NCJ Number
188900
Journal
Journal of the Center for Families, Children and the Courts Volume: 2 Dated: 2000 Pages: 61-97
Date Published
2000
Length
37 pages
Annotation
This article presents the history of California's Family Law Facilitator Act, describing two legislatively mandated pilot projects as well as other local precursor programs.
Abstract
During the past two decades, the increasing number of self-represented litigants, especially in family law, has placed an increasingly heavy burden on courts throughout the country. Recent data from California suggest that this number is now approaching 75 percent. The reason for this increase is that litigants cannot afford to hire attorneys. The solution, however, is not so simple. No-cost or very low cost traditional, full legal representation has been available only to a limited number of poverty-level litigants through attorney pro bono services, legal services programs, and other public-interest providers. Because the demand for such legal representation far outstrips the supply, a majority of litigants in family law matters has been denied meaningful access to the courts. The California family law facilitator program departs from traditional legal services assistance models to create a new paradigm that shows great promise. The program offers large numbers of self-represented litigants quality (albeit limited) legal assistance in family law matters. The success of this program demonstrates the need to "think outside the box" to find better solutions in this arena. In addition to describing two legislative mandated pilot projects and other local precursor programs, this article examines current facilitator service models and presents data on customer demographics, volume, and service delivery. The authors also discuss ethical and practical issues created by this new role for attorneys in the court, including how best to deliver services to pro se litigants, how to avoid the appearance of advocacy, and how to provide information and education while maintaining the independence and impartiality of the court. 16 tables and 158 notes