PECULIARITIES OF LEGAL REGULATION OF MENTORING RELATIONS IN UKRAINE AND THE USA

Abstract

The article explores the legal nature of the mentoring institution as a socially significant activity within the sphere of family law aimed at supporting orphans and children deprived of parental care. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of the legal regulation of mentoring in the U. S. legal system with the purpose of identifying potential improvements for the Ukrainian regulatory framework. The relevance of a comparative approach is substantiated, especially in light of Ukraine’s efforts to expand mentoring practices to family-based forms of child care. It is established that the United States is a pioneer in the development of modern mentoring, due to initiatives such as “Big Brothers Big Sisters” and numerous other programs receiving federal funding. In particular, the article examines the content and objectives of the Foster Youth Mentoring Act (2023), which provides for grants to create and support mentoring programs for children with experience in foster care. Special attention is given to the definition of mentee categories, mentor requirements, selection and control mechanisms, and methods of using budgetary funds. In addition, the article investigates other legislative initiatives, including the Mentoring to Succeed Act and the H. R.9041 bill on peer-to-peer mentoring for parents. These illustrate the expansion of the mentoring institution in the United States from children and youth to adults in difficult life circumstances. Both similarities and differences between the Ukrainian and U. S. mentoring models are identified. The similarity lies in the shared purpose of mentoring – support, socialization, and preparation for independent living. Differences relate to the level of financial support, the extent of government involvement, and the flexibility of legislation. In the U. S., mentors may receive compensation, benefit from grants, and have access to training programs, whereas in Ukraine, mentoring is primarily voluntary. The conclusion highlights the advisability of adapting selected elements of the U. S. experience, taking into account the Ukrainian social context.