Children suffer in Court Hearings When Parents Have No Lawyers

09/01/2018

A survey of the Magistrates Association has revealed that 68% of people represented themselves at the most recent family court hearings.

This is up from 41% in 2014, resulting in a 65% increase since that time – one year after legal aid cuts were introduced.

Magistrates claim the situation is causing long, confrontational court hearings and injustices but, more importantly, children are ultimately the victims.

The anonymous survey, which consulted 370 magistrates, condemned legal aid cuts which have been blamed for the rise of Litigants in Person (LiPs). The situation, as one magistrate called it, is “becoming a joke, while another claimed that the person with a solicitor “would always fare better”.

Family Courts hear a range of cases which impact children’s lives significantly. Cases include victims of domestic violence, parental disputes over contact, the residence of children, financial support of children and social service interventions.

Speaking of the report, which was commissioned by BuzzFeed News, chair of the Magistrates Association, John Bache expressed concern that those representing themselves were at an unfair disadvantage if the other side had a lawyer representing them. He explained: “The impact on children will stem from that because if there hasn’t been proper representation, the children won’t be achieving necessarily the best outcome in terms of relationship with their parents.”

He also said that court delays caused by explaining the law or waiting from documents from LiPs could also end up harming children as they were left in limbo.

Several magistrates echoed this. One said: “I fail to see how removing legal aid from private law family proceedings is saving any money at all, given the number of extra hearings and additional time spent in court. The situation is becoming a joke.”

95% of those surveyed believe that self-representation had a negative impact on the effectiveness of the court processes and that the imbalance of one having representation by a solicitor, while the other fends for themselves was unfair and resulting in injustices.

In another testimony, a magistrate said: “LiPs are often at a huge disadvantage in the courtroom, this is not justice. LiPs often appear intimidated by the other person's legal representation, [and] some barristers particularly play on the inequality.”

One of the reasons the government introduced the legal aid cuts for low-income divorcing couples, or parents arguing over child arrangements, was to encourage them to enter into mediation. This strategy appears to have backfired. Without lawyers referring clients on to mediation, the number of amicable agreements being made has reduced drastically. This has led to more people navigating their way through the judicial system without a solicitor.

The government has announced a review of the impact of its cuts to legal aid which will report back later this year.