<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Custody Minefield &#187; Intractable Contact Dispute</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thecustodyminefield.com/category/intractable-contact-dispute/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Jun 2018 09:26:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.37</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Judicial Judgment &#8216;Wholly Lacking&#8217; in Intractable Contact Cases</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/judicial-judgment-wholly-lacking-in-intractable-contact-cases/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/judicial-judgment-wholly-lacking-in-intractable-contact-cases/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2016 04:07:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guidance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intractable Contact Dispute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Parental Alienation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2015]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alienation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dispute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EWCA Civ 1315]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[F (Children)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[inadequate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intractable contact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[judgment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lacking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parental alienation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1257</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[F (Children) [2015] EWCA Civ 1315 is yet another case involving alienation where the handling of the case by the lower court was &#8216;wholly inadequate&#8216;. Not my opinion (actually it is, and I agree&#8230;), but that of the Lords Justice who heard the appeal. The case highlights the failings which are increasingly commonplace in the&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/judicial-judgment-wholly-lacking-in-intractable-contact-cases/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Proposals for the Reform of Intractable Contact Dispute Law</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/proposals-for-the-reform-of-intractable-contact-dispute-law/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/proposals-for-the-reform-of-intractable-contact-dispute-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2016 07:27:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Enforcement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intractable Contact Dispute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Parental Alienation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contact enforcement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Families Need Fathers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intractable contact dispute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[paper]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parental alienation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[practice direction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[process]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[proposals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[report]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sir james munby]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the custody minefield]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1210</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last September I had the opportunity to write a paper on the reform of private family law and specifically related to contact enforcement. The paper was presented to Sir James Munby, President of the Family Court, by officers of Families Need Fathers who had been offered a continuing dialogue by him following his presentation to&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/proposals-for-the-reform-of-intractable-contact-dispute-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Failings in Intractable Contact Cases Continue</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/failings-in-intractable-contact-cases/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/failings-in-intractable-contact-cases/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Dec 2015 19:01:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CAFCASS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Enforcement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gatekeeping]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intractable Contact Dispute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Litigants-in-Person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Parental Alienation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[failings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intractable disputes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parental alienation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1178</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When intractable contact dispute cases fail to be resolved there are common reasons, and ones which involve how the cases are managed by the court and professionals involved in proceedings. Some of those cases are salvageable, while for others the long length of proceedings acts as a bar to the court entertaining a different approach.&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/failings-in-intractable-contact-cases/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Alienation, Strategies and Pessimism</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/alienation-strategies-and-pessimism/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/alienation-strategies-and-pessimism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2015 07:15:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Intractable Contact Dispute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Parental Alienation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[implacable hostility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intractable contact disputes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parental alienation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Q (A Child) [2015] EWCA Civ 991]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1059</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There are strategies which aid in successful resolution of cases involving implacable hostility and children being cognitively manipulated to oppose contact (commonly referred to as parental alienation). While there is case law to support these strategies, they&#8217;re not rocket science (but just because they&#8217;re common-sense doesn&#8217;t mean they don&#8217;t sometimes need spelling out): it is&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/alienation-strategies-and-pessimism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Minnock Case &#8211; Crime, Punishment and Compassion</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/the-minnock-case-crime-punishment-and-compassion/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/the-minnock-case-crime-punishment-and-compassion/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2015 16:23:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Intractable Contact Dispute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Parental Alienation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child abduction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[false allegations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[minnock]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[perjury]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=753</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The papers and social media are full of discussions on the mother who has abducted her child following residence having been awarded to the father. A number of questions have arisen which we want to comment on. Before we do, it&#8217;s worth noting that we support how the court has acted throughout from what has&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/the-minnock-case-crime-punishment-and-compassion/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A warning: false allegations can backfire</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/a-warning-false-allegations-can-backfire/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/a-warning-false-allegations-can-backfire/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2015 01:36:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Intractable Contact Dispute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abduction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[false allegations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[father]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mail online]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[missing child]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[residence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[somerset]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[transfer of residence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=720</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There was a worrying case in yesterday&#8217;s Mail Online. A mother has disappeared with her child after the court awarded residence to the father. The Mail article can be viewed via the link below: Mother goes on the run with son, three, after losing bitter custody battle &#8211; and judge accuses her family of helping&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/a-warning-false-allegations-can-backfire/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Re H-B [2015] EWCA Civ 389 &#8211; Disagreeing with Black LJ and Munby</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/re-h-b-2015-ewca-civ-389-disagreeing-with-black-lj-and-munby/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/re-h-b-2015-ewca-civ-389-disagreeing-with-black-lj-and-munby/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2015 22:52:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intractable Contact Dispute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Parental Alienation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Black]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court failure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[implacable hostility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Munby]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parental alienation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Re H-B [2015] EWCA Civ 389]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=690</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#8217;s rare that I disagree with a judgment from the President of the Family Court or Lady Justice Black. This however is one such occasion where I feel their judgment is wide of the mark. There are some fundamental failures in the management of this parental alienation case. The case details are depressingly common: an&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/re-h-b-2015-ewca-civ-389-disagreeing-with-black-lj-and-munby/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Added to our case law libraries &#8211; W (Children) [2014] EWFC B215</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/added-to-our-case-law-libraries-w-children-ewfc-b215/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/added-to-our-case-law-libraries-w-children-ewfc-b215/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2015 20:45:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intractable Contact Dispute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Leave to Remove]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shared Living Arrangements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[b215]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chelmsford family court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cochrane]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EWFC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intractable contact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shared living arrangements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shared residence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[w children]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[w v g]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=548</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The case was heard in the Chelmsford Family Court. The Guardian supported an order for shared living arrangements and the mother had interfered with the interim contact arrangements leading to the father making a further application for a reversal of residence. His Honour Judge Cochrane concluded that further litigation was not in the children´s best&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/added-to-our-case-law-libraries-w-children-ewfc-b215/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lying in court and penalties for late filing of evidence</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/lying-in-court-and-penalties-for-late-filing-of-evidence/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/lying-in-court-and-penalties-for-late-filing-of-evidence/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2015 15:10:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intractable Contact Dispute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2015]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[535]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EWFC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HU and SU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[keehan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[late filing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wasted cost]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=343</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This morning, I was reading the case HU v SU [2015] EWFC 535 published earlier this month. The case has a number of features which are depressingly common: Allegations being omitted from earlier statements and the schedule of findings sought, and later fresh allegations embellished and exaggerated in oral evidence; Children being involved in parental&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/lying-in-court-and-penalties-for-late-filing-of-evidence/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Case Law Additon &#8211; M (Children) [2013] EWCA Civ 1147</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/case-law-additon-m-children-2013-ewca-civ-1147/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/case-law-additon-m-children-2013-ewca-civ-1147/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2015 01:06:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intractable Contact Dispute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1147]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2013]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[draconian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ewca]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[M (Children)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[macur]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[no contact]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=340</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An appeal against an order refusing contact. Findings had been made regarding domestic violence, but the appeal court found the decision to award no contact to be draconian. The judge had failed to consider what other measures could be introduced, including supervised contact, to address any risk to the children or the mother´s anxieties. Read&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/case-law-additon-m-children-2013-ewca-civ-1147/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
