*Study backs 'tandem model' of welfare and legal court support for children
Joe Lepper
Friday, May 18, 2018
Children in court benefit from dual representation from both a publicly funded legal representative and a Cafcass guardian, a study has concluded.
This ‘tandem model' of representation to ensure their legal and welfare rights are being protected, had been called into question seven years ago by the Family Justice Review.
This raised concerns that both roles are duplicating work, and deploying a lawyer and a guardian together is disproportionate to the level of representation required by the child.
But a Ministry of Justice study investigating the effectiveness of the model, which has been carried out with the support of Family Division head Sir James Munby, has found that both roles offer distinct support that is beneficial to children.
In backing the retention of the tandem model the study found that it was important for children to have their welfare needs met by Cafcass guardians and legal issues covered by a solicitor or barrister representing them.
Cafcass guardians also offer a distinct mediation role between families, children's professionals and courts which helps limit delays. Cases where a guardian was not present were more likely to involve disagreements and delays, the study found.
"Professionals emphasised the strength and value of the tandem model and overall did not believe that any amendments, or adoption of an alternative model of children's representation, was required," states the study.
"There was consensus that the model was working well with professionals adapting to stretched resources to ensure their respective roles contributed to making decisions in the best interests of the child.
"Judges tended to report that care planning decisions would be subject to increased risk without the guardian's independent scrutiny."
But the study notes that despite support for the tandem model it is only being used in less than half (46 per cent) of cases.
Judges indicated that they wanted to see the model used more widely. They said that in more than half of cases (55 per cent) the model was considered necessary. In just 30 per cent of cases they thought that only a legal representative was needed.
Some judges involved in the study suggested introducing a formal process to assess on a case by case basis whether a guardian and lawyer are both required to represent the child.
The study concludes that it may be worth exploring whether guidance should be introduced for courts should such a formal process be introduced, outlining the distinct value of each role to children.
"This guidance could outline that the assessment must be continually reviewed by the judge, guardian and solicitor during proceedings, and include the option to redirect or excuse representatives as the case necessitates," adds the study.