Responding to severe parent-child rejection cases without a parentectomy : a blended sequential intervention model and the role of the courts

Shely Polak, Tom Altobelli, Linda Popielarczyk

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

There have been significant developments over the past two decades that have expanded our understanding of the dynamics of parent–child contact problems post-separation, which have resulted in some changes in judicial processes to respond to these cases. One significant advancement is a more sophisticated differentiation of the nature and severity of contact problems, which better assists legal and mental health professionals to provide more suitable legal and clinical interventions. However, the issue of innovative court processes has received limited attention. The authors describe a subgroup of families within the “severe” category, for whom an expanded intervention model, referred to as a Blended Sequential Intervention is proposed. This approach involves a reversal of care with court mandated therapeutic support for the rejected parent and child, but also involves the favored parent in the therapeutic plan from the outset, and is intended to avoid a permanent “parentectomy” of the child from either parent. The authors discuss how the courts should respond to these cases, and posit that until all therapeutic treatments are exhausted, interim orders should be preferred to final determinations, and judges should maintain oversight. The authors discuss the critical role of judicial leadership in working with lawyers and mental health professionals to manage and address the issues in these high conflict cases.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)507-524
Number of pages18
JournalFamily Court Review
Volume58
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2020

Keywords

  • divorce
  • judges
  • parent and child
  • transfer (law)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Responding to severe parent-child rejection cases without a parentectomy : a blended sequential intervention model and the role of the courts'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this