Family court care proceedings are instigated to remove children at risk of harm from parental care. Limited information is available on the health of mothers involved in care proceedings. We assessed maternal mortality and causes of death within 10 years of first birth, comparing first-time mothers with and without care proceedings. Using linked, administrative hospital and family court data, we followed a whole-population cohort of first-time mothers delivering between 2007 and 2017 up to 10 years. We calculated mortality rates comparing mothers with and without care proceedings. We examined proportions of deaths potentially preventable (suicide, homicide, drugs/alcohol or injury) and identified factors associated with death after care proceedings. Of 2 775 835 first-time mothers contributing 21 856 503 person-years of observation, 28 405 (1.0%) had proceedings. Following proceedings, 314 (1.1%) died, compared with 5103 (0.2%) among mothers without care proceedings (age-standardised mortality ratio 21.0, 95% CI 14.3 to 27.7). Mortality ratios were lowest among first-time mothers aged <20 years (4.5, 95% CI 3.5 to 5.9) and highest for those aged 30-34 years (28.3, 95% CI 21.3 to 37.5). Among mothers who died after proceedings, 73% of deaths were potentially preventable compared with 28% among mothers without proceedings. Factors associated with death were older maternal age at proceedings, health conditions and court orders related to child removal. First-time mothers with care proceedings had 21 times the risk of dying within 10 years than similar-aged mothers. Healthcare, social care and family courts must address the extreme health vulnerability of mothers before, during and after proceedings.

In May 2021, a German law was implemented to protect children with differences of sex development (DSD) from non-consensual genital surgery. In children and persons incapable of giving consent, exceptions can occur in emergencies or with the approval of the family court. To this end, a favourable opinion from an interdisciplinary DSD committee can be submitted to initiate file-based court proceedings. This study analysed the frequency of referrals post-legislation, alongside diagnoses and demographic information. A survey by the German Society for Paediatric and Adolescent Endocrinology and Diabetology identified centres with interdisciplinary committees. Data from these centres were analysed descriptively. Ten centres established interdisciplinary committees, evaluating 78 patients. The common karyotypes were 46,XX (36%) and 46,XY (55%), with other variations at 9%. The median age at initial presentation was 0.91 years, with most evaluations happening in surgical departments (80.8%). In 46,XX individuals, CAH due to 21-hydroxylase deficiency (21OHD) was predominant (93%), with a median Prader score of 4. In 46,XY individuals, phenotypic assessments mostly identified various levels of undervirilisation, mainly proximal hypospadias. This study highlights the significant impact of this legislation on clinical practice for DSD in Germany. Our results show that the majority of patients with DSD assessed by the interdisciplinary committee had a diagnosis of CAH or hypospadias. The composition of the interdisciplinary committee is prescribed by law, but the approach to counselling may vary depending on the discussions within the DSD committee. Open questions include reimbursement and evaluation criteria. In 2021, Germany introduced a law to protect children with a difference of sex development who are not yet able to give their own consent. We investigated how often specialist teams were asked by families to provide an opinion to facilitate surgery, and the changes in care that have resulted from the law. Most of the children had CAH or hypospadias.

ABSTRACT This project examined published reports from journalists and legal bloggers attending private family law proceedings in England and Wales. This pilot analysis explores issues in private and public family law proceedings with a focus on abuse allegations, use of ‘parental alienation,’ the role of journalists in enhancing transparency, and the involvement and impact of Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Services (Cafcass) or experts on contact outcomes. A mixed methods analysis was used to outline overarching themes (Thematic Analysis) positioned alongside percentages and common statistical tests on variable relationships. Initial findings align with existing literature in suggesting there is a theme of abusive fathers alleging ‘parental alienation’ against victim-mothers, a theme of pro-contact culture influencing contact maintenance with abusive parents, a theme of power held by Cafcass and experts in determining contact, and a serious pattern of administrative delays in cases concerning highly vulnerable individuals. Initial recommendations based on preliminary findings, aligned with existing literature, are to prohibit allegations of ‘alienation’ and ensure protections are in place for abuse survivors in the Family Court. A prior recommendation was to repeal the presumption of contact, but the government announced commitment to this change during the course of this work.

Separating parents subject to intimate partner violence and coercive control may be at risk of experiencing continued abuse through family court processes. However, how control tactics may arise through the rate of filings has yet to be investigated. This study examined associations between the frequency of coercive control during marriage and the rate of (1) filings before the final divorce decree, (2) filings after the final divorce decree, and (3) summonses and subpoenas. Self-report surveys of 173 divorcing mothers and their divorce records from a Midwest county court were utilized. Multilevel count regression models were fitted with an interaction between the frequency of coercive control and party sex as a predictor of the rate of filings before the final divorce decree, filings after the final divorce decree, and summonses and subpoenas. A random intercept was included for divorce case. For every unit increase in the frequency of coercive control, the rate of filings before the final divorce decree increased by 6.8%, with no effect of sex. There were no significant effects of coercive control and sex on filings after the final divorce decree or summonses and subpoenas. The period before the final divorce decree may be vulnerable to the control tactic of excessive filings, but it may also be when survivors seek autonomy. Family courts and state judiciaries must account for increased filings before the final divorce decree in cases with coercive control to reduce the risk of harm against survivors and their children.

Legal protection for children in conflict with the law constitutes an integral part of criminal procedural law, placing the principle of the best interests of the child as the foundation of every law enforcement action. This study comparatively analyzes the regulation of child legal protection under Law Number 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Criminal Justice System, in conjunction with the Law Number 20 of 2025 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code, and the Juvenile and Family Court Act B.E. 2553 in Thailand. The findings indicate that, normatively, both countries have adopted restorative justice principles through diversion mechanisms, the limitation of detention as an ultimum remedium, and guarantees of the right to legal assistance. However, at the level of implementation, challenges remain, including inconsistencies in the application of diversion and the suboptimal fulfillment of children’s rights. Therefore, strengthening procedural aspects is necessary to realize a more responsive and humane juvenile justice system.

ABSTRACT The case of Re Devin [2025] FedCFamC1F 211 has reignited debate about the role of Australia's family courts in medical treatment for transgender and gender diverse children. This article challenges the distinction that Strum J of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 1) sought to make between ‘case’ and ‘cause’: between the competing applications of Devin's parents for parenting orders, and the broader issue of transgender children's rights and access to gender-affirming healthcare. It is argued that Strum J's ‘repeated exhortations’ that ‘the Court was deciding a case involving the best interests of the child and not the cause of transgender people’ are undermined by his Honour's subsequent orders made ‘in the public interest’ in Re Devin [No 2] [2025] FedCFamC1F 368, authorising the identification of an expert witness and a children's hospital. This article concludes that, even if this was simply a ‘case’ about Devin's best interests, the proceedings embodied a protectionist ‘cause’, where transgender children's rights were all but invisible.

Parental Intimate Partner Violence and Abuse (IPVA) is a complex issue, which requires a sensitive response from a range of services. This review aimed to identify and synthesise qualitative research examining the perceptions and experiences of parents and children affected by IPVA and their interactions or engagement with various child welfare, health and legal systems and services. We conducted a systematic review of the international literature, searching 11 electronic databases from inception to November 2023 and supplemented this with a grey literature search. Studies were included if they provided qualitative accounts from adult and/or child victims/survivors of IPVA and/or adult perpetrators reporting on experiences of child welfare, health, and/or criminal justice intervention. A thematic synthesis of 39 individual studies (38 papers and 1 book chapter) which include the perspectives of (n-825) mothers/adult females (n-107) children and (n-58) fathers was undertaken. Three overarching themes were identified: (1) the importance of supporting the family whilst safeguarding the child (2) systems failing of services to hold the perpetrator to account and (3) systems that retraumatize the Family. Services should provide a whole-family approach, which responds to the needs both the parent and child victim/survivor, and recognises the parental identity of the perpetrator. Interventions with adult victims/survivors should take a strengths-based approach, whilst holding the perpetrator to account. Particular care is needed when families are involved in family court to avoid re-traumatisation.

This article analyses the unique challenges and issues Asian parties experience under the Property (Relationships) Act 1976 (PRA) in New Zealand. Drawing on demographic data, case law, and interviews with expert and experienced practitioners in property relationship issues, the article highlights how cultural practices, language barriers, and differing understandings of legal norms complicate relationship property disputes in court. Issues include the treatment of family transfers—whether a transfer is a gift or a loan, interpretation and translation of evidence, discovery and disclosure, limited documentation and lack of expert cultural and language evidence. The analysis emphasizes the need for cultural competence within the Family Court, when cultural issues may be relevant to adjudicative issues, and recommends changes to ensure equal access to justice as the PRA enters its 50th year. Keywords: Property (Relationships) Act; Asian parties; filial piety; cultural competence; family transfers; loans; gifts; language barriers; access to justice; superdiversity; contracting-out and compromise agreements; interpretation and translation; intergenerational support.

Little is known about self-harm in children involved in family justice proceedings, particularly in private family courts in England and Wales. To examine records of self-harm in children involved in private and public law proceedings using population-level linked data. A retrospective e-cohort study of children aged under 18 years, using linked health and family justice (Cafcass Cymru) data (2011-2018). Family court involvement was recorded from age 0 to 17 years. Incidence of self-harm was recorded from age 10 to 17 years to fit with the standard definition of self-harm. Annual incidence of self-harm over time across general practitioner (GP), emergency department and hospital admissions for individual children in private and public law proceedings were compared with a non-court cohort using Poisson regression. Self-harm following court proceedings was compared with an age- and gender-matched non-court cohort using Cox regression. Adjusted self-harm rates were higher in court-involved children than the non-court cohort (incident rate ratios (IRRs) (95% CI), private: GP 1.8 (1.6-2.1); emergency department 1.4 (1.2-1.7); admissions 1.8 (1.5-2.1); public: GP 4.6 (4.1-5.3); emergency department 5.0 (4.3-5.8); admissions 5.0 (4.3-5.8)). Compared with matched comparison children, risk of self-harm was higher following private (adjusted hazard ratios 2.0 (1.7-2.2)) and public court proceedings (hazard ratio 2.3 (2.7-3.8)). Hazard ratios were greater for those from less deprived areas and those with no history of self-harm. The elevated risk of self-harm in children involved in public law proceedings is well recognised. Our study highlights risk in children in private family justice proceedings. Elevated risk among those from less deprived areas and those with no history of self-harm may reflect circumstances associated with family justice involvement, resulting in rates comparable to children with other pre-existing vulnerabilities. Contact with family justice is an opportunity to offer preventative support.

When the court explicitly acknowledges a father's economic incapacity, child support obligations after divorce create acute legal tension. This article looks at a confusing situation in child support decisions after divorce, based on Decision Number 4501/Pdt.G/2024/PA.Jr. from the Jember Religious Court, Indonesia, where the court required a fixed child support payment even though the father had proven he couldn't afford it. The case highlights a bigger problem that courts face in areas with different laws and economic challenges: how to balance the need to protect children with the reality that some financial obligations may not be possible to enforce. This study uses a legal approach to analyse laws, court decisions, and important Islamic legal sources to assess whether the court's reasoning is fair. The findings reveal a structural inconsistency. Even though the court referenced child protection rules and traditional legal views that support parental responsibility, the maintenance order was too high for the father to afford, making it very difficult for him to follow. Through the evaluative lens of Maqāṣid al-Sharīʿah, the decision demonstrates a failure of proportional balancing: the protection of offspring (ḥifẓ al-nasl) was prioritised without adequate consideration of economic preservation and basic welfare (ḥifẓ al-māl and ḥifẓ al-nafs), both foundational objectives within Islamic legal thought. The article argues that this pattern in court decisions shows a common problem in family courts with limited resources, where the legal responsibilities are recognised more than they can actually be enforced. By placing a local decision within this ongoing issue, the study adds to worldwide discussions about fairness, the ability to enforce choices, and the power of judges in child support cases after divorce.

The Mediation Act, 2023 is India's first dedicated and comprehensive cross-sectoral legislation on mediation. It is both significant and yet legally complex in its ramifications for matrimonial and family disputes because the “family” adjudication in India is already legally complex due to the personal-law reconciliation functions that are integrated into the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the Special Marriage Act, 1954, the Family Courts Act, 1984, and protective measures like the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. This paper contends that the Act’s implications should not be considered a blanket “pro mediation” reform, but rather, a highly contested framing of the possible and the limited scope of embedded mediation, along with the mediation ‘exclusionary’ non-categories, confidentiality, and the integrated court ecosystem. The paper advances three main arguments. To begin with, the Act’s “overriding effect” clause is expressly subjacent to a number of enactments, including the Family Courts Act, 1984, which points to a possible intentionality to retain the family court conciliation frameworks and the High Court mediation rules. Second, although the Act creates a first in domestic violence/child abuse for confidentiality exceptions, this protective measure is a reactive one and needs to be accompanied by structural screening, representation, trauma informed, and judicial review, in order to adequately protect vulnerable parties. Third, the Court Annexed Mediation Centers continue to play an important role, especially given that transitional provisions maintain courtannexed rules until new standards are entered, and given that national efforts (e.g. “Mediation ‘For the Nation’” campaign in 2025) reflect the State’s growing dependence on institutional mediation for disputes involving domestic and family violence) holds three. Using doctrinal analysis, feminist and access-to-justice theory, parliamentary materials, and Supreme Court case law, this paper addresses two questions: whether specific disputes should be completely excluded, and how to safeguard the interests of vulnerable parties without compromising the therapeutic and administratively efficient aspects of the settlement.

ABSTRACT This article reflects on a decade of family court involvement in response to the issue of childhood radicalisation, focusing on the UK. After excavating and outlining this new family law-focused landscape of counter-terrorism, the article highlights and discusses several important themes, issues and questions that have emerged from this legal development, focusing on some of its more problematic implications from the perspective of human rights, children’s rights and the principle of open justice. The article also contends that the fact that we have not, as of yet, seen any family justice responses to the far-right racist riots that took hold of English cities and towns in the summer of 2024, despite the clear involvement of children and parents, underscores the racialised dimensions to the family court involvement in the realm of counter-terrorism. Drawing and building on critiques of the securitisation of welfare, the article ends by maintaining that the British state has essentially relied on and even weaponised children’s welfare (or the “best interests of the child” principle, as it is known in international and domestic law) to facilitate the expansion of its counter-terrorism regime into the family home.

ABSTRACT This study explores the experiences of Court Child Experts (CCEs), professionals employed by the Australian family courts, in parenting matters involving parental mental illness. Using interpretative phenomenological analysis, interviews were conducted with five senior CCEs who reflected on their assessment practices, the challenges associated with these cases, and their perceptions of how parental mental illness is understood and responded to within court proceedings. Participants described a high prevalence of mental health concerns among litigating parents and emphasised the complexity of these matters, which were often shaped by intersecting issues such as family violence, trauma and limited access to support services. Rather than focusing solely on diagnosis, CCEs assessed parenting capacity through indicators such as functioning, insight and availability of support. They also identified barriers faced by parents navigating the legal system, including stigma and difficulty engaging with legal processes. The findings highlight the important role of CCEs in providing nuanced assessments and offer insight into how mental illness is framed in family law. Recommendations include improved training for professionals, enhanced therapeutic support and attention to the structural disadvantages affecting parents with mental illness.

Domestic violence and child custody are two critical issues that intersect within the legal domain, posing complex challenges for family courts, legal practitioners, and policymakers. In India, while laws such as the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, seek to address the issue of domestic violence, the intertwining of domestic violence allegations with child custody disputes complicates the legal process. This research paper examines the challenges posed by domestic violence in child custody cases, with a focus on the legal framework and its application in India. The study begins by examining the definition and forms of domestic violence, followed by a review of the legal protections available under Indian law. It then delves into how domestic violence allegations impact divorce proceedings and custody decisions, particularly in light of the paramountcy principle that the welfare of the child is the primary consideration. The research evaluates judicial trends in child custody decisions and highlights the balance or lack thereof between protecting the child’s welfare and safeguarding the rights of the parents. One of the key challenges discussed is the insufficient implementation of existing protective laws, which often fail to provide adequate relief for victims, particularly children. The research also addresses the issue of gender bias in custody decisions and the lack of psychological support for children affected by domestic violence. Additionally, it explores the delicate balance between preventing false allegations of domestic violence and ensuring genuine concerns are addressed. The research concludes with recommendations to strengthen legal provisions, improve enforcement mechanisms, enhance child protection policies, and promote a child-centric approach to custody decisions. It suggests the introduction of mediation and counselling to provide a holistic solution to domestic violence and child custody disputes. Keywords- Domestic Violence, Child Custody, Best Interest of the Child, Parental Rights, Child Welfare.

Abstract This article examines the role of therapeutic jurisprudence in Australian post‐separation parenting disputes involving family violence. A recent appellate court decision has asserted that “courts are not, and cannot operate like, therapeutic agencies”. We engage with the therapeutic origins of the Family Court of Australia, the family courts' role in the “web of accountability” for family violence, the potential for judicial officers to motivate behavioral change in litigants, and therapeutic approaches to family law in various jurisdictions, to suggest how Australia's family courts may embrace therapeutic jurisprudence to promote the accountability of people who use violence, and the safety of those who experience it.

Book Review: <i>The end of family court: How abolishing the court brings justice to children and families</i> by Spinak, J. M. SpinakJ. M. (2023). The end of family court: How abolishing the court brings justice to children and families. New York: New York University Press. 1–369 pp. $35.00 (hardcover), $30.99 (paperback),ISBN 978-1479814084.

ABSTRACT Expert recommendations for family courts in child protection cases have serious consequences, yet evidence on their reliability is limited. This exploratory vignette study examined inter- and intrarater reliability of child maltreatment risk assessments by German mental health professionals. Agreement was analyzed cross-sectionally (Nt1 = 32) and longitudinally after three months (Nt2 = 16), including the influence of irrelevant contextual information. Interrater reliability was low (ICCs ≤ .26), and intrarater reliability ranged from low to moderate (κs ≤ .35; ICCs ≤ .61). The findings indicate substantial variability in expert judgments, likely due to insufficient standardization of assessment procedures.

This January 2026 issue of Family Court Review marks the last for which Marsha Kline Pruett serves as Social Science Editor. Marsha has worked conscientiously and enthusiastically in this role since her debut in the April 2019 issue. Those of us who have worked closely with Marsha during that time want to express to her and to our readers how very much she has meant to us and to the ongoing success of the journal. As Marsha shared in her “Introduction” in the January 2019 issue, “[m]y own interests focus on the nexus between research and intervention, research and policy, and practice and policy. I believe innovation comes from linking disparate disciplines and ideas to move beyond silos. This, of course, is the basis on which the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts was founded more than 55 years ago. Such integration results in new strategies for improving the lives of children and families.” Indeed, Marsha embodies this spirit, possessing advanced degrees in psychology and legal studies and serving as a social work faculty member and associate dean. Marsha was keenly aware of FCR's symbiotic relationship to AFCC, having been an AFCC member since the 1990s, a contributing author to FCR, an FCR Editorial Board member, a member of AFCC's Board of Directors, and AFCC President in 2016–2017. In these roles, she brought innovative ideas and contributions to AFCC and FCR. Thus, she brought to her role as Social Science Editor a remarkable insight into the interests and needs of both AFCC's members and FCR's readership at large. Moving ahead on topics such as children resisting/refusing to spend time with a parent, shared parenting, innovative dispute resolution strategies, and global sharing of interventions and research will require tearing down our silos and building bridges that extend over churning waters and slippery paths. I invite you to submit papers that are not just about successful studies or programs but about how the work is conceptualized when it feels stuck and fraught. What helps? What does not help? What resources were drawn upon? How do communities work together? Many researchers, scholars, and practitioners heeded Marsha's call, and many of those articles became part of a special issue on several of the very topics Marsha identified. In her role as Social Science Editor, Marsha was responsible for assigning at least two peer reviewers for all social science-based articles and for rendering a publication decision for the articles based upon the reviewers' recommendations. For Marsha, this often also entailed her own careful review of the manuscripts and the addition of her highly valuable and informed insights as a source of strong feedback to the authors. On the personal side, Marsha's wittiness, sense of humor, and kindness, in addition to her esteemed professional background, made it a delight to collaborate with her. Each spring, Marsha welcomed the incoming Hofstra law student staff of FCR with compassion and encouragement. She worked closely with many special issue guest editors, helping to ensure the highest quality special issue publications. Throughout her tenure, she was a delightful and valued partner of the editorial staff, including the Editor in Chief and the Hofstra Faculty Administrative Editor. Marsha tells us she is not leaving completely. She plans to continue to peer review FCR submissions and to serve as an Ex-Officio Member of the FCR Editorial Board. For all that she has done and promises to continue to do, we are extremely grateful. On behalf of FCR, AFCC, and all who have benefited from her wisdom, we extend our deepest gratitude to Marsha for her exemplary service, enduring friendship, and lasting contributions to the journal, the field, and the families and children we serve.

This study examines Sri Lanka’s Quazi court system and how it mediates family disputes. Beginning with an overview of the country’s mixed legal system, it highlights the application of Muslim personal law through specialized Quazi tribunals. The study assesses the strengths and weaknesses of Muslim Quazi courts, particularly within the MMDA framework. Although designed to provide more accessible and affordable family dispute resolution for the Muslim community, in practice the system raises concerns about effectiveness, legal certainty, and justice especially in relation to the protection of women’s rights. The article aims to analyze the role of Quazi Courts in resolving family disputes in Sri Lanka by evaluating their effectiveness, identifying structural and procedural limitations under the MMDA, and mapping their implications for gender equality and access to justice. The research adopts a qualitative socio-legal approach using secondary data through document review and doctrinal analysis. Sources include the MMDA, academic literature, institutional reports, and comparative studies on religion-based family courts within the context of legal pluralism. The data are analyzed through deductive thematic analysis to extract key themes such as operational weaknesses, gender disparities in the MMDA, impacts on women, and reform challenges. The findings indicate that Quazi Courts offer access-related advantages (low cost, opportunities for self-representation, and relatively rapid processing for simple cases), but their effectiveness is constrained by the lack of minimum qualifications and formal training for Quazis, irregular hearing schedules, inadequate infrastructure, weak oversight, and alleged corrupt practices. Normatively, several MMDA provisions are seen to reinforce gender inequality (child marriage, mandatory male guardianship, divorce procedures that disadvantage women, polygamy without strict scrutiny, and the absence of post-divorce property distribution rules), thereby weakening women’s protection and the overall quality of justice. This article recommends comprehensive MMDA reform (setting a minimum marriage age, strengthening women’s agency, ensuring equality in divorce procedures, regulating polygamy with strict safeguards, and establishing property division mechanisms), professionalizing and standardizing Quazi Courts (minimum qualifications, mandatory training, a code of ethics, effective supervision, and adequate court facilities).

Chef Boyardee and Family Court: A Case Study of Child Abuse Pediatricians, Child Protection Agencies, and Family Separation