Custody, versus, battle, opponent, rights, parties and dispute – these are the words family law professionals consider the most harmful to family relationships, according to the Family Solutions Group. The group, set up by Mr Justice Cobb in 2020, marked the first anniversary of no-fault divorce reforms by calling for an end to ‘combative’ language in family separation cases.
For the past three months, the group has been holding ‘language matters’ workshops, where 400 professionals, including solicitors and judges, were asked to share words that were most harmful to family relationships.
Other perceived harmful words included entitlement, 50:50, judgment, primary carer, fight, access, my client and applicant.
The most helpful phrases included use of first names, collaboration, problem-solving, together, our children and co-parenting.
In a separate survey, 86% of 228 respondents strongly agreed that plain language instead of legal jargon would help and 76% thought first names rather than terms such as ‘applicant’ were better.
Habit was identified as the greatest obstacle to changing the language around separating families. At least seven in 10 professionals thought formal guidance from the judiciary might be needed for language to change.
Helen Adam, chair of the Family Solutions Group, said: ‘It’s shocking that harmful terms like “custody” are still commonplace in our society and the media, despite every effort to remove them. The “fighting talk” so often used in the context of family separation sets parents against each other, escalating family problems and putting children at risk. A “custody battle” suggests a tug of war between parents for the control of their child, with parents pulling against each other. Not only is this 30 years out of date, but it’s harmful to children, unhelpful for parents and ultimately damaging to society.
‘In these days of increasing awareness of the impact of language upon minority groups, it is extraordinary that there is such a blind spot over the impact of language on families who separate. The simple truth is that fuelling aggression and battles between parents increases the risk of harm to their children. Our language should reflect a problem-solving approach rather than stoke the fire of a battle.’
As well as publishing a ‘Language Matters’ paper, the group has been supporting the ongoing work of the Family Law Language Project, set up to make family law easier to understand, less hostile and more accessible.
