Children First: Proposal for Family Justice Reform and a Family Justice Triage System
- Deanna Newell
- Jul 5
- 3 min read
We call upon HM Government to reform the family justice system to ensure that children are protected from delay, conflict, and fragmented decision-making through the introduction of a structured Family Justice Triage System.
At present, many children are affected by prolonged parental conflict, delays in family court proceedings, and limited coordination between family courts, the Child Maintenance Service, and safeguarding agencies.
Some cases involve domestic abuse, coercive control, economic abuse, or other safeguarding concerns that require early identification and appropriate responses.
These issues can result in repeated litigation, inconsistency, financial hardship, and prolonged uncertainty for families.
We believe the system should be modernised to ensure earlier intervention, improved safeguarding, and more consistent, evidence-based decision-making.
We therefore call for the Government to:
Introduce mandatory early safeguarding and risk assessment in relevant family cases, including the identification of domestic abuse, coercive control, and economic abuse.
Establish a Family Justice Triage System to ensure early case allocation based on risk and need.
Improve coordination between family courts, the Child Maintenance Service, and safeguarding professionals.
Introduce coordinated, legally compliant, evidence-based information sharing between agencies.
Strengthen requirements for financial disclosure and transparency where relevant.
Improve enforcement of child maintenance obligations.
Ensure court proceedings are used as a last resort, reserved for high-risk or complex cases.
Develop a standardised early assessment questionnaire that can support both family court and child maintenance processes, reducing duplication and improving consistency.
Commission a review of whether current child maintenance arrangements unintentionally contribute to prolonged conflict or create perceptions of unfair incentives.
Proposed Family Justice Triage System
Low-conflict cases
Mediation and support services.
Parenting programmes.
Early resolution pathways.
Medium-conflict cases
Structured case management.
Specialist interventions.
Enhanced monitoring and support.
High-risk cases
Court-based safeguarding pathway.
Immediate risk assessment.
Protective measures where necessary.
High-risk cases may include domestic abuse, coercive control, economic abuse, serious safeguarding concerns, and significant risks to child welfare.
A More Joined-Up System
We recommend closer integration between family courts and the Child Maintenance Service, supported by trusted, legally compliant information-sharing and appropriate safeguards.
A single evidence-based assessment process, where appropriate, could reduce duplication, improve consistency, and save public money.
Like the NHS triage model, families should receive the right intervention at the right time. This would help ensure that resources are focused where risk is highest and prevent unnecessary escalation into lengthy court proceedings.
Coercive Control and Economic Abuse After Separation
There is increasing recognition that coercive control and economic abuse can continue after separation.
Restriction of a child’s relationship with the other parent, financial manipulation, or the use of legal processes to prolong conflict may, in some cases, form part of patterns of coercive or controlling behaviour.
Equally, concerns and allegations must always be assessed individually, based on evidence and safeguarding principles.
Concerns have been raised that aspects of the current Child Maintenance Service framework may unintentionally contribute to conflict or create perceptions of unfair incentives. Rising financial pressures and the cost-of-living crisis have increased tensions for many separated families.
The Government should review whether current arrangements adequately support children’s relationships with both parents, where it is safe and in the child’s best interests to do so.
Where courts order indirect contact or no contact, these decisions are made because the welfare and safety of the child are paramount. Such protections must remain available where necessary.
Mental Health and Child Wellbeing
Prolonged family conflict, financial hardship, repeated litigation, and unresolved disputes can have serious consequences for the mental health and wellbeing of children and parents alike.
Earlier intervention and coordinated services could help reduce:-
Stress and anxiety.
Family breakdown and repeated litigation.
Financial hardship and poverty.
Long-term mental health problems.
Pressure on public services.
A More Evidence-Based System
Family justice reform should be guided by science, evidence, and safeguarding principles rather than adversarial approaches or assumptions.
There is a need for:-
Standardised early assessment.
Better data sharing and coordination.
Improved understanding of coercive control and economic abuse.
Gender-neutral, evidence-based decision-making.
Accountability on all sides.
Greater consistency across family justice processes.
Purpose of the Reform
These changes aim to:-
Reduce delays.
Improve consistency.
Strengthen safeguarding.
Reduce unnecessary litigation.
Save public money.
Improve mental health outcomes.
Promote financial transparency.
Protect children from prolonged conflict.
Ensure that the welfare and best interests of the child remain the central priority in all family justice decisions.
Closing Statement
A modern family justice system should prioritise early intervention, coordinated services, financial transparency, and evidence-based decision-making to improve outcomes for children and families.
Court should be a last resort, not the default pathway.
Children First. Facts First. Evidence First. The Right Support. The Right Outcome.
Deanna Newell Family Law
Advocacy for truth-tellers, survivors, and the children who deserve better
