Mapping Paths To Family Justice

​The family justice system in England and Wales has undergone radical change over the past 20 years. A significant part of this shifting landscape has been an increasing emphasis on settling private family disputes out of court, which has been embraced by policy-makers, judges and practitioners alike and is promoted as an unqualified good. Mapping Paths to Family Justice: Resolving Family Disputes in Neoliberal Times examines the experiences of people taking part in out-of-court family dispute resolution in England and Wales. It addresses questions such as how participants’ experiences match up to the ideal; how recent changes to the legal system have affected people’s ability to access out-of-court dispute resolution; and what kind of outcomes are achieved in family dispute resolution. This book is the first study systematically to compare different forms of family dispute resolution. It explores people’s experiences of solicitor negotiations, mediation and collaborative law empirically by analyzing findings from a nationally representative survey, individual in-depth interviews with parties and practitioners, and recorded family dispute resolution processes. It considers these in the context of ongoing neoliberal reforms to the family justice system, drawing out conclusions and implications for policy and practice.

The modern emergence of mediation in the West in the 1980s represents a profound transformation of civil disputing practice, particularly in the field of family justice. In the field of family disputes mediation has emerged to fill a gap which none of the existing services, lawyers and courts on the one hand, or welfare, advisory or therapeutic interventions on the other, could in their nature have filled. In the UK mediation is now the approved pathway in the current landscape of family dispute resolution processes, officially endorsed and publicly funded by government to provide separating and divorcing families with the opportunity to resolve their disputes co-operatively with less acrimony, delay and cost than the traditional competitive litigation and court process. The consolidation of the professional practice of family mediation reflects its progress and creativity in respect both of the expanding focus on professional quality assurance as well as on developments of policy, practice guidelines and training to address central concerns about the role of children in mediation, screening for domestic abuse, sexual orientation and gender identity as well as cross-cultural issues including the role of interpreters in the process. Other areas of innovation include the application of family mediation to a growing range of family conflict situations involving, for example, international family disputes (including cross border, relocation and child abduction issues). Written by leaders in family mediation, this title provides a contemporary account of current practice developments and research concerning family mediation across a range of issues in the UK and Ireland.

Family justice requires not only a legal framework within which personal obligations are regulated over the life course, but also a justice system which can deliver legal information, advice and support at times of change of status or family stress, together with mechanisms for negotiation, dispute management and resolution, with adjudication as the last resort. The past few years have seen unparalleled turbulence in the way family justice systems function. These changes are associated with economic constraints in many countries, including England and Wales, where legal aid for private family matters has largely disappeared. But there is also a change in ideology in a number of jurisdictions, including Canada, towards what is sometimes called neo-liberalism, whereby the state seeks to reduce its area of activity while at the same time maintaining strong views on family values. Legal services may become fragmented and marketised, and the role of law and lawyers reduced, while self-help web based services expand. The contributors to this volume share their anxieties about the impact on the ability of individuals to achieve fair and informed resolution in family matters.

Collaborative practice is a new method of dispute resolution, used mainly in family law matters. By taking a non-adversarial approach, it challenges the strictly positivist view of the lawyer as ‘zealous advocate’ for the client. As such, it has received much criticism from the established Bar and legal profession. This book provides a doctrinal and empirical analysis of collaborative practice with a view to assessing its place within the dispute resolution continuum and addressing whether this criticism has been justified. It begins by establishing the theoretical underpinnings of conflict and differing approaches to conflict resolution, the impact of the comprehensive law movement and therapeutic jurisprudence. The origins and development of the collaborative process and the framework it provides for a multidisciplinary approach to conflict resolution is outlined. The book addresses the examination of the process undertaken in the lead up to the enactment of the Uniform Collaborative Law Act in 2010; now regarded as a model of best practice. Finally, through an examination of empirical research undertaken in the US, Canada and in England and Wales, and in presenting the results of the first known empirical research into the process in an Irish family law context, the book concludes with an evidenced based analysis of the process from the perspective of couples who chose to use the collaborative model to resolve the issues surrounding their relationship breakdown, collaborative lawyers and lawyers who do not advocate a non-adversarial approach. As such this book provides a valuable insight into the process which will be of interest to: academics; practising lawyers; members of the judiciary; researchers in the fields of conflict resolution and family law and for students studying alternative dispute resolution (ADR).

The editors' earlier book Delivering Family Justice in the 21st Century (2016) described a period of turbulence in family justice arising from financial austerity. Governments across the world have sought to reduce public spending on private quarrels by promoting mediation (ADR) and by beginning to look at digital justice (ODR) as alternatives to courts and lawyers. But this book describes how mediation has failed to take the place of courts and lawyers, even where public funding for legal help has been removed. Instead ODR has developed rapidly, led by the Dutch Rechtwijzer. The authors question the speed of this development, and stress the need for careful evaluation of how far these services can meet the needs of divorcing families. In this book, experts from Canada, Australia, Turkey, Spain, Germany, France, Poland, Scotland, and England and Wales explore how ADR has fallen behind, and how we have learned from the rise and fall of ODR in the Rechtwijzer about what digital justice can and cannot achieve. Managing procedure and process? Yes. Dispute resolution? Not yet. The authors end by raising broader questions about the role of a family justice system: is it dispute resolution? Or dispute prevention, management, and above all legal protection of the vulnerable?

Demonstrating how the law and statutory guidance applies in practice, this book is a critical account of current family justice policy and practice. It draws on recent legislation, case law and research findings to provide clear, accessible information and advice on how to make the difficult decisions in pre-proceedings child care practice work. With reference to child protection legislation and practice frameworks, this book highlights the importance of undertaking informed and effective assessments based on the best outcome for the child. The book acknowledges the constraints facing practitioners, such as working under considerable pressure within tight time frames and focuses on the issues which commonly present as challenges for practice, such as neglect, child sexual exploitation and pre-birth assessments. This is essential reading for students and practitioners in social work and law, as well as policy-makers and other professionals concerned with the current state of child welfare.

This book is about those who represent themselves as Litigants in Person in the family justice system. It calls for a refocusing of the debate about the historical challenges associated with Litigants in Person as well as the role they should play within the family justice system in England and Wales. Drawing together interviews with Litigants in Person and decades of research into self-representation from across multiple jurisdictions, this book provides an account of the family justice system through the eyes of its users. It employs an innovative socio-legal framework comprising feminist theory, a Bourdieusian theory of class, vulnerability theory, and actor-network theory to explore the journey that Litigants in Person take through the legal, cultural and social context of the family court. It provides fresh insight into the diverse challenges that people face within this process and how these relate to wider pressures within the family justice system. It argues that there are important lessons to be learned from Litigants in Person. By understanding how and why people come to the point of self-representing, and the kinds of experiences they have when they do, the book advocates the importance of forging a more positive and effective relationship between Litigants in Person and the family justice system.

​This open access book explores how legal proceedings in and out-of-court can be matched to the complex problems underlying disputes concerning child custody, residence and contact between parents. It focusses in particular on Nordic experiences of in and out-of-court mechanisms as means of resolving custody disputes. The contributors are internationally renowned and experienced researchers from the legal, psychological, and sociological fields who provide empirical as well as legal perspectives. They examine central legal, ethical and knowledge-based dilemmas in custody dispute proceedings. The findings speak to an international audience and suggest ways how to best realize the interests of the child. It transcends disciplinary, institutional, and jurisdictional boundaries in search of new knowledge.