Divorcing couples to undertake mandatory mediation before heading to courts
23 February 2011 | By Katy Dowell
Related Articles
Legal brief: Happy families?
25 February 2011
All we are saying is give mediation a chance
9 May 2011
On the move
19 July 2010
Laying the blame
8 April 2001
Happy families
16 February 2011
Divorcing couples will be forced to attend a compulsory mediation awareness session before they are allowed to use the courts, the Ministry of Justice has formally announced today.
Last week The Lawyer revealed how the Family Mediators Association is currently assessing whether it has enough mediators to cope with the new demands that will come into place on 6 April (16 February 2011).
Justice minister Jonathan Djanogly said: “Currently many people repeatedly go to court to argue over matters they’re better placed to sort out themselves – like securing 30 minutes extra contact time or varying their allocated contact days. This is expensive and emotionally draining for all concerned.
“Parents are best placed to resolve these types of issues and mediation can help them do this.”
Family lawyers said the mediation, launched as the MoJ plans a dramatic reduction in legal aid funding for divorcing couples, would not offer a one-stop solution for all couples.
Resolution chair David Allison commented: “Resolution fully supports mediation as an option for those couples for whom it’s appropriate and is pleased that this initiative will give greater awareness to mediation.
“We do have concerns about the provision of information and assessment being limited to mediation at the expense of other options such as parenting information programmes and collaborative law. Mediation is only part of the solution and the use of the full range of non-court options should be encouraged and incentivised.”
Under the new rules the spouse who initiates the case will first go to a professional mediator, who will be required to engage the other party and arrange a mediation awareness session to explain the process to the couple – either together or individually. They will be required to present evidence of this before their case will be accepted by the court.
Reaction:
The Law Society: “The Government is creating a myth that mediation is a panacea in order to justify cuts to legal aid which will take areas such as this, where people desperately need advice out of scope. Divorce can raise very difficult problems and people going through it need legal representation to ensure that they aware of all their options and the strength of their position. Mediation cannot resolve a dispute if there is an imbalance of power between the parties, or if one side is being obstructive or withholding information. Nor does it work if parties are forced into the process. If mediation does not result in an agreement, it will add cost and time to the divorce process which cannot be in the interests of the parties.”
Thomson Snell & Passmore partner Joanna Pratt: “The family court system is overloaded with cases, and mediation has a number of advantages over the adversarial, court focused approach to resolving issues following the breakdown of a relationship. Mediation is actively encouraged, and sometimes ordered, by judges dealing with family cases. However mediation is not suitable for all couples. Even if there are no domestic violence or child protection issues, there can sometimes be such a significant power imbalance in a couple’s relationship, that mediation does not enable the ’weaker’ party to properly represent what they want to say.”
Withers partner Suzanne Todd: “An agreement that has been mediated or produced in mediation can be tailored to each individual family’s needs and can take account of all of their personal circumstances. It is particularly valuable where the interests of children are at the heart of the matter. This government initiative will help to promote the whole range of alternatives that are available so that clients are informed about the options that best suit their family.”
Prolegal head of family Jonathan West: “One of the drivers behind this decision is the proposed changes to Legal Aid which will push more people to act as litigants in person, further clogging up the court system. Compulsory mediation is a way for government to keep as many cases as possible from reaching an already overstretched judiciary. And the truth of the matter is that some judges find that referring matters such as boundary disputes to mediation relives them of hearing some of the more tiresome cases on their lists.”
Readers' comments (9)
Anonymous | 23-Feb-2011 12:21 pm
It may be a good idea for the parties to meditate first - perhaps that will lead to a reconciliation without any need for mediation!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 24-Feb-2011 3:43 am
This is good, especially for fathers whose ex-wives are preventing them from having contact with their children.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 24-Feb-2011 8:21 am
What seems to be being missed in all of the discussions about the new Pre-action Protocol is that is is not only divorcing couples that will need to explore the option of mediation, anyone wishing to make an application to court for contact will also have to comply with this new process.
It is NOT mandatory mediation (at this point) it is the requirement to attend a Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting and consider the option of mediation as an alternative to Court.
I have been attending at a family Court for the last 3 months to provide information about mediation and PIP and the number of people self representing (having taken initial legal advice) or paying a solicitor, who do not know about mediation is quite frankly appalling. When i explain what it is they are quite angry that no-one has told them about mediation before.
I also fully agree that mediation is not right for all couples, in fact unless both parties want to make change and reach settlement and can look properly at what would be best for the children and can listen to their children and act on what they are saying mediation won't work.
We tell parents attending PIP - "you will not move forward until you love your children more than you hate each other" - a quote by a psychologist at a recent local Family Justice Council conference. There is often a "light bulb moment" at this point.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Lesley Landsberg | 24-Feb-2011 2:21 pm
Mediation is fine where thee is a level playing field and both parties are prepared to negotiate, however where there is an inbalance of power within a relationship, for instance a controlling partner, it is simply another forum in which to exert control. This can be particularily demoralising for the party that escaped controlling behaviour years/months ago but is now seeking a divorce.
Regretably this was poorly thought through and is simply an money saving exercise
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Love Doctor | 24-Feb-2011 5:01 pm
I hear medidation is good for the libido.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Huma Mohyuddin @ Saracens Solicitors | 24-Feb-2011 5:32 pm
Undoubtedly mediation is a useful tool in resolving disputes however it is by no means the only one. Many family solictors have already developed a more non-contentious approach in dealing with children and family cases. Litigation certainly is only considered when all other forms of resolution has failed. People (and their solicitors for that matter) should be given more credit in deciding whether mediation is suitable or not, instead of making it mandatory for all.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Free consultancy | 26-Feb-2011 1:16 pm
i m happy to see this site because this is given me good information for leagal resources thanks for sharing good blogs legal aid
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 3-Mar-2011 5:17 pm
Imposing mediation on a couple defeats the purpose of what should be a voluntary 'alternative' process. Studies show a higher rate of success when parties voluntarily enter into a mediation. The option should be readily available, however this movement towards mandatory mediation will only prolong the divorce process in cases where parties want a clear cut end to their marriage.
However, when it comes to power imbalances between parties, i believe that mediation, could help balance the power by allowing the weaker party to have a voice in a reasonably safe atmosphere.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 9-Mar-2011 6:36 pm
mediation will be great in my case, we can not agree to disagree. How to make a father to love his 2 girls and stop listening to his new woman? I agree we have to have a third party to help with the separation deal.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment