Implementing the Guardian Ad Litem Mandate - Toward the Development of a Feasible Model

• NCJ Number: 74305
• Journal: Juvenile and Family Court Journal Volume: 31 Issue: 4 Dated: (November 1980) Pages: 3-16
• Author(s): C L Johnson; G Thomas; A Turem
• Date Published: 1980
• Length: 14 pages
• Grant Number(s): 90-C-392
• Sponsoring Agency: US Dept of Health and Human Services
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: This article is a modified version of the final chapter in the research monograph -- Much More To Do About Something -- The Guardian Ad Litem in Child Abuse and Neglect Judicial Proceedings.

Annotation

This article proposes a model to implement the provision of the 1974 Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act that mandates appointment of a guardian ad litem to represent a child in an abuse or neglect situation as one of the requirements for Federal funding.

Abstract

No guidelines for the guardian ad litem (GAL) function exist in case law, and the legislation itself only specifies how States can meet the requirements and provides that the GAL may or may not be an attorney. In a 1977 research project designed to assess progress in implementing this law, questionnaires were mailed to 575 judges involved in juvenile cases in the Southeast, with 114 finally responding. The findings indicated that the legislation in its present form was unlikely to protect the legal rights and welfare of abused or neglected children. The survey revealed that such children do not receive uniform treatment at any point before or during the judicial process and that diversionary efforts are needed to prevent unnecessary court appearances which can be traumatic for children and families. Furthermore, a division of labor would provide more effective advocacy services and legal representation. Highly trained volunteers could perform many precourt activities such as investigations, act as consultants in the dispositional stages, and assist in monitoring postdispositional services. The GAL's in the Southeast were dependent on the courts for directions and funding. In States with the highest use of GAL's, judges favored a salaried or contractual basis for payment rather than hourly rates. Most felt that the supply of attorneys was inadequate to meet the demand for GAL's. This research demonstrates that a comprehensive and coherent approach to GAL programs is needed. Legal problems may arise because many States limit appointment to cases within the jurisdiction of the court and some courts claim that they lose jurisdiction when a case is referred to another agency for treatment. In the proposed model, a GAL is appointed when abuse or neglect is first detected and is retained through a suitable resolution. The public social agency notifies the attorney, and the two coordinate all activities concerning the case. The GAL attorney receives considerable assistance from paralegals, social workers, and volunteers. The GAL office is quasi-independent, with a small staff partially funded by grants from the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, and could serve as a springboard for local child abuse and neglect multidisciplinary case review teams and citizen advocacy councils. A total of 13 footnotes are included.