Type:	Journal Article
Title:	Family relationship centres: implications for separating families
Other Titles:	DVIRC Quarterly
Authors:	Bailey, Allie
Keywords:	Family law;Policy;Post-separation violence
Publisher:	Domestic Violence & Incest Resource Centre
Citation:	4, Summer 2005/06
Notes:	Outlines concerns about changes to Family Law Act (FLA) highlighting the problems that arise for young mothers, particularly those in violent relationships. Identifies the underlying problem of the conservative agenda of encouraging couples to stay together. This is particularly adverse to the interests of someone living in a violent relationship. The Act provides for screening at centres to remove victim of violence from the alternative dispute resolution process but research shows that only 30% of victims actually report violence. In order to rely on any screening process, centres must have highly trained personnel to conduct screening and even then it is not terribly effective. Changes to the FLA attract penalties for alleging violence if the person alleging it can’t prove that the violence was occurring (a traditionally difficult exercise.) Such penalties include an award of residency being made to the other parent. Evidence shows that violence tends to escalate immediately after separation and therefore women are very vulnerable at this time. Although there are safeguards that can be included to improve the outcomes of mediation for women in violent relationships, since practice is based on the assumption that they will be screened out of the process, these safeguards are not included as part of mediation practice in Family Relationship Centres. The author suggests that legal representation is appropriate in mediations where violence is present; however this is not possible in the Family Relationship Centre setting because the legislation prohibits it. It suggests that the mediation be conducted in collaboration with a domestic violent agency to support the woman. There is an ill-formed assumption underlying the new changes that the appropriate starting point is 50/50 shared parenting that was not based on research surrounding the best interests of the child. In fact the authors cite a distinct lack of evidence that this priority has been recognised in the new laws. The author claims that father’s rights groups have had an unreasonable degree of input into the reforms.
URI:	https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/14747
ISSN:	1324-4264
Appears in Collections:	Journal Articles

Items in ANROWS library are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.