Parent Coordinators: The Latest Model to Resolve


High Conflict Custody Cases by Harry B. Siegel


High conflict custody and access cases.


The very phrase sends judges, masters and many family law attorneys scram- bling in the opposite direction. Many attorneys would rather swim


through shark infested waters than handle the high conflict custody or ac- cess case that often yields daily stressful phone calls to their office, serial emails at all hours and the dreaded ultimate conversation, blaming the attorney for all of their present woes. Over the past decade, courts have ex-


perimented with many different models of alternative dispute resolution to reduce the high levels of conflict that may occur in these cases, both during and after the initial litigation. While many forms of ADR have proven successful in resolving the low and medium conflict cases, none have proven terribly successful in resolv- ing the dreaded high conflict cases. Over the past few years, Maryland


courts have been following a national trend by appointing parent coordina- tors to meet with and work with both parents, letting them air out their dis- putes in front of a neutral third party, attempting to resolve their disputes, and if necessary, allow that third party to make a determination on contested issues, subject to future court review. This article describes the history of


parent coordinators, provides an over- view of how parent coordinators became prevalent in Maryland, defines the role and authority of parent coordinators and provides practical tips on when and how to engage a parent coordinator in your high conflict custody and access cases.


The History of Parent Coordinators Nationwide


An excellent review of the history and usage of parent coordination can be


36


found in the April 2004 issue of Family Court Review (42 Fam. Ct. Rev. 246) in an article entitled “Parent Coordination for High-Conflict Families.” The article summarizes the past two decades of the slow advent of the usage of parent coor- dinators, which represent “an increased


each other, attempt to facilitate or medi- ate the dispute, and if the parties failed to reach an agreement, make a ruling to finally resolve the issue. Florida has a proposed statute regard-


ing parent coordinators, and it is likely that many more states will follow over


Many attorneys would rather swim through shark infested waters than handle the high conflict custody or access case that often yields daily stressful phone calls to their office, serial emails at all hours and the dreaded ultimate conversa- tion, blaming the attorney for all of their present woes.


focus on judicial case management and settlement processes prior to permitting litigation to proceed.” This process has gained popularity after protracted and expensive litigation, especially after one or both of the parties have exhausted their financial resources, yet real disputes still exist between them. It is no secret that judges have become


increasingly frustrated that a certain small portion of cases keep returning to their courtrooms over and over again, with similar or the same disputes. Judges’ rulings in these cases provide nothing more than a stopgap measure until the next time the parties appear in court. The reasons for these continuous


court proceedings are unimportant to this article, as the parties’ issues are real to them. Such issues include, but are clearly not limited to access issues, paying for certain expenses, third party meddling, and relocation. Courts began appointing third parties,


often with mental health backgrounds and occasionally attorneys, to work with the parties, hear their grievances against


Trial Reporter


the next five to ten years. At the time of the writing of this


article, there is no helpful information from which anyone can determine whether parent coordination is working. There are no surveys. There is no formal research. Many judges who advocate the use of parent coordinators say that it is working. Equally important, many experienced family law attorneys see that it is working. It is outside the scope of this article


whether parent coordination represents a lawful delegation of judicial authority. Provided that the court has the final independent decision-making author- ity if one of the parties objects to the recommendation or finding of a parent coordinator, the usage of the parent coordinator is likely to pass muster in Maryland. Think of a parent coordinator as a


domestic master. If either party is ag- grieved from a contested ruling of a parent coordinator, then the party can file exceptions to the court, and the court can make an independent review


Winter 2008


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64