Parenting Coordination (PC) is a dispute resolution and case management role to assist high conflict coparents (Coates et al., Family Court Review, 2004; 42, 246–262; Sullivan, Journal of Child Custody, 2008; 5, 3–24; Carter & Lally, Parenting Coordination in Post‐Separation Disputes, 2014; Fidler, Canadian Family Law Quarterly, 2012; 31, 237–273). A revision of the original practice 2005 guidelines for parenting coordination was just published by the Association of Families and Conciliation Courts in 2019, providing an update for the family justice community about developments in the parenting coordinator (PC) role in the last 14 years. This article focuses on how family law professionals can support effective parenting coordination practice in their jurisdiction. Support begins with understanding the PC role as the most intensive intervention available at this time for high conflict coparents, and guidance about what types of cases are appropriate for referral and which are not. A description of the essential components of appointment orders, parenting coordination procedures, and court review are provided as well to best structure the parenting coordination process for success. Finally, the article addresses how jurisdictions can support the development and maintenance of this unique role.
The Association of Family and Conciliation Courts and Relate, UK, co‐convened a 24‐hour consultation at St George's House, Windsor, UK, on modern family justice issues across Europe. This article identifies a preliminary set of guiding principles for family justice programs developed by consultation participants.
Loneliness, the distressing feeling that accompanies the perception of a person's social relationships as inadequate, is common in emerging adulthood. This qualitative study explored the experiences and views of loneliness, and the causes of loneliness from the perspective of emerging adults. A youth Research Advisory Group was consulted during the design of the study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 27 emerging adults (18–25 years old, M = 20.81, SD = 1.78). Using framework analysis, two key themes were identified; loneliness and development " a part of growing up", and expectations about a typical emerging adult's life " that's how my life should be". Results suggested that social transitions and expectations for an emerging adults' life contributed to feelings of loneliness. Our findings suggest that future efforts to understand and prevent loneliness in emerging adulthood should consider that loneliness may be transient in nature and a more complex experience during this life-stage.
In: Fried , L , Prohaska , T , Burholt , V , Burns , A , Golden , J , Hawkley , L , Lawlor , B , Leavey , G , Lubben , J , O'Sullivan , R , Perissinotto , C , van Tilburg , T G , Tully , M & Victor , C 2020 , ' A unified approach to loneliness ' , The Lancet , vol. 395 , no. 10218 , pp. 114-114 . https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32533-4
Globally, there are growing concerns about rates and consequences of loneliness, especially among older adults. In response, 2018 saw the launch of a UK loneliness strategy and the first minister for loneliness in the world appointed. In the USA, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine set up a special committee to examine the problem.1 Demographic shifts suggest that the numbers experiencing loneliness are likely to increase. However, it is important to recognise that most older adults are not chronically lonely and loneliness is also experienced by other age groups, especially young adults. Large gaps remain in our understanding of loneliness, rates and drivers of loneliness in different populations, its effect on health and wellbeing, and evidence on effective interventions. We believe loneliness can be defined as a subjective negative experience that results from inadequate meaningful connections, but neither definitions nor assessments of loneliness have achieved wide-scale consensus. The variety of scales and single-item measures of loneliness used to date should be standardised to advance knowledge with an agreed common set of valid measures. Currently, there is inadequate causal evidence of the consequences of loneliness but associations with poor health and wellbeing have been established. The evidence shows associations with depression, anxiety, non-communicable diseases, poor health behaviours, stress, sleep, cognition, and premature mortality (with the evidence especially strong for depression).2 However, further work is required to establish causality between loneliness and specific health outcomes, and vice versa, as well as to investigate social consequences that remain unclear. Structural and cultural changes (eg, technology and social media use) and societal forces (eg, perceptions and expectations around ageing and ageism) and their effect on loneliness also need to be better understood. The evidence base for loneliness interventions is characterised by poorly constructed trials with small samples, a lack of theoretical frameworks, undefined target groups, heterogeneous measures of loneliness, and short follow-up periods. Within this context the charity, voluntary or community sectors, and government are delivering programmes, often with inadequate empirical evidence. Key therapeutic elements of interventions must be identified, as well as their optimal intensity, frequency, and duration. Although inevitably more complex to implement and evaluate, evidence indicates that interventions must be tailored and matched to specific root causes of loneliness. This Correspondence is based on discussions from a meeting in Belfast, held in December, 2018, of international researchers that led to the establishment of an International Loneliness and social Isolation research NetworK (I-LINK) to drive this work. Research, policy, and practice can only benefit from a greater pooling of expertise and knowledge exchange to address this global challenge.