Checklist to Aid Referral Decision Making

This page list issues to consider before making a referral to ADR-LINK. It guides you to think about issues that suggest a referral may be premature at this point.

The ADR Operational Plan approved by the Ministry of Children & Youth Services in the South West Region is designed to establish a consistent approach to accessing and funding prescribed ADR services. This initiative must be both equitable to all Societies and also sustainable over time. It is important that all cases proceeding to ADR are timely referrals which are appropriate for the technique. Using ADR funding for cases which do not qualify will threaten the sustainability of the service and delay resolution of appropriate cases. Funds available for ADR services are not unlimited.

To aid (but not dictate) referral decision-making by child protection workers and their agencies, this checklist guides your choices of qualifying cases for ADR as contemplated by this initiative. Mediation and Family Group Conferencing can be used for a wide variety of purposes. However, the funding available through ADR-LINK is limited to cases meeting the guidelines set out by the policies of MCYS and defined in the regulations of the Child & Family Services Act.

It is not necessary that each question be answered as "yes." However these items direct you to think about aspects of the case making it more or less amenable to ADR at this time. The checklist is a work-in-progress and we welcome your comments.

Is this a protection case?

According to the Child & Family Services Act, ADR is to be considered to resolve any issue related to a child or a child's care if that child is or may be in need of protection. Put another way, a child should be eligible for child protection services as defined by the Eligibility Spectrum or soon will be in the absence of a third-party intervention. The exception is when the ADR is used to discuss the openness arrangements of an adoption.

Is this case disqualified from voluntary services?

Is the child or children safe and under no immediate risk?

The ADR process will evolve over several weeks and cannot respond in a timely way to immediate risks. The physical and emotional safety of the child must be assured while the ADR process unfolds.

Is there NO concurrent criminal proceeding related to the safety of any family member?

If a criminal prosecution is underway or being initiated, it could be premature to make a referral for ADR. Parties could be constrained about discussing issues central to plans for child safety.

Is there NO parenting capacity assessment now or soon to be underway?

The results of a parenting capacity assessment could well alter or determine any plan for the children. Use of ADR may be premature until the results of the assessment are known.

Have all internal supports, services and options been exhausted?

According to MCYS policy, Societies must confirm that all internal options for resolution have been exhausted and the intervention of a neutral third party is needed.

In the absence of the intervention by a third party, will this case likely proceed to trial and/or a child be taken into care?

This ADR strategy is intended to streamline court processes and encourage alternatives to court. A key goal is to reduce legal costs incurred by children's aid societies. Some disputed aspects of court cases could be addressed by the intervention of an impartial third party who facilitates a collaborative process of dialogue and decision making. Child protection workers engage in many processes of dialogue and decision making with clients around many important issues. ADR is amenable for only a portion of these cases and issues.

In thinking about how to meet the "bottom line," have all other roles for a third-party intervention been tried?

ADR as contemplated here is not a substitute for other techniques of therapeutic engagement, gaining family alignment with pre-determined plans, engaging in individual, couple or family therapy, resolving parent/child conflict, assessing parenting capacity, or teaching parenting skills. These other services are more suitably sought through a local children's mental health centre or other family-serving agency.

Is there an issue under dispute which could be addressed by the intervention of a third party?

Some features of ADR-related techniques have been adapted and used to help parents gain insight into their strengths and personal challenges. However, the services purchased through ADR-LINK are by definition used to resolve disputes and move forward with a plan that everyone agrees on.

Do all key parties have the capacity to participate in ADR?

Participating in any ADR process requires the ability to comprehend verbal discussions, engage in self-advocacy, and understand what is expected and personally required as a result of any agreement reached. Some levels of intellectual delay may compromise a person's ability to follow discussions and comprehend the implications of agreements. Some types of auditory processing disabilities may have the same effect. Literacy challenges will compromise the ability of some individuals to make informed decisions based on written materials such as contracts. Your agency may have exclusionary criteria for ADR that include psychological impairment, severe psychiatric impairment, and severe behavioural problems. When people agree to processes and plans they don't understand because of a developmental or emotional disability, the likelihood of follow-through is low.

Can all key parties participate in an ADR technique without fearing for their safety?

Parties must feel safe to express their views without fear of retaliation or violence. Past or current violence within the family, including intimate partner violence, may affect the ability of one or more party to participate fully and effectively. There must be the potential to resolve any outstanding safety issue in order for all participants to feel safe and comfortable expressing their views. If real or perceived safety for all participants is not possible, ADR is not appropriate.

If a current court order bars contact between or among key parties, permission from that court for ADR may be required.

Do all key parties agree to consider ADR?

Any ADR process must be undertaken with the informed consent of all participants. Furthermore, each party must understand that he or she can terminate the ADR process at any time or end his or her participation in it. Within the child protection context, the power imbalance inherent in the agency/client relationship may compromise a person’s ability to decline the option of ADR, lest they appear uncooperative. The ADR practitioner is ultimately responsible for ensuring all parties understand the ADR technique, their rights, their role in it, and what is expected of them. The ADR practitioner will screen out the case as inappropriate if any party feels coerced into the process. At this early point in the referral process, it the responsibility of the child protection worker to ensure each party is amenable to hearing more about ADR and consents in principle to the idea of ADR. ADR-LINK has prepared pamphlets suitable for distribution to potential participants with frequently asked questions about each prescribed technique of ADR.

Are there NO parties with active addictions so severe as to compromise ability to follow through on an agreed-upon plan?

Experience with ADR has shown that it's easier to agree to a measure than to follow through on it. Reaching an agreement is only the first step. Each key party must follow through on the tasks and actions forming the basis of the plan/agreement. A party who is not profitably engaged in recommended treatment for addictions and/or is actively abusing substances may not adequately contribute to the ADR process. Consider delaying the referral until that party is further along in their course of treatment.

Has a finding of "need for protection" already been made or is clearly not an issue to be considered in the ADR process?

ADR is not amenable to determining if a child is in need of protection. When the agency seeks a finding of "need for protection" but at least one key party opposes that finding, a referral for ADR may be premature.