Scenario 1
A family with eight children ranging in age from 10 months to 13 years has been sheltered due to
allegations of hazardous environmental conditions and exposure to domestic violence. The three oldest
children (ages 9, 12, and 13) were placed with a relative 200 miles from the court house. The other five
children were placed locally between two foster homes.
At the time of the adjudicatory hearing, the 12 and 13 year-old children indicated they wanted to appear
in court. However, no one was available to pick them up and the relatives had no working vehicle. The
Child Protection Investigator (CPI) was available to pick up the five younger children. When they arrived
at the courthouse, the docket was delayed by two hours. Within 45 minutes, the three and five yearolds became increasingly cranky. By the time their case was heard, the children were all crying and
hungry. Seeing her children so upset, the mother became belligerent and refused to participate
meaningfully in her own defense.
Questions:
1. What preventative measures could have been taken?
2. What could court personnel do to assist?
3. What institutional adjustments are indicated to make the experience more meaningful to
children?
Scenario 2
A 10 year-old girl was being raised by her mother and her mother’s paramour. The child believed the
paramour was her biological father. The girl was sheltered from her mother and placed with her
maternal grandmother due to allegations of substance exposure and physical abuse. Three months into
the case, the child’s absent biological father petitioned the court for visitation. The judge was unaware
that the girl thought the mother’s paramour was her biological father.
When the biological father’s petition was heard, the girl was in attendance. The biological father
mentioned for the first time that he had not seen his daughter since the mother started “selling herself”
eight years earlier. The judge cautioned the father, but not before the girl’s distress became obvious. It
was soon learned that the girl had no knowledge of her true parentage and was further confused by the
man’s comments about her mother.
Questions:
1. What could have been done to prevent the problems in the above scenario?
2. What could have been done to prepare the girl?
3. What interventions could have been performed in the courtroom and how could the girl have
been debriefed?
4. What follow-up with the child was indicated?
Scenario 3
An emotionally vulnerable sixteen year-old boy was in and out of the foster care system for seven years.
He was the victim of physical abuse and neglect by his father, and chronic sexual abuse perpetrated by
his step-mother. Although the allegations of physical abuse and neglect were substantiated, the boy
recanted his original disclosure of sexual abuse, and the step-mother was never prosecuted. The boy’s
father ended his relationship with the stepmother for a period of time, but the two ultimately reconciled
while the boy was in foster care.
When the teenage boy learned that his step-mother was going to be attending the next judicial review,
he made it known that he wanted to be at the hearing. A week before the hearing, the boy mentioned
to his mental health counselor that he wanted to tell the judge about the sexual abuse. The counselor
viewed this as a positive sign that the boy was coming to terms with his sexual victimization, and she
encouraged his participation in the court proceeding. In the boy’s foster placement, his behavior
became increasingly agitated in the days leading up to the hearing. He wasn’t eating or sleeping well,
and he was quick to anger and upset. The mental health counselor never told the foster parents about
the boy’s intention to openly talk about his abuse experiences in court.
On the day of the hearing, the sixteen year-old followed through with his plan. In front of his father, his
step-mother, the judge, and the attorneys the boy disclosed in graphic detail what this step-mother did
to him. The father became irate and the step-mother began to cry. The judge tried to calm the boy, but
he ignored her. When the bailiff approached the boy, he ran out of the courtroom.
Questions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
What signs were present that the boy would have difficulty handling the court proceeding?
Who needed to be informed about the potential impact of the boy’s participation in court?
What immediate interventions could have been performed?
What follow-up with the boy was indicated?
Scenario 4
A non-shelter petition was filed on a family with two boys, ages 11 months and nine years. Allegations
of excessive corporal punishment were substantiated on the nine year-old. The father was the
children’s primary care giver. Although the father was instructed to bring both boys to court for each
judicial review, the father never brought the nine year-old. The father explained the child’s absences by
saying he couldn’t miss school or was sick. The case manager expressed concern about the child’s
frequent absences from school. The judge admonished the father and told him he had to bring his nineyear old to the next hearing which she scheduled for the following week.
As instructed, the father brought both of his children to court. The nine year-old sat next to his father
with his head lowered. He appeared sad and withdrawn, and when the judge spoke to him, the child did
not look up or respond. The father explained that his son was shy and found it difficult to communicate
with strangers. The case manager reiterated her concern about the child’s absences from school and
the child’s odd demeanor.
Questions:
1. What potential benefits emerged by having these children appear in court?
2. How could the judge have addressed the nine year-old’s needs in the court room?
3. What follow-up with the children was indicated?
Scenario 5
A mother and father were involved in a parental time-sharing dispute involving their daughter (age 7)
and their son (age 12). Both children had mild adjustment problems surrounding their parents’ divorce.
Several times the parents called the Abuse Hotline and levied allegations of child maltreatment against
the other parent. The most recent abuse report alleged substance abuse on the part of the mother.
When the investigation commenced, the mother tested positive for opiates and cannabis. The children
were sheltered with the father who, with the help of his divorce attorney, filed a petition for sole
custody in family court. The father lived 100 miles away from the mother. Because of the children’s
distress over having to leave their mother and their school, the dependency judge ordered that the
father obtain counseling for his children in his home town and that this counselor also facilitate monthly
therapeutic supervised visitation between the children and the mother.
During the first Judicial Review, both children were present. The mental health counselor, who was
unknown to the court, testified by telephone that during the one supervised visit she had facilitated
between the children and the mother, she had diagnosed the mother with borderline personality
disorder and believed the mother unfit to parent. The therapist also disclosed statements that the
children allegedly made about their mother during counseling sessions which she said aided her
diagnosis. Upon hearing the therapist’s testimony, the children became visibly perplexed and the 12
year-old looked down, shaking his head. Because the children would not talk in open court, the judge
asked for an opportunity to speak with the children alone.
When the children first entered the judge’s chambers, they were reluctant to speak. The judge did his
best to establish rapport with the children, and the 12 year-old began to talk. He told the judge that he
never made the statements attributed to him by the therapist and was concerned because the therapist
spent far more time talking with his father during counseling sessions than with him. The children
further disclosed that, although they loved their dad, they wanted to return home to their mother and
to their old school and friends. When asked how they would feel if the judge found them a new
counselor, the 12 year-old said he never wanted to be in therapy again because “counselors tell people
what you say to them and then twist it.” Both children expressed fear about leaving the courthouse
with their father and what might be asked of them about their conversation with the judge.
Questions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
What potential benefits emerged by having these children appear in court?
What could the judge have done next?
What follow-up with the children was indicated?
How might judicial decision-making have been aided by the children’s participation?