Over the past 20 years, a number of evidence-based and evidence-informed mental health treatment models, interventions, and best practices have emerged for use with a wide range of client populations, with many different mental health conditions and diagnoses. Unfortunately, many family court-involved children and families do not have access to mental health programs and services that have been identified as evidence-based or evidence-informed. The reasons for this disparity are complex and multi-layered. The primary aim of this paper is to identify the challenges and possibilities of adopting evidence-based or evidence-informed practices when working in the family court arena. To achieve this, the authors will describe a potential decision-making model to help practitioners determine what is evidence-based and evidence-informed and what model or interventions may fit the context. This model has been referred to as a “levels-of-evidence” approach for evaluating family-focused mental treatment interventions and programs and making informed clinical decisions to better serve children and families. As an example, the authors illustrate how a levels-of-evidence approach could be used to identify how evidence-based practices such as Functional Family Therapy (FFT), designed for use in the juvenile justice setting, could be adapted for use in child custody cases. The authors hope this paper serves as a catalyst to further build a bridge between the family law and evidence-based mental health research communities.

中文翻译：

---

利用一系列研究证据为涉及家庭法庭的儿童和家庭提供临床决策和治疗信息

在过去的 20 年中，出现了许多循证和循证心理健康治疗模型、干预措施和最佳实践，可用于广泛的客户群体，具有许多不同的心理健康状况和诊断。不幸的是，许多涉及家庭法庭的儿童和家庭无法获得已确定为循证或循证的心理健康计划和服务。造成这种差异的原因是复杂和多层次的。本文的主要目的是确定在家庭法庭领域工作时采用循证或循证实践的挑战和可能性。为达到这个，作者将描述一个潜在的决策模型，以帮助从业者确定什么是循证的和循证的，以及哪些模型或干预措施可能适合上下文。该模型被称为“证据水平”方法，用于评估以家庭为中心的心理治疗干预和计划，并做出明智的临床决策以更好地为儿童和家庭服务。作为一个例子，作者说明了如何使用证据水平方法来确定基于证据的实践，如功能性家庭治疗 (FFT)，设计用于少年司法环境，如何适用于儿童监护权案件。作者希望这篇论文能起到催化剂的作用，进一步在家庭法和循证心理健康研究社区之间架起一座桥梁。