At its best, professional practice doesn’t stand still. It questions itself, reflects, and evolves. And the Family Court Journal has provided a mirror for that over the years.
Produced twice a year and now published digitally, the journal brings together voices from across the family justice system: frontline practitioners, researchers, members of the judiciary, academics and — increasingly — people with lived experience. As John explains, the aim is simple but powerful: to fill gaps in understanding, open doors to deeper thinking, and signpost readers towards new ideas and perspectives.
What sets the journal apart is its openness. Catrina describes it as a place for debate, reflection and inquiry. Somewhere practitioners can ask whether current ways of working are really the best ones, and explore alternatives without fear. That has meant publishing pieces that spark disagreement, generate responses, and sometimes influence how people think about their own practice.
The editorial board itself reflects that ethos. Made up of experienced family court practitioners, past and present Cafcass staff, and long-standing Napo activists, it remains deliberately open to new voices and perspectives. Contributions don’t have to be academic or lengthy. Short pieces, letters to the editor, creative writing and anonymised practice reflections are all welcome.
Recent editions have included powerful articles from care-experienced adults, offering insight that simply can’t be found elsewhere. Those pieces, Catrina notes, don’t just inform. They challenge, humanise and reframe professional thinking.
For Napo members in the family court section, the journal arrives as part of that membership. For others, it’s freely accessible online — and the editorial board is keen to widen its readership, particularly among students and academics.
If you have something to say or find out about family court practice, the journal is is your first port of call.
