best interest of the child. An agreement prepared by the child welfare officer is legally enforceable, just like a court decision. If the parents fail to reach an agreement on the child’s circumstances, the final decision will be made by a court of law. In Finland, the majority of parents are able to reach on agreement on childrelated matters, but about 4-5% of cases concerning custody, rights of access and residence are taken to court. More than half of the care and custody disputes ending up in courts relate to demands to amend a previous agreement or court decision. Court proceedings on child care and custody differ from the procedure applied in regular civil cases. Courts are duty-bound to look after a child’s future best interests, which imposes a number of special requirements on the legal process. Child care and custody proceedings are initiated in response to an application filed by one of the parties. Alternatively, instead of going to court, child custody cases can also be addressed in court-administered mediation. In fact, mediation is the most significant procedural reform in Finland in hearing contentious child custody cases, based on an experiment carried out in courts in the 2010s. The process, also known as Follo mediation after its Norwegian origins, has become a popular and effective way of resolving disagreements between parents without exhausting litigation. After all, the system was specifically tailored to provide a better procedure for hearing child care and custody cases. Mediation aims at a lasting parental agreement that is in the best interest of the child. Another benefit of mediation is that reconciliation between parents promotes the well-being of the child and ensures that the child maintains a relationship with both parents. Mediation may also improve parental relations and communication unlike litigation, which tends to foment conflict and distrust between parents and is never a sound and appropriate option More than half of the care and custody disputes ending up in courts relate to demands to amend a previous agreement or court decision. THOUGHT LEADER 65
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy Mjk3Mzkz