A summary of children’s views of the Family Justice Review and family court proceedings
NSPCC briefing
August 2011
This briefing summarises the findings from two reports produced for submission to the Family Justice Review panel.
One report gives children's views of family court proceedings.
The other report looks at children's views of the recommendations set out in the Family Justice Review's interim report.
Report summaries
Do more than listen: act: consultation response to the Family Justice Review undertaken for the Family Justice Council's Voice of the Child sub-group (PDF) by the Office of the Children's Commissioner (OCC).
This report gathered the views and perspectives of 35 children aged 3 to 17 years with recent experience of either:
- public law processes where they had experienced care proceedings and been removed from their parents as a result of protection concerns
- or private law processes where their parents had been through separation or divorce and who had experience of disputes, particularly around contact.
Family Justice Review: the children's verdict: children's views on the recommendations of the Family Justice Review Panel: a report by the Children's Rights Director for England (PDF).
This review looked at 66 children's views on the recommendations made in the Family Justice Review panel's interim report. Some, but not all of the children had been, or were currently, in care.
Overall summary of findings
The main findings to come out of both reports showed that children felt they should:
- be listened to more
- have more say when decisions were being made about them in court or in their care plan
- have a choice in how they could put forward their views, including whether or not they can attend court.
Both reports also highlight that children want their views to be represented accurately, either by themselves or by someone they know and trust, so that their words are not 'twisted' or misunderstood.
Above all, they not only wanted their voices to be heard, but they wanted these views to be acted upon.
Summary of specific findings
The Office of the Children's Commissioner (OCC) report showed that children placed a lot of importance in having clear information available throughout the process and that clear explanations should be available about who people are, what plans and decisions are being made and what happens next.
The OCC report found that a lack of understanding of the process was perceived to be a barrier to children's involvement and meaningful engagement. Children felt that a written explanation of the decisions made throughout the process would be useful, whether this was made available straight away, or kept for future reference when they were old enough to understand.
Although most of the children had recent experience of the family justice process, few were able to confidently recall what had happened and many found it difficult to recall which adults or professionals had been involved.
Children involved in private law proceedings had less awareness of what was going on because they did not have a structured care plan or as many professionals involved in their lives. Often they did not know why their parents had separated or why they had been removed from their family.
In both public and private law this lack of clarity was attributed to the roles of these adults or professionals not being properly explained. In public law cases it was often attributed to the number of different adults children came into contact with.
The number of different adults children came into contact with was also one of the topics discussed in the Family Justice Review (FJR) consultation. The FJR found a mixed response with some children saying the number of people involved in their care was okay.
Children often felt like they did not have a chance to get involved.
Both reports cite children's complaints that they were not allowed to attend court and both reports showed that children wanted a choice in the way their opinions could be heard and for their options to be well explained.
In the Family Justice Review (FJR) consultation, more than half of the children voted in favour of the panel's recommendation that children could have their say by telephone or video link. They worried about judges making decisions when they may not know enough about what is going on or how the child feels; they might just rely on what someone else said.
The children in the Office of the Children's Commissioner (OCC) report suggested a number of ways their voices could be heard, ranging from writing a letter, to speaking directly with the judge.
The OCC report reflects that being listened to and supported is linked to how well the child might be enabled to participate, and that all three are linked to the development of trust. It also showed that children expressed anxiety about sharing their views and the potential emotional impact on their parents or carers.
Age was discussed by the children in the FJR consultation in light of the Family Justice Review Panel's recommendation that older children should have a number of ways to make their views known, with the majority of children thinking that this should apply to children of any age.
The OCC report also discusses age, having collected views from children as young as three, and recommends that children's views should be gathered in a variety of ways, including observing them in their own environments and not just through asking them their views.
In the FJR consultation, children discussed how much say they thought they should have about being put into care. Many felt that they should have some say, but perhaps not the final say as although it is natural to want to stay at home, this might not always be best.
The Office of the Children's Commissioner (OCC) report concluded that consideration should be given to the experiences of and support available to, children in different types of proceedings, as levels of understanding and support differed. It recommends that each child involved in legal proceedings should have their own plan for support, with their options made clear.
Attitudes towards the support given by social workers differed, with both negative and positive comments. Some children felt it would be helpful to talk to another young person who had gone through the same thing. Most children valued talking things over with family members. Children showed a need for access to emotional support, including counselling and social work.
Children with experience of public law proceedings were more able to identify an adult who they could talk to than children with experience of private law who often had no real sense of who they could talk to other than their parents. Children consistently said that they felt most comfortable talking to carers, extended family and close friends about their fears and anxieties and to gather information.
Older children recognised that there were often issues regarding impartiality, confidentiality, not having the full picture, or bias when talking to adults involved in the situation.
The OCC report recommends that consideration is given to how engaged family members are in the process, so that they can understand what is happening and explain it to the child. It also observes that children often feel burdened with the responsibility of sensitivity to their parents and it would be a relief if there were services available to offer support.
The report states that there is a need to consider how involvement in the court process (either direct or indirect) affects children, as the review found that the process itself had a further impact on them in addition to the problems and worries they had about their families.
Children in the discussion groups undertaken by the Family Justice Review (FJR) consultation felt that it was important for courts to check they had made the right decisions by looking at what happened afterwards. When asked if a child in care has a disagreement with the council, who would be best to sort it out between a court, complaints people or an Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO), none said an IRO.
Family Justice Review recommendations
The Family Justice Review (FJR) consultation highlighted the importance of child-centred decision making (more than half of the children said that courts should always put children first, ahead of other people), and decision making based on the individual needs of the children and families in each specific case.
Findings include:
- most children felt that the panel's recommendation that there should be a good relationship between the child and each of their parents after separation should only apply if the child wanted it
- more than half agreed with the recommendation that separated parents should have a written plan saying how they will care for their child, and nearly all children felt that parents, children and social workers should have a say in this plan
- more than half agreed that the recommendation that the same judge should stay with the case at each hearing was quite or very important; nearly all agreed that Independent Reviewing Officers (IROs) should work more closely with courts
- and around half felt that reducing the time limit on deciding whether a child should be taken into care from a year down to six months was still too long.
Children also felt that judges working with children's cases should be given special training, particularly to be able to get to know, understand and communicate with children.
The panel recommended that hearings which don't need to happen in a courtroom should be held in 'family friendly' rooms. Things children suggested were toys or things to do, posters, quiet environment, not too crowded, with comfortable seats.
External references
Office of the Children's Commissioner (2011)
Do more than listen: act: consultation response to the Family Justice Review undertaken for the Family Justice Council's Voice of the Child sub-group (PDF). London: Office of the Children's Commissioner.
Morgan, Roger (2011)
Family Justice Review: the children's verdict: children's views on the recommendations of the Family Justice Review Panel: a report by the Children's Rights Director for England (PDF). London: Ofsted.
Ministry of Justice (2011)
Family Justice Review: interim report (PDF). London, Ministry of Justice.
Related NSPCC resources
NSPCC factsheets on:
NSPCC training courses:
More briefings
CASPAR News
Copyright © 2011 NSPCC - All rights reserved. National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, Weston House, 42
Curtain Road, London EC2A 3NH. Incorporated by Royal Charter. Registered charity number 216401. NSPCC, charity registered in Scotland, charity number SC037717.