Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 25, 2024 Thu
Time: 11:10 am
Time: 11:10 am
Results for divorce
1 results foundAuthor: Kaspiew, Rae Title: Evaluation of a Pilot of Legally Assisted and Supported Family Dispute Resolution in Family Violence Cases. Final report Summary: Evidence of the prevalence of a history of past and/or current family violence among separated parents, and the presence of ongoing safety concerns for themselves and their children as a result of ongoing contact with the other parent, has created an impetus for the family law system to find more effective ways of dealing with families affected by family violence. In July 2009, the Federal Government announced funding for a pilot program to provide assistance, including family dispute resolution (FDR), to such families. Subsequently, Women’s Legal Service Brisbane (and other consultants) were funded by the Attorney- General’s Department (AGD) to develop a model for coordinated family dispute resolution (CFDR). CFDR is a service for separated families who need assistance to resolve parenting disputes where there has been a history of past and/or current family violence. It is being implemented in five sites/lead agencies across Australia: Perth (Legal Aid Western Australia), Brisbane (Telephone Dispute Resolution Service [TDRS], run by Relationships Australia Queensland), Newcastle (Interrelate), Western Sydney (Unifam) and Hobart (Relationships Australia Tasmania). TDRS made adaptions to the model to accommodate its telephone-based service. The pilot commenced operation at most sites in the final quarter of 2010. Implementation in one location (Brisbane) was delayed until mid-2011 to allow time to finalise the composition of the partnership. CFDR is a process where parents are assisted with post-separation parenting arrangements where family violence has occurred in the relationship. The process involves a case manager/family dispute resolution practitioner (FDRP), a specialist family violence professional (SFVP) for the person assessed to be the “predominant victim” in the language of the model, a men’s support professional (MSP) for the person assessed to be the “predominant aggressor” (when they are male),a a legal advisor for each party and a second FDRP. Child consultants are part of the professional team and may be called upon to feed into case management decisions. Child-inclusive practice may be applied in particular cases, but only one location applied it frequently and a second infrequently. Specialised risk assessment and management takes place throughout the process, which unfolds over several steps involving screening, intake and assessment, preparation for mediation, mediation (up to four or more sessions) and post-mediation follow-up. The process is applied in a multi-agency, multidisciplinary setting and it aims to provide a safe, non-adversarial and child-sensitive means for parents to sort out their postseparation parenting disputes. The level of support provided to parents is intensive, and this is a key means by which the process attempts to keep children and parties safe and ensure that power imbalances resulting from family violence do not impede parents’ ability to participate effectively. This report sets out the findings of an evaluation of the CFDR process that has been funded by the Attorney-General’s Department. The evaluation was based on a mixed-method approach involving several different data collections. These were: a study based on case file data from the entire cohort of CFDR files up to 30 June 2012 (n = 126), and a sample of comparison group files (n = 247) drawn from services run by each of the lead partners where CFDR services were not offered; a qualitative study based on interviews with professionals working in the pilot (n = 37) in the early stages of implementation, and a second study comprising interviews with professionals (n = 33) near the end of the evaluation data collection period (April–June 2012); mixed-profession focus groups (participants: n = 37), conducted between August and November 2011; an online survey of professionals, conducted in June–July 2012 (n = 88, with a response rate of 68%); interviews with parents who received the CFDR services and progressed to mediation, conducted as eligible parents became available (n = 29). An online survey was also available to parents; however, the smaller-than-expected number of pilot cases meant very small numbers of people were eligible to complete the survey. Therefore, the evaluation team focused on conducting interviews with as many parents as possible and incorporated data from the seven completed online surveys in the analysis of the qualitative data; and requests for information (conducted via discussions with location coordinators) that examined how the model was adapted and implemented in each location. Details: Barton, ACT: Australian Institute of Family Studies, 2012. 165p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 30, 2013 at: http://www.ag.gov.au/FamiliesAndMarriage/Families/FamilyLawSystem/Documents/CFDR%20Evaluation%20Final%20Report%20December%202012.PDF Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: http://www.ag.gov.au/FamiliesAndMarriage/Families/FamilyLawSystem/Documents/CFDR%20Evaluation%20Final%20Report%20December%202012.PDF Shelf Number: 128180 Keywords: Dispute SettlementDivorceFamily InterventionsFamily MediationFamily Violence (Australia)Intimate Partner Violence |