IS THE TURN TOWARD COLLABORATIVE LAW A TURN AWAY FROM JUSTICE?

Abstract

The new trend in Collaborative Family Law (CFL) in the United States and Canada raises new questions about theories of justice. CFL achieves many of the goals of a viable theory of justice and its implicit critique of the legal system is a valid one. However, it unnecessarily demonizes law and has yet to explicitly articulate where it fits in terms of its own theory of justice. After considering the claims made by CFL, it is apparent that while some are productive, others are problematic and should be discarded. Specifically, CFL's rejection of factual determinacy may be inappropriate in some cases. The CFL approach has the potential to ignore problems of power imbalance, and may sacrifice just outcomes for the sake of efficiency. The emphasis on relationships and the need for their protection is not always an appropriate approach, and in demonizing law in favor of private ordering, CFL unnecessarily rejects the importance of law as a site for public participation in the creation and defense of norms. CFL is an important step forward in law reform, but if it is to fulfill its potential, it needs to incorporate within its practice a theory of justice that avoids the pitfalls of liberal individualism and allows for the public authorship of norms.