“ONE FAMILY – ONE JUDGE”

Many families in Shelby County face multiple jurisdictional or legal needs and must navigate a fragmented court system. This resolution requests Tennessee General Assembly support of legislation permitting Shelby County to operate a Unified Family Court Pilot Program. We would offer families “one family, one judge, one place.”

UNIFIED FAMILY COURT DEFINED

A unified family court is defined by the American Bar Association as a single court system with specially-trained judges that address legal, social and emotional issues in a holistic way with linkage to social services and resources from a case management team, to provide a user-friendly environment which better addresses the needs of children and their families in a comprehensive manner.  Domestic violence, child support, divorce, delinquency, dependency, neglect, custody and other family matters can be under “one roof” – under the authority of one court.

SHELBY COUNTY UNIFIED FAMILY COURT PILOT PROGRAM

We propose a two-year pilot to assist 150 families, and their respective cases, with possible funding from local and national foundations such as The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Department of Justice and the Office of Violence Against Women.

We propose to implement a Unified Family Court pilot within the existing courtroom of a current and presiding judge. Essential staff is comprised of 1 judge, 1 Family Court Coordinator, and 1 Family Services Case Manager. There are no restrictions on who may refer a case for Unified Family Court screening. Once a family’s case meets the screening criteria, an Order on Acceptance Into Unified Family Court will be entered and copied to all other court jurisdictions, litigants, and counsel along with further instructions. To do this, the Unified Family Court Coordinator will notify each court jurisdiction in order that all subsequent applicable cases related to the family are referred to the Unified Family Court. All families will be assigned a Family Services Case Manager.

An important aspect to the pilot will be the evaluation. We propose to include a comparative cost benefit analysis in the evaluation of the Unified Family Court Pilot.

LOCAL AND NATIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR UNIFIED FAMILY COURTS

The American Bar Association recommends, “At a minimum, a unified family court should hear matrimonial (divorce, separation, annulment, division of property, alimony, custody, visitation, child support), domestic violence (protective orders, contempt proceedings), child protection (abuse and neglect, placement, termination of parental rights, adoption), family crisis (truant youth, runaways, unmanageable children) and juvenile delinquency (offenses which are statutorily defined and vary by state) cases.” See American Bar Association, Unified Family Courts- Justice Delivered, 2002.

The Juvenile Court Ad Hoc Committee recommended that a Family Court Task Force be established because “the committee recognized that the ‘current local fragmented court structure’ fails to address the needs of families in crisis.” (Juvenile Court Ad Hoc Committee report, page 17). The Shelby County Family Court Task Force recommended implementation of a Unified Family Court Pilot Project. See Shelby County Family Court Task Force Report, March 2008.

Memphis/Shelby County Operation: Safe Community’s action plan report states, “Our current local fragmented court structure, as it deals with domestic violence cases, does not adequately meet the needs of victims or families in crisis.” The plan further recommends consideration of a “dedicated Integrated Domestic Violence or Family Court.” See Operation: Safe Community – A Strategic Initiative to Reduce Crime in Memphis & Shelby County, 2006.

In the report on Juvenile Court by consultants from the National Center for State Courts, the first recommendation is that cases be assigned “to judicial officers under a one family/one judge case assignment system. . . When a single judicial officer hears all matters related to a single family, (he or she gains) knowledge of  the family’s circumstances and their past response to court orders, are able to identify behavior patterns, and can help to ensure there is consistency and continuity in court orders and case plans. One-judge/one family also helps to minimize the number of times a person is required to appear in court because it allows for multiple cases for one individual or family to be heard together. It is the responsibility of the judicial officer to ensure that all cases receive due process, and judicial officers are trained to hear evidence impartially even when they have heard previous cases regarding the same youth/family.” See National Center for State Courts, A Brief Assessment of the Juvenile Court System in Shelby County, Tennessee, 2007.

NEARLY 75% OF STATES HAVE ALREADY TAKEN STEPS TOWARD FAMILY COURT SYSTEMS

To date, 14 states and the District of Columbia operate statewide family courts; 18 states have family courts in some jurisdictions; and 5 states have pilot or planned family courts. Tennessee is among only 13 states with no unified family court effort. See Barbara A. Babb, “Reevaluating Where We Stand: A Comprehensive Survey of America's Family Justice Systems,” Family Court Review 46, no. 2 (April 2008): 230-257.

The recent national momentum to create unified family courts has been in large part a result of the leadership of the American Bar Association and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. The Shelby County Family Court Task Force, which was established upon recommendation of the Juvenile Court Ad Hoc Committee, recommended a pilot project for a unified family court.

FAMILIES IN NEED

Families in trouble come to the attention of the courts in a variety of ways: through divorce, domestic violence, abandonment or abuse of children, or misbehavior of children. Such families may weave from courtroom to courtroom caught in a process that depletes time, money, and energy, and yet never really addresses the core of the problem. Ironically, children who suffer most as a result of this phenomenon are the unintended beneficiaries of our family courts.  In our present system, no single court or agency has a complete picture of the family and the relationships that affect its members. Because the child is the center of the concerns of the family court, every legal issue affecting a child should be resolved in one court, before one judge who can then coordinate agencies and access all the services that might be available. The underlying philosophy of such a court is called therapeutic justice. See Claudia Wright, “Representation of Children in a Unified Family Court System in Florida,” University of Florida Journal of Law & Public Policy 14, no. 2 (spring 2003): 179-192.

The objectives of a Shelby County Pilot Unified Family Court are to:

• Establish a One Judge-One Family system, with all related family law and juvenile actions assigned to one Unified Family Court judge.
• Coordinate multiple cases involving the same family by linking or consolidation of cases
• Minimize potential for inconsistent, duplicative or conflicting orders
• Coordinate current and future investigative and evaluative efforts
• Refer to appropriate family social services and evaluations early
• Identify and resolve procedural difficulties early
• Focus on Alternative Dispute Resolution
• Measure improvements in the judicial system’s response to family involvement in the judicial system

Matrix Overview of (4) Unified Family Courts and Evaluations

The below matrix illustrates a)improved continuity in judicial oversight; b) decreased overlapping and duplication of court orders; c) a subsequent increase in the utilization of social services by families; thereby d) decreasing the financial burden of the courts. All of the above results in the ultimate goal of strengthening families and protecting children.