Remote family dispute resolution services for COVID and post‐COVID times: Client and practitioner perspectives

• Published date: 01 April 2022
• Author: Genevieve Heard,Andrew Bickerdike,Sandra Opoku
• Date: 01 April 2022
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12639

SPECIAL ISSUE ARTICLE

Remote family dispute resolution services

for COVID and post-COVID times: Client

and practitioner perspectives

Genevieve Heard | Andrew Bickerdike | Sandra Opoku

Relationships Australia Victoria, Camberwell,

Victoria, Australia

Correspondence

Genevieve Heard, Relationships Australia

Victoria, Camberwell, Victoria, Australia.

Email: gheard@rav.org.au

Abstract

In 2020, residents in the state of Victoria, Australia endured

months of government restrictions aimed at curbing multi-

ple outbreaks of COVID-19. Family Dispute Resolution

(FDR) services continued to assist separating couples to sort

out their parenting and property matters, necessitating a

rapid and wholesale shift to remote delivery via telephone

and video conferencing. This paper reports on interviews

during and subsequent to ‘lockdown’with clients of FDR

services offered by a large, community-sector provider. The

data collected provide insights into the ways in which the

pandemic affected the immediate needs and concerns of

families as they navigated separation and shared parenting

during the pandemic. Of importance to service develop-

ment, the data include client responses to different

methods of FDR service delivery and their reflections on

how well these evolving methods were suited to their

needs. Practitioner views were also sought on service deliv-

ery methods to provide a comprehensive picture of the

advantages and challenges of remote delivery, and the ways

in which it helped or hindered in catering to the needs of

clients with safety concerns. Collectively the results of

these analyses indicate that COVID has produced new risks

and opportunities for the provision of FDR services, in both

COVID and post-COVID worlds. The evolving FDR service

model will likely continue to feature multiple delivery

options, regardless of the trajectory of the pandemic.

DOI: 10.1111/fcre.12639

© 2022 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.

220 Family Court Rev. 2022;60:220–240.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/fcre

KEYWORDS

Australia, COVID, Family Dispute Resolution, mediation,

qualitative, remote

Key points for the family court community

•In 2020, during COVID restrictions, Family Dispute Res-

olution services in Victoria, Australia, underwent a rapid

shift to remote delivery via telephone and video

conferencing.

•Client interviews were conducted in order to assess how

well these methods of delivery were suited to their

needs and concerns during the pandemic. Interviews

with practitioners were also undertaken to provide a

comprehensive understanding of the advantages and

challenges associated with remote delivery.

•Significant benefits were identified, including enhanced

accessibility, enhanced physical safety and greater con-

venience for clients. Reduced emotional intensity and

anxiety meant that some clients felt more confident in

negotiating agreements.

•Practitioners found it could be more difficult to engage

clients fully in the FDR process, and that more work was

required to assess client safety and wellbeing. In general,

adaptations were successfully made.

•The evolving FDR service model will likely continue to

feature multiple delivery options.

“I think we'll look back on this time and really value the push that sort of situation gave us to be more

flexible and develop our ability to offer responsive services to the client.”Family Dispute Resolution

Practitioner [FDRP03]

INTRODUCTION

In 2020, every country in the world experienced the dramatic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting

measures adopted by national and regional governments to slow rates of infection. In Australia, the crisis was con-

tained at levels far more manageable than in other parts of the world. However, within Australia, the state of

Victoria, including the populous city of Melbourne, was the hardest hit by COVID infections in 2020, particularly a

‘second wave’peaking in July and August of that year, and consequently endured the most severe government

restrictions for the longest period [1]. With minimal forewarning the population was placed under four months of

HEARD ET AL.221