DIVORCED and separated parents who ignore child contact orders imposed by the courts could be forced to do unpaid community work on Saturdays, placed under a curfew or they might even be tagged, the Government said yesterday.
The reforms are a response to the growing anger of “weekend dads”, whose former partners attempt to cut them out of their children’s lives completely. They aim to help warring parents to settle contact disputes out of court and with minimum delay, in the best interests of the children.
Although the reforms accept that children should have a meaningful relationship with both parents after separation, the Government has ruled out an automatic presumption that children’s time should be split equally between both parents.
Ministers emphasised that parents with care (usually mothers) who repeatedly prevent non-resident parents (usually fathers) from seeing their children without due cause would be held to account and would face a range of community penalties.
Judges do have the power to send parents who breach contact orders to prison, but they are reluctant to do so because it might be harmful to the children.
Lord Falconer of Thoroton, the Constitutional Affairs Secretary, denied that the reforms were a response to the civil disobedience campaign waged by the group Fathers 4 Justice. But he conceded that the family courts system was failing parents, particularly fathers.
“There have been too many cases where the courts have made order after order for contact and there has not been contact. That is not in the interests of the children,” he said.
Community penalties could require mothers to do community service work “at a time that does not interfere with bringing up the child”, such as a Saturday, when the father has contact with the child, Lord Falconer said. Alternatively, mothers could be placed under curfew. “This is to say to them, ‘You have to be at a particular place when the father comes to pick up the child’,” he said.
Although the Parental Separation Bill, to be published within two weeks, will include the possibility of fitting the mother with an electronic tag to enforce the curfew, Lord Falconer said that such a measure would be disproportionate and would be unlikely to survive into the final Act. Patricia Hewitt, the Minister for Women, said: “The courts have to have some powers they can use as an absolute last resort.”
Mothers could also be ordered to compensate fathers where, for example, the cost of a holiday has been lost if contact fails to take place. Courts could also order parents to attend parenting or anger management classes.
The proposals aim to encourage more parents to settle contact disputes out of court by creating an in-court conciliation service run by trained mediators. Parents who apply to court will be expected to attend mediation and will be in contempt if they refuse. Model parenting plans, setting out examples of the sort of contact arrangements that work well for children of different ages are a key part of the proposals. These will also be used by mediators to show parents what the courts might decide if an amicable agreement is not reached.
An extra £7.5 million will be invested in expanding the network of contact centres, where non-resident parents can meet their children. The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service will be required to ensure that courtordered contact arrangements take place and a legal advice helpline will be tried out. There will also be a £10 million-a-year investment to ensure that the risks to children of suffering or witnessing domestic violence are taken in to account.
Fathers’ rights groups said they were disappointed with the proposals. Tony Coe, president of the Equal Parenting Council, said: “There needs to be a statutory presumption in our law that upholds the child’s right to continue to be parented by both parents, unless either parent is proven unfit.”
PARENTING: MODEL PLANS
The Government has produced a series of model parenting plans. Parents will be expected to use them as the basis for their own agreements. The plans are also intended to show parents what might be decided by the courts if they cannot agree.
DISTANCE Des and Rachel lived together for ten years and have a daughter, Holly, 7. Rachel got a job some distance away, but Des refused to move and they separated. Rachel moved out and took Holly with her. After court involvement, it was decided that Holly should live with her mother, but spend every other weekend and half the school holidays with her father.
50/50 Ruth and Martin are divorcing after 15 years. They have two children, Charlotte, 12, and Rebecca, 10. Both want the daughters to live with them full-time, but the children do not want to have to choose. The judge orders joint residence, as both parents live close to the girls’ schools. They spend Sunday morning to Wednesday after school with their mother and Wednesday to Sunday morning with their father.
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE Steve and Sandra are divorcing after 13 years. They have three children, Susanne, 12, Vicky, 10, and James, 5. James once saw his father slapping his mother and is now too frightened of his father to see him, although the girls do. After the intervention of a Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) officer, James visits Steve at his grandparents’ house under their supervision. After the two get to know each other, the order is changed so that James meets him unsupervised.
TEENAGERS David and Susan, who are divorcing after 18 years, have two children, Paul, 13 and Helen, 14. Both parents work full-time and share care of the children. Both want the children to live with them. With the help of a Cafcass officer, the children come up with their own solution. Helen lives with her father and Paul with his mother. Every other weekend Helen stays with her mother and Paul with his father.
