Family Dispute Resolution: Use, Timing, and Outcomes

Abstract

The mandatory requirement for separating or separated parents to mediate disputes over children before filing an application for the courts represents one of the key changes introduced in the 2006 Australian family law reforms. The process is known legally as Family Dispute Resolution (FDR). Based on the reports of three cohorts of parents who had separated in different periods after these reforms were implemented, this paper examines: (1) the socio‐demographic characteristics and circumstances of parents who used FDR; (2) the extent to which parents who attended FDR at different periods after separation differ in characteristics and circumstances; (3) FDR outcomes and the extent to which these outcomes vary according to parents’ circumstances and their timing of FDR use. The analysis shows that use of FDR was quite common among separated parents. Parents who went to FDR were typically able to reach an agreement and this positive outcome appeared to have increased over time, which may reflect improving and refining practice. The data show that the quality of inter‐parental relationship and circumstances surrounding separation such as family violence and other issues are closely linked with FDR use and its outcomes. They also reveal that parents who used FDR typically did so in the early stage of separation with its use much less common after separation for three or four years. Typically, in these cases, s60I certificates, which are normally required before the courts can intervene, were issued.