U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

CHILD PROTECTION MEDIATION IN THE JUVENILE COURT

NCJ Number
148010
Journal
Judges' Journal Volume: 33 Issue: 1 Dated: (Winter 1994) Pages: 14-19
Author(s)
N Thoennes
Date Published
1994
Length
6 pages
Annotation
Juvenile courts in Los Angeles County, Hartford (Connecticut), and Orange County (California) use child protection mediation as an alternative to pretrial approaches.
Abstract
Proponents of the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques believe they save court time, strengthen the caseworker's role to the parents, and encourage parents to face up to their responsibilities. Mediation is also thought to be less detrimental to the family than adjudication. Opponents of mediation voice concerns about protecting the child and safeguarding parental rights. Participants in the mediation process usually include the caseworker, legal counsel for the parents, and the guardian ad litem for the child. Issues to mediate relate to the detention hearing, jurisdictional hearing, and dispositional hearing. Settlement rates in mediation ranged from 60 to 80 percent at these three sites; the only differences between mediated and nonmediated plans was the greater likelihood that victims would receive services through mediated agreement. While compliance in general was a problem, the rate of compliance was higher for mediated than nonmediated agreements. Most people involved in mediation at these three courts agreed that mediation is an improvement over other pretrial approaches, it requires a neutral facilitator, and it should be mandatory and confidential in all juvenile courts. 5 notes

Downloads

No download available

Availability