To What Extent Would a Problem Solving Family Court Help Young Offenders Construct More Durable Pathways Out of Crime?

This article considers the problem-solving family court put forward by Sir James Munby, then-President of the Family Court, in his 2017 Parmoor Lecture to the Howard League for Penal Reform. It utilises constructivist pathways — a heuristic device rooted in developmental criminology — as a normative framework with which to discern effective and counterproductive problem-solving practice. Identifying a target population for this problem-solving court and explaining why a therapeutic mode better encourages prosocial pathway construction, as compared to the existing Youth Court, it closely examines the Family Drugs and Alcohol Court (FDAC) model. The article details how problem-solving family courts already help parents to successfully navigate pathways to desistance, and applies learning from this jurisdiction and overseas to Sir James’ prototype court and the inherent limitations of problem-solving practice.