Commons Sense

House of Commons · Westminster Hall

Family Law Terminology

16 November 2022 · 4 other contributors · 3,444 words

Opened by Siobhan Baillie Con Stroud

Responding minister: Mike Freer

Justice & CourtsChildren & Families

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Siobhan Baillie raised concerns about family law terminology in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.

Key points

  • The hon. Member for Cheltenham raised concerns about the impact of adversarial family law language on children whose parents are separating.
  • The hon. Member noted that approximately 40 percent of separating parents bring issues about their children to family courts.
  • The hon. Member asked the Minister to confirm that the Ministry of Justice's focus on family law reform and demand reduction plan to keep families out of court are still in place.

Key requests to Government

The hon. Member asks the Minister to confirm that the Ministry of Justice's focus on family law reform is continuing now that the Lord Chancellor has returned to his post. She also requests confirmation that the demand reduction plan for keeping families out of court is still in place, as well as a formal response from the Government to reports by the Family Solutions Group (FSG).

How the debate unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.

Opened the debate

Siobhan Baillie Con Stroud

The hon. Member for Cheltenham is concerned about the unhelpful language used in family law and its impact on families, particularly children. She notes that around 280,000 children see their parents separate each year and highlights the adversarial nature of court proceedings which uses terms like 'custody', 'Smith v. Smith', and 'dispute resolution'. The hon. Member also mentions that approximately 40% of separating parents bring issues about their children to family courts. She cites evidence that destructive conflict between parents increases emotional problems in children, such as depression and anxiety.

Other contributors (4)
  • Alex Cunningham

    He supported the initiative but pointed out that insufficient resources in mediation services hinder effectiveness. He proposed investing more in these services could yield long-term savings within the Ministry of Justice and the court system.

  • Jim Shannon DUP Strangford

    The hon. Member praised the initiative and raised concerns about the impact of legal terminology on children in family courts, highlighting issues like custody disputes that can cause emotional distress to young children.

  • Sally-Ann Hart

    As a former magistrate, she agreed with the focus on mediation and suggested that parents should not rely solely on court systems to resolve child arrangements.

  • Stephen Kerr DUP East Antrim

    The hon. Member for East Antrim supports the emphasis on mediation and highlights that demand for such services has increased significantly, especially during the voucher system period.

Government Response

Mike Freer

As ever, it is a joy to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Nokes. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Siobhan Baillie) for securing this debate on an important topic. The focus of the family court must be on acting in the best interests of children and reducing conflict between separating families. The Family Solutions Group noted that current language is accusatory, potentially harmful, and divisive; hence, there's a need to move towards clear, simple terminology that encourages joint agreements rather than adversarial proceedings. Over 11,800 couples have accessed the family mediation voucher scheme, with 65% reaching agreements without court involvement. The Government introduced the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 for no-fault divorce to focus on co-parenting children. They also removed adversarial terms like 'petitioner' and replaced them with more child-focused language such as 'child arrangements'. Technology is being used to create a modern, accessible justice system; HMCTS forms undergo plain English reviews. The Family Justice Young People's Board works directly with the Ministry of Justice to demystify court processes for children and produce resources like 'Mind Your Language!' and 'In Our Shoes'. The Government remains committed to reducing conflict in family courts by supporting parents to resolve issues outside court and improving language used in proceedings.

Get updates like this by email
▸ Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy