This special issue of Behavioral Sciences & the Law examines some of the many issues related to Families and the courts.'' As Judge Ted Rubin (this issue) observes, Not everything or everybody ends up in a family courtÐor any other courtÐwhen there is a family problem. But much does and many do.'' The issue deals with some of the family matters that doÐor shouldÐimplicate the legal system (ranging from the attempts of gay men and lesbians to obtain legal recognition of their parental status vis-aÁ -vis their children to the potential role of law in protecting children from emotional maltreatment by their parents). It also deals with issues regarding the nature, structure, de®nition, and jurisdiction of family courts; the practice of other courts that handle family matters (such as domestic violence); as well as some of the mental health professionals who aid the courts in their decision making. Scienti®c issues, practical issues, ethical issues, and political issues are covered. The six articles comprising the special issue span a vast territory.
Pamela Casey, who served as a guest co-editor for this issue, considers the appropriate roles of courts as they serve constituencies such as children and families. Casey adds to the traditional arsenal of court management tools; she suggests adapting Urie Bronfenbrenner's person-environment frameworkÐan ecological construct originally advanced to understand human developmentÐin order to better understand courts' roles and practices. Such novel ways of conceptualizing the court and its role can potentially aid this critical social institution as the courts confront the challenge of performing not simply as ``umpire'' of disputes but also serving as an integral part of the community's social service system.
Ted Rubin, who has served both within the system as a juvenile court judge and outside the system as a court management consultant and commentator, considers the trend of uni®ed family courts, a kind of one-stop shop'' for child and family matters. In this thoughtful evaluation of both the advantages and limitations of a uni®ed family court, Rubin provides a historical overview of the reform movement (it turns out that, as the song claims, everything old is new again''), and presents the major rationales for the family court. Rubin's assessment concludes with a call for careful, empirical studies so that the debate can be informed by data as well as rhetoric.
Eve Buzawa, Gerald Hotaling, and Andrew Klein examine another ``family'' problem confronting the judicial system: the national tragedy of domestic violence. Buzawa and her colleagues report on their on-going evaluation of the Quincy (Massachusetts) District Court, a model court in that it has developed an integrated CCC 0735±3936/98/020155±02$17.50