Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Family Law Review: Getting It Right For Children - Seminar Report 15 July 2010
Family Law Review: Getting It Right For Children - Seminar Report 15 July 2010
On 15 July 2010, the Centre for Separated families, the Centre for Social Justice, Fatherhood
Institute and Fawcett Society hosted a seminar to look at the key themes of the Family Law
Review and, in particular, how the justice system and the support services that surround it can
help families work together to reach agreements and how children can maintain relationships with
both of their parents, and other significant adults, after divorce or separation.
The seminar, which was sponsored by John Glen MP and chaired by Anthony Kirk QC was
attended by policy makers, practitioners, members of the legal profession, academics, charities,
advocates and others with an interest in the impact of family law on families and children.
Meeting the real needs of process that involves hurt, loss and, often, a lack of
trust. Little wonder so many parents struggle to
separated families build new, co-operative parenting relationships.
Nick Woodall: The Centre for Separated Families Given that, you'd think that the legal and policy
structures that parents encounter, along with the
The core principle of the 1989 Children Act – that support services that they look to for help, would
the welfare of the child is paramount - is one that's seek to engage with them in ways that would
difficult to argue with. And it's a principle that's as orientate them away from the adversarial and
relevant outside of the family justice system as it is towards the collaborative.
within it. The notion that the well being of children
takes precedence over the 'rights' of parents is one Instead, what we see is a legal framework that
that sits at the very heart of everything that we do at divides parents and accords them unequal status.
the Centre for Separated Families. Its an approach We see policy and practice that responds to myths
we've used for the past decade and it is one that and stereotypes rather than real lives. And we see
brings positive outcomes for both parents and their voluntary organisations that play out at policy level
children. what parents themselves play out at the domestic
level – organisations that work to uphold parent's
What can easily be overlooked when we're rights rather than support co-operation. It's these
considering changes to the family justice system is divisions of parenting status and a the adversarial
that the majority of parents, also, just want to do framework within which parents have to operate
the best for their children. Why then, do so many that leads, too often, to poorer outcomes for
find this difficult or impossible to achieve and why children.
do so many end up bogged down in low level
conflict. Or worse, in protracted and damaging We need look no further than the notions of 'care'
court battles? and 'contact', enshrined within Section 8 of the
Children Act, to see how parents are divided into
In many respects, its not a difficult question to what we might call the 'proper parent' and the
answer, particularly when you work directly with the 'other parent'. We can see no need for this division
messy part of people's lives as we, the Centre for in status. Parents simply need to be helped to work
Separated Families, do on a daily basis. Divorce out how each of them will have a positive parenting
and family separation is almost always a painful
We felt that the redrafted section 11 offers much to Father and child need to engage together not only
both mothers and fathers. It addresses the in recreational activities as tend to happen at
concerns of many caring and involved non-resident weekends, but in everyday interactions: getting
parents (mostly fathers), while also addressing the ready for school, being taken to and from school,
concerns of parents’ groups about violence, abuse, having friends round, helping with homework,
and high conflict. It also meets concerns about reading bedtime stories. More than these, a child
parents who will litigate to enforce their ‘parental needs to feel a sense of belonging in his or her
rights’ while frequently neglecting their father’s life, and that’s only achieved through
responsibilities. It builds on the 2006 legislation with substantial and routine interactions. It’s for these
the importance of good contact actually taking reasons that researchers are increasingly sceptical
place for the benefit of the child with the non- about the value of what’s been called ‘standard’
primary residential parent. It is a constructive and contact: that is, every-other-weekend and tea one
positive provision, which gives much more evening during the other week. While sometimes
guidance to courts than the present Act and, we such an arrangement is the only possibility, this kind
believe, modernises it in an appropriate way. of contact almost ensures that the child will remain
an add-on to his or her father’s life, and will not be
Indifference to the child is rarely a factor. Far more • children who have the benefit of meaningful
influential are factors such as the child living in and positive relationships with both parents
another town, father or mother not understanding • mothers and fathers who can keep conflict
the father’s importance; father feeling he has no between themselves to a minimum and either
influence on his child’s life; father poor and/or (at best) cooperate or else parent ‘in parallel’
poorly educated; high levels of parental conflict, without seeking to disrupt the relationship
failure to deal with the emotional aspects of the between their child and his or her other
separation, poor physical or mental health, parent
including over-use of alcohol/drugs (often in a vain • mothers and fathers who are capable of
attempt to self-medicate). l o o k i n g a f t e r t h e m s e l v e s fi n a n c i a l l y,
emotionally and physically and providing well
P o v e r t y i s k e y. I t ’s t h e p o o re s t f a t h e r s , for their child, financially, emotionally, and
overwhelmingly, who are the most likely to lose physically.
contact. Yet their financial circumstances are never
considered. Unlike in Australia, where both
separated parents are deemed ‘single parents’, here