Achieving justice for children often requires proper representation for them and their families, according to recommendations delivered at a landmark conference on legal representation for children held recently at UNLV's William S. Boyd School of Law.
A full report of the conference's proceedings, including recommendations on how to improve legal representation, was released this week as a special issue of the Nevada Law Journal, a publication of UNLV's law school. The conference, titled "Representing Children in Families: Child Advocacy and Justice Ten Years after Fordham," convened nearly 100 lawyers, youth advocates, professors, judges and mental health professionals in an effort to address the complexities of seeking justice for children in legal settings.
Taking into account the deep connection children feel toward their parents and communities, participants were charged with establishing principles and guidelines to enhance the influence children have in cases directly affecting them. The conference was based on a similar meeting held at Fordham University a decade ago, during which participants recommended that, with rare exception, children should be represented by lawyers who act like lawyers, not independent agents advocating what they think is best regardless of the clients' interests.
"Adults who can hire a good lawyer often take for granted that the lawyer will fight for their best interests," said UNLV Law professor and associate dean for clinical studies Annette Appell, who organized the conference. "Children, however, are often silent and at the mercy of a lawyer who fights for what he or she thinks is best."
While participants recognized that some children are too young or otherwise unable to state a preference, they maintained that even pre-verbal children have legal rights that must be protected.
Among the recommendations offered at the conference was bolstering the legal representation of parents and families, who often bear the brunt of their children's actions; loosening restrictions on federal funding for child welfare; repealing laws that force lawyers to violate the confidentiality of child clients by reporting disclosures of maltreatment to child abuse hotlines; and changing the role lawyers play in advocating the interests of children.
"Despite its lofty ideals, our current system too commonly disserves the interests of children by devaluing and condemning their families," said Appell. "Until the system recognizes that it must value children's families, no procedural or substantive change has any real hope of making a difference. It is extremely difficult to take a swing at so-called 'bad parents' without the blow landing on their children."
A full report of conference proceedings, including recommendations, can be found online at http://rcif.law.unlv.edu.
