Twila Wingrove

Children's participation in foster care hearings

PURPOSE Empirical research regarding potential risks and benefits of childrens participation in the legal system generally, and in the child dependency legal system in particular, is sparse and mostly characterized by small studies without comparison groups. The current study was designed to address the following questions regarding childrens participation in dependency court hearings: (1) Is attending court harmful to children? (2) Is attending court beneficial to children? (3) Is judicial behavior with the child in the courtroom related to potential harms or benefits? and (4) Are there age differences in childrens reactions? METHOD The authors measured childrens reactions to attending dependency review hearings (n=43) and compared them to a sample of children who did not attend their hearings (n=50). One to 2 weeks following review hearings, both groups of children were interviewed about their reactions to the court process. RESULTS Children who attended their hearings reported more positive feelings about the dependency process (e.g., trust in judge, perceived fairness, and more comfort with their guardians ad litem and caseworkers). For children who attended, there was no evidence of high distress immediately preceding or following their hearings. Court observations revealed that more active engagement by judges was related to positive responses from the children. Most children, including both children who attended hearings and those who did not, believed that all children should be able to attend their hearings. CONCLUSION Overall, the findings suggest that policies encouraging childrens attendance at dependency hearings are viewed positively by and not harmful to children.

A comparison of students' and jury panelists' decision-making in split recovery cases

This study was designed to assess jury decision-making for 289 participants reading a medical malpractice vignette as a function of participant type (undergraduate students or jury panelists), punitive damage award apportionment (none, half, or all to the plaintiff), and compensation previously assigned to the plaintiff (low, medium, or high). We found several sample differences. Overall, jury panelists awarded more money for punitive damages. Jury panelists were also more affected by compensatory-relevant information when making punitive decisions, including assigning punitive damages and rating the fairness of the traditional apportionment scheme, where the plaintiff receives all of the money. Compared with students, more jury panelists were in favor of the plaintiff receiving the entire punitive award. Most students endorsed split recovery. The authors suggest that psycholegal research conducted solely with student samples, rather than community members, may misestimate the likely behavior of actual juries. The implications of the study for split recovery policy are also discussed.

Father Involvement in Dependency Review Hearings

Understanding the impact of fathers in child maltreatment cases has been a neglected area of research. This study evaluated differences in child welfare hearings and childrens perceptions of their situation where fathers were and were not present. Father attendance at hearings appeared to positively impact information-gathering. When fathers attended hearings, they lasted longer and covered case topics more thoroughly. Children reported more negative affect immediately after hearings where fathers were present; however, these differences were attenuated at subsequent interviews. Overall, the findings suggest that father involvement positively impacts case management, though more research must be conducted to support this finding.

The Use of Survey Research in Trial Consulting

Survey research is among the oldest tools used by trial consultants. When the field first emerged in the early 1970s, assistance with jury selection was the only reason to hire a trial consultant (Barber, 1994; Lane, 1999). In fact, at that time, trial consultants were more likely to be called “jury selection experts” (Fulero & Penrod, 1990), and the principle methodology used to inform jury selection was community surveys, in which members of a community were asked about their views on relevant topics. Today, trial consultants offer a range of services beyond jury selection. As the range of services has grown, so have the contexts in which survey research is used. While surveys remain important in jury selection, trial consultants now use them at every phase of litigation. For example, they conduct surveys to support a change of venue motion, to test trial themes (strategic messages used to tie a case together or make an emotional impact), or to provide evidentiary support for the case itself.

Who Is the Rotten Apple? Mock Jurors’ Views of Teacher–Student Sexual Contact

The present study investigated mock jurors’ (N = 541) perceptions of a hypothetical case of teacher–student sexual contact. Mock jurors read a brief vignette describing an alleged sexual encounter where the gender and age of both the teacher and student were manipulated. Participants rendered legal decisions (i.e., verdict, degree of guilt, and sentence length), as well as culpability judgments pertaining to both the teacher and the student (i.e., blame, cause, and desire for the sexual contact). In addition, the effects of mock juror gender and attitudes regarding both rape myth acceptance and homophobia were investigated. Teacher gender and both teacher and student age predicted mock jurors’ recommended sentences, with male teachers, older teachers, and younger students leading to greater sentences. Overall, student age was most consistently related to multiple culpability judgments, and the culpability judgments regarding the victim were the most consistently predicted by the independent variables. We did not find any evidence of homosexist attitudes, meaning that same-gender teacher–student contact was not judged any differently than opposite-gender contact. Worth noting, we found an interaction such that male students victimized by female teachers were judged to have wanted the contact more than any other gender combination, especially by male participants. The authors discuss these findings in the context of the child sexual abuse (CSA) literature concluding that many of the findings of more prototypical CSA cases extend to the teacher–student context. We also discuss the implications of these findings in terms of gendered judgments of adolescents who are victimized by teachers, possibly decided by legal professionals, school administrators, and jurors themselves. In particular, the three-way gender interaction can be interpreted in the context of stereotypes regarding sexual development marking sexual contact between adolescent males and older females as a “rite of passage” into adulthood.

The role of shared decision-making in shaping intent to access services for adolescents in protective custody

ABSTRACT For adolescents in protective custody (e.g. foster care), decisions about living arrangements, education, and long-term planning are frequently made outside the courtroom, where involvement in decision-making has been less studied. During in-person interviews with 151 adolescents who were aged 16–20 and had been in child welfare protective custody for at least 12 months, perceived and desired amount of involvement in a recent decision was assessed. Data were coded and analysed to identify discrepancies in young people’s perceptions of desired and actual levels of involvement. Results indicate that while the majority of adolescents (96%) are participating in decision-making, they generally desire more involvement in decisions made (64%). Only 7% of youth reported that their level of personal involvement and the involvement of others matched what they desired. The most common individuals identified in a decision made were child protection workers, legal professionals, and caregivers or family members. These findings enhance the existing literature by highlighting the unique issues related to giving young people in protective custody a voice, and provide an empirical foundation for guiding policies around who to involve in every-day decisions made for young people preparing for emancipation.