New court focuses on family problems, including alcohol and drugs

By Jonathan Goodliffe,
Solicitor

Background to the foundation of the new court

Alcohol and drug misuse is at the heart of many family problems. In more serious cases parents may become unfit to look after their children. Action taken by local authorities may result in the children being taken into care.

At a later stage children may be placed for adoption. The parent may oppose this and rely on the right to respect for family life under article 8 of the European Human Rights Convention. But that right is not absolute. The longer adoption is deferred the more difficult it may become to find a placement. Adoption may be the best ultimate outcome in many cases. Children of parents misusing alcohol are at risk of harm. Children brought up within the care system usually have poor educational performance and prospects in adult life.

Judges commonly direct (usually with reluctance) that children be taken into care or adopted where there is a history of serious substance misuse. This course may be inevitable unless convincing evidence of recovery from addiction and success in addressing other problems is forthcoming. These cases are dealt with at private hearings and do not usually get into the public domain until they reach the Court of Appeal. Even then the identity of the parents and children is withheld.

Court procedure as a problem in its own right

The court procedure may also be a problem in its own right. The case may take months or years to reach a conclusion. It may be heard at different stages by different judges, some of whom may not have the appropriate experience. The adversarial court procedure usually involves the examination and cross-examination of a variety of different expert witnesses instructed by the parties rather than the court. By the time the case is decided the children’s problems may have got worse rather than better¹.

Judge Nicholas Crichton has been one of the leading advocates for a radical change in the law’s approach to these problems. He draws on experience in the USA with specialist problemsolving courts. Others involved in his initiative include the Interdisciplinary Child Focused Research Centre at Brunel University, the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust and the children’s charity, Coram.

The Family Drug and Alcohol Court

This initiative led to the creation of the London Family Drug and Alcohol Court (FDAC) earlier this year. It is funded by three boroughs, Camden, Islington and Westminster and has central Government support. It sits within the Inner London Family Proceedings Court in Wells Street, London W1. Its aim is to support families affected by substance misuse so that children can, wherever possible, remain with or return to their parents.

Judge Crichton sits at the FDAC with 3 other judges specialising in child care cases. Where care proceedings are referred to his court, they will generally be heard by the same judge throughout. Support for parents (in relation to substance misuse as well as other problems) and expert reports to the judge will be provided or arranged by a steering group operating within the court. The judge will hold regular hearings to review the family’s progress with a view, wherever possible, to keeping parent and child together. In most cases parents and children will be represented by lawyers who are members of specialist Law Society or Bar panels and who will themselves receive appropriate training.

So, to the extent that these aims are achieved, the court procedure may be transformed from an obstacle to progress into a part of the solution.

Mentors

Further help may be provided by ‘mentors’. Mentors are parents who have themselves had experience of losing children or nearly losing children through care or adoption proceedings. Parents brought before the court may be able to draw on their advice and support, which will be entirely confidential. Mentors will not have any duty to report to the Court. The support they provide may need to continue after the proceedings are concluded, particularly if the proceedings result in a care order being made.

Interview with the judge

Further information about the court’s aims is provided in a BBC ‘Woman’s Hour’ interview in December 2007 which can be listened to online. Participants included Judge Crichton himself, one of the mentors, and Trevor Moores of Westminster’s Local Children's Services. There is also a full research paper², describing the aims and methods of the project, by Professor Judith Harwin of Brunel and child care expert and solicitor Mary Ryan.

Evaluation

The FDAC will run as a trial for three years from January 2008. At this stage it will only involve parents and children from within the three boroughs mentioned above. The project will be evaluated by a separate team led by Professor Harwin. If it proves a success it may lead to more FDACs being established in other parts of the country. It may also, perhaps, influence the approach of family courts in other disputes where substance misuse is a factor.

References:

1 For an example of a case decided under the traditional procedure see In the matter of N (Freeing Order Application) [2005] NIFam 5 (31 May 2005)

2 ‘The role of the court in cases concerning parental substance misuse and children at risk of harm’ Judith Harwin and Mary Ryan, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, Sept- December 2007

Contact the author on:
info@jgoodliffe.co.uk