<?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; Uncategorized</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thecustodyminefield.com/category/uncategorized/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>Parenting Stereotypes and Alienation</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/parenting-stereotypes-and-alienation/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/parenting-stereotypes-and-alienation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 May 2016 12:36:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Parental Alienation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Psychological Assessent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shared Living Arrangements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dr Jennifer Hardman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parental alienation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stereotypes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TED]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1455</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A powerful talk by Dr Jennifer Hardman on parenting stereotypes and alienation, given at an independently organised TED talks event. Dr. Harman is an Associate Professor of Psychology at Colorado State University and is the Program Coordinator for the Applied Social &#38; Health Psychology Program. A number of interesting features for me. Parenting stereotypes; The&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/parenting-stereotypes-and-alienation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Karen Woodall &#8211; BACP Sanction Compliance Notice Published</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/karen-woodall-bacp-sanction-compliance/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/karen-woodall-bacp-sanction-compliance/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2016 20:42:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bacp]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hearing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[karen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[professional malpractice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sanction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[woodall]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1431</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We make this announcement following an invitation from Karen Woodall&#8217;s solicitors to announce details of her compliance with the sanction made against her by the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy. The details of the hearing, decision and sanction were published by the BACP in July 2015 with the decision of the Panel being &#8220;Accordingly,&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/karen-woodall-bacp-sanction-compliance/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Help: Non Molestation Orders and Without Notice Applications</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/non-mol-without-notice-applications/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/non-mol-without-notice-applications/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 May 2016 18:23:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ex Parte]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal Aid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Non Molestation Orders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Without Notice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[domestic violence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[false allegations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[injunction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[injunctive orders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[irregularity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non molestation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non-mol]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[occupation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[orders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[procedural]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unfair]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1408</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Data from a Freedom of Information Act request for non-molestation order applications (in 2014) shows that of the 21,162 applications (included in the statistical returns) a little over 60% were made &#8216;without notice&#8217; (12,769 applications). Without Notice applications to the court involving claims of domestic violence often result in injunctive orders being made without the&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/non-mol-without-notice-applications/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New interim regulations related to domestic violence and evidence for legal aid</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/new-interim-regulations-related-to-domestic-violence-and-evidence-for-legal-aid/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/new-interim-regulations-related-to-domestic-violence-and-evidence-for-legal-aid/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Apr 2016 16:58:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2 years]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[5 years]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[60 months]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[april 2016]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[civil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[domestic violence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fmg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal aid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[may 2016]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1405</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Evidence is required to help secure legal aid funding for victims of domestic violence in private family proceedings. Interim changes are currently being introduced to regulations which relate to this evidence, pending a final decision by the Government (so there may be further changes). These interim regulations include: The time limit for the validity of&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/new-interim-regulations-related-to-domestic-violence-and-evidence-for-legal-aid/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The McKenzie Friend Issue</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/the-mckenzie-friend-issue/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/the-mckenzie-friend-issue/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2016 02:51:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Litigants-in-Person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[McKenzie Friend]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1359</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last weekend I spoke at a charity event on common failings in intractable contact disputes. Inevitably, the question arose about thoughts on the judicial led consultation on McKenzie Friends. What were my thoughts? For those unaware, there is a consultation underway to look at whether McKenzie Friends should be regulated, insured and paid. Dealing with&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/the-mckenzie-friend-issue/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>LIP Friendly Family Law Orders &#8211; Content and Resources</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/lip-friendly-family-law-orders-content-resources/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/lip-friendly-family-law-orders-content-resources/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2016 13:55:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Draft Orders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guidance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[directions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[draft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[draft orders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[order]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[private]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wording]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1251</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A few days ago I shared an update that the President of the Family Court has announced the production of draft family law orders better suited to Litigants-in-Person (parents who represent themselves in court). The intentions are positive and include better consistency across the court service and wording aimed at the non-technical. Hopefully the new&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/lip-friendly-family-law-orders-content-resources/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<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>Our Family Law Quizzes</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/our-family-law-quizzes/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/our-family-law-quizzes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Dec 2015 07:20:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1207</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Test yourself and your colleagues&#8230; Family Law Quizzes Struggling? Then use our guides on our family law app! They&#8217;re free. Family Law Guides &#160;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/our-family-law-quizzes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Supporting the Children&#8217;s Society Seriously Awkward Campaign</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/supporting-the-childrens-society-seriously-awkward-campaign/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/supporting-the-childrens-society-seriously-awkward-campaign/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2015 13:46:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[campaign]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child exploitation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[seriously awkward]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexual abuse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[teresa may]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1156</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We&#8217;ve just had a request to share details of the Children&#8217;s Society Seriously Awkward Campaign. The Children&#8217;s Society are looking to strengthen child protection laws to better safeguard 16-17 year olds from sexual exploitation and abuse. The Children&#8217;s Society is recommending: The Government must give police the same tools to intervene when a 16 or&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/supporting-the-childrens-society-seriously-awkward-campaign/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Where have all the parents gone?</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/where-have-all-the-parents-gone/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/where-have-all-the-parents-gone/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2015 19:44:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Aid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Litigants-in-Person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Statistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hmcts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal aid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[litigant-in-person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[litigants-in-person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mediation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[representation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statistics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1065</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Chief Executive of Her Majesty&#8217;s Courts and Tribunal Service announced this week that litigants-in-person “have not actually increased the court budget or the demands on the court”.  Some have suggested more unrepresented people have not lengthened proceedings as a whole. I thought I&#8217;d have a look at the actual statistics and contemplate what that&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/where-have-all-the-parents-gone/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
