Guidelines for Parenting Coordination

Association of Family

and Conciliation Courts

Guidelines for

Parenting Coordination

Guidelines for

Parenting Coordination

Developed by

The AFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination

2017-19

Foreword

The Guidelines for Parenting Coordination (“Guidelines”) are the product of the interdisciplinary

AFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination (“Task Force”). These Guidelines build on two

previous AFCC task forces, which produced the report, “Parenting Coordination: Implementation

Issues”

and the first set of AFCC Guidelines for Parenting Coordination.

It is noteworthy that, as the parenting coordination model has been implemented in various

jurisdictions, there has been variation in the authority of a parenting coordinator (“PC”), the stage

of the legal process when a PC is appointed, the various functions of a PC, the qualifications and

training of a PC, and the best practices for the role.

In 2017, then AFCC President Annette Burns recognized the need to update the 2005 Guidelines

to reflect developments that had occurred worldwide since the Guidelines were first promulgated.

She appointed the current Task Force on Parenting Coordination (“Task Force”). Task Force

members met monthly via videoconference and in person at AFCC Conferences in Boston,

Massachusetts (June 2017), Milwaukee, Wisconsin (November 2017), Washington, D.C. (June

2018) and Denver, Colorado (November 2018).

While revising the 2005 Guidelines, the Task Force identified issues in need of exploration: use

of technology in parenting coordination; parenting coordination when intimate partner violence

(IPV) is an issue; diversity awareness and responsiveness; and, the evolution and impact of legal

directives since the emergence of parenting coordination.

To inform the process, two subcommittees were formed. The Legal Subcommittee reviewed

current case law, statutes, rules, and regulations across jurisdictions and identified key differences

and nuances in the law. This subcommittee also looked at practices in jurisdictions that are

currently without formal laws pertaining to parenting coordination, those where law is being

developed, and some of the policies and practices in countries where the practice of parenting

coordination is emerging. The updated Guidelines are intended to reflect current developments

while respecting variances in law and practice across jurisdictions.

The Resource Subcommittee identified resources including publications and other resources that

have served to inform and document the practice of parenting coordination as it has advanced over

the last approximately 12 years.

Feedback from AFCC membership was solicited throughout the process in several ways: (1) The

Task Force surveyed AFCC members to examine parenting coordination practices

; (2) open

forums and breakout sessions focusing on the Guidelines were held at AFCC conferences in

See AFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination, Parenting Coordination: Implementation Issues,

(2003) Family Court Review, 41(4). 533-541.

See Guidelines for Parenting Coordination developed by the AFCC Task Force on Parenting

Coordination, (2006), Family Court Review, 41 (1), 164-181.

Much appreciation to Michael Saini, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work, for his

assistance in developing the surveys and data analysis.

Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Denver, Colorado; Washington DC; and, (3) draft Guidelines, were posted

for public comment, resulting in numerous revisions.

The members of the AFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination (2017 - 2019) were: Debra

K. Carter, Ph.D., Chair; Ann M. Ordway, J.D., Ph.D. and Linda Fieldstone, M.Ed., Reporters; Hon.

Dolores Bomrad, J.D.; Dominic D’Abate, Ph.D.; Barbara Fidler, Ph.D.; Alexander Jones, J.D.,

MSW; Mindy Mitnick, Ed.M., M.A.; John A. Moran, Ph.D.; Daniel T. Nau, J.D.; Matthew

Sullivan, Ph.D.; Robin Belcher-Timme, Psy.D., ABPP.; and, Leslye Hunter, M.A., AFCC

Associate Director.

GUIDELINES FOR

PARENTING COORDINATION

Overview

Parenting coordination is a hybrid legal-mental health role that combines assessment, education,

case management, conflict management, dispute resolution, and, at times, decision-making

functions. Parenting coordination is a child-focused process conducted by a licensed mental health

or family law professional, or a certified, qualified or regulated family mediator under the rules

or laws of their jurisdiction, with practical professional experience with high conflict family cases.

The parenting coordinator (“PC”) assists coparents

engaged in high conflict coparenting to

implement their parenting plan by: (1) facilitating the resolution of their disputes in a timely

manner; (2) educating coparents about children’s needs; and, (3) with prior approval of coparents

or the court, making decisions within the scope of the court order or appointment contract. A PC

seeks to protect and sustain safe, healthy, and meaningful parent-child relationships.

Parenting coordination is for coparents who are unable or unwilling to jointly make parenting

decisions, communicate effectively, comply with parenting agreements and orders or shield their

children from the impact of parental conflict. A PC makes recommendations and, if authorized,

legally binding decisions for coparents and may report to the court; therefore, a PC should be

appointed by and accountable to the court. Both coparents may agree to participate in the parenting

coordination process, and in some jurisdictions this agreement may be implemented without a

court order. However, a court order is prudent in these cases. The authority inherent in the role of

a PC is substantial whether stipulated by coparents or ordered by the court. Therefore, it is

important that any jurisdiction implementing parenting coordination adopt and adhere to a set of

guidelines for parenting coordination practice and programs.

The dispute resolution process central to a PC’s role may be inappropriate and potentially misused

by perpetrators of intimate partner violence (IPV), who have exhibited or are continuing to exhibit

patterns of violence, threat, intimidation, and coercive control over their coparent. Accordingly,

Coparent refers to an individual who shares legal responsibility for a child with another individual, regardless of

biological relationship or the circumstances under which responsibility has been initiated or defined. Coparents may

include grandparents, guardians, or others who serve in a quasi-parenting role with a child.

each jurisdiction should have in place a clearly delineated process to develop specialized parenting

coordination protocols, screening, procedures, and training in cases involving IPV.

The purpose of these Guidelines is to provide detailed guidance related to:

1. practice for PCs;

2. ethical obligations and conduct of PCs;

3. PC qualifications, including relevant education, training and experience;

4. assistance to courts, professional organizations, educational institutions, and

professionals that are developing and implementing parenting coordination programs.

The Guidelines for Parenting Coordination include different levels of guidance.

These Guidelines are aspirational and offer guidance in best practices, qualifications, training and

ethical obligations for PCs. AFCC does not intend these Guidelines to define mandatory practice

and they are not intended to create legal rules or standards of liability. Each jurisdiction may vary

in its practices; however, minimum guidelines and best practices are provided. The word “shall”

is typically used in the guidelines not because AFCC enforces or requires adherence, but to be

consistent generally with practice requirements of other regulatory bodies and are thought to be

best practice.

• Use of the term “may” is the lowest strength of guidance and indicates a practice a

PC should consider adopting, but from which the PC may deviate in the exercise of good

professional judgment and may be related to jurisdictional variances or other circumstances.

• Use of the term “should” indicates that the practice described is highly desirable and

should be departed from only with very strong reason.

• Use of the term “shall” is a higher level of guidance to a PC, indicating that the PC

should not have discretion to depart from the practice described.

Guideline I - Competence

A PC shall be qualified by education and training to undertake parenting coordination and

shall continue to develop professionally in their associated roles and functions.

A. Professional Background and Experience. A PC shall be a licensed mental health or

family law professional, or a certified, qualified or regulated family mediator, under the

rules or laws of their jurisdiction. A PC should also have extensive practical professional

experience with family cases involving high conflict coparenting dynamics.

B. Family Mediation Training. A PC should have training and experience in family

mediation. A PC should become a certified, qualified, or regulated family mediator under

the rules or laws of the jurisdiction where he or she practices, if such certification,

qualification, or regulation is available.

C. Parenting Coordination Training. A PC shall have training in the parenting coordination

process, family dynamics in separation and divorce, dynamics related to parents who were

never married to each other, child development, parenting coordination methods and

techniques, court specific parenting coordination procedures, family law as it pertains to

the parenting coordination process, intimate partner violence, child maltreatment and other

safety issues relevant to the parenting coordination process, ethical considerations

pertaining to the parenting coordination process, diversity as it affects the parenting

coordination process, coparenting relationships, and the use of technology within the

parenting coordination process. Recommendations for Comprehensive Training of

Parenting Coordinators incorporating specific modules are included as Appendix A.

D. Arbitration/Decision-Making Training. A PC shall have training in decision-making

processes where this function of the PC role is permissible by law.

E. Continuing Education: A PC shall maintain professional competence in the parenting

coordination process. A PC shall regularly participate in educational activities promoting

professional growth

F. Laws and Guidelines. A PC shall be familiar with the laws governing parenting

coordination practice in their jurisdiction, if any, and to comply with those laws. Where

specific guidelines conflict, a PC should first comply with the law in the jurisdiction where

that PC is practicing, as well as their professional codes of conduct.

G. Circumstances Affecting Competence and Role as PC. A PC shall decline an

appointment, withdraw, or request appropriate assistance when the facts and

circumstances of the case are beyond a PC’s skill or expertise, or personal circumstances

(e.g., medical, mental health, substance misuse or dependence, etc.) exist that compromise

a PC’s ability to perform their role.

H. Consultation. A PC may participate in collegial or peer consultation or mentoring to

receive feedback and support on cases, as needed, subject to confidentiality requirements

set forth in Guideline V. Consultation is distinguished from supervision in that a PC can

choose whether to follow advice from the consultant; a consultant has no authority over

the actions or behavior of a PC who consults with them; and, the consultant does not

assume responsibility nor incur liability for any actions taken by a PC before, during, or

following the consultation.

I. Diversity Awareness and Responsiveness. A PC shall obtain continuing education for

diversity awareness to ensure they are providing responsive and competent services, taking

AFCC Guidelines for the Use of Social Science Research in Family Law (2019), Family Court Review, 57(2), 193-

200.

into consideration core cultural identities such as race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual

orientation, and socioeconomic status; as well as potential cultural identities that may not

be obvious, but which likely affect an individual’s personal presentation (such as an illness

or disability) and worldview. A PC shall also be aware of the diverse nuances of specific

family structure, such as same gender coparents, blended families, and extended family

caregivers.

Guideline II - Impartiality

A PC shall maintain impartiality in the parenting coordination process, although a PC is

not neutral when making recommendations and decisions that impact best interests of the

children. Impartiality is defined here as freedom from favoritism or bias in word or action.

A. Gifts and Favors. A PC shall neither give nor accept a gift, favor, loan or other item of

value from any coparent having an interest in the parenting coordination process or from

which a PC may profit.

B. Respect for Diversity. A PC shall not allow their personal values, morals, or beliefs to

compromise the parenting coordination process or their efforts to assist coparents and

children. If a PC has personal values, morals, or beliefs that will interfere with the

parenting coordination process, a PC shall decline the appointment or withdraw from the

process.

C. Misrepresentation. A PC shall not intentionally or knowingly misrepresent or omit any

material fact, relevant law, or circumstance in the parenting coordination process.

D. Integrity. A PC shall not accept any appointment, provide any service, or perform any act

outside the role of a PC that would compromise the integrity of the parenting coordination

process.

E. Maintaining Impartiality. A PC shall advise participants of any circumstances that may

impact their impartiality, including potential conflicts of interests or bias. A PC shall

withdraw if a PC determines they cannot act in an impartial or objective manner.

F. Undue Influence. A PC shall not be compromised by outside pressure, bias, fear of

criticism, or self-interest, including monetary gain. A PC shall not coerce or improperly

influence a coparent to make a decision.

G. Harassment or Exploitation. A PC shall not engage in any form of harassment or

exploitation of coparents, children, students, trainees, supervisees, employees, or

colleagues.

Guideline III – Conflict of Interest

A PC shall not serve in a case that would create a conflict of interest. A conflict of interest is

a situation in which a person is involved in competing interests or loyalties and serving one

interest may involve working against another interest.

A. Disclosure. A PC shall disclose existing or potential conflicts of interest as soon as

practical after becoming aware of any factor that gives rise to the potential conflict.

B. Waiver. A PC may serve after the appropriate disclosure of an existing or potential

conflict, upon the written agreement of coparents and others specifically related to the

existing or potential conflict.

C. Additional Services. A PC shall not create a conflict of interest by providing any other

services to coparents, children, or other family members.

D. Referrals. A PC may make referrals to other professionals to provide services to coparents,

children, or other family members, but shall avoid actual or apparent conflicts of interest

when making referrals. A PC shall not receive any commission, rebate, or remuneration

from making a professional referral.

E. Solicitation. A PC shall not solicit or agree to provide future professional services to

coparents, children, or other family members beyond the role of parenting coordination.

F. Respect of Other Professional Roles. A PC shall respect the role of other professional

disciplines in the parenting coordination process and shall promote cooperation between

PCs and other professionals.

Guideline IV – Multiple Roles

A PC shall not serve in multiple concurrent or sequential roles in the same case, even with

the consent of coparents.

A. Multiple Concurrent or Sequential Roles: A professional shall not act as a PC with

coparents or others directly involved in the parenting coordination process if they

previously provided professional services to the same parties. Also, a PC shall not provide

professional services other than those pertaining to the parenting coordination process

during, or after the term of a PC’s involvement with the family. This includes, but is not

limited to, service as a confidential mediator, court evaluator, child’s attorney, guardian ad

litem, child advocate, therapist, consultant, coparenting counselor or coach.

1. A PC shall not have served or serve as a confidential mediator for anyone involved

in the same case.

2. A PC shall not have served or serve in a court evaluator role capacity for anyone

involved in the same case.

3. A PC shall not have served or serve as a child’s attorney, guardian ad litem, or child

advocate for anyone involved in the same case.

4. A PC shall not have served or serve as a therapist, consultant, or coparenting

counselor/coach and shall not ‘formally’ engage in such roles concurrently or

sequentially for any party involved in the same case.

5. A PC shall not have served or serve as a lawyer for either coparent or anyone

involved in the same case.

B. Facilitation Role. A PC should attempt to facilitate resolution of issues by agreement of

coparents; however, a PC is not acting in a formal mediation capacity, which would create

a dual role.

C. Decision-Making Role. An effort to facilitate resolution of an issue does not disqualify a

PC from deciding an unresolved issue, where decision-making is permitted by court order.

A PC should provide coparents with written notice of the shift to a decision-making role.

Guideline V – Confidentiality

A PC shall inform all participants in the parenting coordination process of the limitations on

confidentiality before the process commences and throughout the process.

A. Confidentiality Outside the Parenting Coordination Process. A PC shall follow the

requirements in their jurisdiction regarding maintaining confidentiality outside the

parenting coordination process except as provided by law, court order, or by written

agreement of coparents.

B. Communication with Coparents and Children within the Parenting Coordination

Process. A PC shall notify coparents before the process commences that information

shared between them is not confidential and may be shared with other involved participants

such as extended family members, professionals, and relevant non-professionals. When a

PC includes a child in the process, they should provide information about the limits of

confidentiality to them in developmentally appropriately language.

C. Communication with Collateral Sources. Collateral sources may include family

members and other relevant professionals and nonprofessionals. With necessary

authorization, a PC has discretion to communicate and exchange information with

collateral sources. Before requesting information from a collateral source, a PC shall

disclose the limits of confidentiality with respect to the request.

D. Mandated Reporting Laws. A PC shall inform coparents of the following limitations of

confidentiality:

1. A PC shall follow reporting requirements in their jurisdiction regarding suspected

abuse or neglect of a child or vulnerable adult to protective services or law

enforcement whether or not a mandatory or voluntary reporter under state,

provincial, or federal law; and

2. A PC shall report to law enforcement or other authorities if a PC has reason to

believe that any family member appears to be at serious risk to harm himself or

herself, another family member, or a third party.

E. Confidentiality of Records. A PC shall maintain confidentiality of all records developed

or obtained during the parenting coordination process in accordance with their licensure

requirements, the law, or court order.

1. A PC shall maintain security in the storage and disposal of records.

2. A PC shall follow jurisdiction and licensure requirements when relocating or

closing a parenting coordination practice.

F. Use of Confidential Information for Educational Purposes. A PC shall not disclose the

identity of coparents, children, or others involved in the parenting coordination process

when information is used for teaching, writing, consulting, supervision, research, or public

information.

Guideline VI – Scope of Authority

Whenever possible, a PC should serve by formal order of the court. Any court order or

consent agreement of coparents shall clearly and specifically define the PC’s scope of

authority and responsibilities. The ability of a court to appoint a PC on its own authority

varies; some jurisdictions require coparents to consent before a PC may be appointed.

A. Court Order. A PC should not initiate services until they have received an appointment

order, or in jurisdictions where parenting coordination cannot be ordered by the court, a

PC should not initiate services in the absence of a consent agreement between the parties,

the counsel (if any), and the PC that satisfies any legal requirements. If a court order or

consent agreement for parenting coordination services between coparents requires a PC

to provide services outside the scope of the parenting coordination process or accepted

standards of professional practice, the PC shall address and remedy any such conflict or

decline the appointment.

B. Recommended Language for Appointment Orders. The court order or consent

agreement between coparents should define essential elements of the parenting

coordination process including: term of service, definition and purpose of the PC role,

scope of authority of a PC, access to information by a PC, limits of confidentiality,

parenting coordination procedures, procedure for decision-making, submission of reports

to the court or to coparents, judicial review process, parenting coordination fees and costs,

process for grievances, and process for termination of parenting coordination services.

C. Compliance with Laws, Rules, and Orders. A PC shall comply with all statutes, court

orders and rules, administrative orders, and rules relevant to the parenting coordination

process.

D. Professional Services Contract. In addition to the court order or a consent agreement

between coparents to appoint a PC, a written professional services contract between

coparents and the PC shall be used to detail essential elements of the parenting

coordination process not contained in the court order or the consent agreement, and

other professional issues such as schedule of fees, billing practices, recording keeping,

and retainers. A Professional Services Contract is sometimes referred to as a written

informed consent agreement.

Guideline VII – Roles and Functions

A PC shall assist coparents in reducing harmful conflict and in promoting the best interests

of the children consistent with the roles and functions of a PC.

A. Intake Process. A PC serves a screening and information gathering function. A PC shall

screen clients referred for services for suitability of the process. A PC should review a

custody evaluation; interim or final court orders; information from other collateral sources;

intimate partner violence protective orders; any other applicable cases involving criminal

assault, intimate partner violence or child abuse; and other relevant records such as

educational records, medical, mental health, therapy, and treatment records; and then

analyze the impasses and issues as brought forth by coparents.

B. Assessment or Appraisal. A PC serves an assessment function. A PC shall conduct on-

going assessment regarding: appropriateness of coparents for continuation in the parenting

coordination process; the need to refer any family member to another professional for

services, such as evaluation or treatment; safety of family members and the PC; efficacy

of utilized techniques and interventions; and, compliance and violations of the parenting

plans or court orders and agreements between coparents and recommendations or decisions

by a PC.

C. Education. A PC serves an educational function. A PC should educate coparents about

child development, separation/divorce research, the effects of conflict and impact of

coparents’ behavior on the children, parenting skills, communication, and conflict

resolution skills. A PC may model or teach coparents skills and provide

direction/redirection to assist coparents in the acquisition of those skills.

D. Coordination/Case Management. A PC serves a coordination or case management

function. A PC should work with the professionals and systems involved with the family

(e.g. mental health, health care, social services, education, legal). A PC may also work with

extended family, stepparents, and significant others. A PC may also monitor, implement,

and enforce court ordered intervention services if authorized to do so.

E. Conflict Management. A PC serves a conflict resolution function, primarily to help

coparents resolve or manage child-related conflict. A PC may utilize negotiation,

mediation, and arbitration skills. To protect coparents and children in IPV cases, a PC

should tailor the process and techniques to prevent opportunities for coercion.

F. Communication. A PC serves as a conduit for communication between coparents. A PC

should establish communication protocols and rules of engagement in order to facilitate

respectful, child-focused communication between coparents.

G. Decision-making. In some jurisdictions a PC may be empowered to make reports or

recommendations to the court, or to make legally binding decisions. These decisions may

be subject to judicial review to the extent described in the court order or by consent

agreement of coparents.

H. Parenting Plan. A PC may provide clarification of parenting responsibilities and parenting

time as authorized by a court order or consent agreement. If authorized by a court order or

consent agreement, a PC may assist coparents in developing or revising a parenting plan.

I. Written Agreements. A PC may communicate to the court regarding agreements between

coparents, and submit such agreements, if authorized by law or pursuant to the parenting

coordination agreement.

J. Limitations on Functions. A PC shall not offer legal advice, therapeutic services, or serve

in any additional professional role for any member of the family for which parenting

coordination is provided.

Guideline VIII – Informed Consent

A PC shall facilitate the participants’ understanding of the parenting coordination process.

A. Power and Rights. A PC is in a position of considerable authority. A PC shall

communicate to coparents the extent of their parental rights given the authority that may

be delegated to a PC in the form of recommendations, decision-making, the provisions of

confidentiality, the professional persons and other collaterals with whom a PC will be

authorized to consult or obtain information. A PC shall communicate to coparents their

right to seek redress with the court.

B. Understanding the Role of a PC. At the commencement of the parenting coordination

process, and as appropriate thereafter, a PC shall review the court order or consent

agreement and the professional services agreement with coparents to clarify with them the

nature of the PC’s role, function, authority, provision of confidentiality, and procedures.

C. Children Involved in the Parenting Coordination Process. A PC may meet with

children in the parenting coordination process if they are trained in interviewing children

and possess the appropriate skills. When meeting with children, a PC shall explain, in

developmentally appropriate language, the PC’s role, provisions of confidentiality, and

anticipated involvement of the children in the process.

Guideline IX – Fees and Costs

A PC shall fully disclose and explain the basis of any fees and costs to coparents.

A. Allocation of Fees/Costs. All fees for parenting coordination services shall be based upon

the time expended by a PC and any administrative costs. All fees and costs shall be

appropriately allocated between coparents as ordered by the court or as agreed upon in a

PC’s written fee agreement. A PC may be granted authority to reallocate fees based upon

a coparent’s responsibility for the actions that led to incurring those fees.

B. Prior Notice of Fees/Costs in Writing. Prior to commencement of the parenting

coordination process, a PC shall provide to coparents, in writing, the basis of fees and

costs; retainer, if any; procedures for payment; and collection of fees associated with

postponement, cancellation, and nonappearance; as well as identifying any other activities

that may incur fees and costs.

C. Billable Services. Activities for which a PC may charge include time spent interviewing

coparents, children and collateral sources of information; preparation of agreements;

correspondence, recommendations, decisions and reports; review of records and

correspondence; telephone and electronic conversation; travel; court preparation; and

appearances at hearings, depositions and meetings and any associated costs for these.

D. Failure to Meet Fee/Costs Agreements. A PC shall inform coparents that they may

suspend or terminate services due to the lack of payment by either coparent.

E. Recordkeeping of Fees/Costs. A PC shall maintain records necessary to document

charges for services and expenses and should provide a detailed accounting of those

charges to a coparent, their counsel or the court, if requested to do so in accordance with

the requirements of the PC’s governing body or by law.

F. Contingency Fees Prohibited. A PC shall not charge a contingent fee or base a fee on the

outcome of the process.

G. Remuneration for Referrals. A PC shall not accept nor provide a fee for a parenting

coordination referral, as further delineated in Guideline III.

Guideline X – Communication and Record-Keeping

A PC shall communicate in a manner that preserves the integrity of the parenting

coordination process and considers the safety of coparents and children when

communicating with coparents, counsel, children, and the court. A PC should have access

to persons involved with family members and documentary information necessary to fulfill

their responsibilities.

A. Ex Parte Communication. A PC may engage in individual communications with each of

the coparents and their attorneys, unless prohibited in the court order of appointment or

consent agreement, or under formal arbitration procedural requirements. A PC should do

so in an objective, balanced manner. A PC should communicate agreements,

recommendations, and decisions to all coparents.

B. Reports to the Court. A PC should follow the court’s rules or instructions regarding

reports to the court.

C. Collateral Communications. A PC should have access to all professionals involved with

family members including the custody evaluator, attorneys, school officials, medical, and

mental health care providers. A PC should have the authority to meet with the children,

any stepparent or person acting in that role, or anyone else a PC determines to have a

significant role in contributing to or resolving the conflict. A PC should notify any such

collateral sources of provisions of confidentiality pertaining to information obtained from

them.

D. Access to Documents and Information. A PC should have access to all relevant

information including orders, motions, and pleadings filed in the case, the custody

evaluation report, Guardian ad Litem reports, and school, medical, and mental health

records of coparents and their children. Any court order should authorize a PC to execute

releases and obtain consents to permit access to such data and other relevant information.

E. Interviews, Meetings, and Participants. A PC should have initial separate or joint

interviews with coparents. If a PC has appropriate training and skills, they may choose to

interview the children in a developmentally appropriate manner. A PC may, as needed,

interview any individuals who provide services to the children to assess the children’s

needs and wishes. Communication between a PC and coparents may take place in joint,

face-to-face meetings or by electronic means. A PC should determine whether separate or

joint sessions are appropriate. In cases involving IPV, a PC shall determine whether to

conduct interviews and sessions with coparents separately or in other circumstances to

ensure appropriate safety precautions.

F. Maintaining Records. A PC shall maintain records in a manner that is in accordance with

the PC’s licensing or governing body, or law. The records shall be professional,

comprehensive and inclusive of information and documents that relate to and support

decisions and recommendations made during the parenting coordination process.

G. Documentation of Agreements and Decisions. A PC shall document in writing all

agreements made by coparents and recommendations or decisions made by the PC.

H. Responsibility to the Court. A PC shall be candid, accurate, and responsive in all

communications with the court concerning their qualifications, availability, fees, and

disciplinary sanctions related to the parenting coordination process as required by law or

rule.

Guideline XI – Decision-Making

A PC should attempt to facilitate agreement between coparents in a timely manner on all

disputes within a PC’s scope of authority. A PC shall decide the disputed issues or make

recommendations as appropriate when coparents do not reach agreement, if it is authorized

by the court or consent of coparents.

A. Authority for Decision-Making. A PC may be granted the authority to make decisions

(with or without a right of appeal) for coparents when they are unable to agree, or a PC

may be permitted only to make recommendations to coparents or to the court. The scope

of a PC’s decision-making authority may be limited in some jurisdictions. A PC should

first address any dispute about their authority to address an issue prior to beginning work

to resolve that issue.

B. Scope of Decision-Making. A PC shall have only the authority to address issues that are

identified in the court order or consent agreement. A PC shall have the authority, as

specified in the court order or consent agreement, to resolve the following types of issues:

1. Minor changes or clarification of parenting time/access schedules or conditions

including vacation, holidays, and temporary variation from the existing parenting

plan;

2. Procedures for transitions or exchanges of the children including date, time, place,

means of transportation and transporter;

3. Health care management including, but not limited to medical, dental, orthodontic,

vision, and other specialties;

4. Child-rearing issues, including but not limited to disciplinary practices, bedtime

routines, diet, and homework support.

5. Psychotherapy or other mental health care, for the children and coparents;

6. Psychological testing or other assessment of the children and coparents;

7. Education or daycare, including choice of school, tutoring, summer school,

participation in special education testing and programs, or other major educational

decisions;

8. Enrichment and extracurricular activities, including camps and

employment;

9. Religious observances and education;

10. Children's travel and passport arrangements;

11. Clothing, equipment, and personal possessions of the children;

12. Verbal or written communication, including any forms of electronic

communication between coparents about the children.

13. Verbal or written communication, including any forms of electronic

communication by between a coparent and children when they are not in that

coparent’s care;

14. Alteration of appearance of the children including haircuts, tattoos, ear and body

piercing, and cosmetic surgery;

15. Roles of and contact with significant others, romantic interests, and extended

families;

16. Substance misuse assessment or testing for either or both coparents or for a child,

including access to results; and

17. Parenting classes for either or both coparents.

This list is not meant to be inclusive; rather, it provides a framework for understanding the

types of issues a PC may routinely address.

C. Considerations During Decision-Making. A PC should consider written or verbal

statements about the dispute from each parent, and other relevant sources of information.

The methodology used by a PC shall be fair to coparents and transparent to the court and

the coparents. A PC shall ensure that each coparent has an opportunity to be heard in the

process. A PC shall convey their expectations of coparents’ participation in the process and

the consequences of nonparticipation. If either coparent refuses to participate, a PC may

take appropriate action governed by the court order, relevant statutes, or consent agreement.

D. Written Decision of a Parenting Coordinator. If authorized to make decisions by the

law, a PC should communicate their decisions in a timely manner, to be followed by written

documentation of the decision. In the event decisions are provided orally, a written version

shall follow in a timely manner. A PC should provide rationale for the decision, with the

level of detail depending on the nature and magnitude of the issue.

E. Major Decisions. A PC shall not make decisions that would change custody or

substantially change the parenting plan.

Guideline XII – Marketing Practices

A PC shall not engage in any marketing practice that diminishes the importance of a

coparent’s right to self-determination, compromises the impartiality of the PC, or demeans

the integrity of the parenting coordination process or the judicial system.

A. False or Misleading Marketing Practice. A PC shall not engage in marketing practices

that contain false or misleading information.

B. Accuracy and Honesty. A PC shall ensure that any advertisements regarding

qualifications, services to be rendered, or the parenting coordination process are accurate

and honest.

C. Promises. A PC shall not make any claims of achieving specific outcomes.

Guideline XIII – Safety and Capacity

A PC shall be aware of issues regarding safety and capacity that may diminish the integrity

of the parenting coordination process. A PC shall promote the safety of all participants

throughout the parenting coordination process.

A. Screening. A PC shall screen prospective cases for IPV and decline cases if they do not

have specialized training and procedures to effectively manage those cases. A PC should

provide ongoing screening and terminate their role as PC if they are unable to manage those

cases.

B. Protective and No-Contact Orders. A PC shall honor the terms of all active protective

orders and no-contact orders for protection and take measures that may be mandated to

ensure the safety of coparents, their children, and the PC.

C. Monitoring for Safety. A PC shall monitor the process for the presence of safety concerns,

intimate partner violence, child abuse and neglect, and take appropriate action to address

such issues when they are identified.

D. Suspending or Terminating Process Based upon Safety Concerns. A PC shall suspend

or may terminate the parenting coordination process when they determine it is unsafe to

continue and shall notify the court of the suspension or termination, if required.

E. Interruption in Services Due to Parental Impairment or Incapacity. A PC shall

adjourn, terminate, or modify the parenting coordination process if a coparent is incapable

of participating in the process.

F. Suspicion of Substance Misuse and Mental Impairment. A PC shall be alert to the

reasonable suspicion of any substance misuse by either parent or child, as well as any

psychological or psychiatric impairment of any parent or child that compromises their

parenting or may be detrimental to the best interests of the children or the safety of family

members. A PC may recommend a substance abuse or mental health evaluation and

treatment as the PC might deem necessary during the parenting coordination process to

address the best interests of the children affected, if legally authorized to do so.

Guideline XIV – Security, Confidentiality and Privacy Related to Use of Technology

A PC shall manage the risks related to the confidentiality and security of information by

taking reasonable steps to protect the privacy of all interactions and documentations

exchanged consistent with privacy legislation in a PC’s jurisdiction.

A. A PC should become knowledgeable of and utilize the most current technology available

to prevent access to information, documents, or communications within the parenting

coordination process to unauthorized third parties.

B. A PC should utilize protection against viruses and malwares, as recommended by the

relevant privacy legislation, when utilizing a computer or electronic device for parenting

coordination services, including avoidance of wireless communication that is not secure.

C. A PC should develop a protocol for the safe storage and disposal of information and data.

D. A PC should determine the procedures and protocols for providing parenting coordination

services remotely or via telecommunications (e.g. telephone, teleconference, electronic

group text, email communications, etc.) to ensure the privacy and integrity of the parenting

coordination process.

E. A PC shall follow their professional standards regulating telepsychology and interstate and

international practice.

Definitions

These definitions are intended to clarify key concepts and terms that appear throughout these

Guidelines. Some terms may vary by jurisdiction.

Arbitration: The hearing and determination of a dispute by a neutral third party with decision-

making authority.

Collateral Sources: Professionals and nonprofessionals who assist or are invited to participate in

the parenting coordination process.

Consent Agreement (or Stipulated Agreement): A written memorialization, sometimes a court

order, specifying the terms under which coparents will conduct themselves. A consent agreement

should include the details to which the individuals are agreeing and should be signed and dated by

both coparents. In some jurisdictions, consent agreement may be referred to as a stipulated

agreement.

Coparent: An individual who shares legal responsibility for a child with another individual,

regardless of biological relationship or the circumstances under which responsibility has been

initiated or defined. Coparents may include grandparents, guardians, or others who serve in a

quasi-parenting role with a child.

Decision: In some jurisdictions, PCs have quasi-judicial authority to make binding decisions

for

coparents to follow, which are often subject to appeal. In other jurisdictions, decisions may be the

equivalent of recommendations that are subject to further judicial review before they become

binding. Written decisions are often accompanied by an explanation or basis for the decision and

the process by which the decision was made.

High-Conflict Coparents: Coparents who are unable to resolve the overwhelming majority, or

all, of the disputes that arise between them regarding the health, education, general welfare, and

process of raising their common children. These individuals tend to rely on the courts or other

third-party professionals for recommendations or directives for resolution of such disputes and

frequently struggle with communication with one another regarding their common children.

Intimate Partners: Individuals who share or have shared a close interpersonal relationship, often

including those who are married or have been married in the past; those who are dating, whether

or not the couple has shared sexual intimacy and regardless of sexual orientation; those sharing a

familial connection, such as adult family members like parent-child, and cohabitants, current and

past. In the context of parenting coordination, intimate partners will usually refer to coparents who

share children in common.

Intimate Partner Violence (IPV): Physically aggressive behaviors involving the intentional use

of physical force with the potential for causing injury, harm, disability, or death and include:

sexually aggressive behaviors; unwanted sexual activity that occurs without consent through the

use of force, threats, deception, or exploitation; economically aggressive behaviors involving the

use of financial means to intentionally diminish or deprive another of economic security, stability,

standing, or self‐sufficiency; psychologically aggressive behaviors involving intentional harm to

emotional safety, security, or wellbeing; and, coercively controlling behaviors involving harmful

conduct that subordinates the will of another through violence, intimidation, intrusiveness,

isolation, and/or control.

Joint Custody: An arrangement referring to the sharing of responsibility for children, physically

(where the child resides or spends time), legally (decision-making), or both. Joint custody, when

not distinguished, does not necessarily delineate the percentage allocation of parenting time (time-

There are different terms for “decisions,” based on jurisdictional differences, such as awards, determinations,

binding recommendations, etc.

sharing) or legal authority. Joint custody may also be called “shared parenting” or “shared care.”

A PC should clarify and not assume the underlying meaning of the phrase.

Family Mediation: A process through which a neutral third-party facilitates communication

between individuals in a dispute with a goal of helping them resolve that dispute on their own.

There are different models of mediation; some are not confidential and may include

recommendations to coparents or the court.

Order: A legally binding directive issued by a court or an individual with judicial authority in the

jurisdiction where the order was entered, such as a judge or magistrate.

Parent: An individual legally, financially, and physically responsible for children, regardless of

biological relationship or circumstances under which responsibility has been initiated.

Parenting Time: The allocation of time each parent has care and responsibility for the children,

and any specific guidelines or restrictions that may be in place regarding the schedule.

Recommendation: A proposal for the resolution of a dispute or disagreement, often accompanied

by an explanation of the rationale or basis for the recommendation. Recommendations may or may

not be binding, depending upon the jurisdiction in which the recommendation is made. Some

recommendations become binding after a defined period or under certain circumstances.

Screening: An initial and ongoing process in which a PC will gather information regarding the

background of the family members and circumstances and then assess the appropriateness of the

family for participation in the parenting coordination process.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COMPREHENSIVE TRAINING

OF PARENTING COORDINATORS

An appendix to the AFCC Guidelines for Parenting Coordination

Developed by the AFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination

June 2019

APPENDIX A:

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COMPREHENSIVE TRAINING

OF PARENTING COORDINATORS

This document is a companion to the AFCC’s Guidelines for Parenting Coordination (2019) and

should not be utilized as a stand-alone document.

A Parenting Coordinator (“PC”) should have training in each of the following subject areas as

reflected in the modules below. It is anticipated that a licensed mental health or family law

professional, or a certified, qualified or regulated family mediator under the rules or laws of their

jurisdiction, with practical professional experience with high conflict family cases, will have

acquired the knowledge and experience in the areas listed in Guideline I - Competence. Training

programs may want to accommodate different levels of prior training and experience by offering

training in these eight modules and developing a process for exempting certain professionals from

any of the modules where competency is established. Individual jurisdictions should set guidelines,

approve trainings, and assign trainers to ensure that candidates can demonstrate minimum

competencies in order to begin practice, and should require the completion of scheduled follow up

trainings to achieve mastery within a reasonable amount of time. Jurisdictions might consider

developing programs (e.g. mentoring, internships, supervision) to provide consultation and support

for beginning “PCs” to reinforce and develop the skills that are covered in the recommended

subject areas.

Module 1: The Parenting Coordination Process

A. Definition of parenting coordination

B. Development of parenting coordination as a dispute resolution process

C. Differences between parenting coordination and other conflict resolution processes

and professional services relevant to parents in dispute

D. Roles and functions of the PC

1. Intake process

2. Assessment or appraisal

3. Eliciting parent goals for their coparenting relationship, for communication,

and for their children during and after the parenting coordination process

4. Education

5. Coordination/case management

6. Communication and conflict management

7. Decision-making

8. Parenting plan implementation

9. Submit written agreements

10. Limitations on functions

E. Models of parenting coordination (such as the integrated model, med/arb model,

special master model, therapeutic model, dual person model, bifurcated model and

other relevant models)

F. Screening for suitability for parenting coordination process (see Modules 3A.2 and

5D)

G. Professionals Services Agreement/Contract, to include:

1. Roles and functions

2. Scope of authority

3. Goals and objectives of the process

4. Fees and costs

5. Release and sharing of information with collateral sources

6. Confidentiality

7. Grievance procedures

8. Duration of service

9. Termination procedures

10. Other provisions as required by the jurisdiction

H. Stages of the parenting coordination process

1. Referral, intake, screening for intimate partner violence (IPV) and suitability,

and data gathering

2. Orientation

3. Infrastructure: rules of engagement; coparenting relationship; establishment of

the support team; communication and information-sharing between coparents,

with the PC and with the support team; and transitioning the children

4. Agreement facilitation and conflict resolution

5. Decision-making and arbitration

6. Application of protocols and progress maintenance (integration/consolidation

of skills, change in perspective, and practicing coparenting)

7. Termination phase

I. Research on parenting coordination: benefits and risks

J. Working with parents who are self-represented

K. Managing and maintaining boundaries for self-care

Module 2: Family Dynamics in Separation, Divorce and Other Coparenting Constellations

Related to the Parenting Coordination Process

A. Psycho-educational issues in separation and divorce and family dynamics

1. Impact of separation, divorce, married, and never married individuals on

family dynamics

2. Continuum of parent-child contact problems (e.g., affinity, alignments,

realistic estrangement, alienation, hybrid) and levels of severity in cases

involving resist-refuse family dynamics

3. Impact of IPV on coparenting and family functioning (see Module 5)

4. Useful psychological research and theories applicable to interventions for

families experiencing high levels of conflict

B. Issues concerning the needs of children

1. Children’s developmental stages and how they relate to separation, divorce,

and parenting arrangements

2. Benefits of appropriate parenting on children’s well-being

3. Impact of parental conflict, other adverse childhood experiences on physical

and psychological development

4. Short- and long-term consequences on children involved in resist-refuse

coparenting and family dynamics

5. When and how to involve children in the parenting coordination process

C. High conflict coparenting and personality functioning

1. Family dynamics, including family of origin issues

2. Sources of divorce/separation impasses including parental alienating

behaviors

3. Dynamics and implications of parent-child contact problems, including the

continuum noted above (see Module 2.A.2), on parenting, coparenting and

child adjustment

4. Management strategies, specialized interventions, and techniques

D. Family dynamics beyond the coparenting unit

1. Multigenerational and blended families

2. Impact of significant others important in the children’s life

3. Effects of mental illness, substance misuse or dependence, and other

vulnerabilities in the family system that may affect the parenting coordination

process

4. Social network support systems and connection with community resources

E. Models of coparenting (cooperative, disengaged, parallel, and conflictual) and how

they impact children

Module 3: Parenting Coordination Techniques and Interventions

A. Structuring the parenting coordination process

1. Initial queries/referral, establishing protocols, policies, and boundaries

2. Intake (e.g. questionnaires, review of relevant documentation, communication

with attorneys, and interviews with parents)

3. Clarifying objectives and expectations of the parenting coordination process

4. Establishing the time, location, and format of parenting coordination

meetings, including virtual meetings (see Module 8)

5. Conducting joint and individual sessions, telephonic and electronic

communication

6. Maintaining appropriate records and documentation

B. Orienting parents to the parenting coordination process

1. Reviewing parenting coordination order of referral

2. Obtaining informed consent

3. Explaining practice policies (e.g., cancellation, response time, expectations of

the PC and of the clients) and structure of the parenting coordination process

(e.g. meeting frequency and virtual appointments)

4. Reviewing fees and costs, including retainer agreement, and failure to pay

procedures

5. Reviewing professional services agreement, including the objectives and

scope of authority

C. Assessment or appraisal

1. Conducting ongoing assessment regarding appropriateness for continuation in

the parenting coordination process

2. Assessing the need for referral of a family member or family members to

another professional for additional services

3. Appraisal of efficacy of techniques and interventions utilized

4. Assessing compliance and violations of the parenting plans or court orders

and agreements and recommendations or decisions by the PC

5. Assessing the need for implementation of additional safety

parameters/protocols

D. Utilizing the parenting plan and agreements in the parenting coordination process

(where permissible and may vary across jurisdictions)

1. Development of the parenting plan

2. Monitoring the parenting plan

3. Modifying the parenting plan

4. Memorializing agreements

E. Interviewing approaches and skills

1. Interviewing adults

2. Interviewing children

3. Enhancing motivation of resistant clients

F. Setting appropriate boundaries

1. Safety protocols and procedures for those participating in the parenting

coordination process

2. Office safety policies and working with clients who have current restraining

and protective orders

3. Establishing appropriate limits for client expectations

4. Staying within the scope of the parenting coordinator’s authority

G. Educative role including evidence informed research in the parenting coordination

process

1. Impact of separation/divorce and parental conflict: risk and resiliency factors

2. Parenting skills, styles, and effective parenting

3. Factors impacting outcomes: interrelationship between parental conflict,

parenting, and coparenting

4. Adolescent decision making (brain development)

5. Continuum of parent-child contact problems and resist-refuse family

dynamics, including affinity, alignments, realistic estrangement and

alienation; differentiation of nature of the contact problem and level of

severity; continuum of differentiated clinical and educational responses

H. Using outside experts and resources effectively

1. How to build professional and non-professional resources

2. PC roles and functions on the collaborative/support team

3. Team structure and processes: hierarchy, organization, communication, and

confidentiality

4. Collaborative interventions: planning, review of progress, decision-making,

and documentation

I. Case management

1. Managing and responding to non-compliance with parenting plan, court

orders, and parenting coordination agreements

2. Managing impact of clients’ high conflict behavior on the parenting

coordination process and avoiding professional burnout, compassion fatigue

3. When to decline an appointment and withdraw from a case

4. Canceling, postponing, and suspending the parenting coordination process

5. Interfacing with individual and family therapist(s) concurrently involved to

assist with resist-refuse family dynamics in parent-child contact problem cases

J. Decision-making

1. Moving to decision-making phase of the parenting coordination process

2. Process for gathering information and making decisions

3. Process for review of decisions, including parent assent or objection

4. Urgent decisions

5. Memorializing decisions

6. Responsibility to the court

Module 4: Court Specific Parenting Coordination Procedures (Subject to PC’s

Jurisdiction)

A. The PC’s responsibility to the court

B. Knowledge of and adherence to jurisdiction-specific qualifications for a PC

C. Local, state, and provincial laws governing the parenting coordination process

D. Legal concepts as they relate to the parenting coordination process including:

parenting time adjustment, relocation, and modification of parenting plan/agreements

E. The appointment and discharge processes of the PC

F. Whether, how, and when the PC should interface with the court system

G. Decision-making/arbitration process

H. Report writing, recommendations/orders

I. Grievance procedures, if applicable

J. Procedures for providing testimony or evidence

Module 5: Implications of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) and Other Safety Issues on the

Parenting Coordination Process

A. Legal and nonlegal definitions of abuse, neglect, exploitation, and IPV; effects of

abuse, neglect, and exploitation on relationships, family dynamics, and the potential

influence on the parenting coordination process

B. The effects of coercive controlling behaviors on parenting, coparenting, and

parent/child relationships

C. Research-based patterns of IPV

D. Procedures for initial and ongoing screening for abuse, neglect, exploitation, and

IPV

E. Safety interventions and protocols in the parenting coordination process

F. Mandatory reporting of child abuse/neglect to the appropriate legal authority

G. Reporting safety concerns and violations to a judicial officer according to the laws

of the jurisdiction or the court order

H. Procedures for notifying the court regarding modifications necessary in relevant

court orders, include safety parameters

I. Reference AFCC Guidelines for Examining Intimate Partner Violence: A

Supplement to the AFCC Model Standards of Practice for Child Custody

Evaluation

Module 6: Ethical Considerations Pertaining to the Parenting Coordination Process

A. Interplay between AFCC Guidelines for Parenting Coordination (2019), other

ethical guidelines, and other professional practice guidelines

B. Risk management for parenting coordination practice

C. Reference ethical considerations included throughout the AFCC Guidelines for

Parenting Coordination

D. Explicit and implicit emotional, cognitive, and behavioral biases

Module 7: Diversity Awareness and Responsiveness as it Affects the Parenting

Coordination Process

A. Socio-economic, cultural, racial, ethnic, language, age, gender, religion, sexual

orientation, and disability issues that affect ability or willingness of coparents to

engage in the parenting coordination process

See AFCC Guidelines for Examining Intimate Partner Violence: A Supplement to the AFCC Model Standards of

Practice for Child Custody Evaluation, Family Court Review, Vol. 54, No. 4, October 2016, 674-686.

See AFCC Guidelines for Parenting Coordination, AFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination 2018-19.

B. Effects of the PC’s personal biases, values, and styles

C. Process and protocol modifications in response to diversity needs

D. National guidelines and laws that impact individuals with disabilities and knowledge

about how to provide accessibility

Module 8: Use of Technology Within the Parenting Coordination Process

A. Considerations prior to engaging in long distance & virtual practice

B. Utilizing technology effectively

C. Issues related to security, confidentiality, and privacy

D. Including technology issues in the professional services agreement

E. Use of online shared parenting support platforms (e.g. coparenting communication

platform, calendar/scheduling, etc.)

F. Remaining knowledgeable about advances in technology that are relevant to the

parenting coordination process.