7,367
edits
Difference between revisions of "JP Boyd on Family Law Editorial Manifesto"
From Clicklaw Wikibooks
JP Boyd on Family Law Editorial Manifesto (view source)
Revision as of 20:46, 9 May 2019
, 20:46, 9 May 2019no edit summary
Nate Russell (talk | contribs) |
Nate Russell (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
# '''be helpful'''<br/>Above all, the information provided in this resource should be helpful. It should be practical and pragmatic and the wiki should provide other resources, like court forms, charts, checklists and links to external websites, where they serve a practical purpose. | # '''be helpful'''<br/>Above all, the information provided in this resource should be helpful. It should be practical and pragmatic and the wiki should provide other resources, like court forms, charts, checklists and links to external websites, where they serve a practical purpose. | ||
<nowiki>*</nowiki>The bit about this resource being opinionated, prescriptive and recommendatory needs a bit of an explanation. Writing as an individual I have always felt free to express my views on things through my website, although I took care to ensure that my employers wouldn't be tarred with, or too upset about, my opinions. As a result, rather than trying to provide a legally complete, politically neutered website that in trying to say all things for all people wound up saying nothing, I have felt free to use the forbidden terms “should” and “shouldn’t.” I have said that parenting coordination can be expensive (it can), that grandparents will have a hard time getting parenting time over the objections of a parent (they will) and that the cost of resolving a legal dispute through trial can be prohibitively expensive (it is). There is value, I think, in being able to say “yes you can make an application for an order restraining the children from having their hair cut on Wednesdays, but you shouldn’t because it’s not worth the time, the money, the conflict or the anxiety.” I hope that readers learning what they can do, will also learn what they oughtn't. | <nowiki>*</nowiki>The bit about this resource being opinionated, prescriptive and recommendatory needs a bit of an explanation. Writing as an individual I have always felt free to express my views on things through my website, although I took care to ensure that my employers wouldn't be tarred with, or too upset about, my opinions. As a result, rather than trying to provide a legally complete, politically neutered website that in trying to say all things for all people wound up saying nothing, I have felt free to use the forbidden terms “should” and “shouldn’t.” I have said that parenting coordination can be expensive (it can), that grandparents will have a hard time getting parenting time over the objections of a parent (they will) and that the cost of resolving a legal dispute through trial can be prohibitively expensive (it is). There is value, I think, in being able to say “yes you can make an application for an order restraining the children from having their hair cut on Wednesdays, but you shouldn’t because it’s not worth the time, the money, the conflict or the anxiety.” I hope that readers learning what they can do, will also learn what they oughtn't do. | ||
Finally, in reading the 2012 report of the [https://perma.cc/MK6U-5KT9 Family Justice Working Group of the Action Committee on Access to Justice in Civil and Family Matters], I gained further insight into the purposes of my website. In a discussion about court-provided information programs, the working group commented that: | Finally, in reading the 2012 report of the [https://perma.cc/MK6U-5KT9 Family Justice Working Group of the Action Committee on Access to Justice in Civil and Family Matters], I accidentally gained further insight into the purposes of my website. In a discussion about court-provided information programs, the working group commented that: | ||
<blockquote>“Beyond the obvious value of orienting and helping to organize the parties, these programs are premised on two ideas. The first is that information is essential to a fair resolution. The second is that information is a dispute resolution tool, or put in the negative, misinformation can generate and prolong disputes. … Early information has been demonstrated to be sufficiently effective in reducing conflict and expediting resolution that many provinces have elected to make it mandatory.”</blockquote> | <blockquote>“Beyond the obvious value of orienting and helping to organize the parties, these programs are premised on two ideas. The first is that information is essential to a fair resolution. The second is that information is a dispute resolution tool, or put in the negative, misinformation can generate and prolong disputes. … Early information has been demonstrated to be sufficiently effective in reducing conflict and expediting resolution that many provinces have elected to make it mandatory.”</blockquote> | ||
I took two principles from this. First, that accurate legal information is essential to the fair resolution of family law disputes. Second, that accurate legal information is itself a tool for the resolution of family law disputes. That was kind of what I had always had in mind for my website, and I hope continues to guide the development of this resource in the future. | I took two principles from this. First, that accurate legal information is essential to the fair resolution of family law disputes. Second, that accurate legal information is itself a tool for the resolution of family law disputes. That was kind of what I had always had in mind for my website, and I hope continues to guide the development of this resource in the future. | ||
