HSC Stuff > Marking Thread Archives
Free Legal Essay Marking!
jamonwindeyer:
--- Quote from: Deng on May 28, 2016, 10:03:18 pm ---Hey, was wondering if one of you guys could read my draft before its due on Monday and see where i can improve on
--- End quote ---
Hey Deng! Welcome to the forums, I'd be happy to provide some feedback! Essay is attached in the spoiler below with comments throughout:
SpoilerEvaluate the effectiveness of the law in resolving conflict in family relationships
A family is defined as the fundamental group of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State” under the Family Law Act 1975(CTH)(FLA). The laws governing conflict within family relationships in Australia are relatively effective in terms of divorce and the legal consequences of separation. I'd like to see a more sophisticated opening than a definition of family (everyone does this). Perhaps instead talk about WHY conflict emerges in family relationships, thus leading into the necessity of the law in addressing it. The law is seen to be effective in these areas due to its ability to meet society’s needs, be accessible, protecting rights and resource efficient. In contrast, the laws governing domestic violence are ineffective due to the lack of enforceability. Nice, succinct Thesis here and good integration of judgement with criteria, nice! I would try to integrate a list of what you will be discussing in each paragraph, just as a structural fix.
Laws governing divorce in Australia reflect society’s needs with the introduction of the ‘no-fault’ concept under the FLA. Try to make your judgement in each area apparent from the get go, it should be the focus of each topic sentence! The legal termination of marriage only requires parties to state that there is an irretrievable breakdown of marriage, removing the previous need for spousal blame under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1959 (CTH)(MCA). Remember that your marker knows about this content already, they don't need this info, they only want analysis! This law reform has proven to be effective as it improved the ease and accessibility of divorce, meaning couples were no longer trapped in unhappy or dangerous unions. It also meant custody arrangements were not affected on the grounds of one party being ‘at fault’. The effects of reform saw divorce rates in 1975 jump from 13,000 to 63,320 in 1976 . Excellent inclusion of a statistic to prove your evaluation, fabulous! The FLA also saw the creation of a “kiss and makeup” clause which allowed parties to reconcile without having to restart the 12 month waiting period before applying for a divorce. The clause advised couples to attend alternate dispute resolutions before attending court ensuring a better outcome for both parties and being more resource efficient. The reform of the MCA reflects the laws ability to meet society’s needs. Overall a very nice paragraph! I would trade some of the description of the laws for more analysis and evidence, the content does nothing for you. Make the judgement obvious in the conclusion!
The FLA effectively protects the rights of children in family conflict by placing the best interest of the child first. Better, included a judgement this time, nice! The FLA(Sect 55A)(CTH) and the Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Act 2006(CTH) reflects the FLA role through the creation of the Family Court. The Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) created the notion of shared parental responsibility which attempts to create meaningful relationships with both parents resolving conflicts surrounding children. Furthermore, the Court can issue parenting orders under the Family Law Reform Act 1995 (CTH) Section 60CA where the court must regard the best interests of the child as the paramount consideration . Again too much content and not enough judgement and analysis! This is demonstrated in in Harris v Harris(2009), where the mother requested the children live with her due to school, but under shared parental responsibility, the court issued a parenting order where the children would spend half the time at their fathers’. This reflects the laws effectiveness in resolving conflict between families surrounding children. Nice case inclusion, but again, try and shorten the case description and blend your judgement to make it one sentence. Succinct = Powerful. However, under the FLA SECT60CC , the court has the ability to determine a child’s best interest where a meaningful relationship with both parents may not exist. This was demonstrated in Lewis v Wackett where the court did not make a parenting order of shared cared when one of the parents were seen as a risks to the child thus overriding the notion . Overall, the court’s ability to determine the best interest of the child depicts its effectiveness in resolving conflict. Another effective paragraph, and this one adds the judgement in the conclusion, you are proving your points quite well.
The Family Court has jurisdiction over property decisions under S.79 and S.75(2) of the FLA. Property is a reference to the financial aspects of a relationship which is a common cause of conflict. At the time of divorce both parties are given 12 months to settle any financial matters before the court will impose a decision. If a couple manages to reach a decision, they can have it enforced by the Court as a Consent Order. Replace those four sentences with an evaluative introduction, and then one brief sentence describing everything you just said. The marker knows what property is, knows about the 12 month cooling off period for divorce, etc. This is effective as it is resource efficient as it does not require court intervention. However, if a couple fails to reach an agreement, the court will split all assets 50/50 before taking into prior commitments such as financial position prior to marriage and contributions during marriage and future needs. Thus showing effectiveness/ineffectiveness? The court’s ability to settle conflict surrounding property is reflected in Morre v Moore(2008), where the husband alleged the wife had failed to put in commitment towards the family and marriage, being distracted by interests outside of the family resulting in a revision of the Consent Order. The court’s role in property disputes demonstrates its effectiveness through the enforceability of its decisions. This paragraph doesn't have a strong analysis or evaluation, it is mostly content. Definitely not to the same standard as the first two.
The Court is an expensive measure thus limiting its effectiveness. An SMH article, “Australia's most expensive divorce: Woman fights $10.5m legal bill” demonstrates how expensive litigation is. The legal system has attempted to fix this through the creation of the Family Circuit Court and Family Relationship Centres. The FCC has the same jurisdiction as the Family Court but for lesser matters, whilst the FRC is a form of ADR. This is seen as an effective way the law has attempted to be resource efficient. The efficiency of the FRC is seen in SMH article “Savings in Family Law” shows that the FRC’s are resource efficient for every $1 is equal to $1.48 in court time as well as having more cooperation between parties. The law’s increase access for families to resolve conflict reflects its ability to meet society’s needs. I would like to see more evidence here, perhaps integrating some cases, it just seems very bare compared to the length of your other paragraphs? The evaluation however, is quite good!
In the area of domestic violence, the law has seen a decrease in its effectiveness in resolving conflict. Nice topic sentence! The creation of ADVO’s through the Crimes (Domestic Violence)Amendment Act (1982)(CTH) can be seen as an ineffective measure in resolving conflict. “Call for war on domestic violence as half of all AVO’s fail” show that “in the year to last September courts issued 26,491 domestic AVOs. According to the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research figures, there were 11,788 or 44% breaches.” . The article also highlights the increasing level of domestic violence and the laws inability to resolve this as “At the end of the day an AVO is a piece of paper” . Absolutely fantastic analysis there, excellent! It works better without content description! There has been attempts to protect society through the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007(CTH), where police are now able to take out an AVO, making the recriminations against police rather than the victim. However, the statistics above show that an AVOS lack enforceability and the deterrent itself do not deter recidivism. This was seen in the recent Leila Alavi case where she was murdered despite an ADVO on her husband. Try to use the proper referencing style where possible. Thus, the lack of enforceability of ADVO’s demonstrates the laws ineffectiveness in resolving conflict surrounding domestic violence. This is a great, fantastic paragraph.
Australia’s laws can be seen as effective in resolving conflict in family relationships. However, due to the increasing number of domestic violence and the decreasing effectiveness of the legislation surrounding it, it limits the effectiveness. The law deals with divorce and the legal separation of marriage effectively and efficiently, however the price of litigation can deny some families access. Nice succinct conclusion, awesome!
This essay is absolutely fantastic Deng! Very very effective analysis in most sections (particularly your last paragraph) and good inclusion of judgement. Nice Intro and conclusion, good structure (though I'd like to see you set out the topics of your paragraph in the intro, and I think the "cost of courts" paragraph feels lacking and out of place).
The main improvement I would suggest is to remember that your marker is a Legal Studies teacher. They know the content. They know what legal terminology means. You do not need to define your terminology or go into detail about what a law covers. Your focus should be analysis and evaluation, you should NEVER mention anything without making some kind of judgement on it for a question like this. It won't contribute to your mark, and thus, it is wasted time ;D
On the whole, an absolutely fantastic essay! Read my comments throughout and let me know if anything needs clarification, good luck for tomorrow! ;D
Deng:
I edited my property paragraph i guess but i still dont think i gave enough of an analysis and not sure what else to chuck in. Was wondering what could i add to make this paragraph up to par
The jurisdiction and power of the Family Court over property decisions are under S.79/S.75(2) of FLA illustrating the enforceability of the law in resolving conflict. Conflict surrounding property can either be settled in court or outside of court through ratifying a Consent order. A consent order can be seen as resource effective due to the reduction of court time thus effective. However, if a couple fails to reach an agreement, the court will split all assets 50/50 before taking into prior commitments such as financial position prior to marriage and contributions during marriage and future needs. Thus again showing the effectiveness of the law in resolving conflict surrounding property. The court’s ability to settle conflict surrounding property is reflected in Morre v Moore(2008), where the husband alleged the wife had failed to put in commitment towards the family and marriage, being distracted by interests outside of the family resulting in a revision of the Consent Order. The court’s role in property disputes demonstrates its effectiveness through the enforceability of its decisions.
Thanks
jamonwindeyer:
--- Quote from: Deng on May 29, 2016, 02:35:19 pm ---I edited my property paragraph i guess but i still dont think i gave enough of an analysis and not sure what else to chuck in. Was wondering what could i add to make this paragraph up to par
--- End quote ---
Cool! Some brief comments:
SpoilerThe jurisdiction and power of the Family Court over property decisions are under S.79/S.75(2) of FLA illustrating the enforceability of the law in resolving conflict. This is good, but try and start with a more general statement of effectiveness. This topic sentence restricts you to discussing enforceability only. Conflict surrounding property can either be settled in court or outside of court through ratifying a Consent order. This is content description, unnecessary for marks! A consent order can be seen as resource effective due to the reduction of court time thus effective. Little iffy wording there, and, what is effective about it? However, if a couple fails to reach an agreement, the court will split all assets 50/50 before taking into prior commitments such as financial position prior to marriage and contributions during marriage and future needs. More content description, you can remove it! Thus again showing the effectiveness of the law in resolving conflict surrounding property. The court’s ability to settle conflict surrounding property is reflected in Morre v Moore(2008), where the husband alleged the wife had failed to put in commitment towards the family and marriage, being distracted by interests outside of the family resulting in a revision of the Consent Order. The court’s role in property disputes demonstrates its effectiveness through the enforceability of its decisions. You have discussed things besides enforceability.
This paragraph does need something more to sustain effective analysis. Perhaps look at including another case, or talk about how accessibility has been improved for property matters involving De Facto couples? The Property (Relationships) Act 1984 (NSW) would be worth discussing, for example. Do some experimenting with those ideas, just remember to focus on analysis! ;D
Deng:
Should i just focus on the Property Relationships ACt? i had a part about it but i removed it because i was over the word limit
jamonwindeyer:
--- Quote from: Deng on May 29, 2016, 02:56:30 pm ---Should i just focus on the Property Relationships ACt? i had a part about it but i removed it because i was over the word limit
--- End quote ---
Potentially! It's up to what you feel more comfortable discussing in that paragraph, there is definitely lots in that act ;D
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version