Parent Reactions to Their Child Custody Mediation and Adjudication Experiences (From Final Report of the Divorce Mediation Research Project, 1984 - See NCJ-98054)

• NCJ Number: 98065
• Author(s): J Pearson; N Thoennes
• Date Published: 1984
• Length: 22 pages
• Grant Number(s): 90-CW-634
• Sponsoring Agency: US Dept of Health and Human Services
• Corporate Author: Assoc of Family and Conciliation Courts
• Publication Format: Document
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Earlier version presented at the 22nd annual conference of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Denver, colorado, May 23-26, 1984.

Annotation

This paper describes the Divorce Mediation Research Project (DMRP), which evaluated public mediation programs at the Los Angeles Conciliation Court, the Family Relations Division of the Connecticut Superior Court, and the Domestic Relations Division of Minnesota's Hennepin County Family Court.

Abstract

A total of 450 clients who had used court mediation services in late 1981 and early 1982 was administered a questionnaire prior to the initiation of mediation, approximately 15 weeks later, and about 13 to 15 months after the first interview. Also interviewed were 300 individuals who had mediated child custody in 1978 or 1979 and 100 individuals who had contested divorces in 1978. A sample of 100 individuals with contested divorces in Colorado from 1981 were administered questionnaires at the same chronological time points used at the mediation sites. A sample of 100 noncontested divorce cases from 1981 was interviewed at three points in time. Results reveal that the majority of respondents recognized and appreciated the more personal and private resolution of disputes offered by mediation. Regardless of the year in which the sample was drawn and regardless of whether mediation was attempted, between 50 and 60 percent of those with a dispute over custody or visitation were dissatisfied with the court experience. However, mediation was found to result in only slight improvements over adjudication in cooperation and compliance. Among the reasons for this finding is that mediation in court settings is only a brief intervention. Two tables and six references are included.