Using the Range of Research Evidence to Help Inform Clinical Decision Making and Treatment for Family Court‐Involved Children and Families

• Published date: 01 October 2021
• Author: Frank Davis,Thomas Sexton
• Date: 01 October 2021
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12599

USING THE RANGE OF RESEARCH EVIDENCE TO HELP INFORM

CLINICAL DECISION MAKING AND TREATMENT FOR FAMILY

COURT-INVOLVED CHILDREN AND FAMILIES

Frank Davis and Thomas Sexton

Over the past 20 years, a number of evidence-based and evidence-informed mental health treatment models, interventions,

and best practices have emerged for use with a wide range of client populations, with many differentmental health conditions

and diagnoses. Unfortunately, many family court-involvedchildren and families do not have access to mental health programs

and services that have been identified as evidence-based or evidence-informed. The reasons for this disparity are complex

and multi-layered. The primary aim of this paper is to identify the challenges and possibilities of adopting evidence-based or

evidence-informed practices when working in the family court arena. To achieve this, the authors will describe a potential

decision-making model to help practitioners determine what is evidence-based and evidence-informed and what model or

interventions may fit the context. This model has been referred to as a “levels-of-evidence”approach for evaluating family-

focused mental treatment interventions and programs and making informed clinical decisions to better serve children and

families. As an example, the authors illustrate how a levels-of-evidence approach could be used to identify how evidence-

based practices such as Functional Family Therapy (FFT), designed for use in the juvenile justice setting, could be adapted

for use in child custody cases. The authors hope this paper serves as a catalyst to further build a bridge between the family

law and evidence-based mental health research communities.

Key Points for the Family Court Community

There are few evidence-based or evidence-informed, family-focused mental health treatment models for working spe-

cifically with children and families involved in child custody cases. Using evidence-based practices (EBPs) requires

adopting the “levels of evidence”approach to identify the best available treatments to bear on current problems or

cases.

To achieve better outcomes, evidence-based and evidence-informed, family-focused interventions and treatments

must be more widely accepted and integrated into the practices of mental health professionals (MHPs) who work

with children and families involved in family court.

There are a number of existing evidence-based, family-focused mental health treatment models that can be adapted

to work in family court settings that are client-centered and accountable.

FFT and other evidence-based and evidence-informed family-focused mental health treatment and intervention

models could be viable resources upon which stakeholders in family court could rely on to improve their work with

children and families involved in child custody cases.

Keywords: Children; Evidence-based; Evidence-informed; Families; FamilyLaw; Mental Health Treatment.

I. THINKING DIFFERENTLY ABOUT EBPS: BEYOND A SINGLE STANDARD

It is well known that randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have been considered the “gold standard”

of clinical intervention research by mental health scholars and researchers (Glancy & Saini, 2009;

Mulder et al., 2003; Sexton et al., 2012). Specifically, as noted by Sexton et al. (2008), RCTs “pro-

vide reliable and valid evidence for the efficacy of clinical interventions by reducing variation in cli-

ents, contexts, therapists and interventions.”Typically, the RTC approach has been viewed as the

single standard for identifying what interventions are useful and evidence-based. The authors of this

article agree that the RCT is a robust research method and definitely has its place in the field of

clinical intervention research.

Corresponding: dr.frankdavis@att.net

FAMILY COURT REVIEW, Vol. 59 No. 4, October 2021 641–655, doi: 10.1111/fcre.12599

© 2021 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.