The crux of the problem is that when we encounter stakeholders in the family court system, their level of understanding of family violence is vastly different, depending on their own training. When you have broad terms such as “where it's appropriate”, to me, because of my background, that is understood to include family violence. To many of the people we encounter in the family courts, that is not necessarily understood.
What you're going to see is a common theme in our submission that if you want to address family violence, which I believe is one of the four pillars of these changes, there has to be some specificity. The language matters. We've been talking all along about how the language matters.
If you have a recognition that not everybody is coming to that space at the same level of understanding, our strong recommendation is that it should be reflected. It should be made clear in the legislation and there should be a caveat put in, that in cases of family violence this may not be appropriate. What we see time and time again with different parts of the family court system, which in Ontario includes court support workers, mediators, paralegals, consultants and legal clinic clerks, is that people come to it with a different level of understanding.
We have the strong recommendation that the family violence wording be put into play in proposed section 7.3, but also in the best interest of the child in proposed subsection 16(3), that where appropriate, family violence should be considered by decision-makers when they're deciding the best interests of the children.