SAVES Grant Seeks to Provide Trauma Informed Approaches to Child Support Services

By Elizabeth West, Management Analyst, Friend of the Court Bureau; and Amy Rebideaux, Muskegon County Friend of the Court Director

In early 2021, the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) issued a grant proposal called Safe Access for Victims’ Economic Security (SAVES). OCSE accepted proposals for a 5-year demonstration project with a focus on comprehensive domestic violence policies, procedures, and program services to increase safe access to child support services for victims/survivors while looking at all domestic relations matters through a trauma-informed lens.

The Friend of the Court Bureau in the State Court Administrative office (SCAO FOCB) and Muskegon County applied for the grant in June 2021, and was awarded one of the 16 demonstration grants in September 2021. Michigan’s grant proposal was unique among the 16 grantees in that it created a two-track approach – a county-specific track and a state workgroup track.

During the grant writing, the grant team learned that the family violence data within MiCSES has fluctuated over the past ten years. As of June 2021, 23.7 percent of all open Michigan IV-D cases contain a family violence indicator. The numbers reported in MiCSES are much lower than the national average reported.

Motivational Interviewing as a Tool to Serve the Whole Family

By Amy Lindholm, Management Analyst, Friend of the Court Bureau

What are we really trying to accomplish through our services? The Michigan child support program’s strategic plan states a vision of “engaging parents to improve children’s lives,” and that our purpose is “to achieve families’ well-being and self-sufficiency through a family-centered, holistic approach.”  We want to improve children’s lives and strive for entire families’ well-being and self-sufficiency, yet we typically only try to interact, beyond information-gathering, with the parent who is supposed to pay child support. And this usually only happens when that person is not paying enough, and then we make contact through a punitive action or threat of punishment.

How can we actually get better at “engaging parents”? We know that a lot people with a case avoid any contact with our program, and when we start asking parents why, some of the responses are that they are not experiencing individualized treatment or feel they are not truly heard. And this is understandable to anyone who has worked an enormous FOC caseload and felt the pressure of limited time to spread across hundreds of cases.

As a Door on FOC Career Closes, Another Opens

By Mary Katherine Neumann, Oakland County Friend of the Court Custody and Parenting Time Specialist

Retirement always seems such a faraway event and then one day WOW - it is here. You feel you have accomplished many goals throughout your journey as a professional, but you know in your heart when it is time to retire. It is time for me to retire from Oakland County and the Friend of the Court. My mother always said when one door closes, another one opens. This describes my 32 years as a social worker in Oakland County. When I started this journey as a social worker, I would have never guessed that I would end up working at the Friend of the Court as a Custody and Parenting Time Specialist.

My journey as a social worker began in 1986 when I received my Master’s Degree in social work from Wayne State University. I worked at Oakland Family Services for five years, providing group treatment to children who were sexually abused. This linked me to working with Oakland County Prosecutor’s Office and being an advocate for victims who were going to testify in criminal trials. The Prosecutor’s Office developed the Child’s Sexual Assault Unit and posted a position for a social worker.

Friend of the Court Alternative Dispute Resolution Training and Qualification Requirements

 By Timothy Cole, Friend of the Court Bureau Management Analyst

MCR 3.224 requires the State Court Administrative Office (SCAO) to establish training and qualifications requirements for friend of the court (FOC) alternative dispute resolution (ADR) providers.  MCR 3.224 outlines three basic FOC ADR services - 1) FOC domestic relations mediation, 2) facilitative and information-gathering conferences (FIGCs), and 3) joint meetings.  This article will provide SCAO training and qualifications, information on Circuit Courts requesting a waiver for training and qualifications, and information on training opportunities.

Education requirements

The education requirements to provide FOC domestic relations mediation and FIGC is a bachelor’s degree in social sciences, education, or a related field, or a juris doctorate.  For joint meetings the education requirements are a bachelor’s degree in social sciences, education, or a related field, or an associate degree and two years of experience working with families.

Announcing New Friends of the Court

The Friend of the Court Bureau would like to welcome and introduce new local FOC directors.

Trinja Henrickson

Friend of the Court

51st Circuit Court, Mason County 

Education and experience:

Bachelor of Arts, Grand Valley State University

Prior to my promotion, I was a Friend of the Court case manager.

Interests and activities:

In my free time, I love spending time with my three wonderful children.

Legal Corner

 

PUBLISHED OPINIONS

Child Custody – Considerations On Remand

In lieu of granting leave to appeal, the Michigan Supreme Court vacated in part Butters v Butters, ___ Mich App ___ (2022), because while “[t]he Court of Appeals correctly explained that, on remand, the trial court should consider up-to-date information, including the children’s current and reasonable preferences when determining whether a modification of the previous custody order is warranted,” it “erred by instructing the [circuit court] on remand to apply the best-interest factors under the clear-and-convincing evidence standard without regard to any changed circumstances that might have occurred during the pendency of th[e] appeal.” Butters v Butters, ___ Mich ___, ___ (2022) (quotation marks and citations omitted). “When nonharmless errors occur in child custody cases that necessitate a remand to the circuit court for reevaluation, those courts should address the circumstances of the child as they exist at the time of remand.” Id. at ___ (directing the circuit court on remand “to reevaluate the children’s established custodial environments based upon up-to-date information in existence at the time of the evidentiary hearing”).