This pilot study examined the attitudes of parents in the child dependency process to determine whether their perceptions of fairness, trustworthiness, and satisfaction with the juvenile dependency system differed across types of relationships: relationships with judges or child protective service (CPS) workers. Method: The study relied on a convenience sample of (N = 40) parents who were administered structured interviews with Likert-type items after being in relationships with the authorities for 6 months. Results: The findings supported the study's hypotheses about the nature of the relationships in the family drug court process and the relative contributions of relational versus self-interest factors in explaining variations in parental attitudes. Discussion and Applications to Practice: The implications of the study's findings were examined regarding the roles played by CPS case managers in improving compliance with substance abuse treatment in the dependency process.
Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1999, P.L. 105-89, 111 Stat. 2155 (1999).
2.
Ashford, J. B. (2004). Treating substance-abusing parents: A study of the Pima County Family Drug Court approach. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 55, 27-37.
3.
Ashford, J. B., & Faith, R. L. (2004). Testing models of justice and trust: A study of mediation in child dependency disputes. Social Work Research, 28, 18-27.
4.
Ashford, J. B., & Holschuh, J. (2006). Fairness issues in law and mental health: Directions for future social work research. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 33, 131-152.
5.
Awad, A. G. (1999). Antipsychotic medications in schizophrenia: How satisfied are our patients? In A. G. Awad (Ed.), Clear perspectives-management issues in schizophrenia: Patient satisfaction: Compliance and outcomes in schizophrenia (pp. 1-6). London: Shire Hall.
6.
Awad, A. G. (2004). Antipsychotic medications: Compliance and attitude towards treatment. Current Opinion Psychiatry, 17, 75-80.
7.
Azar, S. T., & Benjet, C. L. (1994). A cognitive perspective of ethnicity, race, and termination of parental rights. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 249-268.
8.
Beck, C. J. A., & Sales, B. D. (2001). Family mediation: Facts, myths, and future prospects. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
9.
Belenko, S. (2001). Research on drug courts: A critical review.New York: National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University.
10.
Brockner, J., & Siegel, P. (1996). Understanding the interaction between procedural and distributive justice. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research(pp. 390-413). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11.
Bryman, A., & Cramer, D. (2001). Quantitative data analysis with SPSS Release 10 for Windows: A guide for social scientists. Philadelphia: Routledge.
12.
Children and family futures: Hearing before the Subcommittee on Human Resources of the Committee on Ways and Means, 106th Cong., 2 (2000) (testimony of Nancy K. Young).
13.
Cramer, D. (2003). Advanced quantitative data analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
14.
Deutsch, M. (1985). Distributive justice: A social psychological analysis. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
15.
Edwards, L. P. (2003). The juvenile dependency drug treatment court of Santa Clara County, California. In B. J. Winick & D. B. Wexler (Eds.), Judging in a therapeutic key: Therapeutic jurisprudence and the courts(pp. 39-42). Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
16.
Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17.
Harrell, A. (2003). Judging drug courts: Balancing the evidence. Criminology and Public Policy, 2, 207-212.
18.
Howgego, I. M., Yellowlees, P., Owen, C., Meldrum, L., & Dark, F. (2003). The therapeutic alliance: The key to effective patient outcome? A descriptive review of the evidence in community mental health case management. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 37, 169-183.
19.
Jellinek, R., Murphy, J. M., Poitrast, F., Quinn, D., Bishop, S. J., & Goshko, M. (1992). Serious child mistreatment in Massachusetts: The course of 206 children through the courts. Child Abuse and Neglect, 16, 179-185.
20.
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.
21.
Lovato, N., & Mack, K. (2003, March/April). Courts that heal. Children's Voice. Available at www.cwla.org
22.
McGee, C. H. (1997). Family drug court: Another permanency perspective. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 48(4), 65-67.
23.
Melton, G. B., Petrilia, J., Poythress, N. G., & Slobogin, C. (1997). Psychological evaluations for the courts: A handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers. New York: Guilford.
24.
National Center on Addition and Substance Abuse at Columbia University. (1999, January). No safe haven: Children of substance abusing parents. New York: Author.
25.
National Drug Court Institute. (1999, May). Family drug courts: An alternative approach to processing child abuse & neglect cases. Alexandria, VA: Author.
26.
Office of Justice Programs Drug Court Clearinghouse and Technical Assistance Project. (2003, November). Summary of drug court activity by state and county: Juvenile family drug courts. Washington, DC: American University.
27.
SPSS. (2002). SPSS release 11.5 for Windows. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
28.
Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
29.
Tyler, T. R. (1989). The psychology of procedural justice: A test of the group-value model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 830-838.
30.
Tyler, T. R. (1998). Trust and democratic governance. In V. Braithwaite & M. Levi (Eds.), Trust in governance (pp. 269-294). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
31.
Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2000). Cooperation in groups: Procedural justice, social identity, and behavioral engagement. Philadelphia: Psychological Press.
32.
Tyler, T. R., & Degoey, P. (1996). Trust in organizational authorities: The influence of motive attributions on willingness to accept decisions. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 331-356). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
33.
Tyler, T. R., & Kramer, R. M. (1996). Whither trust? In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research(pp. 1-15). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34.
Williamson, O. E. (1993). Calculativeness, trust, and economic organization. Journal of Law and Economics, 34, 453-502.
35.
Winick, B. J., & Wexler, D. B. (2003). Introduction. In B. J. Winick & D. B. Wexler (Eds.), Judging in a therapeutic key: Therapeutic jurisprudence and the courts(pp. 3-10). Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
36.
Young, N. K. (2003, January). Findings from the Retrospective Phase Family Drug Court National Cross-Site Evaluation. Presented at the National Association of Drug Court Professionals 4th Annual Conference in Washington, DC.
37.
Young, N. K., Gardner, S. L., & Dennis, K. (1998). Responding to alcohol and other drug problems in child welfare: Weaving together practice and policy. Washington, DC: CWLA Press.
