Jack Straw announces major changes to Family Courts

[onebatmother]

Blood and thunder, this is serious

So they finally figured out just how much it costs to drag children through the family courts and be hounded by idiot cafcrap cafcass officers did they?

Ok, so anyone on legal aid will have to go to mediation to be intimidated by the ex, not just have their solicitor and cafcass officer do it for them, and then what the mediator will be able to point fingers at who, why, where and how? Not going to work.

People going LIP will not have to attend, neither will people who can afford a solicitor, so not much has changed there then.

If they want to save money get rid of cafcass, that would be a starting point. The only thing divorcing parents agree on is that cafcass made everything worse.

Then don't allow solicitors anywhere near the court room, that should make things go faster.

Get rid of the presumption of contact for fathers because it's being abused by cafcass who claim it's for all fathers even the violent ones.

Jack Straw and Mark Potter are twats idiots, they have allowed the emotional torture of children to become common place inside the courts and those moron mindless judges who allow the 'professionals' (cafcass, ss and solicitors) to perjure themselves need shooting sacking.

Mad Now.

Sounds like a genuine step forward to me but I have NO experience and perhaps mediation will just become a box to be ticked before divorcing couples move on to the usual adversarial path?

On the face of it that sounds sensible though it all depends on the details of the new scheme doesn't it.

Does this mean lots of lawyers having to get a real job?

Atlantis I know almost nothing about this, but it says in the article that people who pay for their own lawyers should also have to consider mediation.

"Atlantis I know almost nothing about this, but it says in the article that people who pay for their own lawyers should also have to consider mediation. "

Yes they do that now, ask you to attend mediation, and on the first appearance your seen by the court mediation officer to see if you can agree before you get started.

Cafcass will also try to mediate between the parents (which only makes things worse usually).

The only people they can really force into mediation now are the legal aiders, or they lose legal aid, but if your legally aided and the ex isn't and he refuses then they can't force mediation.

As it stands now anyone who wont consider mediation is frowned upon by the court, I can't see how much will change.

Ah ty I misread it then. It sounded like the richer people would now be required to do what the poor people did all along.

Yes and there was some serious evidence a few years ago, that mediation done badly was a very good chance for men to bully women into agreeing to financial settlements that a lawyer would not have agreed to. That was without the presence of DV.

I wish there was some fucking awareness of these issues in government. Do they not talk to women? Does Harriet Harman not know about this and tell the cocks in cabinet about it?

"I thought maybe this was going to be an announcement that the family courts were having their veil of secrecy lifted. No such luck. "

The government do not have the backbone to stand up to the 'professionals'and open the courts, Straw said he would, and then Potter told him not to be silly, so he didn't.

Harman promised they would open them, and then she went very quiet.

Falconer lied and stalled, saying they should open them, even had a consultation, but apparently out of the 200 children ( a sample who work with cafcass on their childrens board) they interviewed, they claimed the children didn't want them opened .

With so many court users wanting the courts open it is only the 'professionals' who want to keep the shutters down.

Shame on Straw and the other limpets.

"Does Harriet Harman not know about this and tell the cocks in cabinet about it? "

Harriet Harman can never claim not to know about it, women's groups have lobbied her continuously and she said there was not a problem within the family courts re; DV or child abuse. ( I still have the poo faced cows email.)

I just posed on a thread about this thread. Is there a way that we can get this a bigger audience and make the real issues very publicly known?

This forum has huge power - can we use it?

No, no-one in government gives a toss. Because mediation sounds a. nice and b. cheap. So sod injustice and exploitation.

Posted, not posed. Obviously.

Atlantis - I know you have an axe to grind about these kinds of cases based on your own experience but I really don't think it's necessary to be quite so insulting and dismissive of the entire range of professionals in CAFCASS and solcititors/judges involved in the family courts. Many of these people work very hard to try to act in the best interests of the children who are caught between warring parents. Of course there will be some cases where one or other of the parties will be disatisfied with the outcome but that I'm afraid is the "nature of the beast" where these cases are concerned. I am also willing to believe that fathers are often allowed contact with children when this is inappropriate and there have been cases where they have used this "contact time" to try to intimidate ex wives/partners.

However I think your language is unnecessary e.g. "emotional torture of children, mindless judges, idiot politicians, perjury in court and people needing shooting" etc and actually says more about you than it does about the system. Just because you had a bad experience does not mean that the entire system is rotton to the core and I think your post could cause anxiety to parents caught up in the family court process. I have been involved in the family courts for many years and in the main I have been impressed with the way in which matters are conducted and how the best interests of the child are kept at the heart of the matter.

I absolutely applaud these new proposals and think that mediation is definitely the way forward, rather than protracted and expensive court hearings which are intimidating to most parents. From the account I have read in the link given, there is no distinction made between parents on legal aid and those who are self funding as far as mediation is concerned. The report says that at present parents on legal aid have to consider mediation and that in future self funding parents should also have to consider mediation. I can't see the distinction that some of you are making.

Some posters talk of being intimidated by an ex in mediation but no mediator would allow this to happen. I think people need to remember the object of the exercise - to try to reach agreement about how the children can still have contact with both parents after separation/divorce. Children have a right to this contact, though sadly many parents are more concerned with scoring points from each other and "winning" the case than ensuring that they are acting in the best interests of the real "innocent parties" the children that the couple created.

I sincerely hope that these proposals are taken forward.

"Some posters talk of being intimidated by an ex in mediation but no mediator would allow this to happen"

That is simply not true. It HAS happened. As ever Nina, you have far too much faith in professionals. There are such things as mediators who just aren't very good, you know.

"That is simply not true. It HAS happened. As ever Nina, you have far too much faith in professionals. There are such things as mediators who just aren't very good, you know. "

Oh just ignore the troll HB, she doesn't have a clue what she is talking about, everything is rosey on her side of the fence because she has never had to fight to stop her child being abused.

No of course not, I'm just staggered that they obviously don't listen to her.

"Harriet Harman doesn't deserve the blame for this."

I think your confusing her with someone who gives a damn, that would be her sister.

Sarah's a saint.

www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article745605.ece

Oh so I don't have a clue what I am talking about says Atlantis - I think over 30 years experience in the family courts should mean that I have picked up a thing or two. Of course Atlantis can rubbish and insult the entire system on the basis of ONE experience, her own.

You know nothing Atlantis of what I have been through personally and whilst I have not intention of telling you the details, I do actually have experience of trying to prevent my beloved grandchildren being abused when they were very young, and very very stressful it was too.

I do feel for any mother who is trying to protect her child from a father who is too violent to have contact with their child and is acting to protect that child, and I acknowledged in my first post that I do know of cases where this has been an issue.

However I don't think it's fair to insult and discredit the entire system based on a single experience.

Can some of you posters who are determined to believe that mediation is a terrible thing and allows men to intimidate their ex wives/partners have any direct experience of this or is it just something that you suspect might happen. Of course I know that some mediators may not be as competent as they could be (again part of the human condition) but I also know that most men will not want to show their unpleasant or violent tendencies in public, as they are usually smart enough to know that this would not show them in a good light in front of a mediator or in court. Many of them are devious enough to put on a show of being ultra reasonable to try to court favour with the court or mediator.

Anyway I think i will probably depart the thread - some of the names of posters are familiar to me (as I will be to them) and I know there will never be any middle ground, just arguing and insults, and that is not going to further this important debate.

"I know she gives a damn.

She's not responsible for this."

She was solicitor general she had the opportunity to change things and she didn't.