AFCC Think Tanks: Promoting Dialogue on Difficult Issues in Family Law*

• Date: 01 April 2019
• Published date: 01 April 2019
• Author: Peter Salem
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12406

AFCC THINK TANKS: PROMOTING DIALOGUE ON DIFFICULT

ISSUES IN FAMILY LAW*

Peter Salem

This article examines three think tanks sponsored by the Association of Familyand Conciliation Courts, which convened represen-

tatives of different disciplines, often with differing perspectives,toaddresspolicyandpracticedilemmasinfamilylawanddispute

resolution. This essay was initially commissioned by the Nuffield Foundation, London, UK, as an Insight Article for its Family

Justice Observatory, which aims to improve the use of data and research evidence in the family justice system in England and

Wales. The think tank process is described and analyzed, identifying factors that created challenges and thosethat led to success.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:

Effectively addressing conflict within the professional family court requires an inclusive and collaborative process.

Social science research plays an important role in addressing conflict but is not determinative.

It is important to identify and manage policy and ideological agendas if collaborative efforts are to succeed.

Timing, personal and professional values, and personalities are important factors in consensus-building efforts.

Keywords: Domestic Violence; Family Law Education; Shared Parenting;Consensus; AFCC Think Tanks.

I. INTRODUCTION

The last half-century has seen dramatic changes in private family law. The 1970 introduction of

no-fault divorce in California was followed by the development of family mediation in the 1970s

and 1980s (Thoennes, Salem, & Pearson, 1995), then multiple innovative family justice processes

and programs worldwide (see, e.g., McIntosh, Wells, Smyth, & Long, 2008; Parkinson, 2013;

Salem, 2009; Walker & Marjoribanks, 2018). These developments emerged alongside increasing

divorce rates, a greater number and acceptance of children born outside of marriage, and changes in

family roles that called into question the traditional division of work and family responsibilities

(Pruett & DiFonzo, 2014b).

The typical 1960s divorce outcome of sole legal and physical custody for the mother, with alter-

nate weekends, child support, and alimony obligations for the father, has evolved to individualized,

often nuanced, parenting, decision-making, and financial ar rangements that reflect changes in con-

temporary post-separation family life. Procedures to reach these outcomes have also changed.

Lawyer-directed distributive settlement negotiation and litigation have been supplemented, if not

largely supplanted, by integrative (or “win-win”) negotiations, mediation, collaborative law, parent-

ing coordination, and various hybrid processes (Macfarlane, 2008; Shienvold, 2004; Yates &

Salem, 2013). Indeed, the twenty-first-century family law landscape “has, both literally and meta-

phorically, moved from confrontation to collaboration and from the courtroom to the conference

room”(Schepard & Salem, 2006, p. 516).

*This article was originally written for the Nuffield Foundation’s Family Justice Observatory, which aims to improve the use

of data and research evidence in the family justice system. It is available at https://www.nuffieldfjo.org.uk/report/afcc-think-

tanks-promoting-dialogue-on-difficult-issues-in-family-law-october-2018. Reprinted with permission of Lancaster University.

The author thanks Arnold Shienvold, Erica Salem, Bernie Mayer, Andrew Schepard, Marsha Kline Pruett, and Maureen

Sheeran for their thoughtful feedback on earlier drafts of this essay. All opinions expressed in this essay are those of the

author and do not represent AFCC or any individual or partner organization involved in the think tanks.

Correspondence: psalem@afccnet.org

FAMILY COURT REVIEW, Vol. 57 No. 2, April 2019 231–242

© 2019 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts