"FAMILIES FIRST": COMPULSORY EDUCATION IN POST-DIVORCE PARENTING

A few meetings ago the Bar Family Law Section Board of Governors held an enthusiastic discussion about the nationally publicized reform concept known as "Kids First." The idea was to have a vigorous public education program designed to keep children from becoming the first casualties in divorce by forcing parents to think about their children's welfare -- even to the extent of thinking about it when making the important decision whether divorce is necessary. The program called for giving litigation avoidance serious consideration and developing a certain measure of post-divorce decency such as one finds in a "Parents are Forever" leaflet. Little interest was generated on the outside, and the idea, like many exciting reform notions, sank without a trace. Now a very similar idea is being advanced in our state with help from an unexpected quarter. On September 14 Robert C. Chesnut, an Assistant United States Attorney in Alexandria, explained why he is going everywhere to talk up an idea called "Families First."

Continually sending 18-year-olds to prison for long terms without parole for drug violations grows depressing after a while, Mr. Chesnut said. Noticing how often the young malefactors come from what used to be called "broken homes," Mr. Chesnut felt he had to find something that might break the cycle of grossly ineffective parenting that looks like it will go on unchecked from generation to generation. He found an Atlanta, Georgia program, now used in 39 states, including Maryland. Ever since then he and some colleagues from the U.S. Attorney's Office have been trying to educate local bar associations about it.

Like the Texas Tape program favored by Virginia's Family Court establishment, "Families First" seeks to grab a captive audience at a crucial time. It contemplates trial courts making both parents attend a four-hour class in the handling of post-divorce child-related issues before a divorce will be granted. Though it could be required by state statute, and Maryland might be the first state to do that, the program thus far has relied upon courts imposing the requirement by unwritten local rule, as an exercise of their general equity powers. Though Mr. Chesnut focused on two very general Virginia statutes that he theorized would allow courts to impose this requirement, he knew of no plans to seek specific statutory authority.

The four-hour classes go into such areas as alienation, criticism of the opposing party in front of the children, using the children as messengers, using them as spies, and the effects on children of such parental behavior. It also educates parents as to what the probable effect of divorce is on children of different age groups. The program is run by a local public charity, and the parents pay $30.00 a head, with scholarship aid for the indigent. The judges in Atlanta, Mr. Chesnut maintained, have found that the program had wonderful results, and reduced by 50-60% the amount of post-divorce litigation regarding custody and visitation issues. While the program does not hit parents early enough to prevent custody litigation itself, it does seek to control the particular kind of child-related litigation that the courts find the most pointless, bitter, and frustrating.

Mr. Chesnut stressed that the program seems to work best by recruiting an established non-profit public service group, and avoiding the hiring of court employees or the use of any budgeted public funds. He advocated giving each local court system a choice, if possible, of two or three non-profit groups to run the program. The speaker named one public charity in northern Virginia, established for many decades, which has already sent its people to Atlanta to be trained, and has secured a $5,000.00 grant from private industry (out of which the $1,000.00 "licensing fee" for training, pamphlets, etc. was paid to the Atlanta group for an approved "Families First" operation).

The program is taught by a two-person team, male and female. If they are not psychologists, psychologists or psychiatrists are brought in to teach part of the course. Mr. Chesnut also acknowledged that the program has to be mandatory. At the beginning about a third of the participants are resentful, though at the end nearly everyone is an enthusiastic convert. When the program was tried in Roanoke, he revealed, it started off with great popularity and success, and a warm welcome from interested news media. However, because participation was voluntary, the numbers soon fell off as publicity wound down. He represented that the court system in Roanoke is convinced that a mandatory program would be worthwhile.

A fact sheet on the program, and a backup package detailing the experience of other states with Families First is available from Mr. Chesnut at the U.S. Attorney's Office at 1101 King Street, Suite 502, Alexandria, Virginia 22314. Or visit the Families First web site at http://www.familiesfirst.org to learn more about the agency and its Children Cope With Divorce program, and its other program for the children of divorcing parents , "Rollercoasters."