Family Law Newsletter

Publication year1978
Pages1614
7 Colo.Law. 1614
Colorado Lawyer
1978.

1978, September, Pg. 1614. Family Law Newsletter




1614



Vol. 7, No. 9, Pg. 1614

Family Law Newsletter

A New Service Available for Incestuous Families

Dr. E. Spencer Friedman, clinical psychologist with the Children's Hospital, 1056 East 19th Avenue, in Denver advises us of a Family Therapy Program which provides psychotherapeutic services to incestuous families.

Dr. Friedman stated that the Family Therapy Program at Children's Hospital is a three-year privately funded program designed to provide psychotherapy for families who are engaged in incestuous behavior. The program serves the Denver metropolitan area and works closely with the various county departments of social services and juvenile and criminal justice systems.

The Family Therapy Program defines incest as any sexual act occurring between inappropriate members within a family system, e.g., parent and child, uncle and niece, siblings. The treatment program will be most appropriate for family systems where all members are available to participate in treatment. However, treatment will be available for the remaining family system if the perpetrator is out of the home and/or unavailable for treatment. The program is under the directorship of Dr. Friedman and inquiries regarding the program and referrals should be made to Kassy Erwin at 861--8888, extension 2135--2138.

FAMILY LAW CAPSULES

Judges Duress Results in Voidable Agreement

A trial judge must use care in how he urges settlement or the agreement can be held voidable on appeal.

The Iowa Supreme Court held a property settlement agreement voidable in a case where the trial judge conferred with counsel prior to the hearing and urged settlement. The judge also offered to speak to the parties to see if a settlement could be achieved. The problem centered around the husband's business, which the wife wanted to share in after twenty-eight and one half years of marriage. At the meeting with the judge, the attorneys and the clients, the judge gave his impression that the wife could have no interest in the business because it was personal to the husband. After the meeting, the wife's lawyer stated to her that the judge's comments would not be cause for a mistrial and he urged her to settle on the basis that she would receive more in alimony in a settlement than she would be awarded if the case went to trial. One and one half hours later, a...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT