Mandatory mediation of family disputes

Reflections from Australia

Datos Bibliográficos

ID7534755
AutoresHelen Rhoades (The University of Melbourne, autor de correspondencia)
Año2010
Volumen32
Número2
Páginas183-194
Fecha de publicación2010-06-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessNo
TipoARTICLE
RevistaThe Journal of Social Welfare Law (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0141-8033 • E-ISSN: 1469-9621
EditorialTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/09649069.2010.506313
OpenAlexW2081070126
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas8
Referencias citadas11

In recent years the UK government has increasingly promoted the use of mediation in family law matters, particularly in cases involving children, and there has been continuing debate about whether such processes should be mandatory. Australian policy-makers took this step in 2006, enacting reforms which require parents in conflict to make a ‘genuine effort’ to resolve their dispute through a ‘family dispute resolution’ process before being eligible to apply for court orders. As a consequence of this policy shift, there has been a growing interface between legal practitioners and mediation professionals in Australia. This article draws on an empirical investigation of collaboration between these two groups to reflect on the implications of compulsory mediation for client services and inter-professional practices. Its analysis suggests that there are benefits to be had from an increased use of alternative dispute resolution programmes, both for families and the legal system, but that much will depend on the culture of collaboration and the training of practitioners

Alternative dispute resolution · Conflict resolution · Dispute mechanism · Dispute resolution · Family law · Family mediation · Government (linguistics · Lawyer supported mediation · Mediation · Political science · Public relations · Child Abuse and Trauma · Intimate Partner and Family Violence · Law · Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies