Dr. Geoffrey Shannon:

The alternative approach may be to look at mandatory information sessions. There is a key issue of access to the system. There would be profound constitutional difficulties with attempting to introduce mandatory mediation. I understand the purpose and I passionately support what is being suggested. Once two parties are involved in litigation, however, and the reality is brought home to them of court proceedings and that the real victim in those proceedings may very well be the child, I think that will have a very sobering effect on the family.

What we would be attempting to do would be to ensure that objective was blended in with what is constitutionally possible. I have advanced models in that context. I prepared a lengthy report last year in my capacity as special rapporteur on child protection where I considered the issue of mandatory information sessions. I also referenced that in my opening statement. It is an issue that is perhaps worth looking at. Regarding mandatory mediation, it would be interesting to look at the approach adopted in Florida where this has been introduced. Perhaps the success of that system might be worth considering, if the committee is minded to look at this issue.