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.

Navigating the Confusing Language of the Child Support Program

By Steve Capps, Director, SCAO Friend of the Court Bureau

“Pourquoi me parlez-vous en français?” is French for “Why are you speaking to me in French?”  Many commonly used terms in the child support program are actually derived from French words.  Why is this?  How did we get here?

Closing the Gap with Fathers

By Nikki Withrow, Management Analyst, SCAO Friend of the Court Bureau (FOCB)

I don’t know when it happened, but at some point in its 100-year history, the Friend of the Court (FOC) was given an unfortunate nickname: “Friend of the Mother” (or sometimes other, more unsavory versions of this). 

In approximately 90 percent of Michigan’s child support cases, the mother is receiving child support, and the father is paying child support, which means that our system gives the mother the “custodial parent” label and “noncustodial” to the father. In the almost six years since I started working with the child support program, I have heard it said time and again that the FOC is interested in doing what is best for the mother – not what is best for the child, not what is best for the family, and especially not what is best for the father. Granted, the people I have heard this from are either fathers with an FOC case or family members of a father with an FOC case, but it still raises the question: what can the FOC do to make fathers know they matter, too?

Fathers on Child Support webinar.

Lost in Translation: How to Ensure Effective FOC Communications While Working Remotely

By Steve Capps, Director, SCAO Friend of the Court Bureau

Think back to events or holidays you enjoy.  What do you remember?  Chances are the things you remember are sights – lights and colors – feelings, sounds, or smells. Maybe you remember feeling the warmth of the sun at the ballpark or the frozen tundra of Lambeau Field for those of you in the UP.  You might recall sounds like laughter, songs, and cheers.  You might think of the smell of a feast being prepared or hot dogs on the grill.

Alternative Contempt Track Probation Program Addresses ‘Frequent Flyers’

By Barb Self, Specialized Enforcement Officer, Allegan County Friend of the Court

The Allegan Friend of the Court’s Alternative Contempt Track (Allegan FOC ACT) program is designed to address the barriers some parents face which prevent them from being actively involved in their child(ren)’s lives and from financially supporting their child(ren).

Cross-Court Obligation to Ensure Justice for Families

[Editor’s note: This is the second article in a three-part series focusing on continued improvements to cross-court understanding between state and tribal courts through education and collaboration.]

The first article in this series discussed how tribal courts can operate differently from state courts, the overlap in child support responsibilities between tribal and state courts, and profiled two tribal court chief judges who collaborate with nearby friend of the court (FOC) offices.

Retired Michigan Supreme Court Justice Michael Cavanagh said, “Our state courts can benefit greatly from becoming familiar with tribal court procedures and practices and the peacemaking model.”[1]

Following that wisdom, this article delves deeper into how tribal courts interact with their litigants and then explores one example of a strong partnership between a tribal court and a state court on child support matters.

Justice on a Planet with No Atmosphere

Imagine you are on a planet with no atmosphere.  Much like our moon there may be great mountains, stunning vistas, sweeping plains, and more beauty than you could ever imagine.  But with no atmosphere, you cannot experience it to the fullest because you are forced to wear a protective space suit. 

Sometimes courts can come across the same way.  Court processes and services are designed to deliver fair and just results, but sometimes, they end up depriving court users of a true sense of what they are going through.