Here’s to hoping that the ever-increasing number of LIP’s (due to swingeing legal aid cuts in an era of austerity) continue forcing judges to actually do their jobs (instead of merely rubber-stamping often false, misleading and inaccurate LA concerns) to bring back the needle towards equilibrium over compulsory state intervention in established family life.
“Every single child who took part, said they wanted the option to be able to speak to their judge directly.”
A report just published highlights new findings about research and evidence use in family courts.
The Nuffield Foundation, along with several universities, research organisations and adoption and fostering academy CORAM BAAF, created “Towards a National Family Justice Observatory”, a scoping study which aims to identify what role the latest evidence and research can play in child welfare proceedings.
The study includes a consultation, which took place in September 2016 and which Researching Reform completed – you can see our answers here. It is this consultation which forms the basis of the recently publicised report.
The consultation wanted to understand the research evidence needs of stakeholders and
opportunities and barriers to the application of research evidence in policy and practice.
The findings were interesting. At a healthy 64 pages, we haven’t had a chance to comb through the whole report yet (you’ll need at least 30 tea bags and…
View original post 610 more words