45 / 262
responsibility will then fall on the tribunal to make a
decision on such matters as custody of the children,
maintenance, etc.
We recommend that the court or tribunal hearing the
case have power to adjourn at any stage if it thinks
there is a possibility of the parties becoming reconciled,
though we find from our experiences that the estrange-
ment of the parties will be far too deep at this stage
for a reconciliation to be possible.
At the same time, so as to prevent people from rush-
ing into and out of marriage without giving it a chance
of being a successful union, we recommend that it be
provided that no Petition for divorce or separation be
entertained by the court during the first three years of
marriage except in very exceptional cases.
We unequivocally recommend the setting up of a
Family Welfare Council, headed by a Family Welfare
Commissioner, staffed by trained and qualified social
workers, to be known as family counsellors, who would
be concerned only with family and marital problems.
They could work in cooperation with existing volun-
tary and statutory bodies, and organisations. The
Council would establish Family Welfare Centres, and
would be publicised as much as possible. The service
would, of course, be confidential. On request, the
Counsellors would call on families in need of support.
The first suggestion considered by us was the setting
up of a family tribunal which would have two divisions.
One would deal with juvenile matters and the other
with all other family matters.
Either the tribunal would be presided over by a
judge assisted by two family counsellors, or by a family
counsellor (or two) assisted on matters of law by a
barrister or solicitor of a sufficient number of years
standing, known as the Judge Advocate.
Each tribunal would have power to make any of the
decrees mentioned in the section on substantive law. In
addition it would have the power to refer the parties
to the Family Welfare Council if it thinks reconcilia-
tion possible.
As a matter of urgency it is recommended that in-
stead of the above system, but only as an interim
measure, family divisions be created in each of the
present courts, the presiding judge being under legal
obligations
vis-a-vis
reconciliation and family coun-
sellors, or welfare officers in the present system.
ABOLISH THE J UVENI LE COURTS
The abolition of the present system of juvenile courts
and their replacement by locally based children's
panels, with a right to appeal to the Juvenile Court, is
called for in the FLAC report.
Immediate reforms recommended should provice that
I, no child should be prosecuted for any offence except
at the suit of the Attorney General and on his instruc-
tions (through the Office of the Chief State Solicitor).
2. The age of criminal responsibility should be in-
creased to 14 years immediately. In the long term we
would hope to see the introduction of the Scottish
system of children's panels.
3. Greater use should be made of the so called "fit
person" order. This should be extended in scope to
include those institutions which already offert horough
facilities for catering for the special needs of children.
Locally based child care services and family welfare
services should also be included. The scheme should
cater for children of up to 17 years. In this way
children whose special needs are not being best served
by Industrial Schools and Reformatories within the
present system would be brought within a beneficial
system of care.
Long Term Reforms
A. The Repeal of the Children Act 1908 and the
introduction of the following reforms :
1. The abolition of the present system of juvenile
courts and their replacement by locally based children's
panels, with a right of appeal to the Juvenile Court.
2. Reports on family and environmental factors to be
made available in all cases.
3. No child should continue to be subject to a custo-
dial sentence for any time longer than is necessary in
his interest. No sentence should remain in force with-
out review for a period extending beyond one year.
4. Where the child wishes to appeal, lie should have
three weeks within which to do so, and not 14 days as
at present.
5. In the future, recognising the values of the CARE
proposals, we woyld envisage the setting up of a
system of panels of lay people to deal with children
along the lines of those in operation in Scotland as a
result of the recommendations of the Kilbrandon Com-
mittee. Such panels would have powers of ordering
compulsory care or treatment, and would have con-
tinuing responsibility for the children brought before
them, and would replace the existing system of Chil-
dren's Courts.
We would suggest that an official to be known as a
Reporter would be appointed to decide whether or not
the circumstances warranted the bringing of the child
before the panel. He would also organise the panels,
arrange hearings, ensure the execution of decisions and
their review at the appropriatet ime.
There should be but one Government department to
deal with children's affairs, their education, training,
mcare and welfare, formed by the merger of the three
existing departments with responsibility over various
spheres . . . Health, Social Welfare and Justice . . . and
the organisations such as the I.S.P.C.C. concerned with
children's welfare and special needs.
This department, to be known as the Child Welfare
Department, would provide all necessary facilities. If
this is not done, the present Government Department
will continue to "pass the buck" as at present.
" SUBS IDI SE CIVIL CASES"
It was not in the criminal sphere that the need for
publicly subsidised legal aid was greatest but in the
civil cases that such a need was acute, said Senator Pro-
fessor Kelly, at a public meeting in a Dublin hotel last
night, organised by the Free Legal Advice Centres.
Senator Kelly said that in the criminal sphere even
before 1962 when the Criminal Justice (Legal Aid)
Act was passed, it was a point of honour with the legal
profession that no accused person should be left without
defending counsel even if he was not able to pay the
fee. In civil cases, however, the State offered no help
at all to poor people.
"The Free Legal Advice Centres have now provided
this assistance for the first time : yet another example of
how in this "country private goodwill and charity is
expected to make up for the deficiencies of the social
services, still inadequate to the needs of the poor, the
ignorant, the handicapped and the delinquent, he said.
Over the last six or seven years, the Irish Courts,
among a series of highly important and progressive
judgments, had clearly established the individual's right
44