Written evidence from the Cambridge Family
Mediation Service (FC 27)
THE OPERATION OF THE FAMILY COURTS
ABOUT US
1. Cambridge Family Mediation Service was established
in 1982 and offers mediation, counselling and parenting programmes
in the context of separation and divorce. We are a registered
charity and a not-for-profit organisation and are members of National
Family Mediation.
2. Our vision is to build on our established
expertise, of more than 25 years, to develop an integrated range
of services in the context of separation and divorce as well as
other related services concerning family matters. An important
aim of our work is preventative and ideally our timely support
and early resolution of family disputes diminishes the possibility
of future mental distress and the need for costlier interventions
and support later on.
3. We employ seven mediators and three counsellors
who in addition to their mediation/counselling/parenting programme
training, bring a wealth of additional relevant skills including
family law, teaching and family therapy. Over the years we have
worked with more than 7,000 couples and provided support to about
15,000 children.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
4. In December 2004-December 2005 the Legal Services
Commission (LSC) funded us to run a pilot project in Cambridge
County Court, working in partnership with the local Judiciary
and CAFCASS to provide a "Mediation Stall" on section
8 Children Act Application days. An evaluation was carried out
during January and February 2006 and Cambridge County Court permitted
us to examine the court files for those cases that had been referred
to mediation during the pilot project, so that we could follow
up the progress of each case. A copy of the evaluation can be
provided on request.
5. We resumed our presence in Cambridge County
Court in October 2009, initially funded by Cambridge Evening News
Press Relief Community Fund and then by the Evelyn Trust for two
years to October 2011. Again, we work closely with the local Judiciary
and CAFCASS, though this time, rather than have a stall, we sit
in the courtroom with the Judge and Family Court Advisers before
assessing the clients suitability for mediation if appropriate.
6. It is in this context that the following submissions
are made. As our response is succinct, we do not summarise our
points here.
OUR SUBMISSIONS
(i) The effect of CAFCASS's operations on
court proceedings, and the impact on the courts of the sponsorship
of CAFCASS by the Department of Education
7. CAFCASS's role in reporting to court on local
authority & police checks is vital to the judge in assessing
how to move the case forward, and in early detection of possible
welfare issues.
8. It is important role in facilitating discussions
between conflicted parties, particularly where there are welfare
issues.
9. CAFCASS give a great deal of help to
judge in identifying at outset whether a case may be suitable
for in-court or out of court mediation & smoothing the way
for the mediation referral process.
10. CAFCASS are very helpful in assisting the
judge to identify which cases are suitable for parent information
programme (PIP) & helping to co-ordinate referral to PIP.
(ii) The impact on court proceedings and access
to justice of recent and proposed changes to legal aid
11. New LSC contracts do not start until October
2010 so it is difficult to assess how severe the impact of the
changes will be, but at a local level, we are aware that right
now, there are more clients than available solicitors doing publicly
funded family work and it is likely to be worse come October.
12. Clients with limited resources currently
have to telephone numerous firms to get an appointment; they don't
always succeed and have to appear in court as litigants in person.
13. Litigants in person often take up more of
the court's time, as they require support from the court office,
CAFCASS, and the Judges. This results in lengthy delays during
s.8 days for all concerned: it is quite usual to have to wait
for several hours beyond the hearing time before going before
the Judge.
14. Many clients that qualify for public funding
have significant needs - learning difficulties, mental health
problems, drug and alcohol misuse to name a few - and these people
already struggle to access solicitors that have available "matter
starts" to take on their case. From October, access to a
solicitor may be more difficult, it is unlikely that these clients
will be able to face court hearings as litigants in person, and
their failure to attend court could have a serious impact on the
outcome, not just for the parent but also the child/children
15. Many family cases involve several parties
- eg the mother, the fathers (if different fathers of a number
of children), grandparents and sometimes guardian ad litem (if
a 9.5 direction has been made). In cases such as these, only some
parties may be able to access a solicitor in their area; the other
parties may have to travel or simply act as litigants in person.
16. From October, as fewer solicitors are doing
publicly funded family work, in turn, there is likely to be a
big reduction in clients attending intake appointments with the
relevant App 7 form. This will reduce the number of clients able
to consider mediation rather than going straight to court.
17. Clients that manage to access a mediation
service and qualify for public funding are likely to find it difficult
to find a solicitor that can draft a Minute of Consent Order for
financial matters within divorce proceedings. Some people may
submit a consent order that is drafted without the assistance
of a solicitor and this will require more court time
(iii) The role, operation and resourcing of
mediation and other methods in resolving matters before they reach
court
18. The constant cutbacks in LSC eligibility
criteria make it increasingly difficult for clients to qualify
for free mediation.
19. Borderline LSC clients who do not qualify
often feel they cannot afford mediation. Unfortunately, some of
them may thereafter get sucked into court proceedings without
trying mediation first, only to find that this is much more expensive
than they expected. By then, the case may have become so entrenched
that mediation is less likely to work.
20. Making it a requirement that all parties
to any family case (money and/or children - save for cases that
fall within the exemption categories) should attend a mediation
assessment meeting before being allowed to file a court application
would maximise the chances of people at least trying mediation
before going to court.
(iv) Confidentiality and openness in family
courts, including the impact of the recent changes in the Children,
Schools and Families Act 2010
21. We have no submissions
on this point.
September 2010
|