Enforcing child contact orders: Are the family courts getting it right?

Enforcing child contact orders: Are the family courts getting it right?. 43(9):1145-1149, United Kingdom, 2013.
abstract bibtex

There are long-standing concerns that courts fail to enforce their own orders in child contact cases following parental separation. Part of the problem has been that the available sanctions – fines, imprisonment or change of the child's residence – may be impractical or contrary to the child's welfare. The Children and Adoption Act 2006 sought to address this by introducing a new sanction of unpaid work (community service) for a defaulting parent. This new sanction has been rarely used. The Coalition government is now considering other policy options. To date, however, there has been no research on enforcement to inform policy-makers about the nature of the cases or the approach of the family courts. This article summarises findings from the first ever empirical study of enforcement in England based on analysis of 215 enforcement cases. It finds that most enforcement cases are about mutual conflict, risk and child refusal of contact rather than implacable hostility of resident parent. The courts generally take an appropriately problem-solving rather than a punitive approach to these cases. There is no evidence that further punitive sanctions would be more widely used or more appropriate or more effective.

@article{Trinder2013ecc,
  title = {Enforcing child contact orders: Are the family courts getting it right?},
  xau = {Trinder, L. | Macleod, A. | Pearce, J. | Woodward, H. | Hunt, J.},
  year = {2013},
  address = {United Kingdom},
  keywords = {enforcement and child contact},
  xla = {English},
  number = {9},
  xu2 = {Legal | Qualitative Research},
  booktitle = {Family Law},
  volume = {43},
  abstract = {There are long-standing concerns that courts fail to enforce their own orders in child contact cases following parental separation. Part of the problem has been that the available sanctions -- fines, imprisonment or change of the child's residence -- may be impractical or contrary to the child's welfare. The Children and Adoption Act 2006 sought to address this by introducing a new sanction of unpaid work (community service) for a defaulting parent. This new sanction has been rarely used. The Coalition government is now considering other policy options. To date, however, there has been no research on enforcement to inform policy-makers about the nature of the cases or the approach of the family courts. This article summarises findings from the first ever empirical study of enforcement in England based on analysis of 215 enforcement cases. It finds that most enforcement cases are about mutual conflict, risk and child refusal of contact rather than implacable hostility of resident parent. The courts generally take an appropriately problem-solving rather than a punitive approach to these cases. There is no evidence that further punitive sanctions would be more widely used or more appropriate or more effective.},
  pages = {1145-1149}
}

Downloads: 0

{"_id":"kf3EGfsx96BftgqyL","bibbaseid":"anonymous-enforcingchildcontactordersarethefamilycourtsgettingitright-2013","bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Enforcing child contact orders: Are the family courts getting it right?","xau":"Trinder, L. | Macleod, A. | Pearce, J. | Woodward, H. | Hunt, J.","year":"2013","address":"United Kingdom","keywords":"enforcement and child contact","xla":"English","number":"9","xu2":"Legal | Qualitative Research","booktitle":"Family Law","volume":"43","abstract":"There are long-standing concerns that courts fail to enforce their own orders in child contact cases following parental separation. Part of the problem has been that the available sanctions – fines, imprisonment or change of the child's residence – may be impractical or contrary to the child's welfare. The Children and Adoption Act 2006 sought to address this by introducing a new sanction of unpaid work (community service) for a defaulting parent. This new sanction has been rarely used. The Coalition government is now considering other policy options. To date, however, there has been no research on enforcement to inform policy-makers about the nature of the cases or the approach of the family courts. This article summarises findings from the first ever empirical study of enforcement in England based on analysis of 215 enforcement cases. It finds that most enforcement cases are about mutual conflict, risk and child refusal of contact rather than implacable hostility of resident parent. The courts generally take an appropriately problem-solving rather than a punitive approach to these cases. There is no evidence that further punitive sanctions would be more widely used or more appropriate or more effective.","pages":"1145-1149","bibtex":"@article{Trinder2013ecc,\n title = {Enforcing child contact orders: Are the family courts getting it right?},\n xau = {Trinder, L. | Macleod, A. | Pearce, J. | Woodward, H. | Hunt, J.},\n year = {2013},\n address = {United Kingdom},\n keywords = {enforcement and child contact},\n xla = {English},\n number = {9},\n xu2 = {Legal | Qualitative Research},\n booktitle = {Family Law},\n volume = {43},\n abstract = {There are long-standing concerns that courts fail to enforce their own orders in child contact cases following parental separation. Part of the problem has been that the available sanctions -- fines, imprisonment or change of the child's residence -- may be impractical or contrary to the child's welfare. The Children and Adoption Act 2006 sought to address this by introducing a new sanction of unpaid work (community service) for a defaulting parent. This new sanction has been rarely used. The Coalition government is now considering other policy options. To date, however, there has been no research on enforcement to inform policy-makers about the nature of the cases or the approach of the family courts. This article summarises findings from the first ever empirical study of enforcement in England based on analysis of 215 enforcement cases. It finds that most enforcement cases are about mutual conflict, risk and child refusal of contact rather than implacable hostility of resident parent. The courts generally take an appropriately problem-solving rather than a punitive approach to these cases. There is no evidence that further punitive sanctions would be more widely used or more appropriate or more effective.},\n pages = {1145-1149}\n}\n\n","key":"Trinder2013ecc","id":"Trinder2013ecc","bibbaseid":"anonymous-enforcingchildcontactordersarethefamilycourtsgettingitright-2013","role":"","urls":{},"keyword":["enforcement and child contact"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}},"html":""},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/f/v9y3N5nSNJCGbutCQ/PASG_library_converted.bib","dataSources":["DkxHaYY5Deg2ufLDd"],"keywords":["enforcement and child contact"],"search_terms":["enforcing","child","contact","orders","family","courts","getting","right"],"title":"Enforcing child contact orders: Are the family courts getting it right?","year":2013}