When Supervision Becomes the Only Plan: An Analysis of Long‐Term Use of Supervised Access and Exchange Services After Separation and Divorce

• Author: Judy Newman,Michael Saini,Maribeth Christensen
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12307
• Published date: 01 October 2017
• Date: 01 October 2017

ARTICLE

WHEN SUPERVISION BECOMES THE ONLY PLAN: AN ANALYSIS OF

LONG-TERM USE OF SUPERVISED ACCESS AND EXCHANGE

SERVICES AFTER SEPARATION AND DIVORCE

Michael Saini, Judy Newman, and Maribeth Christensen

Supervised access is typically viewed as a short-term transitional intervention. This study seeks to identify factors that influ-

ence clients’ long-term use using mixed-method secondary analysis. Several factors distinguish long-term clients, including

ongoing legal proceedings, custodial and noncustodial stated reasons for initiating service, the involvement of child protection

services, a pending criminal trial, presence of domestic violence reported at intake, and previous clinical assessments.

Implications for practice include exploring the unique needs of long-term clients, creating clear court orders for service, mak-

ing supervised access part of comprehensive parenting plans, and assisting families to transition from supervised services.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:

To be effective, supervised access programs should work collaboratively as part of an overall plan, with both short-and

long-term goals supported by a team of professionals to ensure that families are making gains on the risk factors that

brought them to the program in the first place.

This study explores the characteristics of long-term clients in supervised access.

The study examines what factors contribute to families’ extended use of service and identifies benefits and challenges

of working with these families.

The study provides suggestions for future policy, practice, research, and community collaboration.

Keywords: Child Custody; Divorce; High Conflict; and Supervised Visitation.

I. INTRODUCTION

Supervised access programs (SAPs) have been established across many North American court

jurisdictions and in other developed countries, such as Great Britain, Australia, and New Zealand

1

(Bala, Saini, & Spitz, 2016), to facilitate parent–child contact postseparation in a safe, neutral, and

child-centered setting. SAPs are an integral service when there are risks for families litigating before

the courts (Birnbaum & Alaggia, 2006; Saini & Birnbaum, 2015), and the courts are increasingly

relying on supervised visitation services in custody disputes (Salem, Kulak, & Deutsch, 2007).

Supervision of parent–child contact may involve supervising visits or exchanges of the child between

the parents (Bala et al., 2016) and typically “involves a third party overseeing access visits between a

child and his or her parent” (Kelly, 2011, p. 283). Supervision of access or exchanges is an important

service for families involved in family disputes and is generally undertaken pursuant to a court order

(Saini, Van Wert, & Gofman, 2012). Bala et al. (2016) note that there are several types of supervision

that may be ordered by a court or agreed to by the parents, including supervision at a government-

funded or subsidized center, supervision by a private agency or professional, supervision by a friend

or relative, or supervision by a child protection agency.

Typically, supervision of the parent–child contact is conducted in designated safe settings for the

child to spend time with the noncustodial parent under the supervision of trained professionals or

Correspondence: michael.saini@utoronto.ca; newmanju@rogers.com; maribeth.christensen@ontario.ca

FAMILY COURT REVIEW, Vol. 55 No. 4, October 2017 604–617

V

C2017 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts