INDEPENDENT LEGAL REPRESENTATION FOR CHILDREN IN CUSTODY AND ACCESS CASES

In this article, the author discusses the role of children's representation in custody and access cases, and in particular, considers whether the Stobridge case came to a correct determination of the most appropriate role for children's counsel. The three possible modes of child representation are considered: amicus curiae, litigation guardian, and advocate. The role of amicus curiae is rejected because it does not provide the child with an opportunity to be heard, thus defeating the purpose of representation. The role of litigation guardian is rejected on the basis that the guardian does not advocate the child's interests unless they are consistent with that of the guardian. The author concludes that Stobridge was correctly decided, and that the role of children's counsel in a custody or access dispute in which the children are capable of directing counsel should be that of advocate.