Family Justice Narratives : No. 2
Posted on | April 10, 2012 | 2 Comments
This is the second of the Family Justice Narratives. You can find out what the Family Justice Narratives are all about and how to get involved here.
Narrative No 2 : ANONYMOUS SOCIAL WORKER
Tell us where you fit in (solicitor, barrister, social worker, guardian, judge, researcher, court staff, something else)
I’m a Social Worker (not that I admit that to everyone I meet!). I have been working in the child protection field for nearly 6 years and, perhaps unusually, I love my job – despite all the challenges it throws in my path.
Tell us about your typical week Tell us about where you’re at this week (bad week, good week, rewarding week, soul destroying *headdesk* kind of week?)
One of the reasons that I love my job is that I never have a typical week – my main motto is to always expect the unexpected. My job covers such a range of roles and responsibilities that it is almost impossible to sum them up: I am expected to do everything from arranging financial support for families who have run out of money; to providing parenting advice; to being a shoulder to cry on for families, professionals and colleagues; through to making life changing decisions about where children should live; attending Court; and supervising contact. It is hard to do justice to the range of tasks that I undertake as a Social Worker – I frequently find myself laughing at the unusual things that I do – they certainly don’t warn you about most of them in the Social Work training. I often describe myself as a Jack of All Trades – if people aren’t sure who should be doing something, or even what they should be doing, then it usually falls to a Social Worker to do it or sort it out.
As for this week… Luckily it was only four days (although I could have done with 5!) It was a hectic, helter skelter kind of week – with too much to do and not enough time – and the predictable crisis or two before the long Bank Holiday weekend. But I got to the weekend in the end.
Tell us about the highs and lows and the reasons you do the job
I am passionate about my job as a Social Worker, although sadly this is increasingly unusual in my field. My job, and the reason that I do it, can be simply summarized – to ensure that children are safe and that their needs are being met. This doesn’t always make me popular with the families I work with, but I try to use an open and honest (some would say blunt) approach in my work with all families, making it clear what the concerns are about their children and what the parents or family members need to do to change. That is what gets me up and out the front door in the morning – the many children I have worked with, and will continue to work with.
The highest point of my job is definitely seeing children happy, safely cared for and having their basic needs met – whether this is with their parents, family members or with other carers. Unfortunately, striving for this also leads to the lowest point of my job, which is removing children from their parents. The process of removing children from their home, whatever the circumstances, is not a job I relish, although it is important and necessary for some of the children that I work with. Read more
Litigants in Person – some numbers
Posted on | April 9, 2012 | 6 Comments
A while ago I made a Freedom of Information Act request to get some stats from the court service about litigants in person in private law matters. The request and the response I received can be found here, and my summary of the figures is here. It shows the position as at end Jun 2011. I’ve now made an updating request and have received the new set of stats as at end Sept 2011. The response can be found here.
Of course this is two snapshots only a quarter apart and there are limitations to how much one can read into the figures. But its interesting to do a little analysis of what the available material tells us, because the whizzy Open Justice website is silent on private law proceedings and the stats published on the Justice website do not refer to the numbers of litigants in person. Quel surprise. (I suppose the domain www.selectivelyopenjustice.gov.uk was too unwieldy.)
I wanted to compare the two sets of figures for two reasons : to see if they can tell us anything about any fluctuations in the numbers of litigants in person and to see if they can tell us anything about the impact of litigants in person on case duration. I’m no statistician so I’d welcome input from those with the ability to analyse these figures properly, but here goes.
As at 30 June 2011 1 in 5 of all private law children cases at all tiers of courts involved one or more LiP applicant (20%). This was unchanged as at 30 Sept 2011.
As at 30 June 2011 43% of all private law children cases across all tiers of courts involved one or more LiP respondent. This rose to 48% by 30 September. There were increases in the proportion of unrepresented respondents across all tiers of court
The mean and median case duration of private law cases dropped markedly across all tiers of court between June and September 2011 (e.g. mean case duration in the County Court went from 63 weeks to 44 weeks). Taken at face value this suggests an increase in efficiency, perhaps because of increased capacity to deal with cases as numbers drop – but there is an explanation provided in the narrative to the response which makes clear that this is as a result of changes to the way data is collected. It appears that the most recent figures are the more reliable, as previously cases were counted as “outstanding” for the purposes of case duration if they had been left open on the case management system, even if they were not in fact live. This also accounts to some extent to a drop in the number of cases outstanding. However, the most recent stats available on the Justice website confirm that the number of such cases issued is also on a downward incline. Read more
Marrying Up is Down
Posted on | April 8, 2012 | 1 Comment
DISCLAIMER: I’m not a social scientist, a statistician, an economist or a politician. So I may be talking out of my hat.
Again.
The IPPR has published a report on marriage patterns, and it shows that fewer women are “marrying up”. According to the report I read in the Observer today “IPPR director Nick Pearce said class had “tightened its grip” on families: “This shift has implications for inequality, as well-educated, higher earners marry each other and pass on the fruits of their success to their children.”” The paradigm example given in the article is a female secretary marrying the male boss. In fact it appears from the equivalent article in The Independent that Nick Pearce is slightly misquoted – the full quote is that ”social class has tightened its grip on marriage” not family, which is not quite the same thing.
This report sounds actually really interesting but irritatingly I could find no link to it or even any press release about it on the IPPR website. And so it isn’t really possible to drill down into what it is all about, and I was left with a glimpse of the statistical information and a few odd quotes, the context of which was unclear.
I’m not sure what the implications of this report actually are because I can’t actually read it (ggrrr), and am imagining it through the prism of what the press thinks is newsworthy, but reading this article left me with a slightly odd sensation that I should regard a change in such patterns is a bad thing. Am I missing something? I understand the argument that if more people marry within their own class, wider income inequalities are exacerbated. But aren’t we simply talking about more women achieving an upward movement by means other than marriage? And more of those women marrying partners who are like them rather than their seedy old boss?
A social scientist (author of a thing called Honey Money, whatever that may be) is quoted in the article as suggesting that “there is plenty of evidence that most women aspire to marry a wealthy man”. Really? Most women? Speak for yourself love. If I can’t make my own money I certainly don’t want to be beholden to any sugar daddy (Just as well, ‘im indoors most definitely ain’t loaded).
That most women who aspire to “move up” now aspire to do so by dint of their own hard work and intelligence rather than their ability or willingness to catch the eye of their seedy male boss is surely a known phenomenon and something that we should embrace?
And that many women may be motivated by factors other than wealth or career is surely not so difficult to comprehend?
And that some successful men may be wary about the financial risks associated with marrying “down” is surely not a controversial proposition either.
But, continues the social scientist:
“As women become better educated, and start to outnumber men among higher education students, it becomes impossible for all to marry an even more highly educated and high-earning spouse, so they are increasingly forced to marry equal or down.
“This is going to have a huge impact in the long term, as wives become equal earners to husbands, even higher earners. So sometimes couples will decide that it should be the husband who stays at home to look after the kids and the home, and you get an increase in role-reversal households.” Such families suffer higher divorce rates, she said.
Do you see what I mean? Forced to marry equal or down? We can’t all be Kate Middleton, eh? What a load of “Prince Charming” aspirational B.S. (I know, I’m over-reacting a tad – I understand that the statement is logically accurate but the use of the word “forced” implies aspiration disappointed).
Maybe this has hit a nerve because the role-reversal household model she goes on to describe reflects my own household, and maybe I’m coming from the perspective of women “like me” (whoever they are) – but the way this is put grates. I’m not aware of any research that “such families suffer higher divorce rates”. I’ve had a good old google and I can’t find anything (if there is some please set me straight in comments – I’d be genuinely interested in reading it). Even if the proposition that role reversal families suffer higher divorce rates is correct, one would need to go beyond mere correlation in order to show causation.
Ah well, spare a thought for the poor chaps who can’t find enough good girls to marry “down” to. There’s only troublesome independent ones to be had these days. And it’s our fault that financial inequality is on the up because of our selfish insistence on equality, right? Arguments that “feminism has trumped egalitarianism” are not new (e.g. here).
I sense (in fact I know) that this is all rather more complicated and less clear cut than I would like it to be. But surely there must be a way to achieve social equality and minimise poverty other than “marrying up“? (more reality TV shows perhaps?)
Odd Socks
Posted on | April 3, 2012 | 3 Comments
An interesting project is on the drawing board over at OnlyDads and OnlyMums : Odd Socks.
You can read all about it on Flawbord here, but below is a little summary of what they have in mind. Sounds inspiring – but they need your help :
Project Summary
To develop (probably in partnership) a web-based support and advice service for young people with parents in conflict – Odd Socks (OS).
OS will be a website where young people interact with young people in a safe and supervised environment.
This not-for-profit service (structure to be agreed) would be governed and guided by a management committee made up of experienced professionals and others to comply fully with the legal structure agreed upon. OS would, under such a management board, continue to be driven and designed by young people of separating parents.
Essentially it will be a service for young people given by young people.
The project will focus on providing appropriate services for four age groups; 7-11, 11-14, 14-16 and 16+.
At the core of the project is the belief in the recognition, acknowledgement and practice of basic human rights for all children.
Goals and Objectives
To give young people of separating and divorced parents a voice and an opportunity for them to tell other young people how it is or was for them – Peer Mentoring; so they can learn from each other and support each other.
To develop a service that is completely safe to use, genuinely youth friendly and accessible to young people nationwide.
To encourage and empower young people to have their voice heard in the future development of the family justice system in the UK.
To provide a comprehensive signposting service for young people presenting with a wide range of issues.
Family Justice Narratives: No. 1
Posted on | April 2, 2012 | No Comments
This is the first in the Family Justice Narratives. You can find out what the Family Justice Narratives are all about and how to get involved here.
Narrative No 1 : ANONYMOUS SOLICITOR
I’ve been a solicitor since 1988 and worked for the same firm throughout and always in family law.
This week was exhausting but every week is pretty much. Often with legal aid work you take on more than is comfortable because :
- you feel bad if someone calls and says they’ve tried loads of other solicitors and no one will take them
- they have something urgent happening DV or a hearing on children
- you would not do this work if you did not want to help people
I do legal aid work but I also do a lot of private work as well- if I didn’t I could not do the legal aid work it just wouldn’t bring in enough income to keep the wolf from the door.
I often work on Sundays a hangover from when the children were younger and OH took them to church. I often feel guilty that I didn’t spend enough time with when they were younger. I don’t take a lot of holiday though I’m trying to get a bit better about that.
The above all sounds a bit poor me so stopping that now. I have a print in my room at work of some dockers working in the States to remind me that my work is pretty easy in comparison! Read more
Stuff I grazed on today
Posted on | March 27, 2012 | No Comments
It was a slow old day today. A spot of overlisting and a lot of hanging around at court, a couple of hours on a train….The iphone has had a workout today – I cleared all my backlog of unread RSS feeds, gorged on twitter and read Metro from cover to cover whilst languishing in a 3G deadzone, and still had time for some shoe shopping*.
So here are some of the fruits of my labour:
- John Bolch in Family Lore beat me to it with his post about judicial support for no fault divorce and the response of the Daily Mail to it: Another blow to journalism.
- The New Yorker carries an extremely long but absorbing article about the Daily Mail and our national obsession with it (love it or hate it): Mail Supremacy: The Newspaper that Rules Britain.
- Bailli report a judgment from last summer which, amongst other things, offers a few choice words about case management and unacceptable delay: Re R (Children) [2011] EWCA Civ 1795 (h/t Family Lore)
- Head of Legal has posted some interesting commentary on a case currently awaiting judgment from the Supreme Court, but which relates to the age old problem of the benefits system failing to recognise the diverse ways in which families are structured in the modern world: Humphreys v HMRC.
- Cherie Booth, patron of Coram Children’s Legal Centre launches a free online legal service.
- Prof Gary Slapper explains cross examination (useful for litigants in person on one level): The art of cross examination.
- Oh, and @_millymoo from Beneath the Wig shares her thoughts on shared care (actually I read this last week and forgot to mention it): Shared Care – Ideal for whom?
[ENDS]
* Needless to say I was not doing any of this at the expense of paying attention to my case, there was just a lot of waiting time when nothing productive could be achieved.
News of my appointment has been greatly exaggerated
Posted on | March 26, 2012 | 5 Comments
Oops. The Times have me down as not just a silk but also an arbitrator. And not just that but an arbitrator who is dealing with a complex international dynastic “feud” with Cherie Blair. Anyone got ANY idea who they have mistaken me for?? I can’t work it out!! (one other Lucy Reed is an arbitrator but neither British nor a QC, the other other one is dead). What ever the answer is it’s a surprise to find such an epic gaff in The Times.
(click on the image to see a bigger version)
For the avoidance of doubt, the blonde in the middle is Goldie Hawn not yours truly. Read more
Shared Parenting Postponed
Posted on | March 25, 2012 | 1 Comment
Don’t panic. It’s just a postponement of my post on the topic (although there may be a certain prescience in the title – I don’t think you’d get great odds on getting the shared parenting legislation through Parliament before the next General Election…). I was full of good intentions to finish my shared parenting blog post last night, but was hampered by being asleep by 7.30pm and not waking until 6.30am this morning (British Summer Time don’t ya know). And today I have been digging weeds for all my life is worth. Well, it its summer…Tonight is prep for tomorrow and I have a raft of committee meetings most evenings this week so…well…I aim to finish it before the clocks change again, hopefully thats not too ambitious a target.
In the meantime, here’s Zoe Saunders’ post on Shared Parenting in The Lawyer last week: Why the Government is wrong about shared parenting legislation.
Meta-Rant: The Lizard Woman Speaks
Posted on | March 23, 2012 | 44 Comments
Here’s a little post that has been sitting in draft for a little while. I shelved it, took a few deep breaths and instead published The Caucus Race. I thought it’s moment had passed, but on the other hand perhaps it has some relevance in light of the ongoing campaigning activity of F4J (summary: Matt O’Connor casts off his M&S kecks to make the girls at Mumsnet cry), if nothing else because it tells you what my heartfelt first response was as compared to my more considered published one. I was pretty angry when I wrote it. References to “this week” are obviously out of date and there is of course some duplication with other subsequent posts. My views on how best to react have developed, as you can see from subsequent posts. It wasn’t really a finished post, but I am publishing as is without tinkering because some of it feels as if it may have some currency: the phrase “the tyranny of the victim” has been bandied about a lot lately – re-reading this post and thinking about some of the public behaviour that has been acted out since has made me ponder whether that label might be a rather apt one after all – because actually it is very often fathers rights groups who now enlist the power of the victim and wield it with naked aggression.
So, the post:
I’m often asked by colleagues why I bother blogging. I don’t often give them the full explanation because it’s complex. But at least one big part of the reason is that I want to inform, to debate and to learn. There is a transparency gap in family justice and it breeds misinformation. I want to help people better understand it, to remove some of the fear, to help the different groups and individuals who work in it and have their lives decided in it communicate better. Not that I’m enough of an egomaniac to think I can make much difference, but I just feel someone should be doing it. And I can. So I must. Read more
Family Justice Narratives
Posted on | March 20, 2012 | 11 Comments
I like the sound of my own keyboard, but recently I invited you all to share your perspective on things, to tell a story other than mine (original post here). And quite a few of you replied saying you’d like to take part. So here is how I’d like to do this. I’ve drawn up a list of questions – not to constrain but to guide. I’m hoping they will form a loose sort of structure and that participants will answer those where they think they can say something interesting, ignoring those that don’t grab them or which aren’t relevant to them. You don’t need to take them in order.
The questions:
- Tell us where you fit in (solicitor, barrister, social worker, guardian, judge, researcher, court staff, something else)
- Tell us about your typical week
- Tell us about where you’re at this week (bad week, good week, rewarding week, soul destroying *headdesk* kind of week?)
- Tell us about the highs and lows and the reasons you do the job
- Tell us about what works well in the system and tell us about what does not work at all
- Tell us about how you see the family justice system and how you think others see you and the system you work in
- Tell us about an important influence on your work
- Tell us about how you combine your family with your work and how your experiences impact on your relationships and your parenting
- Tell us – would you choose this job in your next life? and will you be doing it in ten years time?
- And tell us your bright ideas for change and for dialogue
The rules:
- Anonymous is ok.
- Don’t give details of the contents of documents or of what has been said in court in individual cases, don’t breach client confidentiality (remembering that you can be in breach if your client can identify their anonymous self).
- Don’t be abusive or defamatory.
- Expect others to disagree with your views – check back for comments and engage with them.
This is a project which is intended to inform and to provoke constructive and respectful if robust debate. I am not inviting parents to contribute for reasons which I’ve already set out in the original post, but which are probably worth repeating here. In a nutshell two main reasons: 1 Publication of information about individual cases is prohibited. 2 There is already a wealth of information concerning parental experiences of the justice system out there, I’m trying to address the imbalance in the publicly available information about the family justice system so that voices from a range of different perspectives can make themselves heard.
Submissions can be sent to familoo@pinktape.co.uk. I will publish them under a #narratives tag.
Lucy
« go back — keep looking »
Feeds
Recent Comments
- familoo on Children & Families Bill
- FORCED ADOPTION on Children & Families Bill
- familoo on Children & Families Bill
- FORCED ADOPTION on Children & Families Bill
- familoo on Children & Families Bill
Recent Posts
Archives
Categories
About Pink Tape
Advertisers
Other Ads
Stephens Scown
Family Solicitors Exeter
Clear Law Solicitors for Car Accident Claims
Find solicitors and lawyers at Solicitors.com
Medical Negligence solicitors in Manchester and London
First Personal Injury offer expert accident claims advice.
Darbys Medical Negligence Solicitors provide specialist legal advice & support in fatal accident claims.
Looking for family solicitors? Get in touch with us for the best family law advice.
Hurt in an accident which wasn't your fault? Injury Claims can help you with no win no fee accident claims today.