IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT, WITH THE EXCLUSION OF HOMICIDE, CHILD ABUSE SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE CRIMINAL CODE DOMAIN IN FAVOR OF CIVIL JURISDICTION. HOWEVER, IT IS BELIEVED THAT IN SPITE OF THIS CHANGE CHILD PROTECTION WORKERS WOULD REMAIN RELUCTANT TO USE THE COURTS IN DEALING WITH CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT SITUATIONS, BECAUSE: 1) THERE IS A STRONGLY HELD VIEW THAT PARENTS' RIGHT TO CUSTODY OF THEIR CHILDREN SHOULD NOT BE VIOLATED; 2) RESTRICTED INTAKE IS URGED DUE TO THE COST OF FOSTER CARE; 3) FEAR THAT COURT PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE CHILD PROTECTION AGENCY MAY UNDERMINE THE HELPING RELATIONSHIP ESTABLISHED WITH THE PARENTS; AND 4) PREVIOUS EXPERIENCES WITH THE COURTS INVOLVING OUTCOMES DETRIMENTAL TO THE FAMILY SITUATION. IMPROVEMENT IN INTAKE AND SCREENING PROCESSES AND INFORMAL CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN JUDGES AND CHILD PROTECTION AGENCY STAFF ARE RECOMMENDED AS WAYS OF IMPROVING THE USE OF THE COURTS IN TREATING CHILD ABUSE CASES. THE ADVERSARY SYSTEM IN FORMAL JUDICIAL PROCESSES IS BELIEVED TO BE DESTRUCTIVE IN CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT CASES BECAUSE OF ITS ACCUSATORY CHARACTER. A JUDICIAL CONFERENCE, OR AN INFORMAL CONFERENCE WITH THE PARENTS, THEIR ATTORNEY, AND POSSIBLY WITH THE PRINCIPAL CASEWORKER IS RECOMMENDED AS A MORE APPROPRIATE PROCEDURE DEVELOPING A PLAN TO DEAL WITH ABUSIVE PATTERNS. IT IS ARGUED THAT ABOUT 95 PERCENT OF REFERRED CASES CAN BE SETTLED BY THIS METHOD. (RCB)