Child inclusive mediation model

When might a family dispute resolution matter be suitable for a “child inclusive” model?

McIntosh defines the Child Informed Practice (“CIP”) as “finding the child’s voice in the presence of the child”[1]. Despite the rise of the use of the child inclusive model, it is not appropriate in all cases[2]. Thus, it is essential that the application of the model is applied appropriately.

The overriding aim of the CIP is to strengthen the parental alliance by focusing parents on the child/ren and providing insight into the impact of their conflict[3].

The CIP is distinguished to child focused mediation as it is conducted in the presence of the voice of the child through a session with a child consultant and the interpretation of this information provided to parents in the mediation session by the child consultant[4]. The aim is to positively effect the individuals and assist in the positive family reorganisation post separation[5].

Taking into consideration the overriding purpose and practical application, the process is not suitable to all matters. Notably, child inclusive dispute resolution involves two professional roles: mediator(s) who conduct a formal negotiation of the dispute with parents and a child consultant who meets with the children and provides parents and mediators with feedback[6].

In short, the process involves each parent participating in a confidential session with the child consultant (secondary intake from their individual intake) and if the matter is deemed to be suitable for the child-inclusive model, each child meets with the Child Expert to participate in age appropriate, relaxed, play-therapy-style assessment and interview[7]. Then, the Mediator, Child Expert and both parents attend mediation. Children do not attend the mediation itself[8]. During the mediator facilitated session, the mediator will consistently encourage the parents to focus on the children and their developmental needs. The child consultant will convey to the parents the issues that emerged from the assessment and provides input on how appropriate arrangements could be made to satisfy those needs[9].

For the purposes of clarity, McIntosh, and Long’s 2006 child-inclusive mediation longitudinal study assessment criteria[10] will be in listed format, below.

Parents are separated or are considering separation;[11]
The parental dispute includes child-related matters;[12]
At least one child implicated in the parenting dispute is of school age:[13]
Both parents demonstrate some intent to better manage or resolve their dispute;[14]
Adequate ego maturity of both parents;[15]
In the absence of interpreters as needed, parents speak/read English at a year 7 level or above:[16]
Consent of both parents and children is required for children’s participation in a mediation context;[17]
Children are likely to benefit from discussing their experience of the separation;[18]
Voluntary and mandated cases are applicable;[19] and
A broad range of conflict severity can be tackled in this approach.[20]

From a practical application, using a few practical examples, a CIP would be appropriate where both parents have a genuine interest in hearing how their child is coping with the separation and the parent’s conflict but would not be appropriate where there is domestic violence or child abuse[21].

Another example is that CIP is appropriate where parents have the capacity to reflect on their child’s needs as distinct from their won but would not be appropriate where there were capacity concerns whereby parents are unable to consider their needs and the needs of their child/ren as separate from their own[22].

When applied appropriately, the process can:

Facilitate the involvement of children in the disputes[23];
Provide children with an opportunity to be heard in an age-appropriate manner[24];
Allow core themes from assessment to be incorporated into mediations[25];
Introduce current and intimate material into the mediation[26]; and
Considers the developmental needs of children in any agreement reached[27].

[1] Jennifer McIntosh, ‘Child Inclusion as a Principle and as Evidence-based Practice: Application to Family Law Services and Related Sectors’ (July 2007) 1 AFRC Issues

[2] College of Law, Module 3: Needs-based decision making, children’s best interest and post separation parenting arrangements, 2023, FDR2 M03 notes 2018_12_18, <https://warehouse.collaw.edu.au/file/9fef254b-48c7-4238-b115-ac0a07967994/3/FDR2%20M03%20notes%202018_12_18.pdf>, at 5 May 2023.

[3] College of Law, above n2.

[4] L Moloney and Jennifer McIntosh, ‘Child-responsive In Australian Family Law: Past Problems and Future Directions’ (2004) 10(1) Journal of Family Studies 71-86

[5] Ibid

[6] Jennifer McIntosh, ‘Child Inclusion as a principle and as evidence-based practice: applications to family law services and related sector’ (2007), Australian Family Relationships Clearinghouse

[7]Clark & Associates Mediation Services, Child-Focussed and Child-Inclusive, Family Dispute Resolution Services, https://clarkmediation.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/CHILD-FOCUSSED-AND-CHILD-INCLUSIVE-FDR-BROCHURE.pdf, at 5 May 2023.

[8] Ibid

[9] Clark & Associates Mediation Services, above n7.

[10] McIntosh, J E & Long C M (2006) Children Beyond Dispute: A prospective study of outcomes from child focused and child inclusive post-separation family dispute resolution. Final Report. Canberra: Australian Government Attorney General’s Department.

[11] Ibid

[12] McIntosh, J E & Long C M (2006) Children Beyond Dispute: A prospective study of outcomes from child focused and child inclusive post-separation family dispute resolution. Final Report. Canberra: Australian Government Attorney General’s Department.

[13] McIntosh, J E & Long C M, above n12.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Ibid.

[19] Ibid.

[20] Ibid.

[21] College of Law, above n2.

[22] Ibid

[23] Clark & Associates Mediation Services, above at n7.

[24] Ibid.

[25] Ibid.

[26] Ibid.

[27] Ibid.