The Family Solutions Initiative – A Response To A System In Crisis
The Family Solutions Group (‘FSG’) report, entitled What about me?: Reframing Support for Families following Parental Separation starkly underlined the problems of a family justice system ‘in crisis’.
A key factor for the crisis is the volume of applications which find their way before the family court. Applications are ‘growing exponentially’. Those pressures which already exist are exacerbated by the current global health pandemic.
In the longer term, it is clear that proposals will be made for ‘an overhaul of the system’. However, until such time, the Family Solutions Group reminds us that current ‘child focussed legislation, rules and professional duties’ already provide a framework for practitioners and that the proper and consistent use of this framework (by lawyers and courts alike) could have a significantly positive impact on family dispute resolution.
One such example is the Surrey Initiative, the brainchild of Karen Barham, which was cited in the FSG report as ‘a new protocol … to facilitate the court’s duty to consider … non court dispute resolution options’ (FSG report p 159). The Surrey Initiative continues to gather momentum across the country.
The key mission of the Surrey Initiative is to require all legal professionals to engage substantively with out of court processes at the pre-proceedings stage (as all should be doing in accordance with FPR Part 3).
Karen Barham, Martin Kingerley QC and Rhys Taylor have now built on the Surrey Initiative, which goes by the working title of The Family Solutions Initiative (‘The FSI’). The FSI represents a concerted effort to re-focus attention on current legislation, rules and professional duties with a view to encouraging parties to meaningfully engage in out of court processes with the aim of avoiding judicial determination of disputes.
The FSI recognises the cultural shift to move away from the language of ‘dispute resolution’ to ‘solution’ focussed processes.
The FSI envisages the court, in both finance and children matters, giving consideration to the conduct of the parties specifically in respect of their willingness (or otherwise) to engage in methods of non-court based issue resolution, and, where appropriate, for costs sanctions to be imposed.
The Divorce Surgery very much supports this initiative. All efforts must be made, at the earliest stage, to find a way for couples to reach a solution which works for their family. Karen, Martin and Rhys have sensibly built on the Court rules already in place. Small changes in the way we as practitioners approach out of court processes can have a huge impact. Separating couples need options, and lots of them. The more we innovate as a profession, and find new ways to solve old problems, the better we can serve the families who need us.
Author Name: Editor
Published content by The Divorce Surgery Editorial Team.
Related Posts
