Finchem: Lawmakers to push family court reforms in Arizona

Audio By Carbonatix

(The Center Square) - Arizona legislators plan to introduce proposed reforms to the state’s family court system, according to state Sen. Mark Finchem, R-Tucson.

Finchem, co-chair of the Arizona Joint Legislative Ad Hoc Committee on Family Court Orders, told The Center Square he expects nine to 12 bills during next year’s legislative session.

The committee Monday released a report outlining issues found in Arizona’s family court system. The report reviewed topics such as court-ordered behavioral interventions, reunification programs, behavioral health evaluations and child safety decisions in custody disputes. 

The report found the state’s family court system lacked proper oversight of court-appointed psychologists and therapists and that decisions were being made that were not in the child’s best interest.

Finchem said the report revealed the Arizona family court system is “terribly broken and in need of significant reform,” specifically in Maricopa County, Arizona's most populous county and home to Phoenix. 

The system is providing a level of “tyranny that is crushing families," he said.

The report noted reunification programs lacked adequate scientific support and often cost over $15,000.

The state senator noted family court systems should be about what is in the best interest of the child, but these courts seem “to have lost track of that.”

Instead, Finchem said the family court systems are focused on “maximizing” profits for lawyers and psychologists, which is “destroying families financially.”

“The court has got some serious work to do on cleaning up its act,” he said.

According to the report, the court system lacked oversight of court-ordered evaluators and treatment providers, as well as standards for psychologists involved in cases.   

The court system has a “perverse profit motive,” so the Legislature is “going to have to take action that instructs the court on what it can and can’t do,” Finchem said.

In the Arizona family court system, quasi-immunity is given to non-judges involved in cases such as the therapeutic interventionists, evaluators and parenting coordinators. Quasi-immunity prevents someone from being sued when working on a court case. 

Quasi-immunity for psychologists needs to end, according to Finchem. He added that if there were an established area of practice, people would worry about malpractice.

Finchem said he would like to see the family court system adopt a standard practice. 

His committee identified another issue: the Commission on Judicial Conduct's role with the Arizona family court system. The CJC oversees judicial ethics; however, in the family court system, they have limited power, according to legislators.

The CJC can only investigate a judge’s conduct rather than legal errors or non-judges working on cases, the report noted.

The report said the CJC dismissed between 85% and 90% of complaints due to “many submissions contest[ing] rulings rather than alleging judicial misconduct.” 

 ”The only people that are being served by the system are the people that are lining their pockets by raiding the wealth of the family that is supposed to be going to raising the child,” Finchem told The Center Square. “Absolutely and utterly shameful what the court system [has] turned into.”

Even though Finchem said he expects legislators to introduce bills next session, he pointed out that the Legislature is determined to “see change happen,” which may mean it considers getting this done through the budget process or by having conversations that prompt the court to reform itself.

According to Finchem, it will require a combination of changing laws and the budget process, because he said he has “very little hope” that the family court system will reform itself.

The report recommended reforms, including Arizona passing Kayden’s Law, which prioritizes the best interests of the child, as well as creating a governmental body called the Office of the Child’s Advocate.

On top of this, the report suggested putting limits on quasi-immunity standards to make sure people can be held accountable for their decisions and to make child safety the top priority. 

Finchem said he is thinking about introducing a bill that would require a jury trial to determine if a relationship between a child and parent should be severed. 

“ I believe that it should always be a jury trial," Finchem said. "Why are we going to leave that up to a person, a judge that may have a personality conflict with the two litigants?” 

“ The whole reason we have jury trials is to inject a level of fairness [and] a level of empathy for the underdog,” he added. 

Finchem noted the committee heard testimony from so “many underdogs” that it would make a person “weep.”

The committee heard 40 hours of testimony from people affected by the state family court system, Finchem said.

Sen. Carine Werner, R-District 4, said the committee “heard deeply personal and painful testimony from families whose lives were upended by inconsistent court practices.”

"Their courage in speaking out will help drive needed reform to protect future children and parents," she said.

Finchem noted the committee heard from people who said they were affected by the court system because of judges who ignored testimony and evidence.

There's also the cost factor. People who were caught up in the family court system ended up losing their homes after paying “exorbitant costs to psychologists and lawyers,” Finchem said.

One person had to spend $1 million for nine years just to have access to their children, Finchem said.

The report included a story about two children who were killed after the family court system ignored abuse warnings.  

State Rep. Lisa Fink, R-Phoenix, said Arizona needs “transparency, cost controls and oversight to prevent abuse and restore trust in these proceedings."

Finchem said his greatest fear is the kids “caught up in the system are going to become their abusive parents.”