One family, one court

A family breakdown is tough. A family breakdown with allegations of domestic violence is ugly, complicated and can be dangerous for spouses and children alike.

Consider the case of Brantford’s Julie Craven. In March 2006, her husband Andrew Osidacz stabbed their 8-year-old son Jared to death, then fled to Craven’s house where he attacked her with a 12-inch butcher knife. Craven was saved when police officers fatally shot Osidacz as he tried to slit her throat.

At the time, a criminal court judge had ordered Osidacz to stay away from Craven, but a family court judge had granted him unsupervised access to Jared every weekend.

That’s why a pilot project in which both family and criminal court issues are handled under one roof by one judge for one family is such a good idea.

The Integrated Domestic Violence Court in Toronto, the first of its kind in Canada, was set up in 2011 to resolve the lack of communication between family and criminal courts. It’s an issue that was flagged as a serious problem by the province’s Domestic Violence Death Review Committee in 2004.

As Dr. Peter Jaffe, a member of the committee, explains: “You shouldn’t put a family in five or six different proceedings with multiple judges. Not only is it ineffective, it’s also dangerous.”

More study is needed to ensure that having one judge handling both criminal and family proceedings, with their different standards of proof, is not prejudicial to the accused. But so far the court is receiving positive reviews.

Experts in the field — including Jaffe, who assessed the court and the views of stakeholders such as judges, lawyers, victims and offenders — explain that having one judge and one court handle both family and criminal proceedings can help:

The judge can more fully evaluate safety concerns, compliance with orders and progress in parenting concerns relating to access.

The court eliminates conflicting or inconsistent orders that might have arisen if issues were being handled separately by family and criminal courts — or even by different judges.

There can be more consistent handling of multiple matters relating to the family by a judge who is knowledgeable in the area of domestic violence.

There can be a better connection to social services and other community resources available at the joint court.

Costs can be reduced for both the justice system and the parties involved by cutting the number of court appearances.

The integrated court in Toronto has not been around long enough or handled enough cases for final conclusions to be drawn.

Still, a study of a similar joint court in Buffalo, N.Y., found that many of the benefits that were hoped for actually happened, “making victims safer and holding the defendant more accountable.”

That’s why experts are urging Attorney General Madeleine Meilleur to expand the tiny pilot project, which has handled only 48 cases so far. She should do that quickly so that more families are eligible for a program that makes sense — and could save lives.