FINLAND Law and Practice Contributed by: Pekka Tuunainen, Pekka Tuunainen Attorneys Ltd
• the needs and spending of the children, which is decisive. Both parents must take part in payments. When one parent has more income, they are responsible for the majority of payments. When doing calculations, both parents are expected to work and have income, if there is not adequate reason not to work. Child support is not meant to cover 100% of the pre ‑ vious standard of living, but more likely an average Finnish standard of living. Child support payments are relatively low compared to some jurisdictions, and are meant to cover basic needs. Healthcare is free as it is covered by the state. If the child has activities and hobbies that are reasonable, those must be covered. Parents can agree maintenance payments freely with ‑ out court involvement, and this happens most of the time. Parents are also encouraged to use a local social welfare office, which offers guidance on child mainte ‑ nance and visitation agreements. If not agreed, a court will order one parent to pay maintenance, and such order is enforceable. Court orders are normally monthly payments until the child reaches 18 years of age. Increases in payment are determined by law, reflecting the cost-of-living index. If child maintenance needs to change or if the par ‑ ents’ ability to pay changes significantly, a new court order must be applied for, or parents must make new agreements. A child must be represented by a parent or other legal guardian when claiming maintenance. 3.3 Other Matters Courts have powers to make orders on all parental responsibilities and powers – eg, residential permit application, schooling, medical treatment, religion, holidays, language taught to child, etc – if the parents have significant disagreements on these matters. In practice, this is applied rarely and such matters should be decided by the parents. In disputed cases, on the other hand, such orders are very important and should be requested by parties.
If parental alienation is obvious, courts take this into account when deciding child matters, especially par ‑ ents’ access to the child. All things are considered and courts tend to promote the establishment of the alien ‑ ated parent’s contact with children. This can include proactive enforcement orders so the alienated parent can act swiftly to enforce orders. A child may be heard in court in person, if this is nec ‑ essary for resolving the case and the child requests it or consents to it. However, children under 12 years of age may be heard in person only if the hearing is abso ‑ lutely necessary, and it must be assessed that the hearing will not cause the child any significant harm. A child can be heard with nobody else but one or more members of the court present, if this is necessary to protect the child or to find out the child’s independent opinion. If the child is considered mature enough to give their opinion on the case, this opinion will be tak ‑ en into account, all things being considered. The older the child is, the more decisive their opinion can be. For example, if a child is 16 or older, and their opinion is genuine, it has great significance. In practice, children are not very often heard at court. A child’s opinion is normally reported in a status evaluation made by a local social office at the request of the court. 3.4 ADR in Child Law Matters Parents have the option to use a local social welfare office’s services on child matters. These offices are required to offer help to parents to reach an agreement on all child-related matters. If parents are willing to agree, this is the most common way to take care of an agreement outside court, with the majority of agreements being made at the social welfare offices. If agreement is reached, the social welfare office has powers to verify such agreement and, after this, the parents’ agreement is equivalent to a court order and is instantly enforceable like a court order. In child-related matters, the courts also offer the pos ‑ sibility of mediation. Such mediation is stated in law and is completely voluntary – not using it does not have any negative effect on the normal court pro ‑ ceeding. Mediation is run by an experienced judge who was not previously involved in the case. One of
130 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook