Premium
Judicial settlement‐seeking in parenting disputes: Consensus and controversy
Author(s) -
Semple Noel
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
conflict resolution quarterly
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.323
H-Index - 21
eISSN - 1541-1508
pISSN - 1536-5581
DOI - 10.1002/crq.21041
Subject(s) - settlement (finance) , mediation , coercion (linguistics) , law , political science , child custody , best interests , family law , empirical research , meaning (existential) , negotiation , alternative dispute resolution , psychology , social psychology , criminology , psychotherapist , linguistics , philosophy , epistemology , world wide web , computer science , payment
The judicial role in child custody and visitation disputes has traditionally been understood as one of authoritative decision‐making. However this new empirical research suggests that many family court judges prioritize the pursuit of voluntary settlement in pre‐trial conferences, using evaluative and facilitative mediation techniques. Drawing on qualitative interviews with judges and other family law professionals in Toronto and New York City, this article identifies points of consensus and controversy among settlement‐seeking family judges. Despite the general support for settlement‐seeking, there are substantial differences of opinion regarding coercion, due process, and the meaning of the best interests of the child standard.