afcc news su2005 · phoenix, az hon. george czutrin hamilton, on, canada hon. linda m. dessau ......

AFCC NEWSASSOCIATION OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS

Professionals dedicated to improving the lives of children and families through the resolution of family conflict

www.afccnet.org

Volume 24, Number 3 Summer 2005

Breckenridge TrainingConference AFCC FirstAll systems are go for AFCC’s Regional Train-ing Conference, Reaching the Pinnacle ofPractice. The conference takes place Septem-ber 22-24, 2005 in Breckenridge, Colorado,and will feature three full days of training.

Training tracks are designed for mediators,custody evaluators, legal professionals andparenting coordinators. Participants can signup for a full track or mix and match thesessions that are of most interest.

The program begins with pre-conferenceinstitutes on Thursday, September 22, andcontinues with 3-hour sessions on Fridayand Saturday, September 23 and 24. Topicsinclude: Testifying in Court; a Research-BasedApproach to Evaluating Relocation Cases;Mapping the Negotiation in Collaborative Law;Legal Advocacy Through Technology; Workingwith Children of Separation and Divorce;Advanced Mediation Institute and others.

The conference will feature the first-timeoffering of a three-day parenting coordinationtraining based on the AFCC Parenting Coordi-nation Task Force’s new Recommendations

continued on page 7

New Orleans 2006AFCC 43rd Annual ConferenceWhat happens in New Orleans…

Could only happen in New Orleans!

See the Call for Presenters on page 15

2 ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS

AFCC NewsVol. 24. No. 3 Summer 2005

EditorCandace Walker

Contributing EditorNola Risse-Connolly

Published by AFCC6525 Grand Teton PlazaMadison, WI 53719-1085Tel: 608.664.3750Fax: 608.664.3751E-mail: [email protected]: www.afccnet.org

AFCC News is a publication of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts and is publishedfour times a year. Deadlines fornews items and advertising areJanuary 15, April 15, July 15, and October 15.

AFCC News AdvertisingAdvertising copy must be cameraready and payment made in U.S.funds.

AFCC Non-members member

Full page(7 1/2” x 10”) $425 $600

Half page(7 1/2” x 4 7/8”) $300 $450

Quarter page(3 5/8” x 4 7/8”) $150 $250

AFCC NEWS SUMMER 2005

AFCC StaffExecutive DirectorPeter Salem, [email protected]

Program DirectorCandace Walker, CMP, [email protected]

Registrar and Office ManagerDawn [email protected]

Program AssistantNola Risse-Connolly, [email protected]

AFCC Board of DirectorsPresidentHon. Hugh StarnesFort Myers, FL

President ElectMary M. Ferriter, J.D., M.P.A.Boston, MA

Vice President/SecretaryHon. William C. FeeAngola, IN

TreasurerRobert Smith, J.D.Fort Collins, CO

Past PresidentLeslye Hunter, M.A.Metairie, LA

Board MembersRichard L. Altman, J.D.Napoleon, OH

Wendy Bryans, LL.B.Ottawa, ON, Canada

Annette T. Burns, J.D.Phoenix, AZ

Hon. George CzutrinHamilton, ON, Canada

Hon. Linda M. DessauMelbourne, VC, Australia

Robin M. Deutsch, Ph.D.Boston, MA

Cori Erickson, M.S.Sheridan, WY

Linda B. Fieldstone, M.Ed.Miami, FL

Stephen Grant, M.A.Wethersfield, CT

William J. Howe III, J.D.Lake Oswego, OR

Hon. Emile KruzickOrangeville, ON, Canada

C. Eileen Pruett, J.D.Columbus, OH

Philip M. Stahl, Ph.D.West Palm Beach, FL

Janet Walker, Ph.D.Newcastle upon Tyne, England

AFCC is an interdisciplinary and international association of professionals dedicated to the resolution of family conflict.

MissionTo improve the lives of childrenand families through theresolution of family conflict.

VisionA justice system in which allprofessionals work collaborativelythrough education, support andaccess to services to achievethe best possible outcome forchildren and families.

Values• Collaboration and respect

among professions anddisciplines

• Learning through inquiry,discussion and debate

• Innovation in addressing theneeds of families and childrenin conflict

• Empowering families to resolveconflict and make decisionsabout their future

All views expressed in the AFCC News are those of indi-vidual contributors and do notnecessarily reflect the opinions of AFCC.


ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS 3

Hi! I’m Hugh, and this is my story of addiction toAFCC.

My first experiment with AFCC came in about1984 at a regional conference in Ft. Lauderdale.I was asked to give a plenary talk on our newshared parenting statute in Florida. Intoxicatedby my appearance before such an august groupof professionals, I stayed and attended severalworkshops. The session on rituals in marriageseparations always stuck in my mind. I learnedthat many of the seemingly destructive or bizarrebehaviors that occur during a divorce are akin totribal rituals from the early development ofsocietal customs. Examples given were burningthe wedding dress by the wife (releasing griefand rage), and the desire of the husband toreturn to the home under the pretense of seeingthat none of his possessions were left there(making peace with the place where good timesand bad were shared). These ideas opened anew, exhilarating world for me.

I was hooked.Oh, yes, I have had my highs and lows since

then: there were the annual conferences inHawaii and New Orleans, and then the long,lonely, stretches where budgets and schedulestook away my emotional fixes. But then there wasthat Academy of Family Mediators conference in1999 in Chicago, where my Florida colleague, Dr.Greg Firestone, and I had a discussion with PhilBushard, then AFCC President, about starting aFlorida Chapter. Ah, the wonderful rush thatcomes with heady plans! Within a year ourFlorida Chapter of AFCC was a reality! A fewshort years later, the chapter is working on itsfifth annual conference and I am drunk with theelixir of the presidency of AFCC.

How did this all occur? Attending meetingsnearly every day was a must (we do ours byconference call at either 8:00am or 12:00noon);otherwise I could have slipped at any time downthe long slippery slope of backsliding behavior.An addiction is a wonderful thing, if you cancontrol it!

That’s my story, and I’msticking to it!

The future? I believe in thatvenerable politician, Tip O’Neilof Massachusetts, who said,“All politics are local.” All familylaw is local. That’s where allgood ideas (and bad) and allinnovations must be put inpractice or they are meaning-less. We must strive in everyway possible to find ways toimpact local jurisdictions withthe cutting edge ideas developed and expoundedon at our conferences. This piece of work mustbe done collaboratively. We must approach thefamily law system as a group ofco-equal professionals workingat the local level to improve thelot of the traumatized familiesworking their way through afamily law case. How? Mentor-ship, consultation, local interdis-ciplinary social and professionalgroups, brown bag lunches, andusing innovations in our every-day practice.

We must become addicted to this process. We need to dedicate ourselves to get startedon this path to salvation. Ahigher power commands it!

And finally, how do you be the best AFCC Presidentpossible? Get out of the wayof all the great staff and leaderswho surround you, and let themdo their job!

Yours in AA(FCC)

Hugh

President’s Message

Hon. Hugh StarnesAFCC PresidentFort Myers, Florida

We must strive in

every way possible

to find ways to

impact local

jurisdictions with

the cutting edge

ideas developed

and expounded on

at our conferences.


AFCC President Hugh Starnes is a man of many talents.Most AFCC members may know him as the thoughtful,soft-spoken, quick-witted judge from Florida. But afterspending a bit of time with him, it becomes clear that he isa man of many interests and that he pursues them with thesame zeal that makes him such a strong leader for AFCC.

A lifetime Floridian, Hugh has spent most of his life inFort Myers. “I loved sports when I was growing up,” Hughsaid, “but I was so small that I never did much more thanpractice with the team. My father was a lawyer and myfamily also had a cattle ranch, so on weekends I wouldwork on the ranch.”

After finishing high school, Hugh was off to the Univer-sity of Florida in Gainesville, where he earned his politicalscience and law degrees. “Looking back, it is interestingto me that I wrote my senior paper in law school on theimportance of non-doctrinal research in the law. I wasn’tnecessarily thinking about family law at the time, but I wasinterested in looking at the influence of other professionson the law.”

Hugh returned to Fort Myers and joined the NationalGuard. “This was in 1965, during the Vietnam war, and oneof my friends suggested that I should think about joiningbecause my other alternative would be getting drafted. Infact, I got my draft notice just after enlisting.” After servingin South Carolina and Oklahoma, it was back to Fort Myersand the family business. Hugh joined his father’s law prac-tice and, after 13 years as a lawyer, was appointed in 1978by Gov. Rueben Askew to fill a vacancy on the bench.

Hugh has been a family court judge since 1985,when he volunteered for the new family law division. Thisfollowed his first exposure to AFCC at a 1984 conferencein Fort Lauderdale. “AFCC member Shelly Finman intro-duced me to AFCC, and I was asked to present on ournew shared parenting statute at a plenary session at theconference. I have been a member ever since.”

For the last twenty years Hugh has spearheaded acollaborative effort in Lee County with lawyers and otherprofessionals to reduce adversarial practice, increaseinterdisciplinary cooperation and change the culture of thelocal family law system. This effort ultimately evolved into

AFCC’s Florida Chapter. “A Florida Chapter was such alogical idea,” Hugh said. “We simply took our Lee Countyexperience to the next level.”

Outside of his professional life, Hugh maintains anextraordinarily active life. He and his wife Judy have threegrown children, Cindy, Charlie and Sally. There are nograndchildren yet, but Charlie is recently married, Sallyis engaged to be married and Hugh is hopeful. Judy ownsand operates Janet Marie Studios, a clothing store thatmakes generous donations to AFCC’s Annual SilentAuction. “Originally, my plan was that Judy would nothave to work,” said Hugh, “and to be honest, I wasn’tcrazy about it when she started. But looking back, I wasable to understand and adjust, and now I am her biggestsupporter.”

Although both Hugh and Judy work more than full-time,they make plenty of time for their passion of competitiveballroom dancing. “Judy told me that she was going to takeprivate dance lessons and that I could either take lessonstoo or choose not to,” Hugh said. “We took lessons, andthen Judy decided she wanted to get into competition.Then Cindy got into it and decided to compete. At first,I wasn’t interested in it but eventually Cindy, Judy and myinstructor steered me toward competing. We take threelessons a week. Others tell Judy and me that there issomething about us and our relationship with each otherthat makes it so much fun to watch us dance together.”

Hugh continues to maintain his cattle ranch locatedabout 45 minutes from his home. “Virtually every weekendI am down at the ranch working out in the sun doingfence work or putting out minerals for the cattle. That’smy therapy.”

Whether it is cattle ranching, ballroom dancing, winemaking or being a family court judge, Hugh projects anenthusiasm and zest for his life and work. AFCC, in particu-lar, is a beneficiary. “My experience with the Florida chapterwas and continues to be one of the most exhilarating partsof my professional career,” Hugh said.

Members of the AFCC parent organization can lookforward to the same strong leadership and direction ashe guides the organization in the year to come.

M E M B E R P R O F I L E

AFCC President, Judge Hugh Starnes




by Jennifer McIntosh, PhD., Director, Children in FocusResearch Program, La Trobe University and Caroline Long,Research Manager, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia

A study contrasting pathways of adjustment for separatedfamilies through two forms of Family Law Mediation isunder way in Australia. The Children in Focus ResearchProgram is funded by the Australian Attorney General’sDepartment, in a collaboration between Family Transitions,Relationships Australia, and La Trobe University, withsupport from the Australian Institute for Family Studies.The research into child focused and child inclusive media-tion is beginning to highlight key areas of progress anddifferences between the two groups.

While much is now understood about the psychologicalramifications of post separation conflict to date, there hasbeen a paucity of Australian data on the well-being of chil-dren in the face of their parents’ post separation conflict.Equally, knowledge about the connection between formsof Family Law intervention and impacts on well-beingfor all family members is lacking. The current study wasdesigned to provide some of this data, and to exploreoutcomes for families who encounter specialised mediationinterventions specifically designed to augment parentalattunement to the needs of their children within the disputeresolution process. Of interest are both the primary impactsof these interventions and their cumulative secondaryimpacts on the adjustment of children and parents toconflictual separation.

The StudyThe first treatment group (75 child focused mediation

cases) was recruited from separated couples presentingwith parenting related matters to Relationships Australiamediation services across a six month period in threecities: Adelaide, Melbourne and Canberra. This groupparticipated in Child Focused Mediation, an approach tomediation that actively re-focuses parents on the needsof their children, but does not, at any stage, include directconsultation with the children.

The second treatment group (75 child inclusivemediation cases) was recruited six months later acrossthe same sites. The same mediation teams were inten-sively trained in a particular approach to Child InclusiveMediation. This is an approach that includes separateconsultation for children with a child consultant, and feed-back of the children’s material carefully incorporated intothe ongoing discussion with parents in mediation. Both

mediation approaches were implemented within strictlysupervised guidelines.

Across both samples, families were eligible for thestudy if their dispute included parenting matters, and atleast one child in dispute was within the ages of 5-18years. Voluntary and mandated cases were approached forinclusion in the study, and a broad range of conflict severitywas sought. Families in the study are followed up in personat three and 12months post media-tion, using an inter-view and the samemeasures theycompleted at intake.Children were seenin a one-to-one playstyle interview atintake, with follow-upinterviews at threeand 12 months postmediation.

OutcomeVariables

Outcomes moni-tored in this studyinclude changes in 1) post separationparental alliance; 2)conflict management;3) parent-child rela-tionships; 4) livingarrangements/man-agement and satisfaction; 5) children’s well-being andadjustment; 6) children’s self representations of parentalconflict; and 7) children’s perception of parental availabilityand alliance.

Findings to dateInteresting findings emerging in the three month follow

up data include a clear trend for fathers in the child inclu-sive mediation group to experience mediation as signifi-cantly more supportive and fair than fathers from the childfocused group. Of interest, mothers and fathers in the childinclusive mediation group report similar experience andoutcomes, whereas mothers and fathers from the child

Interesting findingsemerging in thethree month followup data includea clear trend forfathers in the childinclusive mediationgroup to experiencemediation assignificantly moresupportive and fairthan fathers from the child focusedgroup.

G L O B A L I S S U E S

Australian Families in Post-separation Disputes:Comparative Mediation Outcomes

continued on page 11

Dynamic—one simple word that can be used to describeevery aspect of AFCC’s 42nd Annual Conference. From thesetting in Seattle, to outstanding pre-conference institutes,plenary sessions and workshops, to the presenters and,most of all, to the mix of over 660 attendees from aroundthe globe, dynamic characterizes them all.

The conference began with a compelling address bykeynote speaker Justice Bobbe Bridge of the WashingtonState Supreme Court.

Three stimulating plenary sessions received ravereviews. Noted researcher Joan Kelly, Ph.D. moderated apanel of experts who discussed the topic The Politics ofResearch: The Use, Abuse and Misuse of Social ScienceData. Panelists included Richard Gelles, Ph.D.; Janet John-ston, Ph.D.; and Kyle Pruett, M.D.

Relocation Cases: An International View from theBench was the second plenary session topic. Hon. JerilynBorack moderated the session. Presenters included Hon.Mary Lou Benotto, Hon. Peter Boshier, Hon. Diana Bryantand Hon. W. Dennis Duggan.

The final plenary session, Shattering the Myths: Whatthe Research Shows about Lawyer Negotiations, was

presented by Professor Andrea Schneider, J.D., along withdiscussant R. John Harper, LL.B. and moderator Hon.Linda Dessau.

Conference attendees chose from over 50 workshops,yet still managed to experience Seattle. From the confer-ence’s headquarters at the Sheraton Seattle, downtownSeattle was just outside the door. Mariners baseball, out-standing shopping and a view from the Space Needle werejust some of the activities enjoyed by participants.

Added into the mix of plenary sessions, workshops,and Seattle atmosphere were the conference presentersand participants. After all the learning and networking,attendees were able to take this mix back home to improvetheir work—the best dynamic of all.

Seattle Conference a Smashing Success



AFCC members were honored for their accomplishmentsat the Annual Awards Luncheon at AFCC’s 42nd AnnualConference in Seattle.

Distinguished Service AwardKathryn Kuehnle, Ph.D., Indian Shores, Florida

Dr. Kathryn Kuehnle was honored with AFCC’s Distin-guished Service Award. She is a frequent presenter atAFCC conferences and a member of the AFCC ChildCustody Evaluation Standards Task Force. Dr. Kuehnle isa nationally known forensic expert who provides evaluationin cases of alleged child abuse, treatment to victims ofchild abuse and expert consultation to attorneys, otherprofessionals and the Court.

Stanley Cohen Distinguished Research AwardJanet A. Walker, Ph.D., Newcastle upon Tyne, UnitedKingdom

Dr. Janet Walker was presented with the Stanley CohenDistinguished Research Award. Dr. Walker, a member ofthe AFCC Board of Directors, has served for many yearsas Director at the Newcastle Centre for Family Studiesand as Professor of Family Policy, both at the Universityof Newcastle upon Tyne. She has authored an impressivelist of research projects and publications relating to familycourts and the impact of divorce on children. Many of Dr.Walker’s publications, research reports and conferencepapers were instrumental in shaping the passage of

England’s Family Law Act of 1996 andhave influenced the best practices offamily courts throughout the world.

Irwin Cantor Innovative ProgramAwardEarly Neutral Evaluation Program, Hennepin CountyFamily Court Services, Minneapolis, Minnesota

The Irwin Cantor Innovative Program Award waspresented to the Early Neutral Evaluation Program inHennepin County, Minnesota. Early Neutral Evaluationaims to expedite judicial case management, reduceexpensive evaluation cases in Court Services, focusnecessary evaluations on critical issues, move familiesthrough court as quickly and inexpensively as possibleand maximize staff efficiency.

President’s AwardAndrew Schepard, J.D., Hempstead, New York

AFCC President Leslye Hunter presented the AFCCPresident’s Award to Andrew Schepard, AFCC memberfrom Hempstead, New York. The award is presented forexemplary service to AFCC. Professor Schepard is theEditor of the Family Court Review and a Professor atHofstra University School of Law. He is the Chair of theFamily Law Education Reform Project, a frequent confer-ence presenter and served as Reporter for the ModelStandards of Practice for Family and Divorce Mediation.

AFCC Annual Awards Presented

Audio Cassettes and Audio CDs are available fromAFCC’s 42nd Annual Conference and may be purchasedindividually or as a complete conference set. Orderonline at: http://www.aven.com/conf.cfm/cid/817or call AVEN at 1-800-810-TAPE (8273).

Guidelines for ParentingCoordination ApprovedThe Guidelines for Parenting Coordination, produced by the interdisciplinaryAFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination (Task Force), were approved bythe Board of Directors of AFCC on May 21, 2005.

The Task Force met regularly for two years and researched, reviewed, dis-cussed and debated all areas of parenting coordination. In early 2005, AFCCposted the product of the Task Force, Guidelines for Parenting Coordination(originally called Model Standards of Practice for Parenting Coordination) onits Web site, and the Task Force members also widely distributed them forcomments. The Task Force received many thoughtful and articulate commentsthat were carefully considered in making substantive and editorial changes.Now approved by the AFCC Board of Directors, the Guidelines are postedon the Standards of Practice page of AFCC’s Web site at www.afccnet.org,and include a discussion of qualifications and best practices for parentingcoordinators, guidance for training programs and best judicial and programpractices.

The members of the AFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination were:Christine A. Coates, M.Ed., J.D., Chairperson and Reporter; Linda Fieldstone,M.Ed., Secretary; Barbara Ann Bartlett, J.D.; Robin M. Deutsch, Ph.D.; Billie LeeDunford-Jackson, J.D.; Philip M. Epstein, Q.C., LSM; Barbara Fidler, Ph.D.,C.Psych, Acc.FM.; Jonathan Gould, Ph.D.; Hon. William G. Jones; Joan Kelly,Ph.D.; Matthew J. Sullivan, Ph.D.; and Robert N. Wistner, J.D.

Draft Model Standards Postedfor Comment

The AFCC Child Custody Evaluation Standards Task Force completed adraft of the new Model Standards of Practice for Child Custody Evaluation forreview and comment.You may link to the Draft Model Standards from AFCC’sWeb site home page at www.afccnet.org.

for Comprehensive Training of Parenting Coordinators. Topics will include FamilyDynamics, Nuts & Bolts of Parenting Coordination, Domestic Abuse and Parent-ing Coordination, and Connecting Parenting Coordination and the Courts. TaskForce members providing the training include Christie Coates, Barbara Bartlett,Robin Deutsch, Billie Lee Dunford-Jackson, Barbara Fidler, Linda Fieldstoneand Matt Sullivan.

From the Denver airport, a 90-minute shuttle through the scenic RockyMountains will take you to the Beaver Run Resort. Deluxe Studios, OneBedroom Suites or Colorado Suites are available for only $119 per night.Many rooms include fireplaces, spa tubs and private balconies. For reservations,call 1-800-525-2250.

Registration rates begin at $260 for AFCC members. Pre-conferenceinstitutes require separate registration. Program information and onlineregistration is available at www.afccnet.org, or contact AFCC [email protected] or 608-664-3750.

What’s Newfrom AFCC?NEW MEMBER BENEFITS IN 2005!

• Family Court Review archives:Online access to the entirecollection of AFCC’s quarterlyjournal, Family Court Review,beginning with the first issuepublished in 1963.

• Conference Audio: Listento AFCC Annual ConferencePlenary Sessions in MP3 for-mat, available in the MemberCenter of the AFCC Web site.

• Member Discounts: AFCCmembers receive a 15% dis-count on all AFCC publicationsand videos, a 20% discounton publications from BlackwellPublishing and a 25% discountwith J. M. Craig Press.

• Online Member Resources:AFCC members can accessselected items from the AFCCPublication Library in electronicformat for no charge, includingAFCC’s newest publication,Exemplary Family CourtPrograms and Practices.

NEW PUBLICATIONS!• Three special editions of Essays

from the Family Court Reviewhighlight special topics ofinterest:

• Overnights and YoungChildren

• Domestic Violence

• Mediation

• Exemplary Family CourtPrograms and Practices

NEW CONFERENCE ANDTRAINING PROGRAMS!• Bi-annual Regional Training

Conference

• Two-day training programs onchildren and divorce, parentingcoordination and child custodyevaluation



BreckenridgeContinued from page 1

Editor’s Note: This article is a response to Anita Trubitt’sarticle, The Incorporation of Play Therapy Modalities in aComprehensive Child Custody Evaluation published inAFCC News Spring 2005. Views expressed by authors ofsubmitted articles are those of the authors.

by David Martindale, Ph.D., Morristown, NJ;Lorraine Martin, MSW, Toronto, ON, Canada; and William Austin, Ph.D., Steamboat Springs, CO

As representatives of the AFCC’s Task Force re-writing theModel Standards for Child Custody Evaluations, we (theTask Force Reporter and Task Force Co-chairs, respec-tively) would like to respond to Trubitt’s endorsement of TheIncorporation of Play Therapy Modalities in a Comprehen-sive Child Custody Evaluation (2005). In our view, “insightsinto [the] thoughts, feelings and needs” of children who areparticipants in custody evaluations cannot be reliablyascertained by means of drawing tasks and play and wediscourage the use of such techniques.

At the recently concluded AFCC 42nd Annual Confer-ence in Seattle, Gelles, Johnston, Pruett and Kelly (2005)presented a Plenary Session entitled: “The Politics ofResearch: The Use, Abuse, and Misuse of Social ScienceData.” In this session, the presenters and participantsaddressed the harm that is done when research data areused to persuade rather than to educate. In any context itis inappropriate to describe researchers’ work in a mannerthat can be expected to produce a misunderstanding ofthat work rather than an understanding of it. Trubitt accu-rately conveys the view of Bow and Quinnell (2002) thatmore must be done to assess the needs of children andthe parent-child dynamics. Trubitt uses the Bow and Quin-nell position to suggest that they would look with favorupon her assessment techniques. Trubitt does not reportthe dismay that Quinnell and Bow had expressed in theirearlier article (Quinnell & Bow, 2001) concerning the con-tinued use by mental health professionals of “projectiveinstruments, which generally lack adequate psychometricproperties . . .” (p. 500). The editorial view of Quinnell andBow is clear: In a forensic context, it is inappropriate toutilize instruments for which empirical support is lacking(Bow, 2005, personal communication).

Though it is often said that we don’t know what wedon’t know, some of the most widely discussed research isvaluable to the mental health professions because it doesteach us what we don’t know. In particular, our publishedresearch has taught us that certain data-gathering anddata-analyzing techniques cannot be relied upon to provideinformation of the type that is required to form opinions thatmust be expressed with a reasonable degree of profes-sional certainty.

Though most research on the utility of doll play fordiagnostic/evaluative purposes has been conducted within

the context of investigations of allegations of child sexualabuse, the message that emerges is that young childrendo not perceive dolls as symbolic representations of them-selves (DeLoache, 1995). In particular, there is no empiri-cal support for Trubitt’s assertion that “[w]here [children]put the family doll that represents themselves tells uswhere they feel most comfortable or safe” (p. 6).

If a mental health professional is to employ a conceptin her work, it is incumbent upon her to fully understandthe concept. We submit that if one fully understands theconcept of projection, one is more likely than not to con-clude that neither drawing nor doll play is a “reliable sourceof information.” Even if it had been demonstrated that thedynamic of projection consistently operates as childrendraw and play with dolls, there would still be no basis forour relying upon it. Trubitt herself has referred to projectionas a “source of information about the thoughts, feelings,needs, and wishes of children and their parents” (p. 13).The early proponents of projective techniques (Abt &Bellak, 1950) made it clear that we cannot be certainwhat is being projected.

To use family drawings as an example, if a child pro-duces a drawing in which she places herself close to herfather, this may represent a projection of her perception ofher relationship with her father. Unfortunately for the exam-iner trying to decipher the drawing, it may also representnot a perception, but a wish. The child with a father who iseither physically absent or emotionally distant might drawthe father close to the child. An older child whose drawingskills are somewhat better might draw himself being caredfor by a parent who, in reality, provides deficient care. Thus,there is no basis for Trubitt’s assertion that when an exam-iner employs the Family as Animals in the Sand technique,the “sandtray… becomes a 3-dimensional representationof the child’s perception of the family…” (p. 6). To furthercomplicate matters, even if we could presume that it isalways a perception that is being projected, are we topresume that children’s perceptions of family dynamicsare accurate (or that if they are inaccurate it does notmatter because it is only their perceptions that are ofconcern to us)?

Richard Dana, who has authored numerous articles onprojective testing, sagaciously observed more than threedecades ago (Dana, 1966) that interpretations of responsesto projective stimuli are vulnerable to eisegesis – distortionstemming from projection by the examiner (as opposed tothe examinee) deriving from the examiner’s theoreticalbiases, emotional investment in certain hypotheses, etc.He has reiterated his position more recently (Dana, 1996,p. 202). Anastasi (1988) also opined that the interpretationof responses to projective stimuli “may reveal more aboutthe theoretical orientation, favorite hypotheses, and

Reader Response



continued on page 9

by Anita Trubitt, LCSW, RPT-SHonolulu, HI

“You can learn more about a person in an hour of play thanin a year of conversation.” Plato

What makes AFCC such a dynamic organization is itshistory of questioning and challenging the ideas of manyinnovative clinicians. Given the reviewers’ critique of myPractice Tips (AFCC News Spring 2005), I am clearly ingood company.

While we continue to hold opposite positions aboutmany issues, one point of agreement is that our conclu-sions must be based on a multi-method protocol that gath-ers data from many sources, because “currently, there isno formula for how to weigh the various components of achild custody evaluation” (Gould and Bell, 2000, AFCCSymposium). Therefore, I strive to be redundant, and untilthere is reliable evidence to justify the inclusion or exclu-sion of any method, I include play therapy because itstands the test of my clinical training and experience. Ifreferences are made to it in my final report, they describebehavior, not interpretation or prediction. But if we “throwout the baby with the bath water,” we also throw away thepotential richness of children’s thoughts, feelings and per-ceptions that are rarely expressed in their words.

Play therapy techniques for the child interview aredescribed by Stahl in Conducting Child Custody Evalua-tions (1994). Schutz et al. include a structured format for

parent-child observation that includes free play and a coop-erative play task in Solomon’s Sword (1987).

My protocol is comprehensive, carefully described toparents, structured and internally consistent in its applica-tion. The following example demonstrates how interviewswith children occur within the context of their play.

An overweight nine-year-old girl blurted out that shewanted to live with her father. Her reason: “my dad lets meeat whatever I want and my mom makes me eat all myvegetables.” In her Kinetic Family Drawing, she and hermother, drawn first and second, were similarly rendered.Her father was drawn last, after her brother, much smaller,tilted and floating, a red slash for a mouth and eyes withoutpupils. She and her brother reported hearing their parentsfight, and using family dolls, he enacted a vicious attack onthe mother by the father in the dollhouse activity during hisinterview. The Build-A-House was a collaborative effort withMother and children, while Father, in the same activity,argued with the girl so insistently that she built a room forherself outside the house. Mother alleged spouse abuseand a police report confirmed it. It was the convergence ofall the data that guided my recommendations to the court.

Rather than dismiss the vital “humanizing” contributionof play therapy data in this daunting work, I propose thatopen discussion begin. Our first effort might be a surveyof play therapy techniques in current use, how and whythey are administered and how they contribute to the finalproduct. I welcome the response of my colleagues [email protected].

To Play Or Not To PlayA Response to Martindale, Martin and Austin



personality idiosyncrasies of the examiner than it doesabout the examinee’s personality dynamics” (p. 614).

To her credit, Trubitt endorses “a comprehensive cus-tody evaluation” (p. 13) and it is reasonable to infer thatshe utilizes many other information gathering methods.However, the inclusion by an evaluator of reliable and validdata would not lessen our concern with regard to use ofunreliable and invalid data. When the formulation of anopinion requires the integration of data from differentsources, the foundation for the opinion is never strength-ened by the addition of unreliable or invalid data any morethan a building foundation would be strengthened by theaddition of substandard elements. Involving a child in playor in drawing as a means by which to facilitate rapportbuilding is generally accepted. Viewing the play as a“reliable source of information” is not.

At the AFCC conference in Seattle, those in attendancewere provided with highlights of the current draft of whatwill ultimately become the new Model Standards. Unlessdramatic and unanticipated changes occur, the final docu-ment will contain references to the importance of reliabilityand validity, to the need for evaluators to acknowledge thelimitations of their data, and to the obligation of evaluatorsto differentiate among their observations, inferences, andconclusions. In our view, Trubitt has disregarded issues ofinter-judge reliability and temporal stability, has been inat-tentive to the issue of discriminant validity, has failed toarticulate the very dramatic limitations of observationaldata collected through projective techniques, and hasclouded the important distinctions among observations,inferences, and conclusions.

(For a complete list of references, contact DavidMartindale at [email protected].)

Reader ResponseContinued from page 8

AFCC’s Annual Appeal for 2004-05raised more than $16,000 to supportthe AFCC Innovation Mini-Grantand Scholarship Programs. Theseprograms are sustained entirely byAFCC member contributions, sothe generosity of the followingcontributors is especially appreciated.

Key Club ($5,000+)John and Joan VanDuzerand the Harbinger Foundation

Diamond ($1,000-$4,999)Charlie & Barb AsherDoneldon DennisSuzie S. Thorn Family FoundationArline and Barry Rotman

Platinum ($500-$999)Robert M. SmithPhilip StahlHugh StarnesAFCC Florida ChapterAFCC Massachusetts Chapter

Gold ($250-499)Phil BushardGeorge CzutrinMary Ferriter

Leslye HunterLisa B. JohnsonFredric MitchellPeter SalemAndrew SchepardAFCC Texas Chapter

Silver ($100-$249)Richard L. AltmanAllison J. BellChristine A. CoatesLinda DessauRobin DeutschCori EricksonWilliam FeeDavid FinkRandy FuerstJoel B. GlassmanJonathan GouldCarl F. HoppeWilliam J. Howe IIIJanet JohnstonWilliam G. JonesHon. Lawrence W. KaplanDenise McColleyStesuko MiyashitaChet MuklewiczBrenda Russo-WoolseyEileen M. Shaevel

Jeffrey SiegelBarbara F. SteinbergJudith N. StimsonFrank S. WilliamsAFCC New Jersey Chapter

Bronze ($50-99)Aza ButlerJohn C. CarmodyJames C. Cawood Jr.Leslie M. DrozdGregory FirestoneElaine Fridlund-HorneMary Kae HellerStacy SarnoffR. Malia Taum-DeenikShirley ThomasSharon S. TownsendAnita TrubittLynn TysonWilliam WalshCelia WongContributorsJean McBrideMindy MitnickClaire M. HillPat MichelsenEric DeanPeggy Gorman

AFCC Thanks Contributors



AFCC’s Resource Development Committee awarded itsfirst $5,000 Innovation Mini-Grant to It’s Not Your Fault!,a collaborative effort of Voices for Children, the Contem-porary Art Center and the University of New OrleansCounselor Education Department. This year’s award wassponsored by the Harbinger Foundation and Hon. Johnand Joan VanDuzer.

It’s Not Your Fault! is designed for children ages 5-16,and will offer an educational creative art experience thatprovides children a new voice in expressing their thoughtsand feelings, a peer support group and professional

counseling. The program will be unique in its use ofperforming and visual arts to assist children in their familytransition.

The Resource Development Committee also grantedeight scholarships to the 42nd Annual Conference inSeattle. Six scholarship winners received a wavier ofconference registration fees and two internationalscholarship recipients (for those outside of North America)received a registration fee waiver and $1,000 travelstipend.

R E S O U R C E D E V E L O P M E N T U P D AT E

AFCC Awards Innovation Mini-Grant, Conference Scholarships

AFCC’s Seventh Annual Silent Auction at the SheratonSeattle on May 20, 2005 was a resounding success. Almost$9,000 was raised for AFCC special projects, including thenew AFCC Parenting Coordination Guidelines, AFCCModel Standards for Child Custody Evaluation and theFamily Law Education Reform Project.

Featured items at this year’s auction included StarwoodPoints, hotel accommodations from the Capital Hilton, Sher-aton New Orleans and Beaver Run Resort, extraordinarily

fine beverages, original artwork and glass art, lobster din-ners and steaks, autographed books and sports memora-bilia, DVDs and videos, and many one-of-a-kind items.

AFCC would like to thank the volunteers who workedon the Silent Auction: John Harper, Dick Altman, and theirassistants Mary Ferriter, Perri Mayes, Emile Kruzick andChris DelFavero. A special thanks to Starwood Resorts andto all of those who solicited and contributed to this year’sevent.

Organizations:Starwood ResortsAFCCAFCC Arizona ChapterAFCC California ChapterAFCC Florida ChapterAFCC Massachusetts ChapterAFCC Missouri ChapterAFCC New Jersey ChapterAFCC New York ChapterAFCC Texas ChapterABA Section of Dispute ResolutionAmerican Girl, Middleton, WIAssociation for Conflict ResolutionBeaver Run Resort, Breckenridge, COBlackwell Publishing, Malden, MACapital Hilton, Washington, DCGuilford PublishingH&H Jobbing CompanyHamilton Superior Court of Justice JudgesInstitute for Advanced Dispute ResolutionJanet Marie Studios, Fort Myers, FLMediate.comNorwich Bookstore, Norwich, VT

Sheraton New OrleansStay at Home and LearnQuick Quality Press, Madison, WIWegner LLP Consultants, Madison, WI

Individuals:Dick AltmanAndrea AnderlyWendy BryansPhil BushardLinda CavalleroBarbara ChasnoffChristie CoatesGeorge CzutrinDoneldon DennisLinda Dessau Robin Deutsch Cori Erickson Bill FeeMary FerriterLinda FieldstoneLarry FongSiedah GarrettJonathan Gould

John HarperBill HoweDavid Hoffman Sjoerd HommingaLeslye HunterSharon JamesEmile KruzickMichele MacFarlaneDenise McColley Woody MostenKelly Browe OlsonEileen PruettLeanne SchlegelJoy RisseBarry and Arline RotmanPeter SalemRichard SalemAndy SchepardJan ShawRobert SmithPhil StahlHugh and Judy StarnesBetsy ThomasJanet Walker

Seventh Annual Silent Auction is a Success



focused group report significantly different experiences,with these fathers feeling the process to be profoundlyunfair, unsupportive and less productive than their formerwives reported. Hypotheses are currently being explored inthe child inclusive model around the “level playing field”that this approach seems to create, particularly by remov-ing from the mediation process mother as “gate-keeper”of the children’s needs and views.

With 680 variables on each family, at three time inter-vals, there is an enormous amount of data to be sifted

through yet! Over the next year, full analyses will be con-ducted, exploring both repeated measures and qualitativedata for parents and children in the two groups, up to12 months post mediation. Findings will roll out throughout2005-2006.

Information on the study and research measures aredetailed in Child-focused and child-inclusive mediation: Acomparative study of outcomes (Journal of Family Studies,10, no. 1, McIntosh, Long & Moloney) and Current findingson Australian children in post-separation disputes: Outerconflict, inner discord (Journal of Family Studies, 11, no. 1,McIntosh & Long)

Global IssuesContinued from page 5



AFCC is pleased to welcome two newmembers of the Board of Directors,with terms beginning July 1, 2005:Annette Burns, Phoenix, Arizona andEmile Kruzick, Orangeville, Ontario,Canada.

AFCC thanks the members whohave completed their service on theBoard of Directors: Fred Mitchell,Tucson, Arizona and Ross Goodwin,Quebec, Canada.

AFCC Board of Directors

PresidentHon. Hugh StarnesFort Myers, FL

President ElectMary M. Ferriter, J.D., M.P.A.Boston, MA

Vice President/SecretaryHon. William C. FeeAngola, IN

TreasurerRobert Smith, J.D.Fort Collins, CO

Past PresidentLeslye Hunter, M.A.Metairie, LA

Board MembersRichard L. Altman, J.D.Napoleon, OH

Wendy Bryans, LL.B.Ottawa, ON, Canada

Annette T. Burns, J.D.Phoenix, AZ

Hon. George CzutrinHamilton, ON, Canada

Hon. Linda M. DessauMelbourne, VC, Australia

Robin M. Deutsch, Ph.D.Boston, MA

Cori Erickson, M.S.Sheridan, WY

Linda B. Fieldstone, M.Ed.Miami, FL

Stephen Grant, M.A.Wethersfield, CT

William J. Howe III, J.D.Lake Oswego, OR

Hon. Emile KruzickOrangeville, ON, Canada

C. Eileen Pruett, J.D.Columbus, OH

Philip M. Stahl, Ph.D.West Palm Beach, FL

Janet Walker, Ph.D.Newcastle upon Tyne, England

AFCC Committee ChairsContact information is on AFCC’sWeb site at www.afccnet.org.

Awards CommitteeHon. Emile Kruzick, ChairOrangeville, ON, Canada

Chapter CommitteeAnnette T. Burns, J.D., Co-chairPhoenix, AZ

Linda Fieldstone, M.Ed., Co-chairMiami, FL

Conference CommitteeLeslye Hunter, M.A., LPC, Co-chairMetairie, LA

Hon. Denise McColley, Co-chairNapoleon, OH

Finance CommitteeRobert Smith, J.D., ChairFort Collins, CO

Human Resources CommitteeHon. William C. Fee, ChairAngola, IN

International CommitteeWilliam J. Howe III, J.D., Co-chairLake Oswego, OR

Janet Walker, Ph.D., Co-chairNewcastle upon Tyne, England

Nominations CommitteeLeslye Hunter, M.A., LPC, ChairMetairie, LA

Professional Development andTechnical Assistance CommitteeKelly Browe Olson, J.D., LL.M.

Co-chairLittle Rock, AR

C. Eileen Pruett, J.D., Co-chairColumbus, OH

Publications CommitteeWendy Bryans, LL.B., Co-chairOttawa, ON, Canada

Doneldon Dennis, Co-chairMinneapolis, MN

Linda Fieldstone, M.Ed., Co-chairMiami, FL

Resource Development CommitteeHon. Arline Rotman (ret.), ChairNorwich, VT

AFCC Board of Directors for 2005-2006

AFCC 2005-2006 Committee Chairs

Florida Chapter Updateby Linda Fieldstone, M.Ed., Miami, FL

The Florida Chapter of AFCC is very excited about its FifthAnnual Conference, Resolving Family Conflict: Innovations,Initiatives & Advanced Skills, to take place at the TampaAirport Marriott Hotel on October 28-29, 2005. FloridaSupreme Court Chief Justice Barbara Pariente will be thekeynote speaker for the conference and will address theconcept of the Unified Family Court and her vision of thedomestic relations courts of the future. Additionally, thespecial challenges in assisting non-traditional families willbe explored with the help of Justice Harvey Brownstone,who will be bringing his inspiration and sensitivity downfrom Toronto, Canada. Other exciting programs featuremediation, parenting coordination, domestic violence,family law bounds of advocacy, dependency issues,collaborative law, mental health, financial issues andmore. For more information contact Deborah Day, Psy.D.at [email protected].

The Florida Bar recently asked the FLAFCC ParentingCoordination Task Force to reconvene a collaborative multi-disciplinary group to develop and modify language for aParenting Coordination statute for the next legislative ses-sion. A PC Statute was introduced in the 2004 legislativesession and was unanimously adopted by the Senate andpassed the House by a two-third’s majority only to bevetoed by Governor Jeb Bush. While initially disappointing,the parenting coordination profession in Florida has contin-ued to gain strength and momentum and the chapter hascontinued the lead in bringing together groups with diverseand, often, competing interests to participate in thisprocess, working toward a more successful legislativeprocess.

The Florida Organizational Collaboration Initiative hasbeen developing key principles and will be meeting in thefall for a retreat to discuss further how to work collabora-tively to best assist the families served. Members areexcited about the growth of the chapter and the passionmembers bring to making changes in the Family Courtsand serving clients and families more effectively. Chaptermembers wish to congratulate FLAFCC Past-PresidentHugh Starnes for his position leading AFCC!

Texas Passes Parent Coordinator Statuteby Judge Leta Parks, Houston, Texas

On June 17, 2005, Texas became the fifth state to have aspecific parent statute that authorizes family court judgesto appoint mental health professionals as parent coordina-tors in high conflict cases. The statute, which also requires

parents to file a detailed parenting plan in every divorcecase, was the product of a collaborative effort betweenAFCC members, Texas legislators and advocates for vic-tims of domestic violence.

Members of the AFCC Texas chapter proposed lan-guage for a bill to be introduced to the Texas legislature inSpring 2004. The language of the bill was discussed in theBoard of Directors meeting and debated again at the chap-ter’s statewide annual conference in November. There wasspirited discussion in both sessions; however, compromisewas reached and language that the majority of AFCCmembers could support was introduced to the legislature.

Significant areas of debate focused on credentialing ofparent coordinators and confidentiality of their work withthe parents. The Texas statute requires parent coordinatorsto have a minimum of a bachelor’s degree in education,psychology, counseling or social work plus a minimum of16 hours parent coordination training. A masters’ degree ina mental health discipline with an emphasis on children’sissues does not require parent coordination training. Allparent coordinators are required to complete at least eighthours of family violence dynamics training. The statuteclearly contemplates mental health rather than legal pro-fessionals fulfilling the role as parent coordinator. This isnot to say that a lawyer who also has the additional trainingwould not qualify.

The Texas statute reflects a desire to keep parent coor-dinators from becoming tools of litigation. Therefore allcommunication between the parent coordinator and theparents is privileged and the parent coordinator is requiredto file a report with the court only indicating whether theparent coordination is working and should continue. Onlythe judge can remove the parent coordinator on therequest or agreement of the parties or on its own motion.

To read the statute, go to the Texas Chapter Web site atwww.texasafcc.org/standards.html and click on New ParentCoordination Legislation.

AFCC Chapter News



AFCC Member News• AFCC Board member Eileen Pruett moved from

the Dispute Resolution Section at the SupremeCourt in Columbus, Ohio and has taken a leader-ship position at the Franklin County MunicipalCourt.

• AFCC member Elayne Greenberg was namedone of the Best Lawyers in New York in DomesticAlternative Dispute Resolution by Best Lawyer inAmerica (2005).

Overnights and Young Children: Essays from the Family Court ReviewThis collection of essays previously published in the Family Court Reviewexamines the long-standing debate on overnights and young children.Includes articles from Joan Kelly and Michael Lamb, Richard Warshak,Judith Solomon and Marsha Kline Pruett. Price: $20 for non-members,$17 for AFCC members.

Domestic Violence: Essays from the Family Court ReviewThis volume features Clare Dalton with a response from Janet Johnston,and examines issues including Domestic Violence and Child Protection,Partner Violence and Risk Assessment, Domestic Violence and Gayand Lesbian Victims and Teen Dating Violence. Price: $20 for non-members, $17 for AFCC members.

Exemplary Family Court Programs and PracticesExemplary Family Court Programs and Practices profiles nearly 70 court-relatedprograms including Dispute Resolution, Access to Justice, Parenting Plan Servicesand Children Services. This 170-page book is a must-have for courts, privateagencies and others looking for innovative, effective and creative ways to servefamilies. Price: $25 for non-members, $21.25 for AFCC members.

AFCC Members Receive a 15% Discount on Publications and VideosTo order online go to www.afccnet.org and then to the Shopping Center. Or contact AFCC at (608) 664-3750

or [email protected] and ask for a publication order form.

New AFCC Publications Available!

COMING SOON! Mediation: Essays from the Family Court Review.





A F C C 4 3 R D A N N U A L C O N F E R E N C E

New OrleansMay 31-June 3, 2006Sheraton New Orleans

Juggling Conflicts,Crises and Clientsin Family Court:The Big (Not So) Easy

Professionals who work with families in conflict are constantly juggling numerous responsibilities. Effectively serving clients,courts and the professional community can be difficult, exhausting, dangerous, and lead to professional burnout. Join AFCC andexplore how to successfully juggle our significant professional challenges while productively managing their impact on our lives.

Preliminary Topics:

AFCC is accepting proposals for ninety-minute workshop sessions including, but not limited to, the topics listed above. If you are interestedin presenting a workshop, please send the following information: (1) an abstract of no more than 200 words describing your proposed work-shop; (2) a one-page outline of your proposed workshop; (3) three learning objectives that will be addressed by your proposed workshop;(4) resumes and complete contact information for all proposed presenters; (5) the name of the person who will be coordinating your work-shop; and (6) contact information for two professional references. Maximum of four presenters per workshop.

Please note that the deadline for proposals is October 10, 2005. AFCC is unable to guarantee consideration of incomplete proposals orthose submitted after the deadline. AFCC offers a reduced registration fee for conference presenters.AFCC is unable to reimburse travel andrelated expenses. Electronic submissions via email are preferred; however you may also send your proposal to AFCC, Conference Proposal, 6525Grand Teton Plaza, Madison,WI 53719-1085. Phone: (608) 664-3750; Fax: (608) 664-3751; Email: [email protected] (Word or WordPerfectattachments only please).

C A L L F O R P R E S E N T E R S

• Child Custody Evaluation• Involving Children in Mediation• Family Violence• Child Support • Innovations in Court Services • Mediation• Personal Safety and Security

• Research • Managing a Multidisciplinary Practice• Relocation• Parenting Coordination• Legal Representation of Children• Vicarious Trauma• Collaborative Divorce

• Ethical Issues for Professionals• Hybrid and Dual Role Processes• Alienated Children • Negotiation for Lawyers• Dealing with Difficult People • Dependency Mediation• Innovations in Practice

AFCC Regional TrainingConferenceSeptember 22-24, 2005Beaver Run ResortBreckenridge, Coloradowww.afccnet.org

Texas AFCC ChapterConferenceSeptember 30-October 1, 2005Houston, Texaswww.texasafcc.org

Florida AFCC Annual Chapter ConferenceOctober 29-30, 2005Tampa, Floridawww.flafcc.org

Parenting Coordination:Working with High ConflictFamiliesPresenter: Christine A. Coates,M.Ed., J.D.December 5-6, 2005University of BaltimoreBaltimore, Marylandwww.afccnet.org

Working with Children ofSeparation and Divorce:Fostering Healthy FamilyTransitionsPresenter: Risa J. Garon, LCSW-C, BCD, CFLEDecember 7-8, 2005University of BaltimoreBaltimore, Marylandwww.afccnet.org

Arizona AFCC Annual Chapter ConferenceFebruary 3-5, 2006Sedona, Arizonawww.azafcc.org

Parenting Coordination:Helping High Conflict Parents Resolve DisputesPresenter: Joan B. Kelly, Ph.D.February 7-8, 2006Loyola University New OrleansNew Orleans, Louisianawww.afccnet.org

Working with Children ofSeparation and Divorce: What They Know, What TheyWant, What You Can DoPresenter: Mindy F. Mitnick, Ed.M., M.A.February 9-10, 2006Loyola University New OrleansNew Orleans, Louisianawww.afccnet.org

California AFCC AnnualChapter ConferenceFebruary 10-12, 2006Los Angeles, Californiawww.afcc-cal.org

AFCC 43rd Annual ConferenceMay 31-June 3, 2006Sheraton New OrleansNew Orleans, Louisianawww.afccnet.org

AFCC 44th Annual ConferenceMay 30-June 2, 2007Capital HiltonWashington, D.C.www.afccnet.org

Upcoming AFCC Conferences and Trainings

afcc news su2005 · phoenix, az hon. george czutrin hamilton, on, canada hon. linda m. dessau ......

Documents