• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

DO you consider that the provisions of ss11A-11P children act 1989 will equip the courts more effectively to deal with contact disputes in future?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Under s.8 of the Children Act 1989 the court may make a contact order requiring the resident parent to allow contact with a person specified therein. This is usually the non-resident parent. A breach of such an order constitutes contempt of court and may be sanctioned through a fine or imprisonment of the resident parent.1 Alternatively, in some cases, residence of the child may be transferred to the other parent. There has been much dissatisfaction with the previous law. There has been criticism of the use of imprisonment, branding it as a sanction which may be detrimental to the child's welfare2 and thus in conflict with the paramountcy principle. Another criticism of the sanctions is that they are hardly used and, therefore, ineffective.3 As a result the Children and Adoption Act 2006 amended the Children Act 1989 to introduce two new sanctions. Section 11J introduces the sanction of unpaid work where the court is satisfied, beyond all reasonable doubt, that a breach has occurred and that there is no 'reasonable excuse' for the breach. 4 Moreover, s11O introduces financial compensation for loss caused by the breach, such as the cost of a missed holiday. Contact activity directions and conditions has also be introduced (ss. 11A-G) with the aim to facilitate child contact, by providing the courts with "more flexible powers". These include parenting classes and other specified activities such as counselling or anger management courses.5 Contact activity directions will be made only whilst a court is considering making a contact order.6 Conditions will be imposed where a final contact ...read more.

Middle

Typically, the emotional harm caused to a child if its mother is sent to prison has been thought to outweigh the advantages of any contact that may thereby follow. As a result, the process of enforcing contact was often long and drawn-out, and frequently unsuccessful.18 Prior to the implementation of the reforms enacted in the 2006 Act, the courts' powers to enforce contact orders were limited to contempt proceedings, for which the sanction was either a financial penalty, often unrealistic, or imprisonment of the resident parent, with almost invariably adverse consequences for the child's welfare.19 The new sections introduced the "unpaid word requirement" designed to broaden the courts' powers to secure compliance with contact orders without infringing the child's welfare. If the court is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that a person has failed to comply with a contact order, it may make an 'enforcement order' imposing on the person an unpaid work requirement.20 In an interesting study (Dyer, 2008) it was shown many agreed, 52.8% of the legal professionals surveyed were in the view that unpaid work would not be practical for many parents due to, for example, childcare or employment commitments. As a result, it was felt probable that this measure will not commonly be utilised. Furthermore, according to the study (Dyer, 2008) there was a 56:44 split between those who thought that unpaid work would be successful in practice and those who didn't. Some commented that if harsher sanctions, such as imprisonment, were ineffective, half-hearted measures such as this would also not work. ...read more.

Conclusion

As far as the financial compensation loss is concerned, it was felt that financial constraints on the parents may simply prevent courts from imposing the new sanctions. Until now it was felt that measures to enforce contact orders are likely to remain of limited significance until the underlying problems relating to the promotion of contact are resolved. (1727 words) 1 Lowe, N. and Douglas, G. (2007). p.568 2 Baker, J. and Pressdee, P. (2006). p.185 3 Ibid. p.170 4 Children Act 1989, S.11J(2) 5 Children Act 1989, S.11A(5) 6 Children Act 1989, S,11A(7) 7 Ibid. 8 Baker, J. and Pressdee, P. (2006). p.169 9 Ibid. p.173 10 Dyer, C., McCrum, S., Thomas, R., Ward, R. and Wookey, S. (2008). 11 such as counselling or anger management courses 12 Baker, J. and Pressdee, P. (2006). Contact: The New Deal. Jordans Publishing. p.179 13 New Contact Enforcement Provisions in Force. Available at: http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed28453 (Accessed: 10 December 2008). 14 Herring, J. (2006) 15 Children Act 1989, S.16(A) 16 Fisher, M. and Whitten, S. (2006). p.35 17 Freeman, M. (2007). p.240 18 Baker, J. and Pressdee, P. (2006). Contact: The New Deal. Jordans Publishing. p.170 19 Ibid. p.185 20 Children Act 1989, s 11J(2). 21 Baker, J. and Pressdee, P. (2006). p.190 22 Dyer, C., McCrum, S., Thomas, R., Ward, R. and Wookey, S. (2008). 23 Fisher, M. (2006). p.34 24 Baker, J. and Pressdee, P. (2006). p.197 25 Herring, J. (2006). p.520 26 Ibid. 27 to direct parties to undertake contact activities, to monitor contact arrangements closely through CAFCASS, and to to subject recalcitrant parents to do unpaid work and pay compensation if they breach contact orders ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Family Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Family Law essays

  1. Child Contact

    what is in the child's best interests.6 The Court of Appeal held a child contact with parents should not be denied if there was no cogent reasons and any minor upsets would surely be outweighed by the long-term advantages.7 Also held in Re B8, bizarre behaviour did not displace the

  2. The aim of the Children Act 1989 was to simplify the law relating to ...

    In Re P (Contact: Discretion)3 the judge held that the mother's reasons should not be given any credit as her own fears and personal welfare are irrelevant. The notion of the implacably hostile mother developed in the course of a number of judgements revealing an increasingly tough line on parents who opposed contact.

  1. Child law

    The boy was forcefully returned to South Africa, however failed to settle there and his family later consented to him being returned to the couple in England.21 This evidently shows how the child's best interests were clearly not the crucial priority on the outcome of the case as stated in

  2. Who has parental responsibility & what is the significance in having it?

    Those who are aware of the law, in particular of the parental responsibility agreement, felt uncomfortable raising the subject with their partner as they felt it implied a lack of trust and as focusing on the breakdown of the relationship.

  1. Family Law: The court's interpretation of parental responsibility for fathers focuses more on ...

    than a consolation to "...help [the father] get over feelings of bitterness..." upon separation. Hoggett suggests that it is not unnatural for fathers to feel bitter as they are often the party who does not wish the relationship to break-up.

  2. Shared parenting after relationship breakdown is not in the best interests of children Discuss. ...

    Such a presumption is of course rebuttable if there is a history family violence or abuse, or such arrangements are not in the best interests of the child.12 Indeed, preliminary data has shown that in most cases that come before the Family Court of Australia and proceed to judgement, equal

  1. Discuss, with reference to statutory provision and relevant case law, the extent to which, ...

    Additionally Drs Sturge and Glaper concluded contact fulfils a wide spectrum of purposes resulting in a great quantity of benefits including the meeting of the child's needs for warmth, approval, feeling unique and special to a parent-experiences and that can be the foundation for healthy emotional growth and development, for extending experiences and developing (or maintaining)

  2. Problem Question, Divorce& FInancial Provision

    Needs Fairness requires that the assets of the parties should be divided so as to meet their housing and financial needs. Baroness Hale said that the most common rationale for redistribution is that the relationship has generated needs which it is right that the other party should meet.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work