SECTION 4
Guardians Ad Litem in Child Abuse and Neglect Proceedings: 
Clarifying the Roles to Improve Effectiveness

A. Development of Volunteer Programs

In 1977, with the goal of obtaining more complete information about a child's situation than attorneys generally provided, Judge David Soukup of Washington's King County Superior Court began using volunteer citizens as GALs. The volunteers were trained by and worked under the supervision of a social worker and a lawyer, and were represented by an attorney in court. In the first year of the program, 110 lay volunteers were trained and subsequently appointed by the court to serve as guardians ad litem for 498 children. ⁶¹

Following endorsement by the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, ⁶² other programs were developed using trained non-lawyers as GALs or as adjuncts to the GAL. Use of volunteers gained further acceptance after the Seattle program was evaluated be the National Center for State Courts along with other volunteer programs in juvenile court, and found to be one of the most innovative and successful volunteer efforts. ⁶³ As reports of Seattle's success spread, new CASA programs were developed in Rhode Island, California, Arizona, Florida, New York, and elsewhere. With Florida taking the lead, states began to pass legislation creating statewide programs. ⁶⁴

All these programs, while they differed in structure, funding sources, and role of the volunteer, shared a common commitment to careful screening and training of volunteers. Other factors that were seen as important to the volunteer's effectiveness on behalf of the child included involvement in no more than three cases at a time and careful matching of the volunteer to the family to ensure that cultural bias was removed. ⁶⁵ Other factors contributing to the early success of volunteer models included the volunteer's independence and objectivity in providing information to the court, and the fact that the volunteer provided a source of continuity for the child through the judicial process. ⁶⁶ Elements that were identified as necessary for successful CASA program development included strong support of the judge; a clear definition of the volunteer's role; an effective program manager; and a broad spectrum of volunteers. ⁶⁷

The National Court Appointed Special Advocate Association (NCASAA) was established in 1982 and incorporated in 1984, to promote, assist, and support the development, growth, and continuation of quality CASA programs. ⁶⁸ Under a cooperative agreement with the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention in the U.S. Department of Justice and other private organizations, the Association continues to provide training, technical assistance, and financial support through grants to its state and local member programs. The Association also promotes public awareness on issues of importance to abused and neglected children and advocates for laws and policies that affect positive systems change.

Programs utilizing volunteers in child abuse and neglect proceedings continue to grow. Currently, there are 531 volunteer programs operating under a variety of different names. A 1992 NCASAA survey found that in approximately 60 percent of these programs, the volunteer serves as the child's GAL. Legal counsel is generally provided by a staff attorney, a public attorney, or by an attorney providing pro bono service. In the other programs, the role of the volunteer varies from Friend of the Court to the most limited role as monitor of the court's orders.

The status of the volunteer in these programs is determined by state statute, state or local court rules, or by an individual judge's wishes. There are, however, consistent characteristics among most programs. The volunteer provides a written report to the court containing the facts of the situation and the volunteer's recommendations regarding placement and services for the child and his or her family. The volunteer is also usually required to appear at every hearing and to monitor the court's orders until the child's case is dismissed after final resolution.

B. Effectiveness of Volunteers

Lay volunteers have now worked as guardians ad litem in juvenile courts across the nation for over fifteen years. To this date, though, many still question the non-attorney's ability to provide effective representation for abused and neglected children. There is, however, a growing body of evidence that shows that well-trained and supervised volunteers can provide effective representation for children.

In the first major comparative study of various models of representation of children, which was funded by the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, the performance of lawyers, law students, and lay volunteers was compared. The research found that the trained lay volunteers, the law students, and the trained lawyers performed substantially alike as child advocates. ⁶⁹

Volunteers, however, were more likely than the other groups to have met with the child for the purpose of assessing the child and the child's environment. ⁷⁰ Upon final analysis, the study's authors concluded that carefully selected, trained, and supervised volunteers can do at least as well as trained attorneys and better than untrained attorneys in representing children in protection proceedings. ⁷¹ Significantly, an analysis of ninety-five interviews with the social service workers and court workers who served on the cases handled by the study representatives revealed that they felt that the volunteers were very competent.⁷²

In the 1988 study, National Evaluation of the Impact of Guardians Ad Litem in Child Abuse or Neglect Judicial Proceedings, ⁷³ CSR researchers sought to evaluate the impact of GALs in serving children's best interests and to examine the activities and responsibilities under five different models of representation: the Law School Clinic Model; the Staff Attorney Model; the Paid Private Attorney Model; the Lay Volunteer/Paid Attorney Model; and the Lay Volunteer (Without Attorney Assistance) Model. The effectiveness of the five models was compared in six areas of GAL involvement: legal activities, services and placement, timing of judicial action, case plan changes, case goals, and stability of representation. This comparative analysis determined that the volunteer models clearly excelled as an effective model of representation. ⁷⁴ While respondents noted that volunteers sometimes became too emotionally involved in their cases, and social services personnel were, at least initially, resistant to working with lay volunteers, the volunteer models were highly rated and exceeded the other models on the quantitative best interest outcome measures. ⁷⁵

Another recent evaluation supports the findings of the earlier research. This study compared two existing programs providing representation for children in a metropolitan city in the Midwest. ⁷⁶

One of the programs is a CASA program and the other a program of staff attorneys within the juvenile court. The study retrospectively compared cases opened and closed by the two programs during the period from January I, 1984, and August 30, 1988. The cases were compared using variables defined as types of cases, court processes, and case outcomes.⁷⁷

The results of this study confirm the results of earlier research: that volunteers perform at least as well as specialized attorneys in representing children in court. The volunteers performed as well as attorneys on six of eight process variables and three of four case outcome variables. The only difference appeared in the adoption of children, where CASA cases resulted in significantly more adoptions. ⁷⁸

Clearly, additional large scale and longitudinal evaluations of volunteer models are needed to determine if volunteer effectiveness is universal. But the evidence thus far indicates that lay volunteers enhance the quality of representation for children in a number of ways. First, the volunteer is usually involved in one case at a time and therefore has considerable time to devote to the fact-finding and social aspects of the case, while the attorney can focus on the legal details. Time and attention translates into better recommendations to the court.

Second, volunteers enhance the quality of decision making because they are specially trained to conduct interviews with children, parents, and professionals to obtain important facts and opinions. Using the materials gleaned from the investigative process, the volunteer GAL, in conjunction with the attorney and the volunteer's supervisor, can engage in a process of joint case discussion. Considering a child's situation from several perspectives can lead to well-developed, carefully considered recommendations that may strongly affect the decisions of the court. Volunteers also provide continuity of representation because they generally stay involved with a child for the duration of the case. This can mean that after other professionals have changed, the volunteer may be the only one who knows the case's history.

Utilization of volunteers is more cost effective than using paid attorneys. King County (Seattle), Washington, estimated a savings of more than $2 million in 1988 based on the cost of volunteers as opposed to paid attorneys. Florida has also demonstrated comparable savings. ⁷⁹ Having volunteers involved also makes better use of an attorney's time.

When a volunteer conducts the investigation, develops the recommendations, and writes the reports to the court, an attorney can concentrate on the legal aspects of the case. Involvement of a volunteer also avoids those ethical and practical dilemmas that sometimes stand in the way of effective representation of the child by an attorney. Since a lay volunteer always represents best interests, she is not bound by the attorney's professional obligations, has no privilege to honor, and may testify at trial.

Finally, involvement of community volunteers in the court system provides the added benefit of educating citizens about the needs and interests of abused and neglected children. By engaging citizens, the community is encouraged to accept responsibility for the social problems of child abuse and neglect and to work at finding solutions and preventions.

Contents |  Sec.1 | Sec.2 | Sec.3 | Sec.4 | Sec.5 | Sec.6 | Footnotes