Climate change? The multiple trajectories of shared care law, policy and social practices

ArticleThe definitive version is available from Jordan PublishingThis article explores how shared care following parental separation or divorce has developed in law and policy over the past 25 years, identifying five phases of evolution. It traces the development of shared care as social norm and as social practice, and the interrelationship between the research evidence on shared care and case-law and policy. It explores two of the drivers for these developments: the body of research evidence on shared care and the role played by different ideas or ‘frames' surrounding shared care – ‘welfare', ‘rights', ‘risk' and ‘resources' – and concludes that current case-law is significantly more supportive of shared care than either the current policy framework or the existing research base.Nuffield Foundatio

Taking Responsibility? Legal Aid Reform and Litigants in Person in England

This is an author version of a book chapter accepted for publication by Hart Publishing. The definitive version will appear as Chapter 13 of: Delivering Family Justice in the 21st Century, edited by Mavis Maclean, John Eekelaar, Benoit Bastard. ISBN: 9781849469128. Due for publication by Hart Publishing in 2015. http://www.hartpub.co.uk/BookDetails.aspx?ISBN=9781849469128Author version submitted in accordance with publisher self archiving policy.In April 2014, the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) introduced sweeping reforms to legal aid in England and Wales. The impact was felt most severely on private family law cases, that is, divorce or civil partnership dissolution, property and finance and arrangements for children. Since April 2014, legal aid has only been available for a restricted range of private family law cases, primarily for victims of domestic violence

Opening closed doors: a micro analytic investigation of dispute resolution in child contact cases

Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-000-22-2646. Swindon: ESRCThe family courts face intense criticism about decisions made about child contact (or access) following parental separation or divorce. Both father's rights groups and Women's Aid have raised concerns about institutional bias, ineffectiveness and a lack of transparency. However, the inherently closed nature of decision-making in the family courts has prevented greater understanding of how decisions are reached. This study addresses this gap by undertaking a detailed analysis of in-court conciliation meetings where parents negotiate over contact with the assistance of a judge or court social worker. The research uses conversation analysis to explore precisely how the actual, real-time work of family courts is undertaken in and through the communicative processes of spoken interaction. The study will explore, for example, the interactional processes by which agreements are achieved, negotiated and/or impeded, and how the rights and needs of children and parents are discursively framed by conciliators and disputants.Research supported by ESRC grant RES-000-22-264

Assessing Risk of Harm to Children and Parents in Private Law Children Cases: Final Report

This is the final report of the expert panel appointed by the Ministry of Justice to assess how effectively the family courts identify and respond to allegations of domestic abuse and other serious offences, in cases involving disputes between parents about the arrangements for their children, known as ‘private law children proceedings’. It reflects the findings from the call for evidence, following over 1,200 responses from individuals and organisations across England and Wales, together with roundtables and focus groups held with professionals, parents and children with experience of the family courts. Most of the evidence received focused on domestic abuse. The report makes findings in relation to both the processes and the outcomes for parties and children involved in such proceedings The panel makes several recommendations for next steps to be taken forward by the family justice system

Building bridges? An evaluation of the costs and effectiveness of the separated parents information programme (PIP)

The Separated Parent Information Programme (PIP) is the first nationally available parent education programme for parents involved in litigation over contact and residence in England. The programme is a Contact Activity, introduced by the Children and Adoption Act 2006 as an additional tool for courts to facilitate contact. PIP is a four hour group programme for parents referred by the court. Both parties, i.e. the applicant and respondent, are required to attend the programme, but former couples attend separate groups. The groups are designed to include both men and women. The aim of the programme is to encourage parents to focus on children’s needs and perspectives. The programme is delivered by trained providers from mediation, counselling or contact services backgrounds

Building bridges? An evaluation of the costs and effectiveness of the Separated Parents Information Programme (PIP)

This study was conducted over a three month period from January to March 2011.The Separated Parent Information Programme (PIP) is the first nationally available parent education programme for parents involved in litigation over contact and residence in England. The programme is a Contact Activity, introduced by the Children and Adoption Act 2006 as an additional tool for courts to facilitate contact. PIP is a four hour group programme for parents referred by the court. Both parties, i.e. the applicant and respondent, are required to attend the programme, but former couples attend separate groups. The groups are designed to include both men and women. The aim of the programme is to encourage parents to focus on children’s needs and perspectives. The programme is delivered by trained providers from mediation, counselling or contact services backgrounds.Department of Educatio

Understanding the lives of separating and separated families in the UK: what evidence do we need?

This study was designed to address three broad questions: What are the evidence – and data – needs around family separation in the UK? How far are these needs met by administrative, survey and other research data that currently exist or are in the process of being developed? What additional data are required, and how would these best be collected

Data Resource: population level family justice administrative data with opportunities for data linkage

Introduction Although there has been considerable progress in the use of administrative data for applied health research, the family justice field lags behind. Better use of administrative data is essential to enhance understanding of how the family justice system is working, as well as the characteristics of, and outcomes for, children and families. The Family Justice Data Partnership (FJDP) supports this aim through analyses of core family justice and linked datasets in the SAIL Databank (Secure Anonymised Information Linkage). Cafcass Cymru provide expert advice for children involved in family court proceedings in Wales, ensuring decisions are made in the best interests of the child. We provide an overview of Cafcass Cymru data. We also describe and illustrate linkage to administrative datasets within SAIL. Methods Cafcass Cymru data was transferred to SAIL using a standardised approach to provide de-identified data with Anonymised Linking Fields (ALF) for successfully matched records. Three cohorts were created: all individuals involved in family court applications; all individuals with an ALF allowing subsequent health data linkage; and all individuals with a Residential Anonymised Linking Field (RALF) enabling area-level deprivation analysis. Results Cafcass Cymru application data are available for child protection matters (public law, range 2011-2019, n=12,745), and child arrangement disputes (private law, range 2005-2019, n=52,023). An 80% data linkage match rate was achieved. 40% had hospital admissions within two years pre or post application; 54% had emergency department attendances and 61% had outpatient appointments. Individuals were more likely to reside in deprived areas regardless of law type. Conclusion Cafcass Cymru data can be accessed through the SAIL Databank. The FJDP will continue to enhance research opportunities for all to better understand the family justice system, and outcomes for those involved, such as health and wellbeing for children and family members