Whether representing children, parents or a child welfare or foster care agency, in private practice, government, public interest practice or as a policy advocate, the issues and the environment in which advocates operate is increasingly complex. This year, PLI’s 15th Annual Children’s Law Institute will focus on a variety of social and legal issues affecting child welfare practice.
Lecture Topics [Total time 06:23:10]
Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.
- Introduction and Custody Cases for the Child Welfare Attorney [02:27:20]
Elizabeth Fassler, Margaret P. O'Marra, Rebecca S. Rubloff, Diane Costanzo, Susan Sommer, Anna Maria Diamanti, Dawn J. Post, Hon. Anne-Marie Jolly
- Utilizing Forensics in Custody Cases [00:59:56]
Dr. Marcia Werchol, Katherine F. Wurmfeld
- Visitation [01:13:34]
Dawn J. Post, Margaret A. Burt, Hon. Paula J. Hepner
- Indian Child Welfare Act [01:42:20]
Margaret A. Burt
The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:
- Custody and Visitation Outline
Hon. Paula J. Hepner, Hon. Anne-Marie Jolly
- Calm in the Face of the Storm: Strategies on How to Effectively Represent Children in High Conflict Custody and Visitation Cases
Dawn J. Post
- Custody and Visitation (Chapter 13 of New York Civil Practice & Family Court Proceedings)
Rebecca S. Rubloff
- Debra H. Against Janice R.--New York Court of Appeals Amici Curiae Brief
Susan Sommer
- Debra H. Against Janice R.--Court of Appeals of New York
Susan Sommer
- Oren Adar; Mickey Ray Smith v. Darlene W. Smith--U.S. Court of Appeals For the Fifth Circuit
Susan Sommer
- In the Matter of the Adoption of Sebastian, an Infant.--Surrogate's Court of New York, New York County
Susan Sommer
- State Registrar Letter Regarding Same-Sex Relationships
Susan Sommer
- Birth Certificates and Second-Parent Adoptions for Married Same-Sex Couples in Maryland
Susan Sommer
- Custody Evaluations and Domestic Violence: Practices, Beliefs and Recommendations of Professional Evaluators
Kim Susser, Katherine F. Wurmfeld
- Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in Family Law Proceedings
Katherine F. Wurmfeld
- In the Matter of Gorsky v. Kessler
Katherine F. Wurmfeld
- Rosenblitt v. Rosenblitt
Katherine F. Wurmfeld
- Selected Articles
Katherine F. Wurmfeld
- Notice of Motion for Raw Data
Katherine F. Wurmfeld
- In the Matter of Wissink v. Wissink--Opinion of the Court
Katherine F. Wurmfeld
- Does Biological Family Involvement Impact or Destabilize Adoptive Placements
Dawn J. Post
- Custody Provisions
Dawn J. Post
- Visitation Schedule/Worksheet
Dawn J. Post
- NYS--"TOP TEN" ICWA Questions
Margaret A. Burt
- ICWA Compliance Information for Caseworkers
Margaret A. Burt
- Sample QEW Expert Qualification Questions
Margaret A. Burt
- NYS 18 NYCRR 431.18--Care and Protection of Children
Margaret A. Burt
- NYS Social Services Law Section 2 (35) and (36)
Margaret A. Burt
- NYS Social Services Law Section 39--Indian Affairs
Margaret A. Burt
- The Indian Child Welfare Act in New York State (PowerPoint Slides)
Margaret A. Burt
- Index to Children's Law Institute (15th Annual)
Presentation Material
- The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) and Relocation
Anna Maria Diamanti
- Hypotheticals
- Calm in the Face of the Storm: Strategies on How to Effectively Represent Children in High Conflict Custody and Visitation Cases
Dawn J. Post
- Utilizing Forensics in Custody Cases
- Loaded Art. 6/V’s and Loaded Traditional or Subsidized Guardianships: Optional Language to Consider for Article 6 /V Docket Custody Orders and Traditional or Subsidized Guardianship Orders that Resolve Art. 10’s (Handout)
Margaret A. Burt
- Grandparent Visitation
- Does Biological Family Involvement Impact or Destabilize Adoptive Placements
- The Indian Child Welfare Act in New York State
Margaret A. Burt
PLI makes every effort to accredit its On-Demand Web Programs and Segments. Please check the CLE Calculator above for CLE information specific to your state.
On-Demand Web Programs and Segments are approved in:
Alabama1, Alaska, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho*, Illinois , Iowa2*, Kansas, Kentucky*, Louisiana, Maine*, Mississippi, Missouri3, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire4, New Jersey, New Mexico5, New York6, North Carolina8, North Dakota, Ohio8, Oklahoma9, Oregon*, Pennsylvania10, Rhode Island11, South Carolina, Tennessee12, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia13, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin14 and Wyoming*.
Iowa, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin DO NOT approve Audio Only On-Demand Web Programs.
Minnesota approves live webcasts ONLY
The State Bar of Arizona does not approve or accredit CLE activities for the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education requirement.
*PLI will apply for credit upon request. Louisiana and New Hampshire: PLI will apply for credit upon request for audio-only on-demand web programs.
1Alabama: Approval of all web based programs is limited to a maximum of 6.0 credits.
2Iowa: The approval is for one year from recorded date. Does not approve of Audio-only On-Demand Webcasts.
3Missouri: On-demand web programs are restricted to six hours of self-study credit per year. Self-study may not be used to satisfy the ethics requirements. Self-study can not be used for carryover credit.
4New Hamphsire: The approval is for three years from recorded date.
5New Mexico: On-Demand web programs are restricted to 4.0 self-study credits per year.
6New York: Newly admitted attorneys may not take non-traditional course formats such as on-demand Web Programs or live Webcasts for CLE credit. Newly admitted attorneys not practicing law in the United States, however, may earn 12 transitional credits in non-traditional formats.
7North Carolina: A maximum of 4 credits per reporting period may be earned by participating in on-demand web programs.
8Ohio: To confirm that the web program has been approved, please refer to the list of Ohio’s Approved Self Study Activities at http://www.sconet.state.oh.us. Online programs are considered self-study. Ohio attorneys have a 6 credit self-study limit per compliance period. The Ohio CLE Board states that attorneys must have a 100% success rate in clicking on timestamps to receive ANY CLE credit for an online program.
9Oklahoma: Up to 6 credits may be earned each year through computer-based or technology-based legal education programs.
10Pennsylvania: PA attorneys may only receive a maximum of four (4) hours of distance learning credit per compliance period. All distance learning programs must be a minimum of 1 full hour.
11Rhode Island: Audio Only On-Demand Web Programs are not approved for credit. On-Demand Web Programs must have an audio and video component.
12Tennessee: The approval is for the calendar year in which the live program was presented.
13Virginia: All distance learning courses are to be done in an educational setting, free from distractions.
14Wisconsin: Ethics credit is not allowed. The ethics portion of the program will be approved for general credit. There is a 10 credit limit for on-demand web programs during every 2-year reporting period. Does not approve of Audio-only On-Demand Webcasts.
Running time and CLE credit hours are not necessarily the same. Please be aware that many states do not permit credit for luncheon and keynote speakers.
If you have already received credit for attending some or the entire program, please be aware that state administrators do not permit you to accrue additional credit for repeat viewing even if an additional credit certificate is subsequently issued.
Note that some states limit the number of credit hours attorneys may claim for online CLE activities, and state rules vary with regard to whether online CLE activities qualify for participatory or self-study credits. For more information, call Customer Service (800) 260-4PLI (4754) or e-mail info@pli.edu.