The Strategy Spine was designed for exactly this moment in family law practice. As the field moves beyond the binary of mediate or litigate into a world of diverse, sequenced dispute resolution pathways, the Spine provides the structure to navigate that complexity with intention. Explore gives practitioners the environment to design and test resolution pathways before commitment. Engage provides the tools to execute across multiple forums. The Spine as a whole ensures that whichever process is chosen, strategic legal thinking — not reflex — drives the decision.

For years, family law advice has been framed as a binary:

“You can either mediate or go to court.”

That framing is no longer fit for purpose.

We are now in a new age of Family Dispute Resolution (FDR), where practitioners can draw on a spectrum of processes — mediation, child-inclusive practice, collaborative law, parenting coordination, arbitration, hybrid models and more — to design pathways that match risk, complexity, culture, and client capacity.

The challenge (and opportunity) for family lawyers is to move beyond the reflex “FDR tick box” and become intentional architects of process.

From single-process thinking to process design

Traditional thinking:

• Step 1: Tell the client they “have to mediate”
• Step 2: If mediation “fails”, issue proceedings

Modern practice demands more nuanced questions:

• What are this family’s risks, dynamics, and needs?
• What are the legal and non-legal issues in play?
• Which combination of processes, in what sequence, is most likely to produce safe, durable outcomes?

Instead of “Is this suitable for mediation?”, we should be asking:

“What form of Family Dispute Resolution, at what time, using which safeguards, is most appropriate here?”

The evolving FDR toolkit

We now have multiple tools beyond standard lawyer-assisted mediation:

1. FDR and mediation (in many forms)

Mediation itself has diversified:

• Lawyer-assisted FDR — traditional model with both parties represented.
• Child-inclusive FDR — involving appropriately trained professionals to bring the child’s voice into the room in a structured way.
• Shuttle or online models — to manage safety, geography, and anxiety.
• Co-mediation — combining legal and psychosocial expertise.

Our role is to help match the model to the family system, not just tick “yes/no” to mediation.

2. Collaborative practice

Collaborative practice offers a structured, team-based, non-litigious pathway where:

• Lawyers commit not to file proceedings while the process is active.
• Neutral professionals (financial advisers, child specialists, coaches) can be brought in.
• The focus is on interests, values, and future functioning, not just legal positions.

It is particularly valuable where:

• Parties can still sit at a table (virtual or physical) with support.
• There are complex financial or parenting issues that benefit from joint expert work.
• The family values privacy and long-term co-parenting relationships.

3. Arbitration

Arbitration remains under-used in family law, despite obvious benefits in:

• Timing and flexibility — parties choose the arbitrator and set the timetable.
• Complex property or discrete issues — e.g. classification of an interest, valuation, add-backs.
• Cost control — especially compared with multi-day defended hearings in a busy court list.

Arbitration can be combined with mediation:

• Mediation to narrow issues and explore settlement.
• Arbitration to determine discrete or residual issues that cannot be negotiated.

4. Parenting coordination and post-orders support

The “new age” is not just about how we get orders, but how families live with them. Parenting coordination and similar models can:

• Support implementation of parenting orders.
• De-escalate day-to-day conflict about minutiae (changeovers, holidays, activities).
• Reduce the need for repeated contravention or variation applications.

This reframes FDR as an ongoing support structure, not a one-off event.

5. Trauma-informed and culturally responsive FDR

Modern FDR must be:

• Trauma-informed — recognising the impact of family violence, coercive control, and intergenerational trauma on capacity to participate.
• Culturally responsive — acknowledging First Nations families, CALD communities, and diverse family structures.
• Accessibility-focused — interpreters, disability supports, neurodiversity awareness, and different communication needs.

For practitioners, this means:

• Not assuming that “equal room time” equals “equal voice”.
• Advocating for appropriate adjustments to the process.
• Being willing to say, “This process, in this form, is not safe or suitable.”

Sequencing: it’s not mediation or court — it’s mediation and…

A modern dispute resolution pathway might look like:

• Stage 1: Safety triage, urgent orders if necessary, short-term stabilisation.
• Stage 2: Information and evidence-building (disclosure, valuations, reports).
• Stage 3: Child-inclusive FDR or lawyer-assisted mediation on parenting/property.
• Stage 4: Arbitration on discrete financial issues that remain.
• Stage 5: Parenting coordination to support implementation.

Your job shifts from “litigate vs mediate” to staging and sequencing — using different processes at different times, guided by risk, readiness, and resources.

The lawyer’s mindset shift: from warrior to designer

To fully embrace the new age of FDR, we need a mindset shift:

• From “winning” a case to designing a process that supports safety, dignity, and functional futures.
• From defaulting to “issue proceedings” when mediation stalls to asking “what other process might move this forward?”
• From seeing non-litigious processes as “soft options” to understanding the complexity and skill required to run them well.

This doesn’t mean abandoning robust advocacy. It means bringing strategic, evidence-based advocacy into whichever process best serves the family — not just the courtroom.

Practical questions for your next intake

At your next new client conference, instead of jumping straight to “we’ll need to mediate”, try:

• What are the safety and risk indicators in this family?
• What support (legal, financial, psychological) does my client need to participate effectively?
• How complex are the financial and parenting issues?
• How important are privacy, speed, and control over timing for this client?
• What combination of FDR models could address these needs?
• If we do need court, at what point in the journey should that occur?

The new age of Family Dispute Resolution is not about knowing more processes. It is about thinking more strategically about which process, at which time, for which family. That is precisely the shift the Strategy Spine is designed to support. From Assess‘ early risk triage to Explore‘s pathway design to Engage‘s execution environment, the Spine turns the practitioner from a process-follower into a process-designer. That is the future of family law, and it is what the FLEN curriculum is built to develop.