header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
21 February 2025 / Stuart Hanson
Issue: 8105 / Categories: Opinion , Family , Mediation , ADR , Divorce , Legal aid focus
printer mail-detail

Mediation vouchers: a short-term patch

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
208722
Stuart Hanson on why mediators should not be celebrating the repeated extension of an inadequate scheme

The recent announcement that the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has extended the Family Mediation Voucher Scheme by another 12 months has been met with praise from some quarters, including the Family Mediation Council (FMC). The FMC has highlighted that ‘early analysis from the first 7,200 families to use the scheme showed more than two-thirds reached agreement without the need to go to court’—on the surface, this sounds like a success story worth celebrating.

However, beneath the headlines lies a set of deeper concerns that the mediation profession—and the public—should not ignore. While the voucher scheme has undoubtedly encouraged some separating couples to explore mediation, it also masks the ongoing underfunding of family mediation and the wider issues surrounding access to justice in private family law cases.

Since the removal of legal aid for most private family law disputes in 2013, family mediation was promoted as the government’s flagship alternative to court

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll