“Reasonable efforts” is a term that has existed for decades in child protective services, though its interpretation has changed drastically over the years resulting in widely different and often contradictory conclusions. Factors such as the economic times, different organizational structures, budgetary considerations, geography, service availability, and judicial interpretation have all contributed to the system’s evolving understanding of what “reasonable efforts” means.

Confidentiality in juvenile and family courts is the focus of a two-part series by Public Consulting Group’s Judge James Payne, recently published by the Chronicle of Social Change. In the series, Judge Payne first explores the historical context of confidentiality in juvenile courts—a predilection which dates back more than a century. He then details some of the societal changes, such as advances in technology and communications, that warrant a reevaluation of the need for confidentiality in today’s juvenile and family courtrooms.