The authors describe an interview-based research project that explored the impact of theory and research on practice and training. The study found that many training programs refer only occasionally to theory and research, instead relying primarily on the wisdom and personal experience of the trainer. The authors identify barriers to the integration of theory and research into training programs, and propose new resources and strategies for overcoming these obstacles."W e behave as if we are content to live on two sovereign islands, one for academics and one for practitioners-separated by an uncharted sea, full of monsters" (Honeyman, McAdoo, and Welsh, 2001, p. 1).As the volume, diversity, and sophistication of dispute resolution interventions increase, so too does the mass of theory development and research, both qualitative and quantitative. Yet many in our field have a nagging sense that more could be done to apply what we learn through research and theory building to enhance practice.Research and writing on dispute resolution tend to come either from the perspective of the academic or from practitioners who offer description of interventions and practical advice. Both types of writing are important to our field, but they illustrate the challenges of creating a genuine marriage of rigorous theory and grounded practice wisdom that can be taken seriously by academics and practitioners alike. Although many of us would argue that theory development and research are critical to the authenticity
How we handle professional conflicts affects our capacity to help others in conflict. Two AFCC dialogues, one about domestic violence, the other about shared parenting, illustrate the challenges of taking on professional differences. The former resulted in considerable consensus. The latter involved a frank exchange of differences but little overall consensus. It was, however, an important beginning of a critical conversation. Other issues calling out for constructive conflict engagement, include the crisis in providing access to justice for family litigants who cannot afford legal representation. Professional groups must move beyond defending their own self interests to addressing this crisis.
On September 10, 2021, the Haliburton, Kawartha, Pine Ridge District Health Unit in Ontario, Canada, received a case report of Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1 in a patient (case 1) hospitalized for pneumonia. A second case (case 2) within the same household was also identified. Case 1 was laboratory diagnosed by urine antigen testing, whereas case 2 was diagnosed by PCR and culture from a respiratory specimen collected from case 2, both at Public Health Ontario Laboratory, Ontario, Canada. Cases were linked by household and both cases were exposed via a newly purchased but previously used hot tub. Samples from the hot tub were culture positive when tested at PHO’s Laboratory. Given a respiratory culture isolate was available, together with an environmental isolate from the hot tub, sequence based typing was undertaken. Having both a clinical and an environmental culture isolate is essential for molecular investigations. The sequence type for the clinical isolate was the same as the environmental isolate, providing additional evidence that the hot tub was the source of infection for both cases.
We are delighted to bring you this special volume of Family Court Review (FCR). In 1997, FCR published the first special volume focused on child welfare mediation. At the time it was a relatively new field gaining ground in a number of states and provinces. Since then mediation and other alternatives to traditional and adversarial child welfare proceedings have been emerging and evolving across the United States, Canada, and the world. In this follow-up to the first special volume, the articles trace the history of the development of mediation and family group decision-making programs in the child welfare arena. The authors examine how far mediation and other alternative processes have come and where they may go in the future.The impetus for this volume stems from a two-year effort to distill the lessons learned by child welfare mediation programs from across North America. During the summer of 2007, child welfare mediation programs were surveyed and follow-up interviews were conducted with agency personnel, researchers, and court staff. The results were summarized in a report that was used to inform and energize two Think Tanks on Child Protection Decision Making in September 2007 and May 2008. Summaries of the survey results and the two Think Tanks can be found on the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts' Web site. Many of the issues discussed in this volume reflect concerns and insights that emerged from this process.The articles in this volume range from reflections and research on child welfare mediation in general to concerns and successes in individual programs. There are examples of programs that have succeeded and failed, as well as advice on creating, developing, and reinvigorating programs. Several articles show how the alternative theories and practices have evolved over time. We are honored to have contributions from talented authors who have left their mark through program development, research, and consulting or who have worked with and for families in juvenile court and agencies for years.The first article is written by one of the co-editors and an early developer of the child welfare mediation movement. Bernie Mayer writes about how consensus approaches to child protection decision making have become increasingly widespread since they were first initiated over twenty-five years ago. This article is a reflection on the paradoxes that have grown as mediation programs have evolved. While some programs have grown and thrived, others have been forced to cut back on services or been eliminated all together. Bernie discusses what the child welfare system and programs just starting out need to learn from past programs. He includes important suggestions on where these programs need to go from here. The article is an important examination of the overall trends and paths taken in child welfare mediation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.