Sir Nicholas Wall is President of the Family Division of the High Court. In lay language, boss of the family courts.

He is introducing a 'Protocol' , or ruling on how cases be handled, which expects certain people to attend a meeting about whether they can solve their cases by 'mediation' (discussion led by a person trained to try and get agreement) rather than having a full, hostile, hearing.

A thoroughly welcome move, but with a serious caveat. The Shared Parenting movement has been arguing for many years that more could be done to divert parents away from fighting and into talking. And we have been told that that will require fresh Parliamentary legislation. No, we have said, the judges have powers to say what they expect to have happened before they will hear a case. Well, SNW has said just that, and we salute him.

To be smug, we have been right all along.

But a serious caveat about mediation. It is seeking an agreement between the adults, and the adults may have a very distorted view about what the needs of their children are. When they are facing each other, each naturally thinks about what they want.

They can and do make deals which aren't best for the children. Wretchedly a common one is that the mother will ask for no money and the father agrees not to seek to see the children. So the parental agreement leaves the children short of money and well, orphaned.

I once went to a presentation to promote mediation. And the speaker, one of the leading lights of the trade, presented as a 'success' a father withdrawing his opposition to his ex taking their children to New Zealand to live. Well, how child centred was that?

We don't need this sort of mediation. We need work with both parents to  ensure that they come to a parenting plan that is best for the children. There needs to be a child advocate there, not someone 'neutral' and indifferent to what the agreement actually contains.