Mandatory family dispute resolution

Context

The rise in separations and divorces has been a defining social trend in Switzerland since the 1970s. An increasing number of children no longer live with both parents. Many families experience separation as a difficult time marked by uncertainty, emotional stress and conflict. While most parents manage to find workable solutions for their children despite their separation, conflict levels remain high in some families. Such escalated parental conflicts are characterised by their prolonged duration and heightened intensity. In these cases, separated parents are unable to reach mutual agreements and to cooperate in the best interests of the child, which places a significant burden on both the parents and the children.

Escalated parental disputes often result in protracted and resource-intensive proceedings before the child and adult protection authorities (CAPA) and civil courts. Against this backdrop, mandatory counselling and mandatory mediation have become specific, recognised interventions. Both interventions aim to help parents develop agreements regarding their children’s needs and to strengthen their communication and cooperation skills. Due to their similarities, the umbrella term ‘mandatory conflict resolution’ is used to refer to both mandatory counselling and mandatory mediation.

Objectives

The following research questions guided the project:

1. How are mandatory conflict resolution processes implemented in practice?
2. What are the key characteristics and differences between the two intervention approaches (mandatory counselling vs. mandatory mediation?
3. From the perspective of parents and professionals, what are the curative effects and outcomes of mandatory conflict resolution?
4. To what extent are the parents satisfied with the mandatory conflict resolution process?
5. What are the barriers, enablers and good practices in such interventions?
6. What recommendations can be derived from the study regarding the configuration and use of mandatory conflict resolution? 

Approach

To address those questions, a mixed-methods design was used:

• First, a brief standardised survey was conducted with parents who had participated in a mandatory conflict resolution programme.
• Second, structured interviews were conducted with eight individual parents, providing in-depth insights into their experiences, the dynamics of the process and the changes they perceived. The interviews were transcribed and evaluated using a structured qualitative content analysis approach.
• Third, twenty-one professionals, including counsellors, mediators and members of child and adult protection authorities, were interviewed to gather information on methodological approaches, institutional frameworks and assessments of curative effects. These interviews were also transcribed and evaluated using a structured qualitative content analysis approach.

Findings

The results of the survey show that parental responses to mandatory conflict resolution processes vary greatly. The structured interviews with parents and professionals provide in-depth insight into the mechanisms at work and the changes resulting from mandatory conflict resolution.

The methodological approach reveals that professionals structure the process very clearly. They facilitate communication between both parents, establish clear rules, interrupt destructive communication patterns and consistently focus the intervention on the child(ren), the parents and the future.

A child-centred approach is central in mandatory conflict resolution. Children are primarily involved indirectly, for example through questioning techniques or symbolic presence. In addition to counselling and mediation, psychoeducation also plays a role in mandatory conflict resolution.

A clear majority of the parents and professionals surveyed report improved communication and cooperation. If things go well, parents are able to start talking to each other again, reach agreements and gradually find their way back to a ‘normal’ routine as separated parents. Conflicts subside and the emotional strain eases. Yet, several cases highlight the limitations of intervention. In cases of deeply entrenched or severely escalated conflicts, resolution efforts may stall or the conflicts may even intensify.

Outlook

Outlook Based on the study’s findings, the following recommendations can be made:

Ordering of conflict resolution sessions

The use of mandatory conflict resolution should be systematically considered in cases of escalated parental conflict. The order should be issued as early as possible.

Methodology of conflict resolution sessions

Professionals should clearly structure the process and take a directive approach to help the parents resume a constructive dialogue. They should consistently display a neutral, respectful and transparent attitude.

In addition, the intervention should systematically focus on the child(ren) and the future, and take into account the child(ren)’s perspective.

Cooperation between authorities and professionals: mediation or counselling

The collaboration between the CAPA and mediators or counsellors should be clearly defined and binding. In this context, it is recommended that there be an institutionalised and formalised cooperation between authorities and experts.

Further development of existing services

In the area of mandatory conflict resolution, it is desirable to expand and further develop the available services. Existing voluntary programmes should be expanded. Where possible, voluntary services and mandatory conflict resolution should be accessible without financial hurdles. When successful, early intervention can lead to a de-escalation of the conflict, thereby reducing follow-up costs for the support system.

The study’s findings are available on this page in the form of a research report, while practical recommendations are provided in the form of a guide.