Non
eP
leas
eca
llfo
rpr
ice
info
rmat
ion
10w
eek
prog
ram
,1
1/4
hour
/wee
k
*eve
ryot
her
wee
k
No
ww
w.d
artm
outh
yout
h.co
m/
Gro
upIn
foFi
les/
bsin
tro.
htm
534 FAMILY COURT REVIEW
Sta
teS
tatu
te/C
ourt
Ru
leR
equ
ired
Att
enda
nce
Opt
-Ou
tP
rovi
sion
sC
ost
ofA
tten
dan
ceC
urr
icu
lum
Sim
ult
aneo
us
w/
Par
ent
Pro
gram
Web
site
/C
onta
ctIn
form
atio
n
Mic
higa
nN
otre
quir
edK
ids
Kop
ing
isa
priv
ate
prog
ram
for
pare
nts
and
thei
rch
ildr
enag
es
4–12
;
Fam
ilyM
atte
rsis
apr
ivat
e
prog
ram
for
chil
dren
;
Step
ping
Ston
esis
apr
ivat
efa
ith
base
dpr
ogra
mfo
rch
ildr
en
Non
e
*App
lies
toal
lth
ree
prog
ram
s
Kid
sK
opin
g—$8
0pe
rfa
mily
;
Fam
ilyM
atte
rs—
$55
or$1
0pe
r
sess
ion
Step
ping
Ston
es—
$10
dona
tion
per
chil
d
Kid
sK
opin
g—8
wee
k
prog
ram
—V
ideo
s,ga
mes
,
disc
ussi
ons
and
role
play
ing
Fam
ilyM
atte
rs—
6w
eek
prog
ram
—A
geap
prop
riat
egr
oup
mat
eria
ls—
draw
ing,
wri
ting
and
talk
ing
wit
hot
her
chil
dren
Step
ping
Ston
es—
6w
eek
prog
ram
—C
urri
culu
mba
sed
on
mat
eria
lsby
Gar
yS
prag
ue,
foun
der
ofth
eS
ingl
ePa
rent
Fam
ilyM
inis
try
Yes
*App
lies
toal
lth
ree
prog
ram
s
Kid
sK
opin
g,G
ood
New
s
Com
mun
ity:
(616
)83
1-26
03
Fam
ilyM
atte
rs:
http
://w
ww
.
chil
dand
fam
ilysa
gina
w.c
om
Step
ping
Ston
es:
http
://w
ardc
hurc
h.or
g/
tem
plat
es/S
yste
m/d
etai
ls.a
sp?
id=
1702
&P
ID=
7978
9
Min
neso
taJu
dge
may
requ
ire
chil
d
atte
ndan
cepu
rsua
ntto
M.S
.A.
§
518.
157
(200
7)
Sand
cast
les
(Hen
nepi
nC
ount
y)
isa
cour
tpr
ogra
mfo
rch
ildr
en
ages
6–17
;
Co-
Kid
s(H
enne
pin
Cou
nty)
isa
man
dato
ryco
urt
prog
ram
for
chil
dren
ages
6–17
Non
e
*App
lies
tobo
thpr
ogra
ms
Sand
cast
les—
$45
per
chil
d;
Co-
Kid
s—$5
0pe
rch
ild
Sand
cast
les—
4ho
urpr
ogra
m–
Dra
win
g,w
riti
ngan
dta
lkin
gw
ith
othe
rch
ildr
ento
lear
nco
ping
skil
ls
Co-
Kid
s—3
hour
prog
ram
—D
evel
opm
enta
lly
appr
opri
ate
activ
itie
sth
at
enco
urag
ech
ildr
ento
expl
ore
thei
rfe
elin
gs,
lear
n
prob
lem
-sol
ving
tech
niqu
es,
and
prac
tice
effi
cien
tco
mm
unic
atin
g
skil
ls
No
*App
lies
tobo
th
prog
ram
s
Sand
cast
les—
ww
w.c
hrys
alis
wom
en.o
rg/
dive
d.ht
m#s
andc
astl
es
Co-
Kid
s—
http
://w
ww
.sto
refr
ont.o
rg/
inde
x.as
p?Ty
pe=
B_B
AS
IC&
SE
C=
{10E
061E
B-4
9A7-
42E
5
-AC
29-6
45F
7CE
48A
F3}
Mis
siss
ippi
Chi
ldat
tend
ance
ism
anda
tory
inJa
ckso
nC
ount
y;H
owev
er,
Judg
em
ayre
quir
ech
ild
atte
ndan
cein
othe
rC
ount
ies.
FO
CIS
Pro
gram
isa
man
dato
ry
cour
tpr
ogra
mfo
rpa
rent
san
d
thei
rch
ildr
enin
Jack
son
Cou
nty,
ages
5–17
,pu
rsua
ntto
cour
t
orde
r.
Non
e$2
0pe
rfa
mily
2-ni
ght
prog
ram
Yes
Adm
inis
trat
ive
Offi
ceof
Cou
rts,
Kev
inL
acke
y,D
irec
tor:
lack
eyjk
@m
ssc.
stat
e.m
s.us
FO
CIS
Pro
gram
,Ja
ckso
nC
ount
y
Com
mun
ity
Ser
vice
sC
oali
tion
:
(228
)52
2-19
65
Mis
sour
iJu
dge
may
requ
ire
chil
d
atte
ndan
cepu
rsua
ntto
Mis
sour
i
Sta
tute
452.
605
(200
8)
FO
CIS
isa
cour
tpr
ogra
mfo
r
pare
nts
and
thei
rch
ildr
en,
ages
5–17
via
cour
tor
der;
CT
AS
isa
volu
ntar
yco
urt-
base
d
prog
ram
for
chil
dren
ages
7–14
Judg
e’s
disc
reti
on
*App
lies
tobo
thpr
ogra
ms
FO
CIS
—$4
6pe
rpa
rent
/chi
ldre
n
are
free
;
CT
AS—
free
FO
CIS
—Tw
o,2
hour
prog
ram
s—V
ideo
s,di
scus
sion
s
and
the
crea
tion
ofa
new
slet
ter
for
the
pare
nts
CT
AS—
2ho
ur
prog
ram
—Ta
lkin
g,ar
tac
tivit
ies
and
wor
kboo
ks
Yes
*App
lies
tobo
th
prog
ram
s
FO
CIS
:w
ww
.fam
ily-c
ourt
.org
/
FC
RS
.htm
CT
AS:
http
://w
ww
.kid
sint
hem
iddl
e.
org/
serv
ices
.htm
Mon
tana
Not
requ
ired
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Cou
rtA
dmin
istr
ator
,B
eth
Mcl
augh
lin:
(406
)84
1-29
66
Neb
rask
aJu
dge
may
requ
ire
chil
d
atte
ndan
cepu
rsua
ntto
NE
ST
§
43-2
928
(3)
Pro
gram
sva
ryby
Cou
nty
Yes
$0–2
5pe
rcl
ass
Pro
vide
rsm
ust
mee
tst
atut
ory
lear
ning
obje
ctiv
es
Var
ies
bypr
ogra
mN
ebra
ska
Judi
cial
Bra
nch
Par
enti
ngA
ctIn
form
atio
nfo
r
the
Fam
ilyC
omm
unit
y:
http
://s
upre
mec
ourt
.ne.
gov/
med
iati
on/p
aren
ting
-act
.sht
ml
Pollet/A NATIONWIDE SURVEY OF PROGRAMS 535
Sta
teS
tatu
te/C
ourt
Ru
leR
equ
ired
Att
enda
nce
Opt
-Ou
tP
rovi
sion
sC
ost
ofA
tten
dan
ceC
urr
icu
lum
Sim
ult
aneo
us
w/
Par
ent
Pro
gram
Web
site
/C
onta
ctIn
form
atio
n
Nev
ada
Not
requ
ired
Div
orce
Car
efo
rK
ids
(DC
4K)
isa
priv
ate
fait
hba
sed
prog
ram
avai
labl
eth
roug
hlo
cal
chur
ches
Fam
ilyA
llian
ceis
avo
lunt
ary
priv
ate
prog
ram
for
chil
dren
.
Non
e$0
–15
fee—
pric
eva
ries
depe
ndin
gon
loca
tion
2ho
urpr
ogra
m
Gam
es,
craf
ts,
role
play
ing,
disc
ussi
ons
and
wor
kboo
ks
Yes
Div
orce
Car
efo
rK
ids:
ww
w.d
c4k.
org
Fam
ilyA
llian
ce:
(775
)32
2-19
57
For
furt
her
info
rmat
ion
on
Nev
ada’
sst
atus
,co
ntac
t:
Offi
ceof
Fam
ilyM
edia
tion
in
Cla
rkC
ount
yat
702-
455-
4186
New
Ham
pshi
re
Not
requ
ired
Div
orce
Car
efo
rK
ids
(DC
4K)
isa
fait
hba
sed
prog
ram
avai
labl
e
thro
ugh
loca
lch
urch
es
Non
e$1
5fe
e2
hour
prog
ram
Gam
es,
craf
ts,
role
play
ing,
disc
ussi
ons
and
wor
kboo
ks
Yes
Div
orce
Car
efo
rK
ids:
ww
w.d
c4k.
org
New
Jers
eyN
otre
quir
edP
assa
icC
ount
yK
ids
Cou
nt
Pro
gram
isa
cour
tpr
ogra
mfo
r
chil
dren
ages
7–15
.The
part
ies
get
chos
enba
sed
onw
heth
er
cust
ody
and
pare
ntin
gti
me
isan
issu
e.
Req
uest
for
rem
oval
from
the
prog
ram
mad
edi
rect
lyto
the
Judg
e.R
emov
alis
base
don
a
case
byca
seba
sis.
Non
e1.
5ho
urpr
ogra
m
Art
,w
riti
ngan
ddi
scus
sion
sto
help
chil
dren
expr
ess
thei
r
feel
ings
abou
tdi
vorc
e
The
Pro
gram
isno
t
sim
ulta
neou
sw
ith
Pare
ntE
d,bu
tus
ually
occu
rsaf
ter
Pare
ntE
d
has
been
com
plet
ed.
Con
tact
the
Pass
aic
Cou
nty
Fam
ilyC
ourt
at(9
73)
247-
8472
New
Mex
ico
Not
requ
ired
Div
orce
Car
efo
rK
ids
(DC
4K)
isa
fait
hba
sed
prog
ram
avai
labl
e
thro
ugh
loca
lch
urch
es
Non
e$1
4–15
per
chil
d2
hour
prog
ram
Gam
es,
craf
ts,
role
play
ing,
disc
ussi
ons
and
wor
kboo
ks
Yes
ww
w.d
c4k.
org
New
Yor
kN
otre
quir
edC
hild
ren
ofD
ivor
ce
Inte
rven
tion
Pro
gram
(CO
DIP
)
isa
volu
ntar
y,pr
ivat
epr
ogra
mfo
r
chil
dren
ingr
ades
K-8
;
Chi
ldre
n’s
PAC
Tpr
ogra
mis
a
volu
ntar
y,pr
ivat
epr
ogra
mfo
r
chil
dren
;
Ban
ana
Split
sis
avo
lunt
ary,
priv
ate
prog
ram
for
chil
dren
in
grad
esK
-12
Chi
ldre
nof
Div
orce
Pro
gram
is
avo
lunt
ary,
priv
ate
prog
ram
for
pre-
scho
olag
ech
ildr
enth
roug
h
adol
esce
nts
PE
AC
E4
Kid
sis
avo
lunt
ary
prog
ram
for
chil
dren
.
Non
e
*App
lies
toal
lfo
urpr
ogra
ms
CO
DIP
,C
hild
ren’
sPA
CT
prog
ram
,an
dB
anan
aS
plit
sha
ve
noco
st
Chi
ldre
nof
Div
orce
prog
ram
–
cove
red
byin
sura
nce
asgr
oup
ther
apy
orif
noin
sura
nce,
cost
is
ona
slid
ing
scal
eba
sed
on
inco
me
PE
AC
E4
Kid
sco
sts
$90
per
chil
d;sl
idin
gsc
ale
avai
labl
e.
CO
DIP
—15
grou
p
sess
ions
—Fo
urdi
ffer
ent
curr
icul
ums
depe
ndin
gon
grad
e
leve
l—K
-1st
,2n
d-3r
d,4t
h-6t
h
and
7th-
8th
grad
e.
Chi
ldre
n’s
PAC
Tpr
ogra
m—
4
hour
prog
ram
.C
urri
culu
man
d
supp
orti
ngre
sear
chha
sju
stbe
en
refi
ned
Ban
ana
Split
s—no
spec
ific
curr
icul
um
Chi
ldre
nof
Div
orce
prog
ram
–
10se
ssio
ns,
1ho
ur/s
essi
on—
Age
appr
opri
ate
gam
es,
stor
ies
and
role
play
ing
CO
DIP
,B
anan
aS
plit
s,
and
PE
AC
E4
Kid
sar
e
not
sim
ulta
neou
sw
ith
pare
nts
prog
ram
*Not
e—C
hild
ren’
s
PAC
Tpr
ogra
man
d
Chi
ldre
nof
Div
orce
prog
ram
is
sim
ulta
neou
sw
ith
pare
nts
prog
ram
Chi
ldre
nof
Div
orce
Inte
rven
tion
Pro
gram
:
http
://w
ww
.chi
ldre
nsin
stit
ute.
net/
prog
ram
s/C
OD
IP/
Chi
ldre
n’s
PAC
Tpr
ogra
m,
Les
ley
Frie
dlan
d:(3
47)
401-
9861
Ban
ana
Split
s:w
ww
.
bana
nasp
lits
reso
urce
cent
er.
org/
inde
x.ht
ml
Chi
ldre
nof
Div
orce
prog
ram
,
Mar
ilyn
Kot
cher
:(9
14)
997-
4338
PE
AC
E4
Kid
s:
Paul
J.M
elle
r,P
h.D
.
Dir
ecto
r,In
stit
ute
for
Fam
ily
Fore
nsic
Psy
chol
ogy
Sal
tzm
anC
omm
unit
yS
ervi
ces
Cen
ter
131
Hof
stra
Uni
vers
ity
Hem
pste
ad,
New
Yor
k
1154
9-13
10
(516
)46
3-42
53
peac
e4ki
ds@
hofs
tra.
edu
536 FAMILY COURT REVIEW
Sta
teS
tatu
te/C
ourt
Ru
leR
equ
ired
Att
enda
nce
Opt
-Ou
tP
rovi
sion
sC
ost
ofA
tten
dan
ceC
urr
icu
lum
Sim
ult
aneo
us
w/
Par
ent
Pro
gram
Web
site
/C
onta
ctIn
form
atio
n
Nor
th
Car
olin
a
Not
requ
ired
Chi
ldre
n’s
Supp
ort
Gro
up
(Cum
berl
and
Cou
nty)
isa
volu
ntar
yco
urt
prog
ram
for
chil
dren
ages
8–14
Non
eN
one
1ho
urpr
ogra
m
Aco
unse
lor
spea
ksw
ith
the
chil
dren
and
read
sst
orie
s.T
hen
the
Chi
efJu
dge
wil
lsp
eak
wit
h
the
chil
dren
.
Yes
Cum
berl
and
Cou
nty
Cou
rtho
use:
(910
)67
8-29
02
Nor
th
Dak
ota
Not
requ
ired
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Deb
Geb
eke,
PhD
Ass
ista
ntD
irec
tor,
FC
S
ND
SU
Ext
ensi
onS
ervi
ce
Mor
rill
311—
PO
Box
5437
Farg
o,N
D58
105
ph:
701.
231.
7179
fax:
701.
231.
8378
Ohi
oJu
dge
may
requ
ire
chil
d
atte
ndan
cepu
rsua
ntto
Ohi
o
Cod
e§
3109
.053
Pare
ntin
g
clas
ses
orco
unse
ling
Judg
em
ayre
quir
ech
ild
atte
ndan
cepu
rsua
ntto
loca
l
Rul
esof
Pra
ctic
ean
dP
roce
dure
ofth
eD
omes
tic
Rel
atio
ns
Div
isio
nof
the
Mah
onin
g
Cou
nty
Cou
rtof
Com
mon
Ple
as
Rul
e23
.03
For
Our
Chi
ldre
n(M
ahon
ing
Cou
nty)
isa
man
dato
ryco
urt
prog
ram
for
chil
dren
ages
8–12
Chi
ldre
nin
the
Mid
dle
isa
com
preh
ensi
veed
ucat
ion
prog
ram
for
chil
dren
expe
rien
cing
thei
r
pare
nts’
sepa
rati
onor
divo
rce,
ofte
nus
edin
conj
unct
ion
wit
h
pare
nted
ucat
ion
prog
ram
usin
g
pare
ntve
rsio
nof
the
prog
ram
Non
e
Non
e
For
Our
Chi
ldre
n:N
one
Chi
ldre
nin
the
Mid
dle:
Pro
gram
can
beta
ken
over
inte
rnet
(for
$45)
wit
hab
ilit
yto
prin
tou
tce
rtifi
cate
topr
ove
com
plet
ion
2-ho
urcl
ass;
Chi
ldre
nus
ea
wor
kboo
k,w
hich
isge
ared
tote
achi
ngth
ech
ildr
en
abou
tth
eir
feel
ings
1-ho
urcl
ass;
age-
base
d(8
–18
yrs)
grou
p
sess
ions
run
wee
kly
for
4w
eeks
.
Gro
ups
shar
eex
peri
ence
san
d
wor
kon
feel
ings
usin
gvi
deo,
activ
itie
san
ddi
scus
sion
s.A
ges
2–6
prov
ided
wit
ha
book
let/
pupp
etsh
owcu
rric
ulum
.
No
Chi
ldre
n’s
prog
ram
runs
inco
njun
ctio
n
wit
hpa
rent
educ
atio
n
prog
ram
byfa
mily
serv
ice
agen
cy
Mah
onin
gC
ount
yfo
rO
ur
Chi
ldre
nP
rogr
am:
http
://w
ww
.mah
onin
gdrc
ourt
.
org/
chil
dren
_firs
t.htm
The
Cen
ter
for
Div
orce
Edu
cati
on:
http
://w
ww
.div
orce
-edu
cati
on.
com
/chi
ldre
n.ht
m
The
Cen
ter
for
Div
orce
Edu
cati
on:
740-
594-
2526
Okl
ahom
aN
otre
quir
edC
alm
Wat
ers
offe
rsa
volu
ntar
y,
priv
ate
prog
ram
for
chil
dren
and
fam
ilie
s
Non
eN
one
8-w
eek
prog
ram
Act
ivit
ies
and
disc
ussi
ons
that
allo
wch
ildr
ento
shar
eth
eir
feel
ings
and
expe
rien
ces
Yes
Cal
mW
ater
s
Cen
ter
for
Chi
ldre
nan
dFa
mil
ies
Nor
thw
est
Offi
ceC
ente
r
4334
NW
Exp
ress
way
,S
uite
101
Okl
ahom
aC
ity,
OK
7311
6
(405
)84
1.48
00
Fax
(405
)84
1.48
03
ww
w.c
alm
wat
ers.
org
Leg
alA
id,A
ttor
ney
Lin
da
Lap
ek:
Lin
da.L
apek
@la
ok.o
rg
Ore
gon
Not
requ
ired
Kid
s’T
urn
(Was
hing
ton
Cou
nty)
,
isa
priv
ate
prog
ram
avai
labl
efo
r
pare
nts
and
thei
rch
ildr
en,
ages
4–17
;
Rol
lerc
oast
ers
(Sal
em),
isa
priv
ate
prog
ram
avai
labl
efo
r
chil
dren
inth
e1s
t—6t
hgr
ade,
thro
ugh
the
YW
CA
Non
eK
ids
Turn
—$1
45pe
rpa
rent
(chi
ldre
nar
efr
ee);
Rol
lerc
oast
ers—
$29
per
chil
d
Kid
sT
urn—
4-w
eek
prog
ram
—cu
rric
ulum
teac
hes
the
chil
dren
and
pare
nts
copi
ngsk
ills
Rol
lerc
oast
ers—
8-w
eek
prog
ram
—H
elps
the
chil
dren
wit
hth
ede
velo
pmen
tal
proc
ess
duri
nga
tim
eof
adju
stm
ent
and
grie
f
Kid
sTu
rn—
Yes
Rol
lerc
oast
ers—
pare
nts
are
invi
ted
toat
tend
the
last
10–1
5m
inut
es
For
furt
her
info
rmat
ion
on
Ore
gon’
sst
atus
,co
ntac
t:
Fam
ilyL
awD
ivis
ion,
Mel
issa
Syd
lik:
503-
986-
5861
Kid
sT
urn
Pro
gram
in
Was
hing
ton
Cou
nty,
Man
dy
Ram
sey:
(503
)84
6-06
65,
kids
turn
@yo
uthc
onta
ct.o
rg
Pollet/A NATIONWIDE SURVEY OF PROGRAMS 537
Sta
teS
tatu
te/C
ourt
Ru
leR
equ
ired
Att
enda
nce
Opt
-Ou
tP
rovi
sion
sC
ost
ofA
tten
dan
ceC
urr
icu
lum
Sim
ult
aneo
us
w/
Par
ent
Pro
gram
Web
site
/C
onta
ctIn
form
atio
n
Pen
nsyl
vani
aC
hild
atte
ndan
ceis
requ
ired
purs
uant
toB
lair
Cou
nty
Cus
tody
Rul
e19
15.1
&19
15.3
Sand
cast
les
prog
ram
isa
man
dato
rypr
ogra
min
Bla
ir
Cou
nty
for
all
chil
dren
ages
6–17
who
sepa
rent
sar
ein
volv
edin
a
cust
ody
orvi
sita
tion
disp
ute.
Part
ies
may
peti
tion
for
spec
ial
reli
ef
$5pe
rch
ild
4ho
urcl
ass
Dis
cuss
ions
and
wor
kshe
ets
Yes
Bla
irC
ount
yC
usto
dyO
ffice
:
(814
)69
3-32
05
Rho
de
Isla
nd
Not
requ
ired
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Fam
ilyC
ourt
Att
orne
y,D
avid
Tso
ni:
(401
)45
8-32
81
For
furt
her
info
rmat
ion
onR
hode
Isla
nd’s
stat
us,
cont
act:
CA
SA
offi
ceat
(401
)45
8-33
30
Sout
h
Car
olin
a
Not
requ
ired
Div
orce
Car
efo
rK
ids
(DC
4K)
isa
fait
hba
sed
prog
ram
avai
labl
e
thro
ugh
loca
lch
urch
es
Non
e$0
-12
per
chil
d2
hour
prog
ram
Gam
es,
craf
ts,
role
play
ing,
disc
ussi
ons
and
wor
kboo
ks
Yes
Div
orce
Car
efo
rK
ids:
ww
w.d
c4k.
org
For
furt
her
info
rmat
ion
onS
outh
Car
olin
a’s
stat
us,
cont
act:
Fam
ilyC
ourt
Rep
rese
ntat
ive,
Cod
yL
ige:
(803
)73
4-18
00
Sout
h
Dak
ota
Not
requ
ired
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Stat
eC
ourt
Adm
inis
trat
or:
(605
)77
3-34
74
Ten
ness
eeN
otre
quir
edB
anan
aSp
lits
and
Rai
nbow
sar
e
volu
ntar
y,pr
ivat
epr
ogra
ms
avai
labl
efo
rsc
hool
-age
dch
ildr
en
Non
eN
one
Off
ered
duri
ngac
tivit
y/fr
ee
peri
ods
Ban
ana
Split
s—no
spec
ific
curr
icul
um
Rai
nbow
s—ga
mes
,st
oryb
ooks
and
jour
nali
ng
No
Ban
ana
Split
s—co
ntac
tyo
ur
loca
lsc
hool
dist
rict
for
prog
ram
avai
labi
lity
Rai
nbow
s,S
arah
Sam
berg
:(6
15)
352-
3087
For
furt
her
info
rmat
ion
on
Tenn
esse
e’s
stat
us,
cont
act:
TN
Cou
ncil
ofJu
veni
le&
Fam
ilyC
ourt
Judg
es:
(615
)
741-
2687
Tex
asN
otre
quir
edFa
mily
Lif
eE
duca
tion
isa
priv
ate,
volu
ntar
ypr
ogra
mfo
r
pare
nts
and
thei
rch
ildr
en
Pare
nts
are
not
requ
ired
tobr
ing
thei
rch
ildr
en.
Pro
gram
sof
fer
the
serv
ice
for
chil
dren
asan
extr
a
serv
ice
$15
per
chil
d4
hour
prog
ram
Cur
ricu
lum
ista
ilor
edto
mee
tth
e
chil
d’s
need
s
Yes
Dep
elch
inC
hild
ren’
sC
ente
r:
ww
w.d
epel
chin
.org
Offi
ceof
Cou
rtA
dmin
istr
atio
n:
(512
)46
3-16
25
Uta
hN
otre
quir
edD
ivor
ceE
duca
tion
for
Chi
ldre
n
isa
cour
tpr
ogra
mav
aila
ble
for
chil
dren
ages
9–12
who
sepa
rent
s
have
file
dfo
rdi
vorc
ein
Sal
tL
ake
Cou
nty
Non
eN
one
2ho
urpr
ogra
m
Edu
cati
onal
-bas
edcu
rric
ulum
whe
rech
ildr
enle
arn
copi
ngsk
ills
tode
alw
ith
the
effe
cts
ofdi
vorc
e
Yes
Offi
ceof
Cou
rtA
dmin
istr
atio
n:
(801
)57
8-38
00
Uta
hD
ivor
ceO
rien
tati
onan
d
Edu
cati
onfo
rP
aren
ts:
ww
w.u
tcou
rts.
gov/
spec
proj
/
dive
d.ht
m
Ver
mon
tN
otre
quir
edN
/AN
/AN
/AN
/AN
/ASu
prem
eC
ourt
and
Cou
rt
Adm
inis
trat
ors
Offi
ce:
(802
)
828-
3278
538 FAMILY COURT REVIEW
Sta
teS
tatu
te/C
ourt
Ru
leR
equ
ired
Att
enda
nce
Opt
-Ou
tP
rovi
sion
sC
ost
ofA
tten
dan
ceC
urr
icu
lum
Sim
ult
aneo
us
w/
Par
ent
Pro
gram
Web
site
/C
onta
ctIn
form
atio
n
Vir
gini
aN
otre
quir
edR
ainb
ows
isa
volu
ntar
y,pr
ivat
e
prog
ram
avai
labl
efo
rel
emen
tary
thro
ugh
high
scho
ol-a
ged
chil
dren
Non
eN
one
12–1
4se
ssio
ns,
30–6
0m
inut
es
per
sess
ion
Gam
es,
stor
yboo
ksan
d
jour
nali
ng
No
Ron
aH
amm
ond
Smit
h:(3
01)
292-
5511
Jean
Dild
ay:
(757
)48
2-38
05
Vir
gini
aJu
dici
alSy
stem
Par
ent
Edu
cati
on:
http
://w
ww
.cou
rts.
stat
e.va
.us/
pare
nted
/pro
vide
rs.h
tml
Was
hing
ton
Not
requ
ired
Ban
ana
Split
sis
avo
lunt
ary,
priv
ate
prog
ram
avai
labl
eth
roug
h
loca
lsc
hool
dist
rict
sfo
r
scho
ol-a
ged
chil
dren
Non
eN
one
Off
ered
duri
ngac
tivit
y/fr
ee
peri
ods
No
spec
ific
curr
icul
um
No
Cal
lyo
urlo
cal
scho
oldi
stri
ctfo
r
prog
ram
avai
labi
lity
Fam
ilyC
ourt
Serv
ices
(Cla
rk
Co.
):(3
60)
397-
2326
Cla
rkC
ount
yW
ashi
ngto
n
Fam
ilyC
ourt
Serv
ices
:
http
://w
ww
.cla
rk.w
a.go
v/
cour
ts/s
uper
ior/
fam
ily-c
ourt
.htm
l
Wes
t
Vir
gini
a
Not
requ
ired
Kid
sIn
volv
edin
Div
orce
Supp
ort
(KID
S)is
a
cour
t-fu
nded
pilo
tpr
ogra
min
Fam
ilyC
ourt
Cir
cuit
Six
(Cab
ell
Cou
nty)
for
chil
dren
ages
6–15
;a
chil
d’s
enro
llm
ent
inth
isco
urse
isup
toth
edi
scre
tion
ofth
e
pare
nts.
Non
eN
one
One
clas
sfo
rch
ildr
enag
es6–
10,
and
one
clas
sfo
rch
ildr
enag
es
11–1
5
Pro
gram
isba
sed
onth
e
San
dcas
tles
prog
ram
.C
hild
ren
part
icip
ate
inac
tivit
ies
tohe
lp
them
cope
wit
hth
ese
para
tion
or
divo
rce.
The
clas
sw
ill
also
help
expl
ain
the
divo
rce
proc
ess.
Yes
KID
SC
lass
Coo
rdin
ator
,
Mor
gan
Con
ley:
(304
)69
7-91
96;
Bar
bara
Fett
y,C
abel
lC
o.:
(304
)
526-
8530
Wis
cons
inN
otre
quir
edC
hild
ren
inth
eM
iddl
eis
a
cour
tpr
ogra
mfo
rch
ildr
enag
es
5–12
who
have
had
agu
ardi
anad
lite
map
poin
ted.
Chi
ldre
nm
ay
also
atte
ndvo
lunt
arily
.
Non
e$2
0pe
rfa
mily
One
sess
ion
Cop
ing
stra
tegi
esar
ein
trod
uced
and
the
foll
owin
gto
pics
are
disc
usse
d:ca
rryi
ngm
essa
ges
betw
een
pare
nts,
mon
eyis
sues
,
crit
icis
ms
ofth
eot
her
pare
nt,
and
the
quiz
zing
ofch
ildr
enab
out
the
othe
rpa
rent
No
Fam
ilyR
esou
rce
Cen
ter:
ww
w.f
dlfr
c.or
gor
(920
)92
3-41
10
Fam
ilyC
ourt
Serv
ices
:(9
20)
929-
3404
Chi
ldre
n’s
Cou
rtIm
prov
emen
t
Pro
gram
,Offi
ceof
Cou
rt
Ope
rati
ons:
(608
)26
6-15
57
Pro
ject
Coo
rdin
ator
for
Chi
ldre
n’s
Cou
rtIn
itia
tive
,
Bri
dget
Bau
man
:
Bri
dget
.bau
man
@w
icou
rts.
gov
Wyo
min
gJu
dge
may
requ
ire
chil
d
atte
ndan
ce;
Cam
pbel
lC
ount
yis
the
only
Cou
nty
inth
eS
tate
that
requ
ires
man
dato
ryat
tend
ance
thro
ugh
aC
ourt
-ord
ered
decr
ee
Sand
cast
les
isa
man
dato
ryco
urt
prog
ram
inC
ampb
ell
Cou
nty
for
chil
dren
ages
6–17
Judg
e’s
disc
reti
on$3
5pe
rch
ild
or$7
0pe
rfa
mily
31/
2ho
urpr
ogra
m
Wor
kboo
ks,
vide
osan
dro
le
play
ing
Yes
Cle
rkof
the
Dis
tric
tC
ourt
:
(307
)68
2-34
24
Cou
rtA
dmin
istr
atio
n:(3
07)
777-
7583
Chi
ldre
n’s
Just
ice
Pro
ject
:
tack
erm
an@
cour
ts.s
tate
.wy.
us
Pollet/A NATIONWIDE SURVEY OF PROGRAMS 539
Continuation of Appendix A
KEY
1. States (or specific counties within a state) where all children of divorcing and separatingparents are required to attend a program;
Alabama, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi,Pennsylvania, Wyoming
2. States (or specific counties within a state) where judges, in their discretion, can requirechildren whose parents are separating or divorcing to attend a program pursuant to legis-lation, court order, administrative order, administrative family court memorandum, or localcourt or county rules.
Alabama, Arizona, California, Iowa, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio,Wyoming
3. States that do not require children whose parents are separating or divorcing to attend aprogram, meaning that while a Judge may refer a child to a program, there is no legislationin place that allows the Judge the ability to mandate child attendance through a court order.
Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas,Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hamp-shire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma,Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont,Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin
NOTES
1. The views expressed in this article belong to Susan L. Pollet and do not reflect the views of the New YorkState Unified Court System. I am grateful to Courtney Chadwell, Maria Finocchio, Erin Hanlon and BrendaHernandez, Pace Law Student Interns, for their extensive research which formed the basis for this article and thechart and key in Appendix A.
2. Kate Stone Lombardi, Making a Case for Staying Together, N.Y. TIMES, Feb. 4, 2001, available athttp://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9A0CE2DD143EF937A35751C0A9679C8B6.
3. Marisa LaScala, P.O.V.:We Still Love You But Not Each Other: What Happens To The Kids of DivorcedParents? WESTCHESTER MAG., May 2008, available at http://www.westchestermagazine.com/Westchester-Magazine/May-2008/POV/.
4. National Center for Health Statistics, http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/divorce.htm.5. Children’s Institute, Children of Divorce Intervention Program, www.childrensinstitute.net/programs/
CODIP/details/.6. Joan B. Kelly, Psychological and Legal Interventions for Parents and Children in Custody and Access
Disputes: Current Research and Practice, 10 VA. J. SOC. POL’Y & L. 129, 130–31 (2002).7. Constance Myers Cottongim, The School’s Role as a Support System for Children of Parental Divorce
(Dec. 2002) (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, East Tennessee State University)(on file with the author).8. See Appendix A herein.9. See Appendix A herein.10. Id.11. Id.12. Id.
540 FAMILY COURT REVIEW
13. Id.14. Kelly, supra note 6, at 149.15. Susan L. Pollet & Melissa Lombreglia, A Nationwide Survey of Mandatory Parent Education, 46 FAM. CT.
REV. 375 (2008).16. Kelly, supra note 6, at 136.17. See Appendix A.18. Anna L. Davis et al., The Effects of Divorce on Children, 10 ABELL REP. 1, 7 (November/December 1997).19. Deborah B. Gentry, Including Children in Divorce Mediation and Education: Potential Benefits and
Cautions, 78 FAM. SOC’Y J. CONTEMP. HUM. SERVICES 307, 313 (1997).20. Robyn J. Geelhoed et al., Status of Court-Connected Programs for Children Whose Parents are Separating
or Divorcing, 39 FAM. CT. REV. 393, 396 (2001).21. Kelly, supra note 6, at 136.22. Id. at 136–37.23. Janice L. DeLucia-Waack & Rebecca A. Gellman, The Efficacy of Using Music in Children of Divorce
Groups: Impact on Anxiety, Depression, and Irrational Beliefs About Divorce, 11 GROUP DYNAMICS: THEORY,RES. & PRAC. 272 (2007).
24. Laurie Kramer et al., Implementation and Diffusion of the Rainbows Program in Rural Communities:Implications for School-based Prevention Programming, 11 J. EDUC. & PSYCHOL. CONSULTATION 37 (2000). Seealso Rainbows.org., Independent Evaluation (March 2000), available at http://www.rainbows.org/indeval.html foran evaluation of the Rainbows program, a small-group program, for children and adolescents who are experienc-ing a divorce, death, or other painful transition in their family.
25. Andrew Schepard, Court-Affiliated Educational Programs For Kids of Divorce, Separation, N.Y.L.J., Mar.7, 2002, at 3.
26. John H. Grych, Interparental Conflict As a Risk Factor For Child Maladjustment: Implications For TheDevelopment Of Prevention Programs, 43 FAM. CT. REV. 97, 105 (2005).
27. See Appendix A.28. Grych, supra note 26, at 105.29. Id.30. JoAnne L. Pedro-Carroll, Fostering Resilience in the Aftermath of Divorce: The Role of Evidence-Based
Programs for Children, 43 FAM. CT. REV. 52, 54 (2005).31. Id.32. DeLucia-Waack, supra note 23, at 272.33. Jeffrey T. Cookston et al., Prospects for Expanded Parent Education Services for Divorcing Families with
Children, 40 FAM. CT. REV. 190 (2002).34. Grych, supra note 26, at 105.35. BRITISH COLUMBIA, MINISTRY OF ATTORNEY GENERAL, FAMILY JUSTICE SERVS. DIV., REPORT ON
CHILDREN’S PROGRAMS ON DIVORCE AND SEPARATION (Mar. 2003).36. DeLucia-Waack, supra note 23, at 273.37. Id.38. Rachel A. Haine et al., Changing the Legacy of Divorce: Evidence From Prevention Programs and Future
Directions, 52 FAM. REL. 397, 397 (2003).39. Id. at 403.40. Pedro-Carroll, supra note 30, at 55.41. Id.42. Id.43. Id.44. Id. at 56.45. Id. at 55.46. Interview with JoAnne Pedro-Carroll, Ph.D., Director of CODIP (April 22, 2008); see JoAnne Pedro-
Carroll & Sheryl H. Jones, A Prevenive Play Intervention to Foster Children’s Resilience in the Aftermath ofDivorce, in EMPIRICALLY BASED PLAY INTERVENTIONS FOR CHILDREN (Linda A. Reddy ed., 2005).
47. Interview with JoAnne Pedro-Carroll, Ph.D., supra note 46.48. DeLucia-Waack, supra note 23, at 279.49. Jan Gilman et al., Children’s Ability to Cope Post-Divorce: The Effects of Kids’ Turn Intervention Program
on 7 to 9 Year Olds, 42 J. DIVORCE & REMARRIAGE 109 (2005).50. Id.51. Id. at 109–10.
Pollet/A NATIONWIDE SURVEY OF PROGRAMS 541
52. Bruce F. Dykeman, The Effects of Family Conflict Resolution on Children’s Classroom Behavior, 30 J.INSTRUCTIONAL PSYCHOL. 41 (2003).
53. Id.54. Id.55. Sharlene A. Wolchik et al., Six-Year Follow-Up of Preventive Interventions for Children of Divorce: A
Randomized Controlled Trial, 288 J. AM. MED. ASS’N 1874, 1875 (2002).56. Id. at 1874.57. Robert L. Fischer, Children in Changing Families: Results of a Pilot Study of a Program for Children of
Separation and Divorce, 37 FAM. & CONCILIATION CTS. REV. 240 (1999).58. BRITISH COLUMBIA, MINISTRY OF ATTORNEY GENERAL, FAMILY JUSTICE SERVS. DIV, supra
note 35.59. Joe Edgar Glenn, Divorce Education for Parents and Children in Jackson County, Missouri, 36 FAM. &
CONCILIATION CTS. REV. 503 (1998).60. Id. at 507.61. Id. at 504.62. Id. at 504; see also, Appendix A.63. Glenn, supra note 59, at 504.64. Id. at 505.65. Douglas Hanze & Karen Jamieson-Darr, Integrated Child and Parent Divorce Class Offered in Jefferson
County, COLO. LAW. May 31, 2002, at 89.66. Id. at 90–91.67. Id. at 92.68. Charlene Deiber Anaya & Jeanne M. White, Kids First, HAW. B. J., Dec. 10, 2006, at 5.69. Id. at 5–6.70. Id. at 6.71. Id. at 6.72. Id. at 6.73. Report from Jenny Schulz, Kids First Law Center to Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller (Jan. 22, 2008),
available at http://www.legis.state.ia.us/lsadocs/sc_MaterialsDist/2008/SDBAL 005.pdf.74. Id.75. Id.76. Peace: Parent Education and Custody Effectiveness, The Center for Children, Families and the Law,
http://www.hofstra.edu/pdf/law_center_family_peace.pdf77. Interview with Hon. Jane Pearl and the Administrator, Lesley Friedland, Esq., (June, 2008).78. See The New York State Parent Education & Awareness Program, www.nycourts.gov/parent-ed79. Children’s Institute, Children of Divorce Intervention Program, www.childrensinstitute.net/programs/
CODIP/details80. Id.81. Id.82. Marilyn Kotcher, The Children of Divorce Program at NYPH: Helping Families and Children Normalize
a Difficult Transition. 9 MENTAL HEALTH NEWS 8, Winter, 2007.83. Id.84. Andrew Schepard, Joan Atwood & Stephen W. Schlissel, Preventing Trauma for the Children of Divorce
Through Education and Professional Responsibility, 16 NOVA L. REV. 767, 772 (1992).85. Id. at 777.86. Id.87. Cookston et al., supra note 33, at 190–91.88. Id. at 199.89. Id. at 201.90. Schepard, supra note 25, at 3.91. BRITISH COLUMBIA, MINISTRY OF ATTORNEY GENERAL, supra note 35.92. Grych, supra note 26, at 102.
Susan L. Pollet is counsel and director of the New York State Parent Education and Awareness Program,an initiative of former Chief Judge Judith S. Kaye and Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman. She is a graduate
542 FAMILY COURT REVIEW
of Emory University School of Law and Cornell University. Prior to her position at the Office of CourtAdministration, she was the executive director of the Pace Women’s Justice Center. She is a recipient of theJoseph F. Gagliardi Award for Excellence and the Marilyn Menge Award for Service. She is the publishedauthor of fifty legal articles and is a past president of the Westchester Women’s Bar Association (WWBA)and a past vice-president of the Women’s Bar Association of the State of New York (WBASNY). She iscurrently an Officer of the Board of the NY Chapter of AFCC, is Co-Chair of the Domestic ViolenceCommittee for WBASNY and serves as Archivist and Historian for the WWBA.
Pollet/A NATIONWIDE SURVEY OF PROGRAMS 543