Using professional practice experience to guide family law reform

References

• Ajjawi, R., & Higgs, J. (2007). Using hermeneutic phenomenology to investigate how experienced practitioners learn to communicate clinical reasoning. The Qualitative Report, 12(4), 612–638.
   Google Scholar
• Altobelli, T. (2011). When a child rejects a parent: Why children resist contact. Australian Journal of Family Law, 25, 185–209.
   Google Scholar
• Attorney-General's Department. (2005, December 8). Bill Marks’ ‘cultural shift’ in dealing with family breakdown. Press release.
   Google Scholar
• Australia, House of Representatives Standing Committee on Family and Community Affairs. (2003, October 13). Child custody inquiry. Official Committee Hansard.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Government. (2010). Exposure Draft Family Law Amendment (Family Violence) Bill 2010 consultation paper.
   Google Scholar
• Attorney-General's Department (2011). An evidence base for the civil justice system. Retrieved from http://www.ag.gov.au/LegalSystem/Pages/Anevidencebasefortheciviljusticesystem.aspx.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Government Attorney-General. (2011, November 24). Family violence reforms passed by parliament. Media release.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Government Attorney-General's Department. (2009). A strategic framework for access to justice in the federal civil justice system. Canberra: AGPS.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Institute of Family Studies (2013). Evaluation of the 2012 family violence amendments. Retrieved from http://www.aifs.gov.au/efva/index.html.
   Google Scholar
• Bala, N. (1999). A report from Canada's ‘gender war zone’: Reforming the child-related provisions of the Divorce Act. Canadian Journal of Family Law, 16, 163–227.
   Google Scholar
• Boyd, S. B. (2000). Can child custody law move beyond the politics of gender?University of New Brunswick Law Journal, 49, 157–168.
   Google Scholar
• Brinig, M. F. (2013a). Substantive parenting arrangements: The tragedy of the Snipe Hunt. SSRN paper posted 14 March 2013. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2233667.
   Google Scholar
• Brinig, M. F. (2013b, April 15–16). Substantive parenting arrangements: The tragedy of the Snipe Hunt. Paper presented to the Leverhulme International Network on New Families, New Governance, Melbourne Law School.
   Google Scholar
• Bryant, The Hon. Chief Justice Diana AO. (2012, May). An Australian perspective on the family justice review. Paper presented at the 2012 International Family Law Lecture, London.
   Google Scholar
• Cashmore, J., & Parkinson, P. (2011). Parenting arrangements for young children: Messages from research. Australian Journal of Family Law, 25, 236–257.
   Google Scholar
• Chisholm, R. (1996). Assessing the impact of the Family Law Reform Act 1995. Australian Journal of Family Law, 10, 177–198.
   Google Scholar
• Commonwealth, House of Representatives, Standing Committee on Family and Community Affairs. (2003). Every picture tells a story: Report on the inquiry into child custody arrangements in the event of family separation. Canberra: AGPS.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, D. (2011). Continuing the critical analysis of ‘meaningful relationships’ in the context of the ‘twin pillars’. Australian Journal of Family Law, 25, 33–53.
   Google Scholar
• de Simone, T. (2008). The friendly parent provisions in Australian family law – How friendly will you need to be?Australian Journal of Family Law, 22, 56–71.
   Google Scholar
• Dewar, J. (2010). Can the centre hold?: Reflections on two decades of family law reform in Australia. Australian Journal of Family Law, 24, 139–149.
   Google Scholar
• Dewar, J., & Parker, S. (1999). The impact of the new Part VII Family Law Act 1975. Australian Journal of Family Law, 13, 96–117.
   Google Scholar
• Dickens, J. (2004). Risks and responsibilities: The role of the local authority lawyer in child care cases. Child and Family Law Quarterly, 16, 17–30.
   Google Scholar
• Diduck, A. (2003). Law's families. London: Lexis Nexis.
   Google Scholar
• Eekelaar, J., & Maclean, M. (2013). Family justice: The work of family judges in uncertain times. Oxford: Hart.
   Google Scholar
• Eekelaar, J., Maclean, M., & Beinart, S. (2000). Family lawyers: The divorce work of solicitors. Oxford: Hart.
   Google Scholar
• Family Law Council. (2009). Improving responses to family violence in the family law system: An advice on the intersection of family violence and family law issues. Canberra: AGPS.
   Google Scholar
• Government of Western Australia Department of Child Protection. (2011). The signs of safety child protection practice framework (2nd ed). Government of Western Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Huntington, C. (2012). Neuroscience and the child welfare system. Journal of Law and Policy, 21, 37–56.
   Google Scholar
• Kaganas, F., & Diduck, A. (2004). Incomplete citizens: Changing images of post-separation children. Modern Law Review, 67, 959–981.
   Google Scholar
• Kaspiew, R., Gray, M., Qu, L., & Weston, R. (2011). Legislative aspirations and social realities: Empirical reflections on Australia's 2006 family law reforms. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 33, 307–418.
   Google Scholar
• Kaspiew, R., Gray, M., Weston, R., Moloney, L., Hand, K., & Qu, L. (2009a). Evaluation of the 2006 family law reforms. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Kaspiew, R., Gray, M., Weston, R., Moloney, L., Hand, K., & Qu, L. (2009b). Evaluation of the 2006 family law reforms: Summary report. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Kaspiew, R., Gray, M., Qu, L., & Weston, R. (2011). Legislative aspirations and social realities: Empirical reflections on Australia's 2006 family law reforms. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 33, 307–418.
   Google Scholar
• King, M., & Piper, C. (1995). How the law thinks about children (2nd ed). Aldershot: Arena.
   Google Scholar
• Law and Justice Foundation of New South Wales. (2012). Legal Australia-wide survey: Legal need in Australia. Retrieved from http://www.lawfoundation.net.au/ljf/site/templates/LAW_AUS/$file/LAW_Survey_Australia.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Lipshitz, R. (1993). Converging themes in the study of decision making in realistic settings. In G. A.Klein, J.Orasanu, R.Calderwood, & C. E.Zsambok (Eds.), Decision making in action: Models and methods. Norrwood, NJ: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Mader, L. (2001). Evaluating the effects: A contribution to the quality of legislation. Statute Law Review, 22, 119–131.
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen, L. (2011). Shared parenting after divorce: A review of shared residential parenting research. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 52, 586–609.
   Google Scholar
• O'Brien, R. (2010, July 20–21). Simplifying the system: Family law challenges – can the system ever be simple? Paper presented to the 2nd Family Law System Conference, Canberra (copy on file with the authors).
   Google Scholar
• Parkinson, P. (2006). Keeping in contact: Family relationship centres in Australia. Child and Family Law Quarterly, 18, 157–174.
   Google Scholar
• Parkinson, P., & Cashmore, J. (2011). Parenting arrangements for young children – a reply to Smyth, McIntosh and Kelaher. Australian Journal of Family Law, 25, 284–286.
   Google Scholar
• Piper, C. (1999). How do you define a family lawyer?Legal Studies, 19, 93–111.
   Google Scholar
• Rathus, Z. (2012). A call for clarity in the use of social science research in family law decision-making. Australian Journal of Family Law, 26, 81–115.
   Google Scholar
• Rhoades, H. (2006). Yearning for law: Fathers’ groups and family law reform in Australia. In S.Sheldon & R.Collier (Eds.), Fathers’ rights activism and law reform in comparative perspective (pp. 125–146). Portland, OR: Hart.
   Google Scholar
• Rhoades, H., & Boyd, S. B. (2004). Reforming custody laws: A comparative study. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 18, 119–146.
   Google Scholar
• Rhoades, H., & Swain, S. (2011). A bold experiment? Reflections on the early history of the family court. Australian Family Lawyer, 21, 11–24.
   Google Scholar
• Rhoades, H., Astor, H., & Sanson, A. (2009). A study of inter-professional relationships in a changing family law system. Australian Journal of Family Law, 23, 10–30.
   Google Scholar
• Rhoades, H., Sheehan, G., & Dewar, J. (2013). Developing a consistent message about children's care needs across the family law system. Australian Journal of Family Law, 27, 191–219.
   Google Scholar
• Rhoades, H., & Swain, S. (2011). A bold experiment? Reflections on the early history of the family court. Australian Family Lawyer, 21, 11–24.
   Google Scholar
• Smyth, B., McIntosh, J., & Kelaher, M. (2011). Research into parenting arrangements for young children: Comment on Cashmore and Parkinson. Australian Journal of Family Law, 25, 258–271.
   Google Scholar
• Trinder, L. (2007). Dangerous dads and malicious mothers: The relevance of gender to contact disputes. In M.Maclean & J.Eekelaar (Eds.), Parenting after partnering: Containing conflict between parents after separation. Oxford: Hart.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, M. (2008). Best interests, conflict and harm – a response to Chisholm and Parkinson. Australian Journal of Family Law, 22, 72–77.
   Google Scholar