Representing Children consistently with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child - Family Law
Representing Children consistently
with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child - Family Law
- The National
Inquiry into Children and the Legal Process
- The child's
right to participate
- Representation
in the Family Court - the separate representative
- Alternative
models of representation
- The Inquiry's
approach
- Further information
The
National Inquiry into Children and the Legal Process
In 1997 the report
of a joint inquiry into children and the legal process undertaken at the
request of the then federal Attorney-General by the Australian Human Rights Commission (the Commission) and the Australian Law Reform Commission
(ALRC) was published. Titled Seen
and heard: priority for children in the legal process, the report
considers, among many other topics, how the representation of children
before Australian courts and tribunals could become more consistent with
the requirements of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
This article briefly outlines the main findings and conclusions as they
particularly apply in Family Law matters.
The
child's right to participate
Article 12 of the
Convention sets out the child's right to participate in judicial and administrative
proceedings. It requires that a child capable of forming his or her own
views has the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting
the child and that they be given due weight in accordance with the child's
age and maturity. Furthermore, it requires that the child be provided
with the opportunity to be heard in any judicial and administrative proceedings
affecting the child - this being either directly or through a representative
or appropriate body.
The general rule
of advocacy is that the client sets the goals of representation. However,
in many cases involving children this general obligation of a representative
to act upon instructions is modified. The law presumes that a child cannot
assert rights or form a judgment. Therefore, children traditionally lack
the legal capacity to instruct. Article 12 speaks directly to the child's
legal representative as responsible for representing the best interests
of the child and being the voice of the child. To secure the child's right
to participate effectively the legal representative must
- determine, in
the individual case, whether the child is capable of forming his or
her own views
- ensure the child
is free and feels free to express those views and
- take those views
into account - with the weight to be given them dependent on the age
and maturity of the child.
Representation
in the Family Court - the separate representative
Separate representatives
are required to advocate in accordance with their assessment of the child's
best interests and do not act upon the child's instruction or advocate
the child's wishes. The functions, rights, responsibilities, obligations
and duties of the separate representatives are derived from common law,
particularly from cases heard in the Family Court.
The Family Court
has established some general guidelines concerning the function of the
separate representative.1 Another Full Family Court decision
listed the functions of the representative, including
1. Act in
an independent and unfettered way in the best interests of the child.
3. Inform the
Court by proper means of the children's wishes in relation to any matter
in the proceedings. In this regard, the separate representative is not
bound to make submissions on the instructions of a child or otherwise
but is bound to bring the child's expressed wishes to the attention
of the Court.
7. Minimise the
trauma to the child associated with the proceedings.2
A major criticism
of the separate representative model is that it denies competent children
the right to instruct their advocates. The separate representative must
tell the court what wishes the child has expressed3 but does
not have a duty to make submissions to the court which represent the wishes
of the child4 or to argue for an outcome in line with the wishes
of the child. The credibility and weight given to children's wishes are
matters for the court and will vary from case to case. In many cases involving
children the representative for a child may discount, editorialise or
reject the child's wishes and argue the case in accordance with his or
her own views of the child's best interests.
The Inquiry was told
that about 70% of children over about 12 with a separate representative
in Family Law matters express wishes as to the outcome of a matter.5
In most cases those wishes are sufficiently developed for them to form
the basis of submissions on the best interests of the child.6
A major role of the
separate representative is to keep the child informed of the progress
of the litigation.7 The representative also should act to minimise
the trauma to the child associated with the proceedings.8
The assumption that
children lack the judgment of adults is now being challenged. Many children
have the maturity and judgment to direct their lawyer just as many adults
have limited maturity and poor judgment but instruct legal representatives.
Children may better
accept decisions that they understand and have participated in making.
The inclusion in the Family Law Act of the wishes of the child as one
of the primary determining factors in deciding the best interests of that
child gives some voice to children in the process. There is evidence that
the increased sense of control by effective participation in these processes
is strongly related to the health, both psychological and physical, of
the child.
Submissions to the
Inquiry suggested that children feel marginalised by the best interest
advocacy. Children expressed a feeling of helplessness due to not being
listened to or believed. Some submissions maintained that many separate
representatives do not meet or interview the child but rely solely on
the assessment of their chosen social scientists to determine the best
interests of the child.9 One submission stated that '[o]ften
the separate representative for the child has never met the child let
alone attempted to understand the child's point of view'.10
Alternative
models of representation
The team approach
In the team approach,
the lawyer is not required to investigate directly and assess the best
interests of the child or to reach conclusions that he or she may not
be equipped to make. The representative takes instructions in the usual
manner from an appropriately trained and qualified social scientist who
is responsible for the assessment of the child's circumstances and the
determination of the child's best interests. In the team approach the
role confusion of the separate representative is reduced allowing the
representative to advocate according to the instructions or advice of
the social scientist. However the child still gets a bit lost in the process.
In fact what the team approach does is add an extra participant between
the child and the court as the decision-maker.
Direct representation
This model of representation
provides the child with a direct voice in the decision making process.
Direct legal representation avoids the role confusion associated with
best interests advocacy by establishing a lawyer-client relationship between
the representative and the child. It allows children to participate directly
in proceedings if they are able and willing to do so.
The
Inquiry's approach
The Inquiry wrestled
with the various modes of advocacy for children and was not convinced
that any one model is appropriate to all circumstances. The needs of children
differ to such an extent that there can be no single model appropriate
for all children. However, the basis of the representation and the roles
and functions of the representative should be clear to the court, the
representative and the child concerned. This requires clear ethical and
practical standards for all representatives to ensure that there is appropriate
participation of an engagement with the child.
The need for
standards
No detailed standards
have been developed by the legal profession for representation of children
in any Australian jurisdiction. The Federation of Community Legal Centres
noted an ad hoc approach to the representation of children. Furthermore
differences are emerging between jurisdictions in the roles and functions
of representatives. The Inquiry heard evidence of different advocacy approaches
in the various jurisdictions.
The legal profession
needs to determine the ethical basis and corresponding rules and standards
for the representation of children in the Family Law jurisdiction covering
both the situation when the child wishes to participate and that when
the child is not able or willing to participate.
The Inquiry recommended
that clear standards for the representation of children in all Family
Law proceedings should be developed. Among other matters, these standards
should require
- In all cases where
a representative is appointed and the child is able and willing to express
views or provide instructions, the representative should allow the child
to direct the litigation as an adult client would. In determining the
basis of representation, the child's willingness to participate and
ability to communicate should guide the representative rather than any
assessment of the 'good judgment' or level of maturity of the child.
- The representative
should meet the child as soon as possible and, in most instances, well
before the first hearing.
- The representative
should meet with a verbal child at least before every substantive proceeding
or event at which important decisions are being made regarding the child
or which are relevant to the representation of the child.
- Contact with the
child should occur where and when it is comfortable for the child not
merely where and when it is convenient for the representative.
- Even where the
child is non-verbal, the representative should at least see the child,
preferably in the child's living environment.
- The lawyer should
use language appropriate to the age and maturity of the child.
- The representative
should employ appropriate listening techniques and provide non-judgmental
support.
- Preference should
be given to face-to-face communication with the child rather than communication
by telephone or in writing.
The standards should
make the following additional provisions where the child is able to communicate
and expresses wishes about the direction of the litigation.
- Sufficient time
should be devoted to each child to ensure that the child understands
the nature of the proceedings and that the representative has established
the child's directions.
- The representative
should meet with the child often enough to maintain and develop the
lawyer-client relationship.
- When discussing
the case with the child, the representative should use concrete examples
and provide the client with a 'road map' of the interview and the legal
process.
- Younger children
who wish to direct the litigation may be clear about their views on
one or more issues to be decided but be unwilling to express a view
on other matters. In such cases, the representative should make procedural
decisions with a view to advancing the child's stated position and should
elicit whatever information and assistance the child is willing to provide.
Representatives should seek the assistance of appropriate social scientists
to assist them to ascertain the wishes and directions of younger children
where necessary.
The standards should
make the following additional provisions where the child is unable or
unwilling to provide direction on the litigation.
- Where a child
is unable or unwilling to set the goals of the litigation, the representative
should ensure that the court is aware of the fact and understands that
the representation is to be on the basis of the best interests of the
child.
- Under no circumstances
should the representative proceed if he or she is uncertain of the basis
of representing the child.
- Standards should
specify functions of a representative acting in the best interests of
a child. They should include
- to ensure that
all relevant evidence, including any evidence that may contradict
the assessment of the representative, is placed before the court
- to investigate
all relevant facts, parties and people
- to subpoena
all documents
- to retain experts
as needed
- to observe the
child in the caretaker's setting and formulate optional plans
- to advocate
zealously for the legal rights of the child including safety, visitation
and sibling contact
- to challenge
the basis for expert and agency conclusions to ensure accuracy
- to ensure that
all relevant and material facts are put before the court.
Duties of disclosure
and confidentiality
In relation to duties
of disclosure and confidentiality the Inquiry recommended that relevant
legislation should ensure that legal professional privilege applies to
communications between the representative and the child in Family Law
matters even where the child is not the client of the representative.
This privilege should be subject to the obligation of the representative
to notify the court of matters
- that may place
at risk the safety or best interests of the child
- that the court
would otherwise not have access to and
- that would be
likely materially to affect the court's deliberations.
The representative
has an obligation to the child to ensure that the child is aware of the
confidentiality of their discussions and of the limits to that confidentiality.
This should be discussed with the child at the first meeting. Where it
subsequently becomes clear that the representative will have to disclose
a communication with the child, the representative should meet with the
child and formulate a strategy for that disclosure.
Representation
of siblings
Siblings are often
represented by one advocate in private family law matters which will be
appropriate in many cases. However, there will be cases in which the children's
instructions or interests do not coincide. The Inquiry recommended that
in these cases the representative should carefully ascertain the views
and instructions of each child. Where any divergence in instructions amounts
to a conflict of interest for the representative, the representative should
not represent all the children.
Terminating
the appointment of the representative
As the child is at
present not the client of the separate representative, he or she is not
permitted to dismiss the representative. It is for the court to decide
whether to discharge the separate representative. In situations where
the child is willing and able to participate in the proceedings and has
lost confidence in the representative, this fact, in the absence of significant
arguments to the contrary, ought to constitute grounds for the court to
remove the representative. Further, the Inquiry recommended that where
it appears to the representative that the child is unwilling or unable
to express a view about the litigation and
- the representative
considers that the best interests of the child do not require that evidence
be tested or adduced or
- the representative
is merely confirming the submissions of one party and is calling no
independent evidence
the representative
should apply, as early in the proceedings as possible, to be discharged.
Skills and
training
Assessing a child's
competence, ensuring his or her views are freely expressed and judging
what weight to give them are all skills in which few lawyers are trained.
The Inquiry received a number of submissions stressing the need for training
for separate representatives especially in the Family Court. The representation
of children is a specialty area and it was pointed out that representatives
should receive specific and substantial training. Children's representatives
in all jurisdictions should receive appropriate training in children's
development and cognition and in interviewing children.
Among other proposals,
the Inquiry recommended that the practice of children's law in the Family
Court should be developed as an area of specialisation. Legal aid grants
should generally be restricted to lawyers accredited as qualified children's
representatives although exceptions for good reason should be permitted.
Further
information
This article is intended
only as a brief guide to the children's representation aspects of Seen
and heard: priority for children in the legal process. If you
would like more detailed information, please refer to the full report.
Footnotes
1 See
Bennett and Bennett (1991) FLC 92-191, 78,258-78,259; P and
P (1995) FLC 92-625, 82,157.
2 P and P (1995) FLC 92-625, 82,157.
3 Pagliarella and Pagliarella (1993) FLC 92-400, 80,108;
Re K (1994) 92-461, 80,770.
4 Pagliarella and Pagliarella (1993) FLC 92-400, 80,108;
Re K (1994) FLC 92-461, 80,770; Bennett and Bennett (1991) FLC
92-191, 78,259.
5 J Ryan, NSW Legal Aid Commission, Minutes of Meeting Sydney
11 November 1996.
6 Ibid. See also D Smith & J Rimmer, Minutes of Meeting Brisbane
2 August 1996.
7 K M Berck 'The role of the separate representative' in P
K Cooper (ed) Family Law: Children Blackstone Press, Sydney, 1993,
131.
8 P and P (1995) FLC 92-615, 82,157.
9 Geelong Rape Crisis Centre Submission 151. See also Youth
Advocacy Centre Submission 120; Royal Children's Hospital Brisbane,
Minutes of Meeting Brisbane 29 July 1996; Adelaide Focus Group 29 April
1996; Bendigo Practitioners' Forum 31 May 1996.
10 Anonymous Submission 180.
Last
updated 2 December 2001.