A DISTINCTION WITHOUT MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE: RESPONSE TO STEVE BARON AND HUGH MCISAAC
2010; Wiley; Volume: 48; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1111/j.1744-1617.2009.01300.x
ISSN1744-1617
Autores Tópico(s)Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies
ResumoFamily Court ReviewVolume 48, Issue 1 p. 201-205 A DISTINCTION WITHOUT MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE: RESPONSE TO STEVE BARON AND HUGH MCISAAC Peter Salem, Corresponding Author Peter Salem Association of Family and Conciliation Courts[email protected]Search for more papers by this author Peter Salem, Corresponding Author Peter Salem Association of Family and Conciliation Courts[email protected]Search for more papers by this author First published: 15 January 2010 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1617.2009.01300.xCitations: 1Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat REFERENCES Baron, S. (2010). A response to Salem: Common sense. Family Court Review, 48, 195–200. 10.1111/j.1744-1617.2009.01299.x Google Scholar Center for Children, Families and the Courts (2003). Research update: Difficult cases in California court-based child custody mediation. Retrieved August 17, 2009, from http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/programs/cfcc/pdffiles/resupDiffCases99.pdf. Google Scholar Edwards, L., Baron, S., & Ferrick, G. (2008). A comment on William J. Howe and Hugh McIsaac's Article, “Finding the Balance” published in the January 2008 issue of Family Court Review. Family Court Review, 46, 586–591. 10.1111/j.1744-1617.2008.00223.x Google Scholar Howe, W. J., & McIsaac, H. (2008). Finding the balance: Ethical challenges and best practices for lawyers representing parents when the interests of children are at stake. Family Court Review, 46, 78–90. 10.1111/j.1744-1617.2007.00184.x Google Scholar Macfarlane, J. (2008). The new lawyer: How settlement is transforming the practice of law. Vancouver, Canada: UBC Press. Google Scholar McIsaac, H. (2010). A response to Peter Salem's article: “The Emergence of triage in family court services: Beginning of the end for mandatory mediation.” Family Court Review, 48, 190–194. 10.1111/j.1744-1617.2009.01298.x Google Scholar Ricci, I. (2004). Court-based mandatory mediation: Special considerations. In J. Folberg, A. L. Milne, & P. Salem (Eds.) Divorce and family mediation: Models, techniques, and applications (pp. 397–419). New York: Guildford. Google Scholar Salem, P. (2009). The emergence of triage in family court services: The beginning of the end of mandatory mediation? Family Court Review, 47, 371–388. 10.1111/j.1744-1617.2009.01262.x Google Scholar Salem, P., Kulak, D., & Deutsch, R. (2007). Triaging family court services: The Connecticut Judicial Branch's family civil intake screen. Pace Law Review, 27, 741–783. 10.58948/2331-3528.1140 Google Scholar Shienvold, A. T. (2004). Hybrid processes. In J. Folberg, A. L. Milne & P. Salem (Eds.) Divorce and family mediation: Models, techniques, and applications (pp. 112–126). New York: Guildford. Google Scholar Thoennes, N., Salem, P., & Pearson, J. (1995). Mediation and domestic violence: Current policies and practices. Family and Conciliation Courts Review, 33, 6–29. 10.1111/j.174-1617.1995.tb00346.x Google Scholar Citing Literature Volume48, Issue1January 2010Pages 201-205 ReferencesRelatedInformation
Referência(s)