It was fascinating reading the President of the Family Division’s latest View from the President’s Chambers recently published.
In particular, the update on the pilot of Pathfinder or ‘problem-solving’ courts in private law children cases (i.e. those funded privately by the parents).
This is a move away from being litigant-led to being child-led.
So, at Pathfinder courts, CAFCASS speak to the parents and children before the first hearing to produce a Child Impact Report.
Judges and staff are trained to speak to people in a non-conflictual manner.
They work closely with local domestic abuse agencies.
Much of this is reminiscent of the Family Drug and Alcohol Courts which operate in the public law sphere i.e. cases are referred in by local authorities.
At FDACs there is multi-disciplinary working between social workers and substance misuse specialists. An intervention plan is agreed. There is regular communication between the multi-disciplinary team and the judge.
One of my best days ever as a family lawyer was back in around 2011 when the pioneering creator of FDAC, District Judge Nick Crichton agreed to me spending a day shadowing him and seeing how the Central London FDAC worked.
That experience definitely influenced my decision to then train therapeutically. That desire (that so many family lawyers share) to work in a more holistic way.
And its influenced the way I’ve developed our TCC training for lawyers.
In how to work in a trauma-informed way.
How to work with addiction.
How to work with vulnerability and suicidality.
I’m also pleased to see that there will be an ‘FJC Experts Committee Symposium’ (sounds fancy!) in October and one of the focuses will be vicarious trauma and trauma-informed practice.
Because, while yes there are many fab agencies (including TCC!) who are supporting lawyers with vicarious trauma and who train in how to work in a trauma-informed way….
…it is still bizarre that there isn’t compulsory training for family lawyers in how to work with trauma from day 1 of practice.
In fact, I’d go so far as to say that working well with emotionally heightened people, many of whom have mental health difficulties, actively involves unlearning a lot of the ‘skills’ we’re taught in law school. Put simply, being too directive and assertive often won’t result in you getting the best out of your clients. it will shut them down. And make them less likely to tell you the truth.
As I’ve said before, we need to go back to the start of how we train the family practitioners of the future. And ensure that holistic thinking (and feeling. Yes, lawyers have feelings too!) runs through our practice like the writing in a stick of rock.