AFCC 61st Annual Conference Workshop 24 Evaluation

Workshop 24: Culture vs. The Court: The Case for Culture as a Customary Factor to Consider

This workshop explores the case for making culture a customary factor for consideration in parenting plan evaluations. The presenter will examine the definition of culture, the role of culture in factors relevant to parenting evaluations and best interests of the child standards, parenting differences and similarities across cultures, parenting laws, ethical guidelines, examples of cultural bias in cases, and how to create a cultural profile of a family.

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. Explain at least one reason why it is important to consider culture in making parental access determinations	1. Explain at least one reason why it is important to consider culture in making parental access determinations 1	1. Explain at least one reason why it is important to consider culture in making parental access determinations 2	1. Explain at least one reason why it is important to consider culture in making parental access determinations 3	1. Explain at least one reason why it is important to consider culture in making parental access determinations 4	1. Explain at least one reason why it is important to consider culture in making parental access determinations 5
2. Discuss at least one example of how parenting differs across cultures.	2. Discuss at least one example of how parenting differs across cultures. 1	2. Discuss at least one example of how parenting differs across cultures. 2	2. Discuss at least one example of how parenting differs across cultures. 3	2. Discuss at least one example of how parenting differs across cultures. 4	2. Discuss at least one example of how parenting differs across cultures. 5

Question Title

* 2. Please rate presenter: Chioma Ajoku, JD, PhD, ABPP (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

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

Question Title

* 3. The content of the presentation was consistent with the abstract in the conference brochure

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

AFCC 61st Annual Conference Workshop 24 Evaluation

Question Title

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

Question Title

* 2. Please rate presenter: Chioma Ajoku, JD, PhD, ABPP (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

Question Title

* 3. The content of the presentation was consistent with the abstract in the conference brochure

Question Title

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

Question Title

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

Question Title

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

Question Title

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

Question Title

* 8. Additional Comments