The Transition to Group Decision Making in Child Protection Cases: Obtaining Better Results for Children and Families   
By Judge Leonard Edwards and Dean Inger Sagatun-Edwards

Abstract: It was only a few years ago that in most jurisdictions across the United States, decisions at each stage of a child welfare case were made by individual professionals (law enforcement, child protection workers, social workers, and judges) who were all a part of the community’s response to child abuse and neglect crises. In the last decade, the development and continuing evolution of best practices have brought about many changes in how professionals approach the resolution of these issues, how they convene interested persons in the decision making process, and how families and children participate in decisions. This article will examine some of these changes, with a particular focus on the expanding use of groups and the inclusion of families in these groups to make better decisions in child protection cases.

Family Values: How Children’s Lawyers Can Help Their Clients by Advocating for Parents
By Christine Gottlieb and Erik S. Pitchal

Abstract: Children’s lawyers too often view themselves as standing in opposition to parents in dependency proceedings. In this article, the authors argue that child advocates do a disservice to their clients by not using their considerable skills, role advantages, and moral authority to actively help parents. Noting that areas of common ground far exceed those places where the children’s bar and the parents’ bar might part company, the authors contend that children’s lawyers have an obligation to actively fight for parents’ rights. In particular, spending time early in a case to ensure that appropriate reunification services are being offered is well worth the investment, as it redounds to the benefit of all parties. Several concrete practice tips are offered regarding how children’s lawyers can better serve their clients by regularly advocating for parents.  

Arkansas Legislative Reforms Provide Framework for Change While Supporting Parens Patriae Philosophy of Juvenile Court
By Lauren Hamilton, Stacy C. Moak, and James W. Golden

Abstract: Changes in Arkansas’s juvenile laws resulting from the school shootings in Jonesboro impacted two separate issues of the juvenile court process. The first law changed aspects of transfer provisions for processing juveniles as adults. Secondly, the law created new provisions allowing blended sentencing for juveniles who commit certain enumerated offenses. Both provisions are examined in this article. The authors examine the impact those changes had on the types and numbers of cases handled by the court  and argue that the framework provided by Arkansas’s Extended Juvenile Jurisdiction law illustrates a legislative response to juvenile violence that supports the concept of parens patriae and promotes the original purpose for which juvenile courts were created while balancing concerns for public safety.