The Child-centred Family Law Strategy,
Summative Evaluation
4. RELEVANCE OF THE STRATEGY
Relevance was addressed through two questions in the evaluation framework:
- To what extent are the objectives and mandate of the CCFLS still relevant?
- Is there a legitimate and necessary role of the federal government in this Strategy?
This section presents the key findings with regard to the above two evaluation questions.
4.1. Relevance of Objectives
Family structure and dynamics have been changing, with families becoming increasingly fluid/less stable and blended families becoming more complex.
Family justice activities like the CCFLS and its predecessors need to be understood and analyzed in a context of an increasingly complex environment. As illustrated in Section 2.1, family structure has been changing throughout past decades. Families are increasingly less stable and more complicated structurally with more common-law relationships, multi-layered blended families and cultural considerations. These trends have resulted in increasing the complexity of issues in family law.
Many of the family law professionals interviewed commented on the increasing complexity of family structures. Blended families (step-families) are becoming more prevalent and more diverse as separation rates increase and conjugal histories become more complex, reflecting multiple past relationships/separations. Inherent to such an increased complexity of family arrangements with many layers of extended family is an increased complexity of custody and access issues. As noted by several key informants interviewed, Canada’s cultural mosaic also contributes to the complexity of issues facing separating/divorcing families, particularly those with mixed cultural backgrounds. Mobility and relocation issues have become very complicated when the parents have lived in different countries and cultures.
It was noted by a member of the judiciary and several mediators and lawyers interviewed for the evaluation that there has been an increase in family cases where the parents had never lived together, making the resolution of custody and access issues in these situations more complicated. Further, separation or divorce often involves younger children, many of whom may face a future of multiple breakups of their family as second and third relationships are more frequent.[23] The probability of women experiencing two separations is expected to increase, with 14.8% of women in their 40s and 13.2% of women in their 30s expected to experience at least two separations.[24] From 1995 to 2001, the number of step-families increased by 16.7% from 430,500 to 503,100.[25] Members of the judiciary and mediators noted that co-parenting arrangements can be more challenging to negotiate or resolve than arrangements where one parent is designated as the primary caregiver.
Key informants also felt that family law cases are further complicated by financial issues faced by separating/divorcing families, particularly in relation to the recent substantial rise of housing costs in urban centers. Members of the judiciary and mediators noted that families are experiencing increased financial hardships and are faced with a lack of legal aid available for family law cases, making it more difficult to afford legal assistance.
Members of the judiciary and family lawyers interviewed felt that there is an increase in the number of self-represented litigants entering the family justice system. Data from the court file review shows that, in close to half (46.9 %) of divorce cases, one or both parties were self-represented. Overall, in 7.9% of cases both parties were self-represented and in 39% of cases, one party was self-represented, with men more likely to be self-represented than women. (Note, however, that these cases would include those where a joint petition is filed or the parties have come to their own agreement; that is, cases where both parties do not necessarily need a lawyer.)
Overall, the objectives and mandate of the CCFLS continue to be relevant.
Members of the judiciary and mediators interviewed for the evaluation unanimously felt that the stated objectives of the CCFLS continue to be very relevant to today’s separating/divorcing families, as increasing numbers of children experience family breakup and at younger ages.[26] Further evidence can be found in the results of the family justice service provider survey where respondents generally felt that the five family justice services supported through the CCFJF are relevant/very relevant to CCFLS objectives, particularly mediation and parent education programs, as can be seen in Table 4-1.
Objective | Parenting Education | Mediation | FLIC | Recalculation | MEP |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Minimizing the negative impact of separation/divorce on children | 84.0% | 88.4% | 59.4% | 65.2% | 69.5% |
Reaching parenting agreements in the child’s best interest | 85.5% | 89.8% | 68.1% | 53.6% | 55.1% |
Making the process to resolve issues less adversarial | 81.2% | 81.2% | 62.3% | 63.7% | 59.4% |
Source: Service Provider Survey (Malatest & Associates); n=69
4.2. Role of the Federal Government
The federal government plays a leadership role in developing and maintaining a national perspective to family justice.
Provincial/territorial and federal officials, alike, stated that the federal government plays a leadership role in developing and maintaining a national perspective towards family justice. Key informants identified a number of ways in which the federal government plays an important role in Canada’s family justice system, in addition to its constitutional responsibilities for marriage and divorce. Overall, it was felt that the federal government has a legitimate and necessary role as coordinator and funder within the family justice system.
The majority of federal and provincial/territorial officials interviewed for the evaluation felt that the federal government acts as leader in terms of setting policy direction and coordinator in terms of supporting the creation of a national perspective. Collaboration between the federal government and the provinces/territories was viewed as a key element in ensuring a “national” approach in family justice. The Department of Justice also provides direction in setting family justice priorities and objectives, and supporting selected provincial/territorial activities. Several key informants from various groups noted that, without the federal government’s involvement and funding support, many provincial programs and services would not be available in their current format, or at all. In general, supporting the provinces/territories in delivering family justice services is considered a critical element in developing a national perspective for family justice and maintaining a minimum level of service across the jurisdictions.
4.3. Observations and Conclusions
Based on the results reported in this section, the following observations and conclusions have been drawn:
- #1: At a broad level, the objectives of the Strategy are still relevant.
- #2: The federal government plays a leadership role in support of the activities of the provinces and territories. Federal-provincial/territorial collaboration is an absolute necessity to support and inspire a “national” family justice system.
- #3: The increasing instability of families reinforces the need for a family justice system that continues to provide the appropriate supports for separating/divorcing couples and their children.
- #4: Increasingly complex family arrangements in blended and multicultural families complicate custody and access issues, further emphasizing the need for an integrated and comprehensive approach to family law.
- #5: Although many issues are being/have been addressed by the Strategy, emerging trends in family dynamics require better understanding to address needs/issues and develop adjustments to policy and practices in the family justice system.
[23] Statistics Canada (2002). Changing Conjugal Life in Canada (General Social Survey – Cycle 15).
[24] Ibid.
[25] Ibid.
[26] Ibid.
- Date modified: