Extra‐Judicial Conferences in Child Welfare Cases: Reassessing their Role and Implications for Practice and Policy

• Date: 01 March 2017
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/jfcj.12085
• Author: Kara R. Finck
• Published date: 01 March 2017

Extra-Judicial Conferences in Child Welfare

Cases: Reassessing their Role and Implications

for Practice and Policy

By Kara R. Finck

ABSTRACT

Child welfare agencies increasingly utilize family team decision-making

conferences in cases where there is a pending child protection matter in family

court. The simultaneous proceedings present critical questions for all practition-

ers and judges about the relationship between the court and the agency, and

implications for the rights of parents and children. This article discusses the

critical tensions raised when the agency pursues extra-judicial conferences in the

absence of coordination with and recognition of the court process, including

expectations of confidentiality, the role of attorneys in conferences and the per-

ception of fairness in both forums.

Key words: Child Welfare, Representing Parents, Representing Children, Family Team

Conferences.

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, child welfare practices have shifted towards a more collaborative

team decision-making based model of practice, exemplified by Family Team Confer-

ences, Family Service Plans and Family Group Decision Making meetings. These confer-

ences utilize strengths based and consensus building principles from social work practice

to engage families involved in the child welfare system in order to facilitate a path

towards reunification. As one child welfare administrator described the conferences, the

“focus of this collaborative approach to working with families has been on a strengths

based practice leading to the empowerment of families to make good decisions and

Kara R. Finck, Practice Associate Professor of Law, directs Penn Law’s Interdisciplinary Child Advo-

cacy Clinic focusing on the legal needs of children and families through holistic legal representation. She

was previously the Managing Attorney of the Family Defense Practice at The Bronx Defenders, where she

created an interdisciplinary legal practice for parents involved in the child welfare system. Her areas of spe-

cialty include child welfare, parents’ rights and interdisciplinary practice focusing on law and social work

collaboration, including the text Social Work Practice and the Law, co-authored with Dr. Lyn Slater, PhD

(Springer Publishing, 2011).

Juvenile and Family Court Journal 68, No. 1

©2017 National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges

49

appropriate plans.”

1

Increasingly, these conferences are being relied on when the child

welfare agency has already initiated the formal judicial process by filing an abuse or

neglect petition, thereby become extra-judicial in nature. When not coordinated with

the judicial process and cognizant of the legal rights of parents and children in the legal

process, the conferences create not merely confusion but the potential for undermining

the legitimacy of the court process.

This article raises the question of whether the rise of extra judicial conferences

in the child welfare system is productively supplementing the court process or

entirely supplanting it, particularly in cases where the family is already involved in

family court. The focus is on the use of family group conferencing specifically in cases

where a petition alleging abuse or neglect has or will be imminently filed. When the

collaborative conferences occur simultaneously with the dependency court process,

questions of legal rights and procedural justice are inevitably implicated. Yet, the

roles of the court, attorneys and judges are significantly absent from discussions of

the merits of family team conferencing in the child welfare system and training man-

uals for child welfare professionals. This gap is indicative of the larger disconnect in

child welfare practice between the processes outside of court and the legal proceedings

inside the court. While the most prevalent models of family team conferences empha-

size transparency and family empowerment, omitting the role of the court and legal

advocates for both parents and children threatens to diminish both of those goals.

The first section defines the family group decision-making model, and its various

iterations and goals. Then, I relate my experiences participating in extra judicial confer-

ences and the tensions created by the lack of coordination between the two processes.

The article then considers pertinent issues about the model, implementation and growth

of family group conferences. Finally, the discussion shifts to practice implications for

parents’ attorneys, child advocates, and the judiciary when engaging with extra-judicial

conferences. Ultimately, if the trend towards extra-judicial conferencing continues, advo-

cates need to reconsider their role, legal advice and case strategy for children and families

both in and out of the court.

DEFINING EXTRA JUDICIAL CONFERENCES:

UNDERSTANDING THE HISTORY, THEORY AND MODELS OF

FAMILY GROUP DECISION MAKING CONFERENCES

The focus of this article is on the use of family group conferencing as an extra-judi-

cial process, defined as cases where a petition alleging abuse or neglect has already been

filed or will be imminently filed as a result of the emergency removal of a child. This does

not include when parents have an ongoing investigation by the child welfare system and

engage in preventive services without ever becoming parties to an abuse and neglect case

in court. It does include those instances where a conference is held days or hours before

1

Peter E. Vriens, Pennsylvania Family Group Decision Making Toolkit: A Resource to Guide and Support

Best Practice Implementation, PA FGDM LEADERSHIP TEAM, 16 (2008), http://www.pacwcbt.pitt.edu/Organi

zational Effectiveness/FGDM Evaluation PDFs/FGDM Toolkit.pdf.

50 | JUVENILE AND FAMILY COURT JOURNAL