THE POTENTIAL OF THE FAMILY LAW EDUCATION REFORM PROJECT FOR FAMILY LAWYERS1

Family lawyers are major beneficiaries of the reforms set out in the Family Law Education Reform Project (FLER) Report. This commentary from a veteran family law practitioner explores the needs of the family law bar for the training of law students in practical, interdisciplinary, client‐centered lawyering that goes beyond the traditional case method. I trace many of the current innovations evolving in family law practice and how FLER reforms will not only benefit law schools but also have a major impact in the courts and private practice sector.     

THE FAMILY LAW EDUCATION REFORM PROJECT FINAL REPORT

The Family Law Education Reform Project (the FLER Project) is co‐sponsored by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts and the Center for Children, Families and the Law at Hofstra Law School. This Final Report is based on a series of dialogues between family law academics and practitioners from many disciplines, a FLER Project survey, and research conducted by law students at Hofstra University and Northeastern University. 2     

HOFSTRA'S FAMILY LAW WITH SKILLS COURSE: IMPLEMENTING FLER (THE FAMILY LAW EDUCATION REFORM PROJECT)

The Family Law Education Reform Project (FLER) Final Report documented that the current doctrinally oriented family law curriculum at most law schools does not adequately prepare students for modern family law practice. FLER recommended that law school courses move from the study of cases to the study of the legal system's effect on families, and integrate the study of alternative dispute resolution and interdisciplinary knowledge. In response, Hofstra Law School has made a comprehensive attempt to implement FLER's curricular recommendations. This article discusses one major innovation – the Family Law with Skills course. Family Law with Skills is the basic course in Hofstra's revised curriculum and is designed to integrate doctrinal teaching with professional skills development. In addition to studying legal doctrine, students are required to engage in structured field observation of family court proceedings; interviewing, counseling, negotiation, and mediation representation exercises in a divorce dispute; direct and cross examination of a social worker in a child protection dispute; and drafting of a surrogacy agreement. The article describes each exercise and discusses its rationale, student reaction to the course, and lessons learned.     

THE EVOLUTION OF MODERN CANADIAN FAMILY LAW PROCEDURE

"Family law procedure" differs greatly from "civil procedure." Canadian jurisdictions and common-law jurisdictions have copied English reforms of merging law and equity. Canada unlike the United States confined legislative authority over divorce to the federal government under the British North American Act. The Canadian federal government enacted the national Divorce Act of 1968, which had a homogenizing effect on substantive family law across Canada in both custody and support matters for a number of years. There are many pressures for fragmentation of procedure specifically, dealing with the provincial courts. Modern family law procedure is much more like civil procedure. If inquisitorial methods are used or if discovery is limited using "simplified rules" for smaller cases, family law procedure will become two different tiers-one for self-represented litigants and litigants where the stakes are small and the other tier would be one that operated under the "normal" rules of civil procedure.     

MEDIATION AND THE PROCESS OF FAMILY LAW REFORM

The family law system needs fixing. The real question is how to go about fixing it. The concept of mediation and its process should be vital in the rethinking and restructuring of the system. This article discusses how mediation can be used in policy-making to get all the stakeholders in the family law system to creatively and non-judgmentally work toward reform. The author contends that increased legal access and speedy low-cost dispute resolution should be at the top of the reform agenda. Courts and professional offices are valued for their consumer-friendliness, stressing nonadversarial settings and cleint education. Unbundling is urged to be not only accepted but also promoted as a practice to meet the legal needs of families. The article concludes with the argument that effective reform should incorporate the principles of mediation, and the reform process should take advantage of models of consumer friendliness from both the public and private sectors .     

A BETTER BEGINNING: FAMILY LAW IN THE FIRST YEAR OF LAW SCHOOL

The American Bar Association's Section of Legal Education and Admission to the Bar's Standards Review Committee has focused law schools' efforts to modify their curriculum with an appeal to focus on outcomes and assessments. A cornerstone of the outcomes and assessments discussion is skills training. The committee's call for more skills training has prompted family law faculty to consider innovative methods to bring that training into substantive courses or to bring the substantive curriculum into a skills course. This essay discusses how law faculty are incorporating family law doctrines into first‐year legal research and writing courses.     

FAMILY LAW IS DIFFERENT

Family law and adjudication are conceptually different from most other areas of law. This difference, and the sensitive needs of members of all families in dispute, including children and people from differing ethnic cultures, demand particular awareness and skills from family lawyers and judges. These special features of family law and disputes imply that mediation is more benign than lawyer-controlled dispute resolution.