◄Previous: 5 Re-imagining social rupture and repair

# Conclusion

In this course, you have explored the differences between adversarial courts and problem-solving courts. In particular, you focused on FDACs as a form of a problem-solving court.

To consider the benefits and limitations of FDAC, you explored different sorts of evidence. These sources of evidence included verbal accounts from those who have experience of FDAC – as either a practitioner or person with lived experience of FDAC proceedings; evaluative information from a report about FDAC outcomes; and financial data about the costs and benefits of FDAC, compared with traditional family courts. In exploring these different forms of evidence, it is possible to consider both the experiences of working with FDACs, as well as the outcomes-based measures of ‘success’ of FDACs. Using different sorts of evidence can help to build a robust analysis of a given topic or issue, and examining the different sorts of evidence on this topic helps to show that problem-solving courts may offer improved outcomes compared to adversarial courts, even if they are imperfect.

This OpenLearn course is an adapted extract from the Open University course DD315 Researching current issues in criminology.

◄Contents►Next: References

OpenLearn - Exploring criminology: problem-solving courts
Except for third party materials and otherwise, this content is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 Licence, full copyright detail can be found in the acknowledgements section. Please see full copyright statement for details.