Reducing the Scientific Bench to Judicial Bench Research‐to‐Practice Gap: Applications of Implementation Science to Family Law Research and Practice

• Published date: 01 October 2021
• Author: Brittany N. Rudd,Rinad S. Beidas
• Date: 01 October 2021
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12606

REDUCING THE SCIENTIFIC BENCH TO JUDICIAL BENCH

RESEARCH-TO-PRACTICE GAP: APPLICATIONS OF

IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE TO FAMILY LAW RESEARCH AND

PRACTICE

Brittany N. Rudd and Rinad S. Beidas

As is the case in most fields, the research-to-practice gap in family law is wide. The field of implementation science has

emerged to attenuate these research-to-practice gaps. The goal of this article is to provide an overviewof implementation sci-

ence because drawing from efforts to reduce research-to-practice gaps in health care and other related fields can help the fam-

ily court ameliorate its own. The current article will present an overview of implementation science, focusing specifically on

how family law stakeholders can use implementation science to accelerate the implementation of evidence-based practices,

such as universal screening for intimate partner violence and the provision of parent education to divorcing parents, in their

court settings. We provide practical examples and recommendations for family law practitioners seeking to implement

evidence-based practices into their settings, and we also highlight opportunities for family law researchers to integrate imple-

mentation science into future research.

Key Points for the Family Law Community

There are research-to-practice gaps in family law.

The field of implementation science seeks to identify methods to reduce these gaps.

Family law practitioners can use implementation research to inform their implementation practice.

There are many opportunities for family law researchers to harness implementation science to advance their

own work.

Keywords: Evidence-Based Practice; Implementation Practice; Implementation Science; Parental Separation; Research-to-Prac-

tice Gaps.

Family law practitioners, including but not limited to judges, lawyers, mediators, child custody

evaluators, parent educators, and family social workers and psychologists, serve vulnerable families

as these families navigate challenging transitions such as parental divorce and separation, as well as

intimate partner violence (Grall, 2020). Family law practitioners are guided by the “best interests of

the child”statute. While there is no standard definition for this statute and the factors used to make

this determination vary by state, this term generally refers to the deliberation courts undertake when

determining the services, actions, and orders (hereafter collectively referred to as family law “prac-

tices”) that are best for the child, as well as who is ultimately best suited to care for the child (Child

Welfare Information Gateway, 2016). Thought leaders have argued that what is best for the child is

ensuring that family law practitioners use, at a minimum, evidence-informed practices, and when-

ever possible, evidence-based practices (EBPs) (Beck, Holtzworth-Munroe, D’Onofrio, Fee, &

Hill, 2009; Salem, Sandler, & Wolchik, 2013)—the theme of this special issue of Family Court

Review. In recognition that there is room for improvement when it comes to the implementation of

EBPs within the family law context, and to safeguard against scholar-advocacy bias (Emery

et al., 2016; Sandler et al., 2016), the Association for Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC)

recently published guidelines to promote the “effective, responsible, and ethical use of social sci-

ence research in family law–related practices, programs, and policies”(Association for Family and

Corresponding: bnrudd@uic.edu

FAMILY COURT REVIEW, Vol. 59 No. 4, October 2021 741–754, doi: 10.1111/fcre.12606

© 2021 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.