A new report is the first major insight into the workings of the family law courts, writes Carl O'Brien, Social Affairs Correspondent.
Now that the veil of secrecy surrounding the family law courts is being slowly lifted, the truth may not nearly be as awful as some might have expected.
Given the strict operation of the in camera rule, public impressions of how the system operates have generally been gleaned through the relatively small number of acrimonious cases which tumble into the open when appealed to the High Court. Fathers' rights groups have also highlighted what they see as injustices inbuilt into the system.
Family Law Matters, the first major insight into the workings of the family law courts, paints a picture at odds with this harsh public perception.
It shows that a total of 90 per cent of divorce and judicial separation cases over a month-long period in Dublin Circuit Family Court were settled by consent. Of the 161 cases concluded in October of last year, 103 were divorces where the terms were agreed between the parties, 33 were judicial separations where terms were agreed, while just 16 cases went to a full hearing.
A very high proportion of divorces were only concerned with extinguishing succession rights and finalising arrangements made by parties themselves, ensuring there was a "clean break" to the end of a marriage.
Another area of major concern has been the custody of children, with fathers' groups arguing vehemently that the system is stacked against them when it comes to either access or custody.
What this research indicates is that custody is overwhelmingly granted jointly in both settled and contested cases. The care and main residency is usually granted to the mother, often reflecting the practical situations of the parties.
The amounts of maintenance being awarded to children, too, has become a lightning rod for many people's grievances into the unfairness of the family law courts. Yet, the amounts the courts awarded and those agreed by negotiation were, by and large, very similar.
This research, however, is in its early stages. The author of the report, Carol Coulter, notes in her commentary that these figures are a snapshot of what happened in the State's busiest family court over a month-long period. While they do not necessarily represent all family courts, they do give an idea of what can be expected from proceedings for divorce or judicial separation.
The small number of contested cases which went to full hearing also means it is too early to draw firm insights into the court's determination on issues such as custody and maintenance.
Yet, there are already some potential issues of concern over aspects of how the family law courts operate, which may only be adequately teased out through further research.
For example, when you drill down further into the issue of joint custody, there are some small but perhaps significant differences in the outcomes in negotiated and contested outcomes. For example, in negotiated cases, just two out of 18 cases result in sole custody. However, in contested cases, sole custody was granted to the mother in three of 11 instances.
The issue of whether children have a say in areas of access and custody is another issue of potential concern. In both contested and settled cases, access was often subject to complicated arrangements to ensure a child spend substantial amounts of time with both parents. However, only in one case were the children's wishes mentioned in relation to access.
Of course, there are still bitter and acrimonious cases which end up before the family law courts. Files show that those which are settled may have come through years of protracted negotiations and dozens of hearings on matters such as discovery and access to children before eventually ending with a settlement.
While the research published yesterday is still just a snapshot, it already shows the value of opening up the family courts system to the public eye.
It is only through greater scrutiny that flaws in the system can be properly exposed and, ultimately, changed.