• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

随机对照试验随访:针对IV-D法庭中未婚父母的在线项目及等待期

Randomized control trial follow-up: Online program and waiting period for unmarried parents in Title IV-D Court.

作者信息

Rudd Brittany N, Poladian Ani R, Holtzworth-Munroe Amy, Applegate Amy G, D'Onofrio Brian M

机构信息

Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences.

Maurer School of Law.

出版信息

J Fam Psychol. 2017 Apr;31(3):381-386. doi: 10.1037/fam0000255. Epub 2016 Nov 3.

DOI:10.1037/fam0000255
PMID:27808522
Abstract

Despite a lack of research on parent programs for separating unmarried parents, many judicial officers mandate participation. Rudd, Holtzworth-Munroe, Reyome, Applegate, and D'Onofrio (2015) conducted the only randomized controlled trial of any online parent program for separating parents, ProudToParent.org (PTP), and related court processes (e.g., having a waiting period between the establishment of paternity and the court hearing regarding child related issues vs. having the hearing the same day). They recruited a unique sample of 182 cases in a Title IV-D Court (i.e., a court for primarily low income parents) (Authorization of Appropriations, 42 U.S.C. § 651, 2013), in which paternity was previously contested but subsequently established via court-ordered genetic testing. Unexpectedly, cases assigned to PTP and a waiting period were the least likely to reach agreement at their court hearing. In the current study, we extend these results to examine the impact of the study conditions on relitigation in the year following the court hearing; only 11.2% of cases filed a motion, and 7.8% had a hearing. The group that was least likely to reach full initial agreement (i.e., assigned to PTP and the waiting period) were the most likely to relitigate. Further, controlling for study conditions, reaching a full agreement in the Title IV-D court decreased the odds of having a court hearing in the following year. Reaching agreements on the specific issues involved in such cases (e.g., custody, child support) reduced the likelihood of both motions and hearings in the year after the Title IV-D hearings. The implications of these findings are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record

摘要

尽管针对分居未婚父母的家长项目缺乏研究,但许多司法人员仍强制要求参与。陆德、霍兹沃思 - 门罗、雷约姆、阿普尔盖特和多诺弗里奥(2015年)对任何在线家长项目“自豪为人父母网”(PTP)以及相关法庭程序(例如,在确定亲子关系与关于子女相关问题的法庭听证之间设置等待期与当天举行听证)进行了唯一一项随机对照试验。他们在一个第四类D法庭(即主要面向低收入父母的法庭)(《拨款授权》,《美国法典》第42编第651条,2013年)招募了182个独特案例样本,这些案例中亲子关系此前存在争议,但随后通过法庭下令的基因检测得以确定。出乎意料的是,被分配到PTP和等待期的案例在法庭听证时最不可能达成协议。在当前研究中,我们扩展了这些结果,以检验研究条件对法庭听证后一年重新诉讼的影响;只有11.2%的案例提交了动议,7.8%的案例进行了听证。最不可能达成完全初步协议的组(即被分配到PTP和等待期的组)最有可能重新诉讼。此外,在控制研究条件的情况下,在第四类D法庭达成完全协议降低了次年进行法庭听证的几率。就此类案件所涉及的具体问题(例如监护权、子女抚养费)达成协议降低了第四类D法庭听证后一年提出动议和进行听证的可能性。讨论了这些发现的意义。(《心理学文摘数据库记录》

相似文献

1
Randomized control trial follow-up: Online program and waiting period for unmarried parents in Title IV-D Court.随机对照试验随访:针对IV-D法庭中未婚父母的在线项目及等待期
J Fam Psychol. 2017 Apr;31(3):381-386. doi: 10.1037/fam0000255. Epub 2016 Nov 3.
2
Randomized control trial: Online parent program and waiting period for unmarried parents in Title IV-D court.随机对照试验:针对IV-D法庭中未婚父母的在线家长项目及等待期
J Fam Psychol. 2015 Oct;29(5):679-86. doi: 10.1037/fam0000106. Epub 2015 Jun 15.
3
Evaluation of court-initiated randomized controlled trial of online parent programs for divorcing and separating parents.评估法院发起的针对离婚和分居父母的在线家长计划的随机对照试验。
J Fam Psychol. 2023 Feb;37(1):65-78. doi: 10.1037/fam0001049. Epub 2022 Nov 28.
4
Federal Act Amending Law Relating to Children (Children's Law Amendment Act), 15 March 1989.1989年3月15日《联邦儿童相关法律修正案》(《儿童法修正案》)。
Annu Rev Popul Law. 1989;16:105.
5
[The attitude of children of divorce to child custody, court hearings and visiting rights--a survey in Zurich].[离婚家庭子女对子女监护权、法庭听证会及探视权的态度——苏黎世的一项调查]
Z Kinder Jugendpsychiatr. 1989 Jun;17(2):55-62.
6
A study of families in high-conflict custody disputes: effects of psychiatric evaluation.一项关于高冲突监护权纠纷家庭的研究:精神病学评估的影响。
Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 1990;18(1):85-97.
7
Outcomes of custody and visitation petitions when fathers are restrained by protection orders: the case of the New York family courts.当父亲受到保护令限制时监护权和探视权申请的结果:以纽约家庭法院为例
Violence Against Women. 2005 Aug;11(8):1054-75. doi: 10.1177/1077801205278045.
8
Relitigation after contested custody and visitation evaluations.在有争议的监护权和探视权评估后的再次诉讼。
Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 1986;14(4):323-30.
9
Who gets custody now? Dramatic changes in children's living arrangements after divorce.现在谁来获得监护权?离婚后儿童生活安排的戏剧性变化。
Demography. 2014 Aug;51(4):1381-96. doi: 10.1007/s13524-014-0307-8.
10
Patterns of intimate partner violence in a large, epidemiological sample of divorcing couples.在一个大型流行病学样本的离婚夫妇中亲密伴侣暴力的模式。
J Fam Psychol. 2013 Oct;27(5):743-53. doi: 10.1037/a0034182.

引用本文的文献

1
Can Online Parent Education Meet the Needs of the Courts and Improve the Well-Being of Children? The Critical Roles of Goal, Program, and Evidence Alignment.在线家长教育能否满足法庭需求并改善儿童福祉?目标、项目与证据一致性的关键作用。
Fam Court Rev. 2024 Jul;62(3):562-582. doi: 10.1111/fcre.12798. Epub 2024 Jun 27.
2
Parental divorce or separation and children's mental health.父母离异或分居与儿童心理健康。
World Psychiatry. 2019 Feb;18(1):100-101. doi: 10.1002/wps.20590.