Psychotherapists say Family Court counselling services have contributed to more stable custodial arrangements and to children's safety for the past 30 years and reducing them will increase costs to the state down the line.
The Otago-Southland branch of the New Zealand Association of Psychotherapists (NZAP) this week joined critics concerned about proposed changes to the family court system.
Government reforms announced in August propose, among other changes, to reduce the amount of counselling provided to families in Family Court as well as legal representation required in family disputes.
The proposal is to create a Family Dispute Resolution (FDR) service for out-of-court resolution of the disputes the Family Court deals with, although "serious" cases involving domestic violence, child abuse or other issues of power imbalance or safety would continue to be dealt with in court.
It is suggested trained mediators would resolve disputes and the service would replace most Family Court counselling and mediation sessions.
The NZAP Otago-Southland branch said in a statement members had considerable reservations.
Marital counselling had long been recognised as an effective preventive service in family court proceedings and existing counselling practices were widely accepted by those who used them and the courts, the statement said.
Dunedin marital counsellor Mary Cockburn said the service had made an enormous contribution for more than 30 years to the stability and safety of New Zealand society.
It improved couples' relationship skills, and reduced harm to children from the conflicts between their parents, gave children a voice in the proceedings, and often pre-empted extended formal court proceedings.
The profession joins lawyers, who have voiced their opposition to the proposals, saying they would leave vulnerable people, particularly children, without legal advice or protection.
Family disputes would be classified into either the fast track, simple track or standard track. Fast track matters would be prompted by "serious issues" that needed court assistance with lawyers involved, but simple and standard track matters would require parties to represent themselves.
Lawyers would not be appointed to represent children until the point of a hearing and unless "serious" issues were identified.
Dunedin lawyer Jennifer Anderson said family lawyers in Dunedin were extremely concerned about the proposals and a group had met to discuss what more they could do to inform the public about their impact.
Concerns were mainly around the proposal support professionals such as a lawyers for the children, psychologists and counsellors would participate in the process much less, which would reduce the voice and representation people, particularly children, would have in proceedings that affected them, she said.
New Zealand First spokeswoman for social policy/welfare Asenati Lole-Taylor said in a statement the changes would be detrimental to families who could not afford the suggested $897 fee to use the FDR service and would be put off going to court.
She said reductions to free counselling made a mockery of the Government's policy of "putting children first".
