Search

Objective: This systematic review will identify and analyse literature focused on understanding child welfare judges’ ability and efforts to promote parental engagement in recommendations toward reunification and strengthen families. PRISMA guidelines will be followed. Introduction: Over the years the child welfare court system has made modifications designed to promote engagement and help improve outcomes for children and families. However, child welfare statistics and outcomes still depict a system needing reform. Given the importance of judges in child welfare hearings, their approach, skills, and practices used to encourage parental engagement can significantly impact family outcomes. Due to gaps in the literature, this review will further examine how to ascertain whether a judge’s actions promote or forestall such engagement and, hopefully, contribute to clarifying the construct of engagement within this very important context. Inclusion criteria: To be included in this review, studies must: (a) assess engagement or hearing quality, (b) be situated in a child welfare court setting, (c) be conducted in the United States, and (d) be written in English. Methods: This review will utilize EBSCOhost databases, ProQuest Sociological Abstracts, and hand searching of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ) publications. See Appendix I for the Boolean string used in this review. This review will utilize the Covidence collaboration platform and be conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

This scoping review aims to synthesize the extant literature on how a judge’s efforts designed to promote parental engagement are measured. Content validity will be assessed against the following theories—Self-Determination Theory (SDT), Psychological Reactance Theory (PRT), Procedural Justice (PJ), and Therapeutic Jurisprudence. Results will both provide an understanding of the strengths and gaps in tools to assess judicial engagement efforts in child welfare courts and provide guidance on what may be needed to improve such tools. Introduction: Parents who enter the Child Welfare System are routinely asked to modify certain behaviors through activities such as attending classes and participating in therapy. Judges hold an important role in promoting parents' engagement in such activities. However, little is known about how to measure or assess a judge’s performance. Psychometric tools that measure a judge’s efforts designed to promote parental engagement range in the number of constructs they assess, the number of items to represent such constructs, and the methods for collecting such information. Early analyses suggest that existing tools tend to focus on court procedures and due process rather than on than how judges work to promote parental engagement, collaboration, and alliance building. Efforts to reform court systems to be more family friendly, therefore, may go undetected weakening understanding of how judges could improve. Inclusion criteria: To be included, studies will need to (a) present or utilize a psychometric tool that assess a judge’s efforts to promote parental engagement, (b) be in a child welfare court setting, and (c) be conducted in the United States. Methods: This review will utilize EBSCOhost databases, ProQuest Sociological Abstracts, and hand searching of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ) publications. See Appendix I for the Boolean string used in this review. This review will utilize the Covidence collaboration platform and be conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology and PRISMA-ScR for scoping reviews.

Objective: This scoping review aims to synthesize the extant literature on perceived coercion among adolescent and adult populations involuntarily admitted into substance use and mental health inpatient or residential treatment with two leading motivational theories— Self-Determination Theory (SDT) and Psychological Reactance Theory (PRT). The results of this review will provide a framework to improve patient subjective well-being and quality of motivation during admission, better understand behavioral health outcome trajectories associated with substance use and psychosocial functioning, and inform future research concerning involuntary populations in these settings. Introduction: The use of coercion or external controlling pressures during treatment admission is a highly contentious practice pervasive in behavioral health inpatient and residential treatment settings for substance use and mental health issues. Perceived coercion refers to patients’ perception of autonomy during admission, including their influence and control over choice. Despite the widespread use of coercive practices for involuntary admission, there is a significant gap in the extant literature concerning involuntarily admitted patients’ perceived coercion and the associated immediate and long- term substance use and mental health outcomes. Inclusion criteria: This review will include research relevant to patients’, ages 12 and older, perceived coercion during involuntary admission into inpatient or residential treatment for substance use or mental health issues. Methods: This review will utilize Medline, Embase, CINAHL Complete, APA PsycINFO, Legal Collection, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, Sociological Abstracts and Web of Science Core Collection MedlineOVID, Embase, EBSCOhost databases and the ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global database to locate relevant published and unpublished research with no date restrictions. This review will utilize the Covidence collaboration platform and be conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology and PRISMA-ScR.