JOIN NOW
DONATE TODAY

Misconceptions of The Family Court: Demystifying the System for Better Outcomes

Hilary Purtell
Contributor

I write about family law best practices and divorce in Massachusetts. 

In Family Court, numerous challenges arise when presenting a case, even in situations marked by cooperation. As you embark on this legal journey, it's crucial to grasp both the capabilities and limitations of the court system. In this article, we'll address nine common misconceptions about the court, ranging from expectations of quick resolutions to assumptions about judicial intervention.

These misconceptions can lead to frustrating and costly results. However, by understanding the court's role and constraints, you can work towards a more favorable outcome. The more realistic your expectations are about how the Family Court will handle your case, the smoother your experience is likely to be.

“My case is simple and shouldn’t take long to resolve ... "

1) Quick Resolutions

Sometimes, litigants enter the legal system expecting swift resolutions, which can be unrealistic due to several factors inherent in the legal process. Court timelines vary and are often protracted, especially when addressing complex issues such as child custody, property division, or spousal support. The court operates within a framework of procedures and formalities; adhering to these processes ensures fairness and due diligence, which can extend timelines even for simple matters. Nowadays, more than ever and certainly post-pandemic, the courts grapple with heavy caseloads which are overwhelming the system. 

Judges must allocate their time judiciously among all matters, which can slow proceedings. Judges’ decisions rely on comprehensive information and evidence, including complex financial records and parenting plans, which can be timeconsuming to gather. Other variables and unforeseen events, such as the unavailability of key parties or emergencies, can also prolong cases. Delays often occur when parties fail to provide necessary required documentation promptly, such as financial statements, business valuations and appraisals, or when a GAL (Guardian Ad Litem) or parenting coordinator’s report is not complete. Additionally, if an attorney or party cannot attend a hearing, it can further exacerbate the delay. Therefore, once your case is filed, take a deep breath; you could be in for a longer ride than you think.

“The Court will see how badly I was treated ... "

2) Airing Personal Grievances

Some litigants see the family court as an opportunity to vent their frustrations or air grievances, expecting the court to favor one party over the other. While it's natural to want the court to address perceived wrongdoings, such as bad parenting or financial mismanagement, judges follow laws, not personal dramas. Using the Family Court to seek personal vindication is a major pitfall that could backfire.

Judges expect clear presentations of issues and proposals for solutions, without the emphasis on complaints. Overemphasizing grievances may hinder the court's ability to address core legal matters efficiently or even anger the judge. It's wiser to share emotional concerns with friends, family, therapists, or other sources of support outside of the courtroom. It's important to remember that the Family Court is not criminal court—there are no juries, only one judge—and it focuses solely on matters of money and parenting.

“They'll pay for what they did to me ... "

3) Justice and Vindication

The feeling of being wronged and the pursuit of vindication can drive litigants to seek moral judgment in court. However, it's crucial to understand that the family court's primary function isn't to pass moral judgment but to uphold legal principles. Unlike a justice system, the Family Court operates within a legal framework. While instances of misconduct may be considered, particularly in cases involving children, the court's main objective isn't punitive. A party's conduct is only relevant if there is a custody battle; because there is a high bar in establishing true “harm” of a child, there are no sanctions for established abuse in Family Court, other than less parenting time. Similarly, if a party has knowingly and willfully deceived the other party with a dissipation of the marital assets, there are no sanctions for this either, even if laws were broken when doing so.

Judges maintain a singular focus on addressing legal matters through established court procedures, basing their decisions on presented evidence and the law rather than personal sentiments. Acknowledging and embracing this distinction from the outset of your case can save you significant time, frustration, and potentially legal fees. Although the impulse to utilize the family court to expose harmful or wrongful behavior of an ex-partner may be tempting, seeking validation or personal vindication through this system often proves fruitless. In fact, attempting to portray your ex-partner in a negative light without substantial legal grounds can backfire, and may cause a judge to view your case less favorably, ultimately damaging what you are trying to achieve.

“Isn't it the Court's job to decide ... ?"

4) Overlooking Decision-Making Authority

Believing that the Family Court is eager to roll up its sleeves and dictate your outcome is another common misconception; Judges actually expect (and sometimes order) that you make efforts to resolve conflicts on your own and make decisions outside of the courtroom. Trials are seen as a last resort when parties are unable to reach an agreement through Alternative Dispute Resolution methods (ADR), which are less formal settings with qualified professionals such as mediators or conciliators, who assist in reaching agreements.

ADR is generally considered faster than going through formal proceedings, and it is often more cost-effective. In contrast, trials can be time consuming, contribute to court backlog, and are expensive due to legal fees, court costs, and other related expenses. ADR methods have less impact on the court's already stretched-thin resources, and Judges will expect litigants to exhaust all other options settling their own cases rather than dragging them through the already overburdened system.

“When the Court hears the facts, they’ll rule in my favor ... "

5) Overestimating the Argument

In Family Court, litigants often come in with the assumption that their argument against the other party is stronger, and will be enough to ensure a favorable result. However, this overlooks the unique dynamics of family court proceedings. Unlike civil trials, where winning or losing is clear-cut, Family Court operates differently. Instead of a competition, it's more akin to solving a math problem.

Judges in Family Court prefer a structured approach: they want litigants to present a clear problem followed by a proposed solution. Essentially, they want to be told what to do. With numerous cases to handle, judges prefer not to devise time-consuming solutions for issues that could potentially be resolved outside of court. Negotiation is key in Family Court, with opportunities during 4-way meetings, status conferences, or pretrial hearings. Failing to engage in meaningful, good-faith negotiations or provide reasonable proposals can prolong the legal process and frustrate all parties, including the judge.

Therefore, it falls upon the parties to clearly communicate their needs and desires to the judge, stating exactly what they believe should happen and when, providing all necessary information and evidence to support their proposed ruling. Leaving out crucial details may hinder the judge's ability to make a ruling, potentially resulting in an outcome you do not want.

“The Judge will understand the complexities of my case ... "

6) Judges Are Experts

Along those same lines and contrary to popular belief, judges aren't always the most suitable individuals to make certain impactful decisions about your case. Some judges possess greater knowledge of complex financial matters, while others may have more experience handling issues such as coercive control or substance abuse. It's a mistake to assume that your judge will be equally adept at handling all components of your case, considering their individual skillset, background, or training.

While you cannot choose your judge, if you think certain aspects of your case requires expertise beyond the judge's scope, consider seeking assistance from a neutral or third-party expert. Your lawyer can help you find someone qualified to evaluate and provide insights.

If you're representing yourself, it may be necessary to hire a qualified individual to assist with specific issues. Judges often rely on outside reports from third-party experts as it allows them to make informed decisions efficiently. Therefore, it's essential to choose an expert wisely, as their professional opinion is likely to influence the final ruling from the judge.

“The Court will help establish a parenting plan ... "

7) Parenting Decisions

Assuming that Family Court Judges should play the central role in deciding parenting arrangements not only creates confusion and frustration, but this common misconception can lead to disastrous outcomes for families. The court has no interest in micromanaging custody decisions; instead, it emphasizes the parents' ability to collaborate, minimizing direct intervention, and promoting the creation of mutually agreed-upon parenting plans.

Judges do not want to decide who picks up your child from soccer practice or who gets to have the kids on certain holidays. Entrusting these parenting arrangements to the judge may result in a binding plan that you and your children do not want. This cannot be overstated; create a parenting plan outside of court —Judges want families to decide what is best for the family, they do not want to have to decide for them.

If you and your ex cannot agree, consider utilizing a qualified third-party parenting expert to help navigate the issues and ultimately present an arrangement to the judge that both parties can live with; Judges heavily rely on the opinions of these outside experts.

“The Court has to be fair. Right …?"

8) Fairness

In the realm of Family Court, the notion of fairness is often misunderstood. Many litigants enter the process with the expectation that the court will deliver a fair and just resolution to their disputes. However, the reality is that Family Court operates within a framework that prioritizes legal processes over subjective interpretations. Again, the Family Court is a legal system, not a justice system. While the court’s goal is to achieve an equitable outcome for both parties, it's essential to recognize that “fair” or the perception of what fair is, in one’s case, may not align with the court's decisions.

Furthermore, Judges typically consider the resolution of a case “equitable” when both sides give up something they want. Instead of seeking fairness, litigants should focus on clearly articulating their needs and desires to the judge, providing compelling evidence to support their requests. Expecting the resolution to be fair, regardless of one party's wrongdoing, is a common misconception that often leads to great disappointment and frustration.

“If we can prove the agreement was violated, the Judge will order fees ... "

9) Repayment of Fees

Another common misunderstanding in Family Court is the expectation that if one party is found in violation of an agreement, or shown to abuse the legal process in any way, the opposing party will automatically be awarded all legal fees incurred. However, the reality is far more nuanced. While judges do have the authority to award legal fees in cases of contempt, they are often hesitant to do so outright. Instead, they may only grant a percentage of the fees, if any, making it more challenging for litigants to recover the full extent of their legal expenses.

The decision to award fees is discretionary and depends on various factors, including the severity of the contempt and the financial circumstances of both parties. As a result, litigants should not rely on the assumption that they will be compensated for their legal costs, no matter what their ex-spouse did (or did not) do, or who promises them otherwise.

In conclusion, successfully navigating the Family Court system demands a solid understanding of its function and limitations, including the avoidance of common pitfalls outlined in this article. Instead, adopting a pragmatic approach, exploring alternative dispute resolution methods, and seeking outside expertise when necessary are crucial strategies. It's vitally important to recognize that family court proceedings prioritize legal processes and evidence-based decision-making over notions of justice or fairness.

Litigants should focus on clearly articulating their needs and presenting compelling evidence to support their requests. By doing so, they can navigate the complexities of Family Court more effectively, and work towards resolutions that align with their family's needs and preferences. While it's common for both sides to feel dissatisfied with certain aspects of the court's decision, approaching the process with the right mindset and strategy can increase the chances of achieving a much better outcome.

Hilary Purtell 
Contributor 

I am a professional actor, voice talent, on camera host, and co-director of non-profit Jane Does Well Organization’s Education & Advocacy Committee. 

To empower your legal journey with valuable information, tips and tools, explore more recent articles below:

Basic Procedural Steps of Divorce in Family Court

Read Now

Interviewing Family Law Attorneys? Key Questions You Will Want to Ask

Read Now