Advance Orientation Improves Ecological Validity in PPEs
Research across many fields demonstrates that when consumers participate in an advance orientation (AO) they are more satisfied with the service, the service is likely to be more efficient and effective, and there are many fewer complaints about the provider. This program introduces AO to family law. Participants learn to distinguish AO from informed consent and from coaching. Preliminary data documenting the value of AO for parenting plan evaluations (PPE) are discussed. The programs available via DefuseDivorce.com are introduced as an example of what AO looks like in practice.

Question Title

* 1. Based on the content of this session, I am able to (1=Strongly disagree, 5=Strongly agree):

  1 2 3 4 5
1. Critically examine research demonstrating that select samples of parents who completed parenting plan evaluation (PPE) were generally dissatisfied both with the process and the outcome.
2. Consider past and possible means of improving both consumer satisfaction and the efficiency and efficacy of PPEs.
3. Take away a foundational understanding of the empirically demonstrated value of advance orientation (AO) in fields including medicine, nursing, dentistry, public health, and genetic screening.
4. Import the value of AO into family law and particularly with litigating parents court-ordered to participate in PPE.
5. Examine the value to families, to professionals, and to the courts of providing AO such as that now available through Defusedivorce.com.

Question Title

* 2. Please rate presenter: Benjamin D. Garber, PhD (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

  1 2 3 4 5
Level of knowledge and expertise
Teaching ability
Maintained my interest
Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions

Question Title

* 3. Please rate presenter: Chris Mulchay, PhD, ABPP (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

  1 2 3 4 5
Level of knowledge and expertise
Teaching ability
Maintained my interest
Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions

Question Title

* 4. Please rate presenter: Fannie Locat, PsyD(c) (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

  1 2 3 4 5
Level of knowledge and expertise
Teaching ability
Maintained my interest
Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions

Question Title

* 5. Please rate presenter: Simon Carrier, PsyD(c) (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

  1 2 3 4 5
Level of knowledge and expertise
Teaching ability
Maintained my interest
Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions

Question Title

* 6. The content of the presentation was consistent with the abstract in the symposium brochure

Question Title

* 7. Please rate this session presentation overall (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

Question Title

* 8. How much did you learn as a result of this CE program? (1=Very little, 5=Great deal)

Question Title

* 9. Information presented in this session reflected the most current evidence on this topic (1=Disagree, 5=Agree)

Question Title

* 10. How useful was the content of this CE program for your practice or other professional development (1=Not useful, 5=Extremely useful)

Question Title

* 11. Additional Comments

T