Law & Side-Law

Updated: May 20

The Academic, Community, & Professional Integrations of Retrospective & New Prevention Areas of Law

Law & Side-Law


1. Introduction

2. School Problems

3. Background

4. Landmark Research

5. Engagement Research

6. The Severity of Conflicts and Children’s Psychological Adjustments

7. Behavioral and Academic Differences

8. Stress-Related Growth

9. Significance of the Problem

10. The Gatekeeping Process

11. Gatekeeping Products

12. The Gatekeeping Environment

13. Integrative Studies

14. Engineered Design

15. Pre-Designing Thinking

16. Elementary Engineering Design

17. The Connection-Keeping Process

18. Connection-Keeping Products

19. Designing the Pain Squad App

20. The Connection-Keeping Environment

21. A Safer VPN Protocol

22. Clean Law - A safer private network (SPN)

23. Proof of SPN Side-Law Validated

24. “Files of Hope”

25. Conclusion



Since the rise of deployment, school strikes, and divorce court battles, the psychological safety nets associated with children involved with these high-conflict parental dissolutions are receiving increased attention by researchers. Proof from this literature suggests that some children suffer more from the difficulties of parental separations and divorce than others (Tashiro et al., 2006) while new safety shields for the middle are very much in queue.

(Source:, 2020)

2. School Problems

Every year, one out of ten children grades K-12 will experience classical family separation and divorce, according to St. Angelo (2019). About 15-30% of those, she says, will be subjected to high conflict dynamics like anger, mistrust, and elevated stress. Studies also show that adolescents and emerging adults involved with divorce showed a significant increase in violent thoughts and a substantial decrease in academic preparedness (Neighbors et al. 1992). And while children themselves don’t choose divorce, there are very limited self-reporting tools for children in the middle of those dynamics to allow parents, caseworkers, and psychology professionals to authentically identify children who may be at risk for long-term negative mental health consequences.

This paper will examine the design of self-reporting technology, such as the existing parental self-reporting smartphone application (the Custody Transfer Log, developed in partnership with the Chair of Mass Communications, Dr. Musonda Kapatamoyo, SIUE) and studies regarding the psychological impacts of high-conflict divorce situations on children.

3. Background

Researchers have found several conditions that may affect how well children can be expected to cope with divorce. Since 1970 the rates of divorce have been on the rise. The divorce rate was 4 in 1,000 marriages during the 1970s, according to Rogers (2010). By the year 2010, that rate had nearly tripled to 11.1 per 1,000 marriages. Furthermore, there are no "Rules of the Dissolution Road" book or course taught in school to help adolescents and emerging adults understand what to expect and how to function accordingly. This means that a life wreck is of less importance to our public safety concerns than an automobile wreck.

Sadly, collaborators should note that the market says divorce is a financial industry. And that the market is silent about parallel financial gravity to hold families together in unity. The amount of pay in the divorce industry is tied to slowly wrenching parents apart over time; it’s never related to mending or holding families together quickly. And unlike criminal law, it is self-evident in classical family law cases that children and their conflicted, or cooperating parents are without several conflict reducing components like the right to be represented when they are poor. There is also no right to bail when parents accuse each other. There is no right to a jury supported decision regardless. There is no right to redress for any financial terms that are in concrete contracts which also have no termination dates. There’s no investigations and many other heartbreaking conflict enhancers in context of childhood that we as a society don’t even let guilty criminals like Ted Bundy walk through alone (Abel & Rettig, 2006). (Even though children of these families have themselves, homes, family careers, educations, and family retirement accounts all on the chopping block). Vital components which may escalate conflicts like agents gearing up two boxers for a prizefight. Lebow and Slesinger (2016) call divorce, its filings, and its activities “unretractable”. A risk to children is the increased lethality associated with parents tearing each other apart with mechanical help according to Creig (2012).

In contrast to divisive principles, other researchers have found correlates of what they call stress-related growth in children of divorce (Tashiro et al., 2006). Challenging social and legal maneuvers by parents of divorce to their children may feel like being inside of two crashing automobiles at once. If children, who are the most fragile, gain even calloused insights, then that growth needs to be shared for the public good. Thus, a different population that may have been previously underground and shushed while only knowing the revolving clashes of conflicts may also be on the cusp of shining new light on these experiences in a most helpful way. Self-reporting, therefore, may provide the only factual data that can help researchers and policymakers better understand the full effects divorce has on children. Terrell (2015) teaches research students that "the problem is the problem." He says that academic research is composed of its background, the problem itself, and the significance of the problem.

There are other factors that may lower the incidence of dysfunction in children of divorce and parental separations. In much of the early research, there were no distinctions made among the levels of conflicts (Johnson 1994). It should be noted that the ages of children when they become involved in a divorce or separation may affect how they respond to the experience. Different individuals react to the same stimuli in different manners. Which makes it hard, if not impossible to share consciousness. Likewise, different individuals may have different levels of tolerance to conflicts. The initial conflicts of divorce commonly wain two and half years after the initial filing and settle into what experts call parallel parenting (Johnson 1994). New trends also research the severity of conflicts during different age groups of children (Pruett & Barker, 2009). Furthermore, longitudinal studies since the prevalence of divorce are just now coming available.

Finally, besides the problem of no real-time measurement tools, it seems just as futile but at the same time vital to reimagine nuclear family “disengagements.” Disengagements, in the first half of this paper, refers to a parent and a child living a considerable distance apart (Hetherington & Kelly, 2003).In the second half of this paper, both disengagements refer to the missing components like mail delivery interferences between children and a parent living outside the home. For example, before a new real-time mobile app was launched to track child custody transfer evidence between two separated parents, no easy custody transfer log service provider existed. Furthermore, disengaged telephone phone lines between children and a parent outside the home could theoretically benefit with a connection-keeping component service provider. Financial interference and impasses could be re-designing with connection-keeping in mind to improve the effectiveness and functionality of financial veins. Mail delivery obstructions could pivot into normal, more protected mail delivery. Tricked away visitation periods could be kept empowered with virtual holographic visitations. Closed problem fears could span into open minded solution-thinking instead of just strict gatekeeping orders. Seemingly ordinary disengagement-to-engagement continuums between a child and both parents to reconsider. Especially when designing updates to practices, programs, and policies for the next-generation of children of high-conflict (HC) dissolutions. The number and magnitude of these disengagements would be particularly useful tools, especially since the disengagement components are more prevalent in HC dissolutions than in amicable, cooperative co-parenting (CC).

4. Landmark Research

Research on the effects of HC divorces involving children is in its infancy. In 1996 the first landmark 25-year longitudinal study of 131 children called the "California Children of Divorce Study" finished. In the research, Pioneering Psychologist Judith Wallerstein investigated the effects divorce has on children (Karen & Flowers, 2018). A project that many following researchers say broke through the stigma of divorce and its mislabeled children meaning new grounds to build on.

Wallerstein found that the impacts on children from divorce are cumulative (Karen & Flowers, 2018). At first, children are shaken and feel socially out of place when the separation occurs. But the prickliness of those experience crescendo over time and often manifest into adulthood. Wallerstein discovered by following the group that through each of life’s stages, from childhood, adolescence, emerging adulthood, and adulthood, the divorce is experienced in new and different ways. In each step comprising their emotional stability, ability to trust, and expectations (Karen & Flowers, 2018)

The research means that throughout various stages in life, especially in adulthood, issues like anger may be prevalent. Many participants in the study group eventually said that they have no intention of helping their parents when they are old (Karen & Flowers, 2018). However, current research on children of divorce still focuses on the adverse effects of divorce, and not the positive results or the growth that some children experience (Tashiro et al. 2006).

5. Engagement Research

The brief period in which research exists on the effects of divorce on children tends to focus on the negativities and gives little attention to the positive developments at the end of an unhappy marriage (Hetherington & Kelly, 2003). Contemporary research suggests that the direst and the most optimistic generalizations regarding the impact of divorce on children should be challenged. Group averages speak to broadly paint individual men, women, girls, and boys in terms of unhealthy dysfunctions while also concealing good and unique coping skills. Interviews during a nearly thirty-year study at the University of Virginia suggests that cooperative parental relationships are often the missing ingredient for healthy children of divorce (Hetherington & Kelly, 2003).

In 1973 with 144 couples (along with a comparison group of intact nuclear families) who were experiencing a divorce took part in a longitudinal study at the University of Virginia (Hetherington & Kelly, 2003). As the research progressed, the scope was expanded in additional projects including some 1,400 families. Later research incorporated adult children from the original families, and stepfamilies who were unrelated to the first group.

Hetherington and Kelly (2003) define a “generous attitude” as ex-spouses who have the ability to manage their communication and cooperation. Research shows that 25% of divorced families maintain a generous attitude towards each other in which they talk over the children’s issues, coordinate household rules, co-develop child-rearing practices, and adjust to fit their children’s needs. This means that 25% of divorced families remain engage in various and meaningful ways after a divorce.

By the time children of divorce reach the age of 15, divorced fathers live an average of 400 miles away studies show (Hetherington & Kelly, 2003). Hetherington and Kelly (2003) define “disengagement” as the point (on average 75 miles) in which parents are less inclined to visit. The emotional consequences of disengagement reflect in the interviews with adult children who are disengaged (Hetherington & Kelly, 2003). The study shows that parents who remain in the same area after a divorce improves the chances of their children coping well. One in four females from divorced families and one in three males feel very close to their fathers. Whereas seven out of ten adult children from intact nuclear families feel very close to their fathers (Hetherington & Kelly, 2003), which means that the study has the potential for social policy initiatives for either raising awareness or else regulating disengagement limits for childhood safety.

6. The Severity of Conflicts and Children’s Psychological Adjustments

A more recent study aimed to identify post-divorce co-parenting profiles and differentiate between children’s psychological adjustments to each (Lamela et al., 2015). Researchers had been guided by previous findings that co-parenting is the crucial mechanism for predicting the outcomes of children of divorce (Feinberg, 2003). The study presents a cluster analysis from 314 divorced parents. They tested for evidence of distinct co-parenting profiles and whether these profiles relate to children’s internalizing and externalizing problems (Lamela et al., 2015).

Overall, the results yielded and later replicated three distinct post-divorce co-parenting profiles: a high-conflict co-parenting group, an undermining co-parenting group, and a cooperative co-parenting group. Each group was then compared to levels of children internalizing and externalizing their problems.

Cooperating co-parents where finally associated with low levels of children internalizing their problems, compared to HC and undermining co-parenting. Children of cooperating co-parents also exhibited low levels of externalizing problems compared to undermining co-parents. This study shows that cooperating co-parenting profile is significantly associated with lower levels of children’s adjustment problems (Lamela et al., 2015).

(Source:, 2016)

7. Behavioral and Academic Differences

In a Swiss study, researchers wanted to examine the differences between children of divorced parents and children of intact nuclear families to see if there were any differences in anxiety, self-esteem, and degree of behavioral problems (Schick, 2002). An area of research that may be important to reduce social violence and increase academic preparedness by spotlighting any differences between children of divorce and children of intact families. Previous studies also investigated statically significant differences, whereas this study examined any differences concerning clinical significance.

Another reason for the Swiss study was that many previous findings indicated that children of divorce have a predisposition for behavioral problems. Because in addition to normal developmental processes, children of divorce have to cope with additional developmental demands like juggling multiple homes. The results of previous longitudinal studies and reviews suggests that the stress experienced after separation results in negative outcomes in behavior, self-esteem, social relations, mental health, and academic status (Schick, 2002). The research surveyed 241 children ages nine to 13 years old. One hundred seventy-five were from intact nuclear families and 66 from divorce. They recruited participants through newspaper advertisements, flyers, and letters addressed personally to parents and handed out through teachers at school. The children who participated were asked questions in class or small groups and given rewards of extra credit or a little present for participating in the survey.

The Swiss study yielded two clinically significant differences from the self-reporting perspectives of two groups of children. One difference was that children of divorced homes face more significant social anxiety than their peers from intact families. And the second difference was that children of divorce homes experience reduced academic performance. These two findings of 14 proposed adverse effects also indicative of statistically significant differences between children of divorce and children of intact nuclear families (Schick, 2002).

The behavioral and academic differences between children of divorce and children of intact families mean that differences are not the result of separation or divorce per se, but a consequence of limited social support and the children’s perception of interparental conflict (Schick, 2002). And although the dysfunctions can begin from divorce, research shows that in addition to quantitative methods, qualitative methods should be applied (Schick, 2002).

8. Stress-Related Growth

Because research in this area is relatively new, and most studies are geared towards the adverse effects of divorce, few studies have specifically asked about the positive impact on children from divorce. Fewer yet propose a means to measure those positive effects. However, research does suggest that posttraumatic growth happens in the form of personal growth (Tashiro, et al., 2006). Albeit, sometimes it’s a resentful and socially abnormal growth.

Researchers conducted a meta-analysis looking for commonly reported changes from children in their relationships with their parents following a divorce. Two meta-analytic studies compared children of divorced and intact families in terms of parent-child relationships. In other surveys, researchers asked parents about positive aspects of their relationships with their children following a divorce (Tashiro, et al., 2006).

Studies found that compared to children of intact nuclear families, children of divorced homes report somewhat better relationships with their mothers and fathers after a divorce. For example, in one study, children from divorced homes reported a better parent-child relationship than did children from unhappy intact homes (Tashiro, et al., 2006). Children of divorce have also reported growth in relationship skills, which includes being more compassionate, empathetic, and understanding. Similar growths had been reported in their relationships with their siblings, which included love, loyalty, and more tolerance.

When parents are asked what qualities their children acquire as a result of adjusting to divorce, the most common reaction (73%) is that their children become more independent and mature. Wallerstein noticed that "many" of the children in her study described themselves as having adjusted stronger and more independent as a result of their increased responsibilities. Wallerstein and other researchers also note that sometime down the road, children may resent growing up too fast and missing out on childhood (Tashiro, et al., 2006).

The most significant gap in research appears to be what children experience at the time of divorce compared to their peers and what they report later on in life about that experience - of course, reporting on facts after the fact is notoriously biased. There are no universal assessment standards to measure and store the growth of children from the situation (Tashiro, et al., 2006) in real-time. No studies were found regarding positive academic growth, which could mean opportunity.

9. Significance of the Problem

The overriding legal standard that governs the high-conflict divorce decisions is the best interests of the child. However, neither states nor local courts define best interest, but instead provide a list of factors from the state statutes to be considered in each case (Austin, Fieldstone, et al., 2013). Research shows that a common best interest factor in some states is the extent to which each parent can support and encourage the other parent’s relationship with their child (Austin, Fieldstone, et al., 2013). This is known as the “friendly parent doctrine.” In many states like Florida, for example, a specific factor in state statute F.S. § 61.13(2)(c)(1) reads: “It is the public policy of this state that each minor child has frequent and continuing contact with both parents after the parents separate or the marriage of the parties is dissolved and to encourage parents to share the rights and responsibilities, and joys, of childrearing. There is no presumption for or against the father or mother of the child or for or against any specific time-sharing schedule when creating or modifying the parenting plan of the child” (Austin, Fieldstone, et al., 2013). This statutory factor in more state statute’s and therefore more courts, would mean parent neutrality, that each parent could justifiably support the other parent-child relationship, social benevolence, less conflict, decreased childhood violence, and increased academic preparedness.

Children's acclimation to divorce isn't only influenced by individual characteristics and context, but also by the relations between the family members and their propensity towards conflict and cooperation (Kalter et al., 1989). Researchers believe that interparental strife is the leading cause of the adverse effects of divorce on children (Kalter et al., 1989; Schick, 2002). Above all, it is the way that conflicts are incurred that's important for children’s mental health and development (Kalter et al., 1989). Gauging, reducing, or reducing the propensity for interparental conflict in some way, shape, or form may be paramount to reducing the violent thoughts and increasing the academic preparedness of children.

10. The Gatekeeping Process

Researchers define parental gatekeeping as the attitudes and actions that serve to affect the quality of the other parent’s relationships with the child (Austin, Pruett, et al., 2013). Gatekeeping is a research-based concept which initially examined intact nuclear families from the perspective of a mothers’ influence over father-child relationships and, conversely, from the perspective of a father’s influence over mother-child relationships (Austin, Pruett, et al., 2013). A theory gate-opening and gate-closing in those relationships where one party or the other sees their role as the primary caregiver and therefore “manager” of the child or specific situations. Such influence is arguably present in any relationship.

The reason that the study of gatekeeping is important to childhood adjustment is because when the influence of one parent on the other detracts from the other’s relationship with the child, then it’s the child who witnesses the attitude and any physical disengagements. Thus, slowing or inhibiting necessary adjustments (Austin, Pruett, et al., 2013). It’s also important because gatekeeping can be intertwined with HC co-parenting (Austin, Pruett, et al., 2013).

11. Gatekeeping Products

Researchers collaborated with practitioners to outline a typology of gatekeeping to help better understand and resolve custody disputes (Austin, Pruett, et al., 2013). Facilitative gatekeeping is that which is described in state’s list of best interest factors. As noted previously, in Florida statute the first best interest factor is both parent’s abilities to support each other’s child rearing role. That’s state statute facilitated gatekeeping. Restrictive gatekeeping, on the other hand, refers to activities by a parent that intends to interfere or does interfere with the other parent’s engagements with the child. Restrictive gatekeeping predictably negatively influences that relationship between the parent and child and the child (Austin, Pruett, et al., 2013). Research has shown that restrictive gatekeeping is more common with HC parenting, and that bilateral restrictive gatekeeping can occur when enduring HC situations occur (Austin, Pruett, et al., 2013).

Studies have proven that most parents are cooperative cooperants (CC) (Austin et al., 2013). Sometimes they increasingly disengaged from each other and communicate on a very limited basis. Judges and case workers, therefore, can administer assessments and evaluations to try and shine a light on gate-opening, gate-closing, and theoretical pinch pints (Austin, Pruett, et al., 2013). Judges can also ask that the reports delineate specific gate-opening and gate-closing behaviors of each parent and behavioral or academic status of children (Austin, Pruett, et al., 2013).This means that the gatekeeping model is a uniform way for judges and other decision-makers to think about the best interest standard in those states.

12. The Gatekeeping Environment

In fears of a HC environment or a legal issue in court, an analysis of the gatekeeping scenario helps address questions about how facilitative (assuming that’s a factor) or restrictive a parent is toward the role of the other co-parent (Austin et al., 2013). This research was conducted because it was said that courts will want to know if restrictive gatekeeping behaviors are tied to the immediately opened divorce case or if they are likely to endure.

Researchers developed a continuum for parallel consultation practice (Austin et al., 2013). A range in attitudes and or actions from facilitative gatekeeping (FG) to restrictive gatekeeping (RG). They found five ranges from very facilitative, cooperative, disengaged, restrictive, and very restrictive. For example, one parent may be very facilitative, or inclusive, of the other parent. While another parent may be very restrictive, or derogates, the other parent. While still another parent may be perfectly in the middle range and laissez faire.

Use and research of this continuum is still in the early stage. But studies show best long-term adjustment occurs when children have quality relationship with both parents, and when parents exhibit cooperational co-parenting (CC). While restrictive gatekeeping (RG) and bilateral RG is believed to foster HC, resulting in poor adjustment of children, unless they are shielded from the conflict by at least one parent (Austin et al., 2013).

Research shows that healthy developments in children are compromised whenever one or both parenting styles are harsh without sensitivity (Austin et al., 2013). Evidence also suggests that children who are exposed to conflict adjust poorly, unless they are shielded from the conflict by a parent’s benevolent ability to keep the child from being the focus of, or involved in, the conflict (Austin et al., 2013).

The gatekeeping model, typology, continuum, and environment not only adds to the significance of the problem but broadens the view for decision makers to see the entire field of HC divorce with more dimensions. Its significance lends knowledge transferability to the integrative studies where psychology meets engineering. However, it also means that without a “friendly parent doctrine” best interest factor explicitly written in state statutes, then the gatekeeping factor is presumed to stand and be open and a child safety concern.

RGs during HCs may be important because it means that when these cases last long enough that a judge has to step in and render a decision based on the state’s best interest factors, then the theoretical damage from disengagements to the child’s relationships and behaviors have already been done.

The study of restrictive gatekeeping and later introduction of its social fabric mate called connection-keeping is also believed to help aid in the transfer of knowledge in this collaboration.

13. Integrative Studies

Programs in Integrative Studies are being offered at many universities today including Michigan State University and Southern Illinois University Edwardsville. When conducting cross disciplinary research, however, it’s important to identify areas in both fields that are directly comparable, thus helping knowledge transfer (Howard and Dekoninck, 2008). The research in this integrative studies paper spans minor psychology studies and minor engineering studies so it’s important to identify a specific area in both that lends a hand to transfer knowledge (Howard and Dekoninck, 2008).

Researchers wanted to describe the creative design process by the integration of engineering design and psychology literature (Howard and Dekoninck, 2008). It was felt that taking elements from types of designs proposed in engineering design and the meaningful results proposed in psychology would produce a modern consensus view of both (Howard and Dekoninck, 2008). A blend that could further link new types of creative designs for industry.

To conduct this cross-disciplinary investigation, researchers first found areas in both engineering design and psychology literature that are directly comparable, thus making knowledge transferable (Howard and Dekoninck, 2008). Researchers saw that in psychology, it’s common to refer to creativity in terms of three primary areas by which are studied, namely the creative “process,” the creative “product (output),” and the creative “environment.” (Howard & Dekoninck, 2008; Murdock & Puccio,1993; Basadur et al., 2000). In engineering design, they saw four broadly similar sections, namely the design “problem,” the design “process,” the design “type” (output), and the design “activity” (Howard and Dekoninck, 2008; Ullman, 2010; Cross, 2008).

Researchers proposed a “creative design process” from spanning engineering and psychology (Howard and Dekoninck, 2008). A composite of three reformulated “design output operations” are presented. Which are believed to transfer elements from the different design types from engineering design and the creative outputs offered in psychology. One new operation is called the original design output. It’s defined as a design output in which there is a creative output at the behavioral level. A second new operation is called the adaptive design output. It’s defines as a design output in which there is a creative output and the functional level. And a third operation is called the variant design output. It’s defined as a design output in which there is a creative output and the structural level. New definitions also can present a coherent way to measure elements and gauge any solutions proposed for effectiveness of and community synchronization or industry impacts. Future research must be conducted in more detail to build up these findings from integrative studies programs. It was proposed that the “obviousness” and the “source” of information are essential to effectively integrate disciplines (Howard and Dekoninck, 2008).

Since gatekeeping is the creative operation, then connection-keeping is hypothesized to be the design portion of that pen. In theory, this review of gatekeeping and connection-keeping should in practice measure the elements of obstructive gates and gauge the effectiveness of various types of relief bridges and those impacts on the market or community well-being.

14. Engineered Design

Since the beginning of the Information Age, demonstrating links between systemic functions associated with human beings of all ages have received increased attention by academic researchers and market researchers alike. Once customer discovery for a new industry design has been completed, then that new design can be engineered (Yoon, 2009). Although there are many views on what exactly is engineered design and the engineering design process, a running example throughout the rest of this paper should help clear things.

15. Pre-Designing Thinking

Market research often incorporates participatory design, which involves end-users in design-thinking (Davidson & Jensen, 2013). In one study, Microsoft Research wanted to discover how the root users of smartphone application ages 4-6 might co-design an app to help these preschoolers plan their playtime during the day. Previous studies had shown that few co-design methods exist for children under the age of six. They also wanted to understand the effectiveness of co-designs for end-users ages 4-6 and younger preschoolers.

Very young children are known consumers of digital media. In fact, 97% of infants are using a smartphone before their first birthday and 75% of children own a dedicated mobile device by the time they turn four (Hiniker et al., 2005). In the pre-designing phase of developing an app, scientists must realize how end-users can function so that the final product is viable before it’s design is funded. Designing for this class of customer’s needs, interests, and social attachments are different than designing for adult users (Hiniker et al., 2005).

Researches conducted a two-hour co-design workshop with seven children age 4-6. They used established participatory design techniques, including comicboarding, a construction activity, and traditional user testing to elicit design ideas. The comicboard, or storyboard, was presented in a way so that children could help fill in a final empty frame where the previous two frames guided planning a birthday party for R2D2. It was discovered ahead of time with conversations with parents that all of the co-designers could relate to a Star Wars theme. In the first frame, a facilitator read what was drawn - a conversation between a child and C-3PO talking about planning the party for R2D2. In the second scene, C-3PO asked the child how to show what he thinks should be planned first. And in the third blank scene, children were then instructed to draw what they think should be in the next scene (Hiniker et al., 2005).

It was discovered that researchers could easily elicit on-topic designs from 5- and 6-year-old preschoolers. For example, one child drew a scene of planning to take pictures at the party. However, exchanges with 4-year-old participants broke down, and children struggled to articulate a thought for action. For example, one child suggested “Big circles” should be in the next scene of planning a birthday party for R2D2 (Hiniker et al., 2005).

Researchers found that 5- and 6-year-old co-designers were able articulate their work so that designers could easily understand and build the ideas. While 4-year-olds created less cohesive ideas and often deflected to other topics. It was also thought that 4-year-olds should have been asked more about what they meant to understand better. Further studies were suggested to include 4-year-olds in the scope of their design. Thus, giving them scaffolding, or an equal voice. After all, they are the experts at being children (Hiniker et al., 2005).

In this age of information, child-computer interactions have come to increasingly value children in the pre-design process (Hiniker et al., 2005). This means that a responsive self-reporting element should be considered in the pre-design phase of all age-appropriate device designs. A well-planned pre-design component for products and services that authentically involve children could also have the potential to reduce potentially frustrating barriers and also assist academic preparedness.

16. Elementary Engineering Design

Researchers examined high school student perceptions of the engineering design process because educators and policymakers agree that engineering content must be part of K-12 classrooms (Berland et al., 2014). This agreement is evident, researchers suggest, to meet twenty-first century needs. Studies show a trend in the availability of engineering in K-12 curricula, according to Katehi (2009), and national policy documents argue that inclusion of engineering into K-12 classrooms will soon be the norm (National Research Council, 2012).

In this study, researchers explored ways in which participating in design supports or inhibits the student’s association with math, science, and engineering (Berland et al., 2014). They also analyzed ways in which participating in design supports or inhibits the association with applying math and science knowledge and engaging in engineering practices (Berland et al., 2014).

Researchers first defined the engineering design process (EDP). They found that there is no single EDP. The procedures differ by industry, experiences, and projects in the work of professional engineers (Berland et al., 2014). Even with those variations, the educational community has recognized core characteristics of the EDP, including (1) the EDP begins with a problem clearly defined; (2) practitioners find custom approaches to choosing between many possible solutions; and (3) the design (noun) requires assessment and analysis (Berland et al., 2014).

Previous research demonstrates that engaging in the act of design supports students in representing math, science, and engineering content as well as increasing student motivation, ownership, and engagement (Berland et al., 2014). This finding corroborates previous research that found the positive impact of design activities in learning environments (Berland et al., 2014).

By the end of the project, these studies suggest the EDP and context should include a reason for K-12 students to go beyond design and engage in the harder work of integrating math and science into the approach of their plans. Educators, it was theorized, must develop engineering design challenges where students are unable to succeed without practicing the quantitative math and science aspects of the work (Berland et al., 2014). This means that graduated challenge and reward levels would more effectively design mobile apps for end-users. For example, a pre-school “Connection-Keeper” journaling app might challenge and reward differently than a high school “Connection-Keeper” journaling app.

17. The Connection-Keeping Process

Researchers indicate that the engineering design process (EDP) can be thought of at different developmental stages for clarity. The Museum of Science Boston, for example, has a program called “Engineering is Elementary” where students in grades 1 through 5 can learn the engineering design process to “Improve Play Dough.” While in 1712 Thomas Newcomen saw a need to pump the water from the bottom of coal mines and used the process to design the first steam engine (Plan & Khandani, 2005).

An early area for both from disciples this study can be thought of as children’s physical and virtual connections with their separated parents, or their mutual parental attachments. Studies show that when children design an improved Play Dough, they often thought in terms of colors, physical characteristsics, and pulling apart and putting back together in a relatively new fashion (Plan & Khandani, 2005).

This means that if kids reimagine connection-keeper (CK), for example, they would see their parents in terms of physical characteristics, and perhaps pulling them apart and putting them back together. However, children with a healthy number and healthy quality attachments may ot see the need to improve their Play Dough like those children with unhealthy Play Dough. For example, immediately delivering a phone call from one parent to the child may not seem as necessary for children who have experienced healthy attachments as with those who have experienced unhealthy “attachments.”

Connection-keeping views, therefore, would be different than gatekeeping views in a sense that as a case progresses in terms of depths of conflict, all the way up until a judge has to decide one way or the other, then corresponding bonds or lack of bonds would progress as well, and the quantity of connections/disconnections would accumulate, but the mold presser may not know or believe a need to reimagine Play Dough. Thus, according to research, this means that fulfilling the best long-term adjustment of children within the gaps of escalating conflicts and within the gaps of knowledge may also very be a practice in futility (Wemple, 2020).

18. Connection-Keeping Products

Khandani (2005) studied an educational transfer plan for use in a design course in engineering intending to provide hands-on experience for people interested in engineering. Researchers felt that by observing our surroundings, we see examples of creativity and emerging technology everywhere. Physical objects like mobile phones, drones, and smart vehicles all coming into being through a creative process.

In the psychology portion of this paper, research showed us the typology of gatekeeping. Now in the engineering portion of this body of work, studies show us types of connection-keeping. For example, an engineer doesn’t usually build a product for the market without first carefully pre-designing it to fit the end-users. Which is the opposite of top-down protocols. Thus, filtering a “best-fit” solution for customers to their problem. A necessary design process includes defining the relevant problem, gathering pertinent information, generating multiple solutions, testing, and implementing a final solution (Khandani, 2005). The design process is especially crucial for the safety of those who physically construct the product, such as a new bridge, and for those who finally use the product like automobile drivers (Behm, 2005).

Studies show that the second phase of basic design is to collect information that relates to the problem (Khandani, 2005). For example, virtual mobile apps are one possibility for children in the middle of a divorce to collaborate with their parents (Hiniker et al., 2005). And then there are other ways like through teachers, phones, mail, events, and public promotions that children can share cooperative attachments with their parents.

According to Appadvice (2019), one mobile app that has recently come to market is called the Custody Transfer Log. This app virtually discovers evidence from both the quantity and the quality of first-party connections between children and their parents during physical visitation exchanges. Evidence of these interactions between children and both of their parents can be easily entered onto a mobile device, compiled, saved, and even printed for court. Co-founder of the Custody Transfer Log Dr. Musonda Kapatamoyo reported that there are over 2,000 users of the app, while users say that it has given them clarity and peace of mind. This study means that pre-designing other products like a mobile app for other end-user problems like children’s telephone exchanges with their parents could be a final product (Khandani, 2005). Gaps in policies and corresponding research may also include other solutions to problems with keeping connections, include a phone exchange app, a mail exchange app, a school calendar and events exchange app, a sporting event exchange app, a religious exchange app, a helpful "How-to" exchange app, a "show and tell" exchange app, a social media exchange app, and even virtual holographic visitations. Deep-level, machine learning, and artificial intelligence that could theoretically be real-time micro-justice for all no matter what “bigger and better” policies say.

Before attempting a motorized flight, the Wright brother first made more than 700 successful glider flights (Buede, 2002). The Custody Transfer Log is an example of a product which has been test and implemented as a final solution to a problem. A design process for better protection of children’s physical exchanges with their parents. This means that children who are involved with a HC divorce may not be able to pre-test their resulting life, but there are self-reporting tools which could begin preparing them for being in mechanically grounded middle.

From psychology research, studies have proven that most parents are cooperative (Austin et al., 2013), and judges can assess parents and caseworkers on specific open-gate and closed-gate behaviors (Austin, Pruett, et al., 2013). This means that parents and policymakers can likewise virtually initiate connection-keeping information, which could hypothetically be a design component of a mobile app suite that automatically sends digital data to a public or private database for reference. However, a gap exists in the availability of a suite of compatible self-reporting tools.

19. Designing the Pain Squad App

In a Canadian hospital for children with cancer, researchers planned to design a gamified mobile app for patients to function as a real-time electronic pain diary (Stinson et al., 2013). Researchers believe that proper assessments are the essential first step to manage pain effectively and that paper-based approaches involving patient recall lead to inaccuracies and biases in the reporting of events. There is no well-validated self-assessing tool to evaluate sensory (intensity, quality, and location of pain) and affect (emotional effects). Designing and developing an electronic-based mobile app to assess and capture pain events as they occur was thought to represent a superior method of treatment (Stinson et al., 2013). The objective of this study was to design, develop, and then test the feasibility, usability, and compliance of a game-based smartphone pain assessment tool for adolescents with cancer.

Researchers first developed pain assessment questions using the e-Ouch electronic juvenile arthritis pain diary as a template. They then generated low-fidelity pre-designs of the proposed app and looked to understand the qualitative usability and navigational structure. Audio-taped interviews and interactive videos of congratulatory effects from police officers were studied. Patients would role-play as detectives investigating pain and have their rank increased with the consistency of use.

Once the pre-design elements were studied and iterated, then a capital investment was made to create a prototype. Once the app was functional, compliance data was collected from a 2-week feasibility trial where users were alarmed to record their pain twice a day, morning, and evening (Stinson et al., 2013).

(Source:, 2013)

The app was programmed to be accessible using an iPhone 4S. Its design was a client-server architecture, where the client-side was built in native Apple iOs code to manage incoming pain assessments. A website interface with password protection was incorporated to allow researchers to add new participants and access results. Assessment information was transferred to a server using an encrypted protocol whenever the app was online (Stinson et al., 2013).

Studies showed that adolescents with cancer had difficulty relating to a typical game theme for the app and indicated the need to iterate the theme to improve desirability. To redress this issue, the theme was changed to “Pain Squad.” Similarly, a designed product included an initial “body map” (left) and an updated body map (right). Another change was an initial pain scale (lower left) and an updated frame (lower right side). End-users advised that on the original “body map” they couldn’t clearly understand the parts of the body on the image. And that the wording and lack of numbers on the initial pain scale were confusing (Stinson et al., 2013).


Customer Empathy & Redress


(Source:, 2013)

The results of this study mean that game-based mobile apps to address real-time pain in children is feasible and clinically helpful (Stinson et al., 2013). Researchers also established that the content validity of a pain assessment questioner through question-importance ratings by end-users. Gamified health information tools using iPhones improve compliance with reporting. Researchers found that adolescents with cancer enjoyed using the app over two weeks, found it to be attractive, and the rewards component while role-playing effective (Stinson et al., 2013).

20. The Connection-Keeping Environment

Theoretically, cooperative co-parenting (CC) may never reach the point where a judge can make a decision in those cases based upon state factors that are believed to be in the best interest of the child. For example, a patient can never get help with pain unless he interacts with a doctor. Divorce and conflicts may reach the severity where a judge must make a decision. Still, by then, any cooperative evidence is outside the scope of a trial, and both sides must gear for battle while strategically discrediting their opponent. Court is well-known to be psychological warfare.

Connection-keeping, in the parallel market, is inherently ground-level. Real-time activities that aren’t always inclusive with the circuit clerks and courts protocols where motions and counter motions are filed and tried. Actions and abilities of connection-keeping which are not taught as acceptable in classical law schools, nor any schools for that matter. This is a significant gap that raises a red flag for the nearly 50% of our children in society who have no voice if and when a conflict in their family culminates beyond common remedies. What if the system fails all three – the statutory gatekeepers, the benevolent connection-keepers, and the vulnerable blank spots in the middle?

If the Custody Transfer Log mentioned earlier were only gamified for kids, then it could also be a shared visitation connection-keeping product. Likewise, a shared phone connection-keeping app game would be a performance product. New-school milestones that already publishes and Clean Law Union (CLU) already records to prevent restrictive gatekeeping (RG) and its plethora of unbridled abuse potential. Likewise, a shared mail connection-keeping app game would be a healthy performance product. Likewise, a school calendar with events and grades connection-keeping app game would be healthy. Likewise for clothes and gift exchange connection-keeping app game products. Likewise for family sustainability connection-keeping products. And likewise for policy-making crime prevention probabilities and data. Tomorrow, kids will finally be able to think instead always being "thinked" on, or traumatically "stormed" on ⛈ .

21. The Safer VPN Protocol

In engineering, a cornerstone case is thought to be a situation or a problem that occurs only outside of the normal operating parameters – specifically one that transforms itself when multiple environmental conditions are simultaneously at extremes, even though each condition may be within a specified range for the parameters (Compton et al. 1991). Researchers say that in the past, enterprises would install internet lines across long distances to ensure secured data transfer. Those were cornerstone cases that demanded inclusion from the sender and receiver because information, or lack thereof, is valuable.

Common cornerstone cases often incorporate decentralized peer-to-peer networks among centralized top-down institutions themselves. Take Bitcoin and the U.S. Dollar, for example. Bitcoins are only peer-to-peer. While the U.S. begins at the federal reserved and trickles down through levels of banks and positions to pivot people and money with respect to interest rates and loan debts.

Streamlined connections are sometimes impractical and not always feasible, so the most recent solution to the problem in remote computing is what’s known as a virtual private network (VPN) (Jaha, 2020). A VPN is a way to provide private communications between members of a group through the use of public communication lines. There are many different VPN solutions, so researchers wanted to categorize them as trusted VPNs, client-based VPNs, and provider-based VPNs (Jaha, 2020). This study was essential to help network engineers decide which VPN solution might be best for their particular project.

Researchers looked at various VPNs to serve as a basis for creating a wide area network that allows the resources of a company to be remotely accessed (Jaha, 2020). VPNs give enterprises the same capabilities as a private physical line, but with increased access capabilities and a much lower cost. Researchers looked at various architectural designs and categorized solutions accordingly (Jaha, 2020).

Studies showed that trusted VPNs are paths that are leased from service providers, and that the architecture and protocols of a company’s local area network (LAN) have to match the architecture and protocols of the service provider’s wide area network (WAN) (Jaha, 2020).

Client-based VPNs are often used with remote users. Client-based, or web-based, VPNs are considered the standard technology. This solution typically reduces the cost associated with corresponding software but can also complement the more expensive trusted VPN use (Jaha, 2020).

Research shows that outsourced provider-based VPNs reduce the in-house skills needed and reduces a company’s security labor costs. It also gives a predictable cost. However, the company’s that outsource provider-based VPNs lose control over their VPN security and the number of remote users (Jaha, 2020).

Secure VPNs are developed using encryption and other security mechanisms like integrity checking and authentication. The traffic is shielded at one network edge or sending computer, before passing through the communication lines, and then unshielded when it reaches the company’s local network or receiving equipment. Trusted VPNs are more intensive and consist of one or more paths leased from a service provider. Client-based VPNs are the most common but usually require additional staff and software maintenance. While client-based, or web-based, VPNs are more financially feasible but have more restrictive components (Jaha, 2020).

22. Clean Law - A safer private network (SPN)

Research shows that classical family law and its persistent lag-time divorce mechanisms and its retrospective instruments create gaps themselves. Gaps in knowledge, gaps understanding, gaps finances, and gaps in physical securities. These are like inherent gates themselves. It is complicated by the court and clerk’s “adult fighting file” recording system, for example, which strictly regulates “mom” party versus “dad” party mechanisms, actions and instruments implying nothing but stormy spots and junkiness for every child involved. Leaving these intellectual and physical short-circuit interferences between every child and their mother and father open is like two or more people holding lighting rods up during a severe storm and touching it to a child according to many adult children of dissolutions who have survived.

In the study of Family Law 2.0, research shows what’s called the top 10 gaps in classical family law and its filing system. One blank spot is the "Versus Void." In other words, in divorce case titles such as “Jane Doe vs. John Doe,” the device “versus” voids out a place in those entitling deals where children like “Junior Doe” could be. Junior, in that case, is no longer highly seen as existing while his or her parents are highly seen as strict adversaries. Other gaps where children could be are the Table-less Void, the gap between the two tables in the courtroom. The No Voice Void, and the Party-less Gap (as in Plaintiff, Defendant, etc.). In this study, the author wanted to design safety bridges for these valleys because on top of the absence of normal parental rights in court, it was believed that these additional gaps are dangerous for children to crawl through all alone (Wemple, 2018).

In contrast to divisive principles, research has also shown that the child safety file system includes a custom file folder for each child, golden paper clips, a table for the children, a chair for the child, a child’s name written on the folder by themselves or by their parents, a voice, a pen or other documenting instrument, a permanent record of their positive achievements, and many other safety bridges. Practitioners can nominate a child for doing something great, like coping well through a separation. That charge can be heard, and then voted on to see if it should be placed in their permanent record or not. Traditionally, these trials have taken place in a community center set up like a board room where the child working on their file has a prominent seat at the table.

A classical grandfather move, besides asking their grand-kids to pull their finger, is bending over and feeling junior’s muscles and commenting on how they are developing. Grandfather might say with widening eyes, “Wow!” Or, he might shake his head and say, “Hmm… you may need to eat a little Spinach. The point is, collaborative divorce care shouldn’t expect to understand any child of divorce by feeling someone else’s muscle.

It’s well-known that our own human bodies have this automatic shield which protects the pupil of our eyes, to protect the most sensitive part of our sight and body. Studies show that this authentic Family Law 2.0 with child safety files is like our eyelid, shielding the most sensitive part of our family during military deployments and divorce.

Studies show that the first 6-year-old girl named Madison, who practiced a safety file with her dad, called it “The best day of my life.” The first two words that a second 6 year-girl named Alayna wrote in her file were “Love, love.” Family Law 2.0 practitioners have also introduced innovative new county, state, and federal policy initiatives like the Clean Child support Initiative to reduce wrongful lag-time charges, Madison's Initiative to reduce the number of continuances, and the 2020 Family Bill – Sustaining our Future (Wemple, 2019).

This updated practice means that like your favorite smartphone, community family law can have newer and newer versions. Albeit, classical divorce contracts and traditional court mechanisms may not be the best suited for reducing childhood conflicts. For example, there often are no built-in remedies in divorce agreements when a child’s mom or dad is injured in a car accident and then in a wheelchair for a year. And there is no automatic or reflective mechanisms to go back and adjust those terms according to reality unless a Modification is filed. Then new future terms can be reflected to that filing date. The difference between a real-time stop in pay due to an accident and the modification date filing is known as lag-time. And everyone knows that even lag-time on our computers can cause frustration. Can you imagine being charged for the time you are down? These children’s parents go to jail when they can’t comply with the lagging terms of concrete contracts and mechanisms regardless. Research shows that divorce agreements and those mechanisms without built-in fluid remedies can cannibalize childhood (Wemple, 2019). Research also shows that with Family Law 2.0, children can be relieved of this pain when the community works with them, publishes, and records their positive accomplishments through an SPN.


Research shows that one Decatur, IL community is using an SPN and shielding children of military deployment and divorce through their own unique battles. Mississippi College of Law Professor Alena Ng Boyte, for example, calls Family Law 2.0 “An innovative new program mitigating the effects of divorce on children.” Studies show that family members can now publish and record their SPN regardless of the level of conflict their parents and institutions establish as policy. And it is easier to do than operating a phone.

Persistent evidence has validated Clean Law’s SPN as a growing peer-to-peer family of childhood safety experts that together support and encourage safer family-hood experiences while passing through divisive storms. Many of which turn out to be divisive hacks that twists one's innocence into unretractable ugliness. An SPN is much like a VPN and private network service delivered through a public network infrastructure (Bollapragada et al., 2005) to shield information from being hacked.

The simplest way to think of a CPN is like two children smiling at each other or playing tag within a bigger angry community. One cannot imagine how impossible it is for children to stay in their parent’s lives when one parent has a slave name like “non-custodial.” Individuals alone often cannot access their children’s school event dates, sporting event dates, report cards, social media accounts, mail, phone, college plans, etc. “Custodial” v. “non-custodial” is an overriding state of gates in-of-itself.


What else could be in our future connection-keeper’s futures?

Anything else?

(Source:, 2020)

And even more safety?


On the website for the law firm of Quinn & Dworakowski, they guide children’s parents through what they call "The Divorce Threat List." These are elevated risk levels of verbal conflicts that either adult party involved in an open divorce case will undoubtedly declare on the other adult party. Psychological warfare tactics and operations, they warn, which are dangerous and unpredictable. This is expected. In the olden days of divorce wars, parties used parental disengagements for all sorts of weaponized and dirty things. These days families have been using an SPN to protect their families, relationships, investments, and security.

If Judith Willerstein were alive today, then we couldn’t help but wonder if she would be a proponent or an opponent of joint family abilities – disconnecting and reconnecting at the same time. Would she support or oppose childproof contracts, a childproof safety file network, and a childproof community? Would she be for or against legislative initiatives that are both combative and cooperative? Could her children be shielded while embattling adults have their ways? Would she be for or against classical family law and Family Law 2.0 markets, each co-existing?

If Wallerstein had been kept out of her children’s lives because she didn’t fit a protocol, or because she had to serve two battling opponents instead of the children, then would we as a society be moving back in time or advancing? Could children of embattled adults ever have the light of day and a clean voice? What if childhood safety in policy was expected?

In conclusion, family unity and togetherness, highly outlawed and unfavored, is unexpected. Future research is needed and might include children in situations where dual restrictive parents are beyond legal or public remedy. Studies might consist of children of contracts and mechanisms with and without built-in remedies. Updates like a child safety seat during an automobile accident, child safety files before, during, and after a life wreck could be studied. Future studies might also include the number of houses children lose due to the absence of counsel when their parents are poor, and the quality of life associated with those experiences. Studies might also include the quantity of lost parental careers due to the absence of bail when accusations are made, and the resulting quality of life from those situations. Further studies may include the number of children whose parents lose educations, retirement accounts, and other such losses in gaps and the corresponding qualities of lives as a result. Many missing pieces themselves that escalate divorce conflicts like agents of pain with no equal healing agents of relief. After all, children don’t choose the painful valleys of disengagements; our valleys choose them.

And finally, alienation pain relief (APR) will obviously warrant emotionally constructive clean law and clarity. Especially to help children’s parents float through the risky levels of the U.S. Family Un-sustainability Rating Scale. Which are elevated risk levels that a family might face depending on how many diverging legal protocols like divorce or school strike that they are involved with. Relief is in the form of positive activities and achievements within the family that parents themselves and children file and record together as a decentralized peer-to-peer group to hopefully someday share within their exclusive network. An authentic shield, if you will, where there is no room for jank-masters who constantly un-righteously step in and get highly paid to steal the show. Welcome to Clean Law and clarity. A fun place where every child gets to have a family.


A Work in Process: Improving a Play Dough Process. (n.d.). Retrieved March 4, 2020, from

Abel , L. K., & Rettig, M. (2006). State Statutes Providing for a Right to Counsel in Civil Cases. Clearinghouse REVIEW Journal of Poverty Law and Policy. Retrieved from

Angelo, M. S. (2019). High Conflict Separation/Divorce, Intimate Partner Violence and its Effects on Child Adjustment (Doctoral dissertation, William James College).

Appadvice. (2019, April 26). Custody Transfer Log by College of Arts and Sciences - Southern Illinois University Edwardsville. Retrieved April 7, 2020, from

Austin, W. G., Fieldstone, L., & Pruett, M. K. (2013). Bench book for assessing parental gatekeeping in parenting disputes: Understanding the dynamics of gate closing and opening for the best interests of children. Journal of Child Custody, 10(1), 1-16.

Austin, W. G., Pruett, M. K., Kirkpatrick, H. D., Flens, J. R., & Gould, J. W. (2013). Parental gatekeeping and child custody/child access evaluation: Part I: Conceptual framework, research, and application. Family Court Review, 51(3), 485-501.

Basadur, M., Pringle, P., Speranzini, G., & Bacot, M. (2000). Collaborative problem solving through creativity in problem definition: Expanding the pie. Creativity and Innovation Management, 9(1), 54-76.

Behm, M. (2005). Linking construction fatalities to the design for construction safety concept. Safety science, 43(8), 589-611.

Berland, L., Steingut, R., & Ko, P. (2014). High school student perceptions of the utility of the engineering design process: Creating opportunities to engage in engineering practices and apply math and science content. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(6), 705-720.

Buede, D. (2002, August). 6.2. 1 The Concepts of Systems Engineering as Practiced by the Wright Brothers. In INCOSE International Symposium (Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 297-302).

Bollapragada, V., Khalid, M., & Wainner, S. (2005). IPSec Vpn design. Indianapolis, Ind: Cisco.

Greig, B. (2012, November 21). Few talk about the terrible toll marital breakdown can take on men's health. But here, one father reveals: 'The stress of divorce almost killed me'. Retrieved April 2, 2020, from

Cross, N. (2008). Engineering design methods: strategies for product design.

Compton, P., Yang, W., Lee, M., & Jansen, B. (1991). Cornerstone cases in a dictionary approach to rule maintenance. CSIRO, Division of Information Technology.

Davidson, J. L., & Jensen, C. (2013, June). Participatory design with older adults: an analysis of creativity in the design of mobile healthcare applications. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM Conference on Creativity & Cognition (pp. 114-123).

Feinberg, M. E. (2003). The Internal Structure and Ecological Context of Coparenting: A Framework for Research and Intervention. Parenting, 3(2), 95–131. doi: 10.1207/s15327922par0302_01

Hetherington, E. M., & Kelly, J. (2003). For better or for worse: divorce reconsidered. New York: W.W. Norton.

Hiniker, A., Sobel, K., & Lee, B. (2005). Co-Designing with Preschoolers Using Fictional Inquiry and Comicboarding.

Howard, T. J., Culley, S. J., & Dekoninck, E. (2008). Describing the creative design process by the integration of engineering design and cognitive psychology literature. Design studies, 29(2), 160-180.

Jaha, A. A., Shatwan, F. B., & Ashibani, M. (n.d.). Proper Virtual Private Network (VPN) Solution.

Johnston, J. R. (1994). High-conflict divorce. The future of children, 165-182.

Kalter, N., Kloner, A., Schreier, S., & Okla, K. (1989). Predictors of children's postdivorce adjustment. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 59(4), 605-618.

Katehi, L., National Academy of Engineering, National Research Council, & Committee on K-12 Engineering Education. (2009, September 8). Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and Improving the Prospects. Retrieved March 17, 2020, from

Lamela, D., Figueiredo, B., Bastos, A., & Feinberg, M. (2015). Typologies of Post-divorce Coparenting and Parental Well-Being, Parenting Quality and Children’s Psychological Adjustment. Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 47(5), 716–728. doi: 10.1007/s10578-015-0604-5

Lebow, J., & Slesinger, N. (2016). Family therapy with families in intractable conflicts about child custody and visitation. In Handbook of child custody (pp. 291-301). Springer, Cham.

Murdock, M. C., & Puccio, G. J. (1993). A contextual organizer for conducting creativity research. Understanding and recognizing creativity: The emergence of a discipline, 249-280.

National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press.

Neighbors, B., Forehand, R., & Armistead, L. (1992). Is parental divorce a critical stressor for young adolescents? Grade point average as a case in point. Adolescence, 27(107), 639–646.

Plan, E. T., & Khandani, S. (2005). Engineering design process.

Pruett, M. K., & Barker, R. (2009). Children of divorce: New trends and ongoing dilemmas. Rogers, S. (2010, January 28). Divorce rates data, 1858 to now: how has it changed? Retrieved March 12, 2020, from

Schick, A. (2002). Behavioral and emotional differences between children of divorce and children from intact families: Clinical significance and mediating processes. Swiss Journal of Psychology/Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Psychologie/Revue Suisse de Psychologie, 61(1), 5.

Stinson, J. N., Jibb, L. A., Nguyen, C., Nathan, P. C., Maloney, A. M., Dupuis, L. L., … Orr, M. (2013). Development and Testing of a Multidimensional iPhone Pain Assessment Application for Adolescents with Cancer. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 15(3).

Tashiro, T., Frazier, P., & Berman, M. (2006). Stress-related growth following divorce and relationship dissolution. Handbook of divorce and relationship dissolution, 361-384.

Terrell, S. R. (2015). Writing a proposal for your dissertation: Guidelines and examples. Guilford Publications.

Ullman, D. G. (2010). The mechanical design process: Part 1. McGraw-Hill.

Wallerstein, J. S., Lewis, J., & Blakeslee, S. (2014). The unexpected legacy of divorce: a 25 year landmark study. New York: Hachette Books.

Wemple, A. W. (2018, August 22). The CLU Story: United Parents Guide. Retrieved March 28, 2020, from

Wemple, A. W. (2018). Family Law 2.0. Decatur, IL: Clean Law.

Wemple, A. W. (2019). 2020 Family Bill. Decatur, IL: Clean Law.

Wemple, A. W. (2020, February 3). Retrieved from

Yoon, C., Cole, C. A., & Lee, M. P. (2009). Consumer decision making and aging: Current knowledge and future directions. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(1), 2-16.

Terms and Conditions   |  Vision  |  Values  |  Contact  |  About

Clean Law

15 S Old State Capitol Plaza

Springfield, IL 62701

© 2019 by Clean Law  |  Patent pending  | All rights reserved.