Acknowledgment: We thank the members of the model court team, especially Judges Bonita Dancy, Yolanda Tanner, and Edward Hargadon and attorneys Joan Little and Vanita Taylor, for assistance at various stages in our research and analysis, as well as the respondents who shared their opinions with us. We are also grateful to the two student teams that worked on this project: Jade Angello, Megan Flynn, Wyneshia R. Hicks, and Katelyn Raab created the initial survey, and Stacey Black, Rena Brinson, Amy Froiland, and Nicole Yelder conducted an initial analysis of the data.
Baltimore City's Model Court: Professional Stakeholders' Experience with Baltimore City's One Family, One Judge Docketing*†
Version of Record online: 25 APR 2013
© 2013 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts
Family Court Review
Volume 51, Issue 2, pages 286–297, April 2013
How to Cite
Shdaimah, C. and Summers, A. (2013), Baltimore City's Model Court: Professional Stakeholders' Experience with Baltimore City's One Family, One Judge Docketing*. Family Court Review, 51: 286–297. doi: 10.1111/fcre.12027
- Issue online: 25 APR 2013
- Version of Record online: 25 APR 2013
- Child Welfare;
- Court Improvement Program;
- Court Reform;
- Court Research;
- Judicial Decision Making;
- Model Courts;
- One Family–One Judge;
- Unified Family Court
The one family, one judge model is a recommended “best practice” adopted in jurisdictions across the country. This article reports findings from a survey of professional stakeholders (N = 165) in Baltimore regarding their perception of a recently implemented one family, one judge model in their jurisdiction. Perceptions of the one family, one judge practice are mostly positive; stakeholders believe that it improves the fairness and consistency of decision-making. Stakeholder concerns focused on implementation, scheduling, and familiarity among parties. Based on our findings, we highlight the importance of ongoing efforts to reduce potential bias, to improve scheduling practices, and to increase inter- and intra-agency coordination and communication to ensure that the one family, one judge model lives up to its promise while mitigating potential concerns.
Key Points for the Family Court Community
- Most stakeholders are satisfied with the one family, one judge docketing as implemented in Baltimore City and believe that it has improved efficiency and decision-making.
- In planning and implementing one family, one judge docketing, jurisdictions must take into account logistical considerations that can impact the program feasibility, acceptance, and success. These include fiscal resources, local regulations, staffing, and workplace structures.
- Communication and good relationships among stakeholders and agencies can help facilitate implementation of model court practices such as one family, one judge docketing.
- Stakeholders voiced mixed concerns regarding the fairness of one family, one judge. Some stakeholders believed that the one family, one judge model potentially or actually exacerbated judicial bias; whereas others believed that the model reduced judicial bias. Understanding these concerns is important in directing future research and practice.