Children’ Children ’s direct involvement s direct involvement in family law matters in family law matters Children’ Children ’s and Parents s and Parents’ ’ Views on Views on Talking to Judges Talking to Judges � Different perspectives in Parenting Disputes in Australia in Parenting Disputes in Australia � UK, Australia and Canada � US � Inquisitorial jurisdictions eg Germany etc Patrick Parkinson � New Zealand Judy Cashmore Judi Single Opposition to judges talking Opposition to judges talking Study: Parents and children Study: Parents and children with children with children � 47 children aged 6-18, median age is 12. In Britain, Australia and elsewhere: � 32 parents from same 28 families Judges are not trained in child interviewing � 58 parents whose children were not interviewed skills, generally lack knowledge about developmental differences in cognitive, � Total 90 parents : language and emotional capacities. Thus, it is � 50 resident parents (39 mothers, 11 fathers) hard for even the most experienced judge to � 35 non-resident parents (3 mothers, 31 fathers) place children's responses in an appropriate context and evaluate the weight that should be � 5 shared parenting (1 mother, 5 fathers) given to their wishes. (Kelly, 2002 p. 154) Children’ ’s reasons for wanting s reasons for wanting What do children say? What do children say? Children to talk to the judge to talk to the judge � Diversity of views – range of options � Best to talk with parents In contested matters – and strong views -- Most in non-contested cases (n = 12): • Speaking confidentially : without parents � Best to talk to the judge or ‘the court rather than to knowing family, friends, counsellors etc • Speaking directly : to the decision-maker and -- All in contested cases (n = 10) to be sure the message is not misinterpreted � Counsellors (6); Not sure (6); Family friends etc • Acknowledgement – by decision-maker � Int 2: Option cf Children’s Cases Program: 85% • Making better decisions 1
Speaking confidentially Speaking directly and lack of Speaking confidentially Speaking directly and lack of faith in the intermediary faith in the intermediary : ������������������������������������������������ ������������������������������������� ��������������������������������������������������� ���������������������������� �������������������������������� ����������� ����������������������������������� ����������������������� ���������������������������� ��������������������������������������# ������������������������������������������� ������������������������������������� ����������������������� !�" Helen, 14) ����������������������������������!� "$���% &'( What did parents say? What did parents say? Children’ Children ’s reasons for s reasons for not not wanting wanting to talk to the judge to talk to the judge � Parents of children wanting to talk with judge supported their views � 47% preferred children to talk with a counsellor Mostly in uncontested matters – or other independent person • Too formal, intimidating � Both resident parent and non-resident parents • Not necessary – prefer speaking with someone � No differences – whether contested or not they know � Resident parents cf non-resident parents • Prefer to keep it within family - where 57% cf 30% in favour - judge (alone or with decision is made counsellor) Parents’ ’ reasons for supporting reasons for supporting Parents’ ’ reasons for opposing judges reasons for opposing judges Parents Parents judges talking to children judges talking to children talking with children talking with children Resident more than non-resident parents Resident and non-resident parents • Child’s need and right to be heard -- and to feel • Too intimidating heard • Acknowledgment and respect • Not appropriate person – prefer counsellor, with more time • Getting the ‘real picture ’ • Risk of children being manipulated • “Children are not stupid” • Hearing at first-hand • Expression of their own frustrations with the • Efficiency -- saving time and money system? 2
Recommend
More recommend
