Throughout our nation, people are increasingly concerned about the multitude of problems within families -- domestic violence, substance abuse, abuse and neglect, divorce, mental illness, and violence -- which often leads to greater problems in the community. The judicial and legal communities in particular are involved in scrutinizing family and juvenile courts where social, medical, and emotional problems mix with legal problems in a way that demands new modes of review and resolution.

A few statistics dramatize the importance of the problem. In 1994, 4.7 million domestic relations cases were filed in state courts, which comprised 25% of all civil filings -- the largest and fastest growing segment of state civil court caseloads.¹ Cases included divorce, support/custody, domestic violence, paternity, the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (URESA), adoption, and miscellaneous matters. An additional, 1.9 million juvenile cases were filed in state courts including juvenile delinquency, truancy, and abuse and neglect.²

While the sheer numbers of these cases is a problem in and of itself, additional problems exist at the state level. For one, although courts are becoming computerized, different districts or jurisdictions are not necessarily able to take advantage of the technology to share information and cross reference cases. In some states, domestic relations, substance abuse, and juvenile matters involving the same family are heard in different courts by different judges. As a result, family members must traipse to numerous hearings in different locations while conflicting court orders sometimes arise and incomplete information impedes informed decision-making.

These problems do not exist because of incompetent judges or disorganized courts. The problems lie, in part, with the way in which many courts were originally structured and how the role of the courts have expanded to include services. In addition, the issues families face today have grown in size and have become more complex. Small budgets designated for the courts also create problems.

Key issues involving children, families, marriages, and other relationships often end up as a proliferation of cases and controversies in our justice system. Families are often frustrated and hurt by the bewildering array of courts and social service agencies that are typically involved in family matters. Services are fragmented: the same family may have case workers from a child welfare agency, a school, a juvenile delinquency program, and a domestic violence advocate. Lack of communication between courts and social service agencies results in unnecessary delay, duplication, and contradictory rulings and recommendations.

As a result of growing judicial and community awareness of problems encountered in family court cases, many jurisdictions are reforming their juvenile and family justice systems so their judges can focus in more depth on the adjudication of the legal problems of families and children, provide help and accountability, and address the social, health, economic, and other needs of the families they serve.

Some jurisdictions have been addressing these serious problems by restructuring and realigning their various justice systems which deal with families into a unified family court. A unified family court combines all the essential elements of traditional family and juvenile courts into one entity and contains other resources, such as social services, critical to the resolution of a family's problems. It is a comprehensive court with jurisdiction over all family-related legal matters. The structure of a unified family court promotes the resolution of family disputes in a fair, comprehensive, and expeditious way. It allows the court to address the family and its long-term needs as well as the problems of the individual litigant. Through its insistence on collaboration among court staffs and units, its "team approach," and its outreach to social service providers and local volunteers, a unified family court can provide the highest quality of service to its clients and its community.

No one system can serve as a paradigm for states or localities looking to create a unified family court system. The development of a unified family court is an ongoing process, adapting to meet the individualized needs of clients and concerns of public safety. In addition, the needs of a state or locality vary - some components of unified family courts may not be practical or possible in a given jurisdiction. Total reconfiguration of existing systems is also expensive and time-consuming.

While it is not possible nor appropriate to offer a definitive model of a unified family court, there are various characteristics which are generally recognized as integral to a unified family court. (It is not necessary to adopt all characteristics and additional components may be added to meet the localized needs and judicial traditions of each court.) Five most frequently discussed characteristics include: jurisdiction, case management, judges, court-related services, and the use of technology.

Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction of a unified family court encompasses matrimonial, domestic violence, juvenile delinquency, substance abuse, child protection, and family crisis cases. Matrimonial issues include divorce, equitable distribution, separation and annulment, custody, visitation, child support, and alimony. Domestic violence cases include issuance of temporary and civil and criminal protective orders and contempt proceedings for violations of those orders. Child protection cases include abuse and neglect, foster care, termination of parental rights, and adoption proceedings. Family crisis cases include juvenile status cases, delinquency proceedings, truancy, runaway, and unmanageable children.

Case Management
A unified family court should facilitate the coordination and management of the various adjunct agencies which provide services to children and families. This improved coordination and management should help make relevant information for decision-making more accessible; in addition, it should encourage the numerous disciplines who work with children and families in the legal system to work together.

Often, such coordination is accomplished through the creation of a family court organizational structure to administer the family court in a given jurisdiction, which should include a family court administrator. This administrator is responsible for coordinating all internal court management activities and for serving as liaison to those agencies providing case-related services.

Judges
The optimal unified family court model has a "one judge, one family" system. In other words, a family is assigned one judge and one social services team who remain with that family during their entire relationship with the court. For some states or localities, the "one judge, one family" model is not practical; in those jurisdictions, judges handling some aspects of a family's litigation are made aware of all pending matters in the courts that involve all family members.

There is considerable emphasis on training and continuing education of unified family court judges. In addition, while most jurisdictions rotate their judges, it is often recommended that judges in unified family courts should remain there long enough to allow them to become knowledgeable about the laws and issues in question and become sensitized to the problems and crises of families in court.

Court-Related Services
The unified family court should have available, through a coordinator of services, those services which are directly related to cases brought before the court. These services should include: substance abuse counseling; alternative dispute resolution where appropriate; social services liaisons to community agencies; guardianship and conservatorship services; restitution and probation; volunteer services; community outreach programs; and enforcement of family support. In addition, the office of the family court administrator can serve as liaison to agencies that provide other services such as individual and group counseling, mediation, and forensic psychiatric and crisis intervention services.

Community outreach programs should also be an integral part of unified family courts. They have numerous benefits, including educating the public on the workings of the court, facilitating prevention programs (parenting classes, sexual abuse, alcohol and drug addiction), strengthening the relationship between families in court and their communities, and assisting in the delivery of other court services.

Use of Technology
Unified family courts emphasize the use of modern technology and computerization. While not a prerequisite to starting a unified family court, the installation of a uniform shared record keeping system that is family-based and easily accessible to judges and staff is essential. Automated case tracking facilitates the capability of court staff to track family court cases and produce statistical reports which monitor the status of each case in the unified family court. At the same time, access to information which has been automated will continue to be governed by statutes, court rule, directives, and policies.

¹American Bar Association, An Agenda for Justice: ABA Perspective on Criminal and Civil Justice Issues 5 (1996) (citing Brian J. Ostrom & Neal B. Kauder, National Center for State Courts, Examining the Work of State Courts, 1994: A National Perspective from the Court Statistics Project 12 (1996)).

²Id.