Including Children’s Voices in Family Law Proceedings: Risks and Unintended Consequences
Hearing from children has become the directive in family law processes, giving them “a voice but not a choice.” This plenary will address concerns and unintended consequences associated with involving children. The presenters will examine the risks in cases with alleged abuse and in resist-refuse cases when children speak with multiple professionals. When cases involve professionals in a variety of roles, coordination between them can limit harm to children. This plenary session will consider safety risks to the children and other family members when children are encouraged to give information that reflects negatively on their parent(s). The panelists will address helping children understand how confidentiality limits are different across professional roles and legal processes. The presenters will discuss how ethical standards and laws differ based on jurisdiction, and how this impacts the type of information that professionals may elicit.

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. Discuss the potential risks of involving children in family law cases, especially in situations with alleged abuse or conflicts between parents.
2. Identify how different professionals (like attorneys, evaluators, therapists, and mediators) can safely and ethically interview children in family law cases.
3. Recognize the need to explain confidentiality limits to children in family law cases and ensure they understand how their information may be used by different professionals.

Question Title

* 2. Please rate presenter: Mindy F. Mitnick, EdM, MA (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: Hon. Denise McColley (Ret.) (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: April Harris-Britt, 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

* 5. Please rate presenter: Alexander D. Jones, JD, MSW (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. Please rate presenter: Kelly Browe Olson, JD, LLM (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

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

Question Title

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

Question Title

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

Question Title

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

Question Title

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

Question Title

* 12. Additional Comments

T