THE Law Reform Commission Report on Family Courts was like a blast of fresh air. It told us clearly and strongly that our family courts so inadequate that the system is simply not working and that things can only get worse - if that is possible.

For legal practitioners there is nothing new in this. All we can hope or is that what we know and what the report confirms will spur the Government into action.

Family law changed more in the last decade than it did during the previous century. The Judicial Separation and Family Law Reform Act of 1989 brought us out of the dark ages and, in particular, gave specific new powers and discretion to judges. Legislation since then has addressed such issues as maintenance, lump sum orders, pensions, nullity and domestic violence. The problem, however, is that the resources, structures and personnel needed to work the legislation simply do not exist. We don't need more law, we need the wherewithal to make it work.

Looking at the present situation in Dublin, at least, we have one family law court sitting all year round. In addition, there are private consultation rooms and a vastly experienced judge. Sadly however, that merely scratches at the surface and, for the most part, the system is breaking down as a result of the long delays in getting a court hearing.

The length of time from the issuing of proceedings for judicial separation to the date of the court hearing is now up to 18 months. Just imagine what the delays will be alike when divorce legislation is in place.

The system is even worse outside Dublin. First of all, the parties can only bring the proceedings in the county in which they reside. Generally, the Circuit Court sits in each county four times a year for about two weeks at a time. At the very most only one day during this period is set aside for hearing law cases. Looking at the lists around the country, there can be 30 to 40 cases listed for each sitting.

A judge recently told me that at a one day sitting in a county town he heard the civil list, and at 4 p.m. he was expected to commence hearing the family law list. This was the only time available for the cases. Such an experience is not unusual. On a good day, a judge could hear three to five family law cases.

What happens to all the other cases?

They are simply adjourned to the next sitting three months furthers down the road. So, you can have a couple leaving their home in the morning for the court hearing, then (finding themselves waiting around, outside the courtroom all day across from each other, and finally returning home that evening having achieved nothing but excuses and apologies from their lawyers, not to mention the extra financial costs.

On one occasion, while waiting outside a county court I met a solicitor leaving the courtroom relieved, at last, he said, after five years of attending court, that his client had finally got a hearing!

Few people recognise that a resort to legal advice and separation by a client is almost always a final solution. By the time the client comes for advice, the marriage has been "under severe stress and often critical strain for many years. The parties, no longer able to live together but forced to do so, must be concerned at the effect of their conflict on the children. However, in most cases, under the present system, they may have to endure a further three years under the one roof until the conflict is finally resolved.

Let me bring you through the present system.

A client visits a solicitor for legal advice in relation to a separation. Under the 1989 Act we must advise the client of the possibility of a reconciliation and of the process of mediation. Let us assume the parties have already been to marriage guidance counselling and acknowledge that their marriage has irretrievably broken down.

The parties may want to resolve their difficulties by attending mediation. If they can afford a private mediator this process can be completed within six to eight weeks. If they cannot afford a private mediator, they can attend the Family Mediation Service provided free by the State but the waiting list can be from six weeks to three months.

If they do not choose mediation as a possible resolution, solicitors enter into negotiations on their behalf. However, if negotiations break down, then the parties must resort to the law. At this stage of the process, the parties must wait a further 18 months to obtain a court hearing.

Clients will have been advised of the entire procedure at the outset, and will be acutely aware that if they fail to resolve their differences and reach an amicable resolution, they must join the waiting list to be heard in court. The present system does much to discourage parties from reaching amicable solutions by agreement. Because of a fear of a long delay (and the certainty of a long delay) couples will frequently initiate proceedings without exhausting all other possibilities of resolution. And once proceedings are initiated, negotiations become more and more difficult.

IF the system provided, say, a three month wait for the court hearing date, then I believe parties would be more inclined to allow the appropriate time for the mediation process and amicable negotiations, because the resolution they want is at least within a bearable and foreseeable time limit.

Understanding that the client, resorts to a separation as a final solution, I don't believe anyone can appreciate the strain and stress in a family home while waiting for a separation. Frequently, parties find themselves under their doctor's care - during the waiting period. The adults, at least, have the benefit of (legal advice and counselling, but (what about the silent victims, the children?

They have no voice in the system.

Very often they are aware of their parents' intentions to separate, but do not know when it will happen. Their lives are also on hold - and they may find themselves being used as pawns by one parent against the other in disagreements during the waiting period. Parties are at, their worst during the process of at separation.

Once a separation takes place, life frequently settles down and the conflict gradually blows over, and an element of certainty and stability returns to their lives. The important point, however, is that children are obliged to cohabit with their parents through the entire lengthy process. The damage and long term trauma can be incalculable. For their sake, more than for anyone else's, the system needs reforming (because it fails them.

At this stage we know what is wrong with the system and what needs to be done. The only certainty is that things are getting worse rather than better. The resources needed are not huge, and in many ways an enhanced system could contribute to its own costs. Before the report gathers dust on the shelves, we must continue to remind those capable of making change to do so urgently.