Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

credentials might be judged by how she dresses?

81 replies

JessieMcJessie · 09/04/2018 08:19

I have just been reading an article in which a number of top female divorce lawyers are interviewed. Among their “Top Tips”:

“What you wear in Court matters: Sandra Davis suggests that mothers negotiating 'children matters' such as contact arrangements should wear 'something soft, nothing too sharp with edges'.

I am taken aback at this suggestion that a woman has to dress in a particular way to maximise the chances of gaining access to her children. Are judges really that easily swayed by the lack of a cashmere cardigan?

OP posts:
Original poster
JessieMcJessie · 09/04/2018 10:24

You’re just embarrassing yourself now Penggwyn.

OP posts:
DeathStare · 09/04/2018 10:26

I then happily accepted that someone should be judged for wearing non-appropriate court dress

You mean by what YOU narrow-mindedly consider to be non-appropriate court dress.

If the mother in question does not own smart clothing, nor does she know anyone who can lend her any, and has no money how exactly do you expect her to turn up in what you consider to be court appropriate dress?

Pengggwn · 09/04/2018 10:27

JessieMcJessie

Oh yes, I'm cringing Hmm

NeedsAsockamnesty · 09/04/2018 10:29

No you complained about judging women based on their attire then did it yourself.

You have then extrapolated to decide that soft clothing may now be considered to be appropriate court attire but that tracksuits are not.

It wasn’t that long ago that only proffesional attire was considered court appropriate, these days lots of people wear their ‘best’ casual stuff to court sometimes that’s jeans sometimes it’s a tracksuit,

Birdsgottafly · 09/04/2018 10:34

I agree to a point with Penggwyn.

"I then happily accepted that someone should be judged for wearing non-appropriate court dress"

No they shouldn't. Judges should be educated to understand the reasons why someone presents themselves the way they do. If there are reasons, then there shouldn't be a judgement.

I was a CP SW. I attended the Family Court, regularly. I (as well as other agencies) also worked with Families. Dressing appropriately, sometimes needs to be taught. The Job Center used to give crisis loans for Court Clothes, now they don't.

We shouldn't judge people based on, a neglected background, poverty, class, intelligence, sensory issues (we had a Parent that was only comfortable in shoes that wasn't really suitable for Court) and many other issues, which bring them to the point that they are.

The Judge will know these factors, the defense Solicitor etc will put them into the argument and they will be factors in sentencing, or recommendations.

It reminds me of the bad old days, when any show of emotion, especially in the case of potentially losing their children, would result in them being branded 'aggressive', 'violent' etc.

We don't want to return to those.

Original poster
JessieMcJessie · 09/04/2018 10:36

I know what I said needasockanmensty.
Repeating your view that you think I said something different isn’t going to change that.

Deathstare in those particular circumstances I’d think it fair to expect the woman to be given the benefit of the doubt. Of course.

OP posts:
KTheGrey · 09/04/2018 10:39

Yes, the message very much about looking like a lovely soft gentle mumsy lady. It's sexist af because the requirement to signal with clothes is actually a sign of disempowerment - in court everybody knows the uniform required to be permitted to speak, for example.

The gutting thing is that that's actually just good advice for those circumstances. You probably do better if you wear pinky beige colours as well (looks more vulnerable).

Men are subject to it in court - the advice to wear a white shirt is a real thing - but to a lesser degree. As usual.

DeathStare · 09/04/2018 10:43

Deathstare in those particular circumstances I’d think it fair to expect the woman to be given the benefit of the doubt. Of course

I think in general - given that most people know that they will be judged for not arriving at Court in smart clothes and most people don't want this - if someone turns up at Court in leggings and a jumper or a tracksuit or jeans and a t-shirt, it is pretty safe to assume they had no other option. I say that from years of professional experience.

So basically you are now going back on your former point that it is reasonable to judge a mother's parenting based on her coming to Court in a tracksuit.

Your views on judging people on their Court clothing really are incredibly inconsistent.

iTonya · 09/04/2018 10:46

This is from the Daily Mail, isn't it? The Mail has a very clear editorial line on what type of clothing is appropriate for women to wear in photoshoots, particularly their line-ups of 'normal readers': shift dresses in soft colours, heels, nude tights. Paul Dacre probably prays for the day Per Una bring housecoats back.

Original poster
JessieMcJessie · 09/04/2018 10:51

OK DeathStare perhaps I should have said that I think it is OK to judge someone for CHOOSING to come to court in a tracksuit (Nb I specifically said tracksuit and not just “casual dress”) when they have other options. I did not state that expressly and you have therefore understandably misinterpreted what I said.

However my AIBU is about subtle differences in soft vs hard clothing in the context of divorce proceedings. Not about how people in grinding poverty are treated by the Courts.

OP posts:
NorthernKnickers · 09/04/2018 10:55

Pengggwn I agree absolutely, we shouldn't have to, but sometimes when the stakes are that high, when it really, really matters, it might just be wise to.

Pengggwn · 09/04/2018 11:02

NorthernKnickers

Oh yes. I'd be buying my cashmere cardigan and pearls with the best of them if it came to losing my DD!

Pengggwn · 09/04/2018 11:03

Although, given that she still won't sleep through the night, I have my tracksuit in reserve in case I want her dad to get residence Hmm

IWannaSeeHowItEnds · 09/04/2018 11:05

The lawyers in that article work in divorce cases where the couple have lots of assets - the woman won't be turning up in clothing that is inappropriate for court because she cannot afford to buy clothes!
The OP is merely highlighting that within the fairly broad umbrella of what constitutes court appropriate clothing, a woman stands a better chance in a child access case if she wears a floaty blouse rather than a suit. I consider it to be pretty horrific that a judge, who really ought to know better, is still being swayed on really important issues, by image rather than facts.

WyfOfBathe · 09/04/2018 11:06

Because a good mother would know that you don’t go to Court in a tracksuit

Mother A and Mother B both rush to the court straight from work. Mother A works in an office, and comes in her suit. Mother B is a yoga instructor, and comes in her tracksuit. From this, you know that Mother B, unlike Mother A, is a bad mother? Really?

willynillypie · 09/04/2018 11:10

WyfOfBathe

Why can't yoga mother take a change of clothes to work?

OneStepSideways · 09/04/2018 11:15

How would you change things?

Nobody is being forced to dress a certain way, it's just advice to help you achieve the outcome you want.

We all make unconscious judgements about people based on the way they dress. I don't think soft edged clothes are less 'empowering' than a sharp suit and heels.

Image is a tool. When I go to the doctor I dress smartly because research suggests you get better treatment. When I want to look friendly and blend in at toddler groups I wear bright, fun tshirts with jeans. When I go to a party with DH I wear a dress that shows off my figure. When I go for job interviews I wear tailored trousers with a soft blouse, to strike a balance between professional and warm/approachable.

I don't feel this is disempowering at all, I'm using clothes to my advantage.

WyfOfBathe · 09/04/2018 11:18

Why can't yoga mother take a change of clothes to work?

She could, and that would be a good idea. I still don't think that wearing her gym clothes would make her a "bad mother".

IWannaSeeHowItEnds · 09/04/2018 11:20

Fine to use clothes to your advantage when you are talking about playgroup and parties and even job interviews, but in court a judge should not be swayed by a deliberate attempt to create an image through clothing. They should be above that sort of thing and make their very important decisions based solely on the facts.

Original poster
JessieMcJessie · 09/04/2018 11:21

I have already said above that this is where the tracksuit wear is a choice, Wyf. I don’t think many court hearings about child custody (as opposed to emergency care proceedings) are conducted at such urgency though.

OP posts:
NeedsAsockamnesty · 09/04/2018 11:21

It’s always been acceptable and fully appropriate for men to wear work wear including uniforms providing they are not shorts to court

WyfOfBathe · 09/04/2018 11:30

I have already said above that this is where the tracksuit wear is a choice, Wyf
So the judge should start proceedings by saying "Ma'am, are you wearing that tracksuit by choice or because you can't afford anything else?"

I agree that wearing a tracksuit to court isn't a good idea, because of unconscious bias, but I don't think it should be consciously used as a judge of character. Maybe people who choose to wear tracksuits to court often make other strange decisions, but surely some people could have no clue what to wear to court but be loving, caring parents?

Birdsgottafly · 09/04/2018 11:31

I've just googled who this Woman is who wrote the article.

She got the famous £337 million settlement for a divorcing Wife. She handled Jerry Hall's divorce and was part of the team that handled Diana divorcing Charles.

I think it's safe to say that she inhabits a completely different World to most of us and her advice may suit that World.

In the same way that her recommendation for a restaurant that it £200 a meal for one, her advice on Court behaviour is irrelevant to most.

YouStacey · 09/04/2018 11:32

Fine to use clothes to your advantage when you are talking about playgroup and parties and even job interviews, but in court a judge should not be swayed by a deliberate attempt to create an image through clothing. They should be above that sort of thing and make their very important decisions based solely on the facts.
I agree, but in reality judges make decisions on an individuals presentation all the time. Essentially, they're trying to work out who is the most honest of the two or more parties. If they didn't we could dispense with actual court hearings with the parties in attendance and they could make their judgements on the written papers/statements. Would anyone really want that?
I have heard that in DLA tribunals the success rate for claimants who actually turn up is much higher than for the ones who do ask for their claims to be decided on the papers - what does that tell us about how judges decide things?

TerfsUp · 09/04/2018 11:38

It has nothing to do with "credentials" - there are no credentials for parenthood - but with showing respect for circumstances (a courtroom is a formal place so it is best to dress formally to show respect) and to make a good impression.

It's the same for all sorts of situations: if you are going for an interview, you dress appropriately for the job / environment.