Fomenters of Strife, Gladiatorial Champions or Something Else Entirely? Lawyers and Family Dispute Resolution

  • Becky Batagol

Abstract

Popularly, lawyers are conceived of as relentlessly adversarial. In the context of family law, the model of compulsory family dispute resolution currently practised in Australia is premised upon an adversarial assumption. Implicit is the view that family lawyers destroy their clients and their families. To a lesser extent, it is understood that lawyers can sometimes offer protection to vulnerable parties. Recent reforms to the processes used to resolve family disputes in Australia have increased the need for collaboration between family dispute resolution practitioners and family lawyers. A collaborative approach demands a more sophisticated non-adversarial view of how family lawyers operate than the negative adversarial stereotype allows. To support this position, this article utilises data from a pre-reform study of family mediation to demonstrate how legal advice around family mediation may operate to provide a protective safety net for vulnerable parties forced to negotiate in family dispute resolution. This article is intended to contribute to the growing body of work on the emerging concept of non-adversarial justice. Non-adversarial approaches can be described as a range of processes used to resolve disputes away from the courts and processes used by courts which adopt a problem-solving approach.

Downloads

Total Abstract Views: 890  Total PDF Downloads: 939

Published
Jun 30, 2008
How to Cite
BATAGOL, Becky. Fomenters of Strife, Gladiatorial Champions or Something Else Entirely? Lawyers and Family Dispute Resolution. QUT Law Review, [S.l.], v. 8, n. 1, june 2008. ISSN 2201-7275. Available at: <https://lr.law.qut.edu.au/article/view/61>. Date accessed: 20 apr. 2019. doi: https://doi.org/10.5204/qutlr.v8i1.61.
Section
Articles - General Issue
Since 2015-12-04
Abstract Views
1146
PDF Views
1230
Until 2015-12-04:
Abstract Views
724
PDF Views
979