The Government has published its response to the recommendations made by the independent family justice review. The response includes major reforms to the family justice system which ministers says will tackle delays, streamline processes and rebuild trust.

According to the government, there is a need to clarify and restore public confidence that the courts recognise the joint nature of parenting. It therefore intends to make a legislative statement emphasising the importance of children having an ongoing relationship with both their parents after family separation, where that is safe, and in the child's best interests.

The government will also simplify the family justice system to help separating couples reach lasting agreement speedily, if possible without going to court. It will will make it mandatory for separating parents who propose court action to resolve a dispute about their child to have an initial assessment to see if mediation is something which would be suitable instead, to help them agree on the arrangements for their child. It will also examine how to give the courts more robust enforcement tools to combat failure to comply with judgments.

Children’s Minister Tim Loughton said:

'It is unacceptable for vulnerable children, who come into the court system through no fault of their own, to be waiting an average of 55 weeks for a decision about their future.

'The introduction of a new six month time limit on care cases sends a clear signal to everyone involved in the process that we want to see radical improvement. Speeding up the court system, and getting earlier decisions about a child’s future, will help ensure that more children are found loving homes more quickly.'

'On the issue of shared parenting, we accept the need to clarify and restore public confidence that the courts properly recognise the joint nature of parenting. We will be legislating to emphasise the importance of children having an ongoing relationship with both their parents after separation, where that is safe and in the child's best interests.'