Kiārahi and the Family Court in New Zealand
Keywords:
Social Work, kaiārahi, family court, justice, New ZealandAbstract
The Kaiārahi, or Family Court Navigator, is a newly established role within the Ministry of Justice in New Zealand. The role of the Kaiārahi is to provide guidance and information about the resolution and support options available to parents, caregivers, and families who are considering applying to the Family Court. This research sought to understand how the introduction of the Kaiārahi role may be improving experiences of Family Court users. A qualitative methodology guided the research process and in 2022, four Kaiārahi engaged in semi-structured interviews. The findings suggested that the Kaiārahi role is contributing to an improved experience for people engaged in the Family Court in New Zealand. The level of impact is, however, affected by the strength of collaboration with community services such as social work organisations, and several implementation factors, including a lack of strategic direction, difficulty sourcing clientele, and variable support from the Ministry of Justice and the judiciary. Addressing these issues would further strengthen the effectiveness of the Kaiārahi role.
References
Boulton, A., Blyth, T. W., Wikaira, M., & Cvitanovic, L. (2020). Te Taniwha i te ao ture-ā-whānau: Whānau experience of care
and protection in the Family Court. Te Kōpū Ed.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Carson, R., Fehlberg, B., & Milward, C. (2013). Parents’ experiences of Family Dispute Resolution and family law services in
Australia following shared parenting reform: Recent qualitative findings. Child & Family Law Quarterly, 25(4), 406–424.
Foster, R., Chudleigh, A., Lenton, R. & Gibson, P. (2005). Fathers and the separation pathway: The Family Court of Australia in
dialogue with men’s groups. Journal of Family Studies, 11(2), 187–195. https://doi.org/10.5172/jfs.327.11.2.187
Gill, S. (2020). Qualitative sampling methods. Journal of Human Lactation, 36(4), 579–581. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890334420949218
Hannan, J. (2013). Child protection in Family Relationship Centres: Innovations in Western Australia. Family Court Review, 51(2),
–277. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12025
Harman, J. (2019). The centrality of the “Family Dispute Resolution” process to the separating family, the community and the
administration of justice. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy, 40(1), 8–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/anzf.1352
Heard, G., & Bickerdike, A. (2021). Dispute resolution choices for property settlement in Australia: Client views on the advantages
and disadvantages of Family Dispute Resolution and legal pathways. Family Court Review, 59(4), 790–809. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12565
Holosko, M. (2010). An overview of qualitative research methods. In B. Thyer (Ed.), The handbook of social work research methods (2nd ed., pp. 340-354). Sage Publications. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781544364902
Lietz, C., & Zayas, L. (2010). Evaluating qualitative research for social work practitioners. Advances in Social Work, 11(2), 188–202.
Massey University. (2017). Code of ethical conduct for research, teaching and evaluations involving human participants. https://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/fms/Human%20Ethics/Documents/MUHE C%20Code.pdf2F3CBE296DD2345CC01794BF9CFCA13A
Ministry of Justice. (2019a). Te korowai ture ā-whānau. https://www.justice.govt.nz/justice-sector-policy/key-initiatives/familyjustice-reform/
Ministry of Justice. (2019b). A qualitative study on behalf of the independent panel examining the 2014 family justice reforms
[Appendices report]. https://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Publications/family-justice-reforms-appendices-report.pdf
Ministry of Justice. (2021). Court users survey – 2021. https://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Publications/Ministry-of-
Justice-Court-Users-Report-2021-FINAL-for-release.pdf
Ministry of Justice. (2021, March 10). Kaiārahi – Family Court Navigator role announced [Press release]. https://www.justice.govt.
nz/about/news-and-media/news/kaiarahi-family-Court-navigator-role-announced/
Moloney, L. (2013). From helping court to community‐based services: The 30‐year evolution of Australia’s Family Relationship
Centres. Family Court Review, 51(2), 214–223. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12021
Nowell, L., Norris, J., White, D. & Moules, N. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International
Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
O’Leary, Z. (2017). The essential guide to doing your research project (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Pidgeon, S. (2013). From policy to implementation: How Family Relationship Centres became a reality. Family Court Review, 51(2),
–233. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12022
Pitt, L., Maidment, J. & Crichton-Hill, Y. (2019). Women’s experiences of intimate partner violence in rural Taranaki, Aotearoa New
Zealand. Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work, 31(1), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.11157/anzswj-vol31iss1id533
Ritchie, J., & Lewis, J. (2003). Qualitative research practice: Guide for social science students and researchers. Sage Publications.
Roberts, D., Chamberlain, P., & Delfabbro, P. (2015). Women’s experiences of the processes associated with the Family Court of
Australia in the context of domestic violence: A thematic analysis. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 22(4), 599–615. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2014.960132
Schepard, A., & Emery, R. (2013). The Australian Family Relationship Centres and the future of services for separating and divorcing families. Family Court Review, 51(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12017
Stannard, E. (2021). More than the rules: Therapeutic jurisprudence and legal actors in New Zealand’s legal system. Family Court
Review, 59(3), 464–477. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12588
The Backbone Collective. (2017). Out of the frying pan and into the fire: Women’s experiences of the New Zealand Family Court.
https://www.backbone.org.nz/reports/report-two-family-court-survey-report201768
Thomson, L., McArthur, M., & Camilleri, P. (2017). Is it “fair”? Representation of children, young people and parents in an
adversarial court system. Child & Family Social Work, 22(2), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.12226
Titterton, A. (2017). Indigenous women accessing family law in Australia: Managing safety, risk and culture. Indigenous Law
Bulletin, 8(30), 11–14. https://doi-org. /10.3316/informit.320535762590277
Valentine, K., & Breckenridge, J. (2016). Responses to family and domestic violence: Supporting women? Griffith Law Review, 25(1), 30–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2016.1204684
Venables, J. (2019). Practitioner perspectives on implementing an alternative response in statutory child protection: The role of
local practice context and leadership teams in shaping practice. Children and Youth Services Review, 107, 104–488. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.104488
Wilcox, K. (2010). Connecting systems, protecting victims: Towards vertical coordination of Australia’s response to domestic
and family violence. University of New South Wales Law Journal, 33(3), 1013–1037. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/
agispt.20111224
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Copyright © Australian & New Zealand Social Work and Welfare Education and Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Advances in Social Work & Welfare Education by Australian and New Zealand Social Work and Welfare Education and Research (ANZSWWER) is licensed under CC BY 4.0
