Randomized control trial: Online parent program and waiting period for unmarried parents in Title IV-D court.

Abstract

Despite a lack of research on parent education programs for unmarried parents, many judicial officers mandate participation. We recruited an understudied sample likely at high risk for negative outcomes-182 court cases involving unmarried parents on government assistance in which paternity was contested and then established via genetic testing ordered by the court. This 2 × 2 randomized controlled trial evaluated the impact on initial litigation outcomes of two factors: (a) participation in an online parent education program or not and (b) having a waiting period between the establishment of paternity and the court hearing concerning child-related issues or not. Using an intent-to-treat framework, we found that among cases not assigned to the program, there was no difference in the rate of full agreement on child-related issues (e.g., child support, custody, parenting time) when comparing cases assigned to a waiting period and cases not assigned to a waiting period. In contrast, for cases assigned to the program, cases also assigned a waiting period were less likely to reach a full agreement than cases that had their hearing on the same day. In addition, cases in the "program and waiting period" condition were less likely to return to court for their hearing than cases in the "no program and waiting period" condition. In exploratory analyses of the subsample of cases in which both parents were present at the court hearing, the pattern of results remained the same, although the findings were no longer statistically significant.

Predictors of Initial Court Agreement and 1‐Year Relitigation in Title IV‐D Contested Paternity Cases

“…The current study is based on a sample of 182 contested paternity cases (364 parents), consistent with Rudd et al (2015). Title IV-D cases were eligible for participation in the study if: (a) paternity was contested, (b) paternity was later established via court-ordered genetic testing, (c) both parents were literate (to complete study forms), (d) neither parent was younger than 18 years old, (e) neither parent was incarcerated, (f) neither parent lived out of state (to be able to come to court), (g) both parents were present by midmorning on the day of their initial court hearing, and (h) there was enough time in court to hear all of the cases scheduled that day.…”

“…The Rudd et al (2015) RCT was conducted in the Marion County (Indianapolis, Indiana) Circuit Court's Title IV-D Division (Title IV-D court), which handles litigation for unmarried parents and where one parent (typically the mother) is receiving government financial assistance. In contested paternity cases, paternity is established in the courthouse through genetic testing of the mother, child, and alleged father, who return to court to learn their paternity results.…”

“…In a nonrandomized study, Schraufnagel and Li (2010) tested family mediation of child support orders to understand whether family mediation or traditional litigation is associated with better parent satisfaction and compliance with child support decisions. Rudd et al (2015) conducted an RCT of an online parent program (ProudToParent, which was specifically designed for separating unmarried parents to increase motivation related to child needs prior to their child support hearing; Asher & Asher, 2012) and of a 2-3-week waiting period between establishment of paternity and initial court hearing. The second study was the one from which data for the current project originates (Rudd, Holtzworth-Munroe, Reyome, Applegate, & D'Onofrio, 2015).…”

“…They found that family mediation resulted in greater parent satisfaction than involvement in the traditional court process, but child support compliance did not significantly differ between the two dispute resolution processes. Counter to study hypotheses, Rudd et al (2015) found that the combination of the online parent program and a waiting period decreased the likelihood that parents would reach a full agreement (i.e., agreement on seven possible issues: child support, legal custody, physical custody, parenting time, arrearage, tax exemption, and child's last name). It was a randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the impacts of an online parent program and of a waiting period between establishment of paternity and the court hearing.…”

“…The second study was the one from which data for the current project originates (Rudd, Holtzworth-Munroe, Reyome, Applegate, & D'Onofrio, 2015). 1 In court-outcome research, including Rudd et al (2015), one typical way of measuring success is agreement or resolution rate, which may be especially important to stakeholders interested in maximizing court efficiency. Rudd et al (2015) conducted an RCT of an online parent program (ProudToParent, which was specifically designed for separating unmarried parents to increase motivation related to child needs prior to their child support hearing; Asher & Asher, 2012) and of a 2-3-week waiting period between establishment of paternity and initial court hearing.…”