Reader Feedback

• Publication year: 2017

Reader feedback

In response to FLEXCOM Chair David Lederman's request in the E-News for member input on how to fix the broken family law system, we received the following input from Jim Raetz, a member from Irvine who practices family law exclusively:

Thank you for the invitation to send in suggestions on how to "fix the family law system." I've been practicing family law for over fifteen years and have some ideas that I would like to share. You can give them the emphasis you believe appropriate.
I believe the system does not serve the majority of litigants, who are really not "litigants" but people who just want the process completed. I believe we have a system flooded with indigent folks who just want to end a relationship and really question why they need the consent and permission of the government to finish what they believe has already ended. Many just give up or file a petition and response and believe they are divorced in six months, like "magic."
Here are my suggestions to speed up the process and serve the people we are here to serve. These ideas do not serve us as family law attorneys in making more money. However, perhaps by helping those at the lower economic rings of our diverse society, it will free up courtrooms for the litigation process when there is a true issue and not just a lack of understanding in the law or procedure.
Cathartic closure—"opening statement." I have found that people want someone to hear that their estranged spouse is a liar, jerk, etc. Our system of jurisprudence was not set up for this and our no-fault divorce provides no outlet for this deeply-held desire to just get this off their chest so that the court "knows the facts". My clients often don't care if the court takes the information into account, they just want someone in a black robe to hear what a bad spouse the other person was.
We could use an "opening statement" type process for parties who agree to this, where they stipulate that they both can forgo all rules of hearsay and relevance and just get out what they want get out. This would be without attorneys and no court reporter. They court could assign fifteen to thirty minutes to each party to make an "opening statement" in their case, and five to ten minutes for questioning each other and then be done with it. The divorce process is not satisfying to the parties, and because they have not had this type of opportunity, it slows down the reaching of a stipulation to end the litigation. It also leads to

...