I am a family law barrister. On this blog you will see me identified as ‘Familoo’ (a concatenation of ‘family’ and ‘Loo’ – short for Lucy). I have been at the family bar for eight years and am still amazed at how little most people understand about the work that I do (even my friends – you know who you are).
Since summer 2008 when I made my escape from the big smoke and back to my roots in the West Country I have been a member of St John’s Chambers in Bristol. Finally, I’m at home…
Pink Tape is not just about family law: I post about what interests me and whilst that is largely family law, it also includes non-family legal stuff, non-legal family stuff and stuff totally unrelated to either law or family.
I’d love to think that this blog will persuade at least one person we aren’t all the money hungry sharks you think we are. Some of us are quite nice really. And I’d like to think that I can provide some useful information about family law for those working in the area without getting too heavy or boring.
Of course, everything on the blog is suitably anonymised so that nobody (including me) gets into hot water. Where necessary I have tweaked facts to ensure that individual cases are not identifiable. I will not post comments that in my opinion offend against the law in respect of the privacy of family proceedings.
And, in case you were wondering, nothing in this blog is intended to constitute or be taken as legal advice. You should take legal advice in relation to any specific case. See further here. And of course I cannot be responsible for the content of sites linked to from this blog, either in terms of their accuracy or the views expressed on them.
Moderation – Unfortunately I’ve had to start moderating comments on this blog. Please be assured I don’t plan to block sensible contributions to a discussion, whether the contributors agree with me or not – but I will weed out comments that are seeking to exploit this blog as a forum to air their own negative views about lawyers in a repetitive or offensive manner. I will try and moderate as quickly as possible.
Right of Reply – I try to be careful and fair with my posts on this blog and try to avoid causing upset to individuals, but if there is any post concerning you as an individual that contains an inaccuracy or mistake that you would like me to correct please post a comment and I will give you a right of reply. I will usually only edit or reject comments that contain offensive material or material which the law or rules of court prevent me from publishing.
Please feel free to email me with suggestions for topics I could cover or blog posts you’d like to see (email: familoo at pinktape dot co dot uk).
Hi! Have just added you to my family law blogroll. We are a small but growing band. Delia Venables is doing a piece on family law blogs and if you get in touch with her she will probably include you on her website listings.
Good luck with it. A reciprocal link would be lovely.
As from Tuesday 25th September the popular Radio 4 series “Law in Action” will be available as a podcast from http://www.bbc.co.uk/lawinaction or via iTunes
The series returns with features on compulsion of witnesses, the use of DNA evidence and a powerful interview with the Chief Inspector of Prisons, Anne Owers.
With best wishes,
[…] About […]
Hi
I am an Insolvency Practitioner and like you I am eager to dispel myths about the profession I am in and at the same time ensure more people get to know more about the basic building blocks of insolvency law and practice.
Increasingly I see the grey area between insolvency and family law as a challenge. I am sure that you see it the same, being the flip side of the coin.
I would appreciate it if we could swop thoughts on where the grey areas between our two specialisms are, how grey they are at the moment, and what developments there may be in the courts and in response to the cases passing through the courts going forward that may effect what either of us does and the advice we give to clients/action we have to take?
Regards
Paul
Hi Paul,
This grey area seems to be a hotbed of activity at the moment, with new case law appearing all the time. Its clearly one of those areas that family lawyers need to know something about, and I ensure I am up to speed with the basics, but those who are truly expert in both areas are I think quite few and far between. Both are highly specialist areas. I am certainly not one of them.
It certainly seems that now more than ever the family courts (and family lawyers) cannot ignore a bankruptcy or a possible bankruptcy, and that there may be more cases in which we will have to take specialist advice from an insolvency practitioner in order to give a client the soundest of advice (whether that be on behalf of a debtor or her/his spouse)…
I am putting together a seminar for family lawyers on this, it will take me a month or so, but I am am sure that a lot will ‘out’ from taking the time out to bring it all together.
Have you heard the outcome of the appeal on Hill & Bangham v Haines?
Hi Paul,
Judgment not out I don’t think. See Family Lore (http://www.familylore.co.uk/2007/11/patience.html), who I think is keeping tabs on this…
Loo
Hi
is there any way of finding out what recent posts (in threads) have been made?
You’ve responded to a couple of comments I’ve made, but I only found out by checking the thread.
Regards
STH
No idea. Anyone out there who can tell us?
Recent comments are easy to add with WordPress. Just go to your Dashboard, select Presentation, then Widgets, and choose the Recent Comments widget. (You have to save the changes, of course.)
So easy I’ve done it in the blink of an eye. Thanks.
Please excuse the shameless self promotion, but…
You (and your readers) might be interested to know that we have recently launched a new blog named “The Ancillary Actuary” (http://www.ancillaryactuary.co.uk). The blog is intended to promote discussion of the financial aspects of divorce, amongst the professionals working in that area. Your views on our content would be much appreciated.
Regards
James Moore
Bradshaw Dixon & Moore Ltd.
PS. It is not my intention to “spam” your site to get publicity for ours. I perfectly understand that you might not wish to publish this comment.
Hi there,
really useful site, but I’m at work at the moment so don’t have much time to search through old blogs. Is there anything on here about ways to make/encourage a father continue with visits to his child? seem to find things about fathers having the right to see their child, but what about the right of the child to see their father?!
Many thanks in advance,
Soph
Nothing specific I don’t think, but I know people have commented before that they wish there was a mechanism to encourage a father’s relationship with his child – the answer I’m afraid is always the same – there is no legal mechanism for achieving this, and not much in the way of practical solution that can be offered to help resolve this sad situation. You can bring a horse to water and all that…Sorry if that’s not remotely helpful.
Hi, Just wanted to reply to a quote by familoo. She said, “people have commented before that they wish there was a mechanism to encourage a father’s relationship with his child”
Well familoo, there used to be a mechanism and it was called marriage. My wish is that couples, but mothers in particular, understood precisely what they are doing to their children when they choose the soft option and run to the solicitor.
Of course if you come from the school of thought that believes there is such a thing as a “well managed divorce” that will have no adverse effect on the children, it is unlikely you will be convinced. I can understand why some people hold this view because the time lag between cause and effect is considerable. There is also an accumulative effect called the cycle of deprivation. Maybe if reps from the legal profession got together with independent, non governmental psychologists, a coherent plan might emerge that does not abuse children. Because that is exactly what the present system is doing. “The Best Interest Of The Children”…don’t make me laugh.
Well I take your point about marriage, but I don’t accept that running to a solicitor (whether by wife or husband) is necessarily a ‘soft option’. Although you are no doubt right that many people give up on marriage too easily, and many don’t appreciate the full significance of their actions on their children, there are a number of very good reasons why leaving a particular relationship may be difficult but right – for both parents and children. To say that one hopes for a divorce to be “well managed” is not to say that one wishes there to be more divorces or relationship breakdowns, but simply to aspire to a situation where those which must come to an end involve as little pain as possible for all involved.
And of course you take my quote out of context (I’m not sure why you have commented on the ‘About’ page rather than at the site of the quote itself which I can’t immediately locate) – what I believe I was referring to was a number of comments from mothers about absentee fathers (but which would apply equally to absentee mothers) opining about the inability of the law to compel an absent parent to spend time with his or her child. There are such absentee parents. Do you criticise the parent left holding the baby for wishing that their child had two parents in their life? A law may not be the answer but the sentiment is surely valid.
What I don’t understand is why in any sense your comment is directed at ‘mothers in particular’. Or perhaps it’s more accurate to say that I think I probably do understand it, but I challenge its validity.
Hi,
Like the blog – I’ve just given it a mention in Community Care – hope that’s ok.
Regards
Simeon
Excellent – thanks.
Sorry about my poor navigation but I come to this site from another link and have not found my way around yet.
Allow me to explain. The reason I described running to the solicitors as the soft option is because it is far easier than the hard slog of counselling which involves self examination and a degree of introspection that is not encouraged in our society.
In my experience the stereoype image of hubby dumping wifey for a younger model is not as prevalent as we are led to believe. Nearer to the truth is that our society has been sold a lie about our entitlement to personal happiness and is espoused in many feminist magazines.
As a result, there is now a wide range of legitimate excuses available designed to alleviate any old fashioned feelings of guilt They start from “not feeling appreciated” to allegations of sexual abuse, real, imagined or made up.
The reason I said, “mothers in particular” is because the stats I frequently read are that 7 out of 10 divorces are initiated by mothers. Possibly you have more accurate figures but these serve my purpose. I am sure of one thing however that the deadbeat dads are outnumbered by mothers who just want to move on to another relationship.
Sadly, whenever divorce is discussed on television , the happiness of children is never factored in to the equation.
But the evidence is out there on the streets as teenagers use alcohol to blot out negative emotions they cannot process internally or articulate.
We have been here before and it didn’t work then. Why would it work today?
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/26jul/russianwoman.htm
O-KAY…Agreed, counselling can be a positive alternative to simply ditching a relationship. Agreed, teenageers (and indeed children of all ages) find family breakdown very troubling and the ramifications of that run through society. Then I’m afraid we part company:
No idea what magazines you are referring to but suspect none of them would count as ‘feminist’ in my book. Mainstream female magazines which I take to be your culprits here are pretty much a product of a male dominated consumerist society in my book, and the notions of entitlement to personal happiness pervade society as whole – both men and women, adults and children, albeit expressed by the different sexes in different ways.
The wide range of ‘legitimate excuses’ for leaving a relationship you refer to are equally available to both men and women, and in my experience utilised by both.
7 out of 10 divorces may well be initiated by women, but that tells us little about the causes of relationship breakdown. What it may indicate however is that women are disproportionately financially vulnerable on separation and divorce and need to initiate proceedings in order to access legal redress in respect of financial relief or injunctive protection. That no doubt is not the only reason but it is a real factor. I don’t suggest that this is the case, but of course one could use the stat of 7 in 10 to argue that men make less satisfying spouses than women, rather than that women per se are less easily satisfied.
I’m afraid I have NO idea of the relevance of your link to an article on Russia in 1926 – I am struggling to see how it helps us to understand modern marriage in England & Wales. Who is advocating the abolition of marriage? I am certainly not (my husband will be pleased).
So whilst I share your sadness at the decline of marriage and of the longevity of relationships in general, I don’t want to return to a situation where someone in an abusive or destructive relationship is unable to escape. And I don’t think its helpful or fair to point the finger at women (or feminism) for that decline. It is tempting for every person who has suffered the breakdown of a relationship to feel that their experience is one instance of a template repeated up and down the country – but it’s not so simple. Relationships are complex and the generalised levelling of blame is not only uninformative but also reductive. It doesn’t do justice to the individual families so profoundly affected.
But this is all too heavy for a Sunday evening. So I’m going to sign off.
Best wishes.
Lucy, The relevance of the article about Russia is the understanding that a piece of history brings to our thoughts today.
But let me clear one thing up first. When I refer to Feminism I am talking about 2nd wave feminism, not the Suggragettes. Understanding 2nd wave feminism is crucial to making sense of everything that is happening to marriage and relationships today.
The article about Russia helps to understand Marxist thinking, an ideology that is alive and well today. It may be in a different wrapper and presented with a smile, but marketing style doesn’t alter the final product.
A good place to start would be with Erin Pizzey, the founder of the first womens refuge in Chiswick London. Her story brings a panoramic view to all who look at this topic through the lens of he mainstream media
To understand what is happening, first we have to read the minutes of the last meeting.
[…] About […]
Well I take your point about marriage, but I don’t accept that running to a solicitor (whether by wife or husband) is necessarily a ‘soft option’. Although you are no doubt right that many people give up on marriage too easily, and many don’t appreciate the full significance of their actions on their children, there are a number of very good reasons why leaving a particular relationship may be difficult but right – for both parents and children. To say that one hopes for a divorce to be “well managed” is not to say that one wishes there to be more divorces or relationship breakdowns, but simply to aspire to a situation where those which must come to an end involve as little pain as possible for all involved.
+1