What Is an Issues Resolution Hearing and Why It Matters.
By the time a children case reaches the middle stage of proceedings, the court is usually asking a different question.
At the start, the question is often broad: what is this case about?
By the time of an Issues Resolution Hearing, the question is sharper: what still needs deciding, and what can be resolved now?
That shift matters. A hearing at this stage can affect the shape of the rest of the case, the evidence the court will hear, the issues that remain live, and whether a contested final hearing is still needed at all.
This article explains how an Issues Resolution Hearing can narrow disputes, focus the evidence and shape the final direction of a family court case.
If you are a parent currently going through family court, it is important that you join PAPA Plus and make use of our courses and other resources, including PAPA AI.
If you require direct assistance with your case, you can also book a call or one of our family law workshops with PAPA as a 'Plus' member.
An Issues Resolution Hearing is designed to narrow the dispute.
An issues resolution hearing is often one of the most important hearings in proceedings involving children. It is not simply an administrative checkpoint. It is a chance for the court to identify what is genuinely still in dispute and what can be agreed.
By this stage, much of the evidence may already have been gathered. That might include statements, Cafcass material, social work evidence, expert reports, police disclosure, medical evidence, or earlier findings made by the court.
The court will usually want to know questions such as:
Which allegations still matter to the welfare decision?
Which arrangements remain unresolved?
What evidence is actually needed?
Can any issues be agreed?
Are there matters that no longer need to be argued?
Does the case still need a contested final hearing?
If there is a final hearing, how should it be organised?
The purpose is not to rehearse every disagreement from the relationship or every complaint since separation. The purpose is to focus the case on the decisions the court still needs to make.
In public law children cases, an IRH often comes before the final welfare decision. In private-law children proceedings, a similar role is commonly performed by a Dispute Resolution Appointment, often called a DRA.
The names may differ, but the practical point is similar. The court is trying to move the case from a broad dispute into a clear set of decisions.
The more focused the case becomes, the easier it is for the court to identify what evidence matters and what outcome best serves the child’s welfare.
That is why this hearing deserves proper preparation. If a parent attends without a clear position, the court may still make directions that affect what happens next.
This hearing can influence the rest of the case.
Some parents treat middle-stage hearings as something to “get through”. That is risky.
An IRH or DRA can significantly shape the path ahead. The court may narrow the issues, set deadlines, decide what evidence can be used, determine witnesses, and fix the structure of any final hearing.
In some private-law cases, a DRA can even become the final hearing if the court considers that appropriate and fair. That means a parent who expected a short procedural hearing may suddenly find that real decisions are being made.
This does not mean every DRA or IRH will end the case. Many will not. But it does mean the hearing should be treated seriously.
The court may deal with matters such as:
whether further statements are needed
whether an expert report is required
whether further Cafcass or local authority involvement is necessary
whether allegations remain relevant
what issues the final hearing should decide
how much court time is needed
which witnesses should attend
whether any agreement can be recorded in an order
This can have a major practical impact.
For example, if a parent raises ten allegations, the court may decide that only three need to be considered at the final hearing because only those three could affect the arrangements for the child. That does not necessarily mean the other concerns are being ignored. It may mean they do not help the court decide the live welfare issues.
Equally, if a parent says they want “more time” with their child but cannot explain what pattern they propose, the court may struggle to understand the case being put forward.
Clarity matters. Vague positions can leave too much room for assumptions.
A focused position is stronger than a long list of grievances.
By this stage, saying “I just want what is best for my child” is not enough.
Everyone in proceedings is expected to say they want what is best for the child. The court needs more than that. It needs to understand what outcome is being proposed, why it is said to be in the child’s best interests, and how it would work in real life.
A clear position should answer practical questions.
What arrangements are being asked for?
This might include where the child should live, how often they should spend time with each parent, how handovers should work, whether contact should be supervised, or how holidays and special occasions should be shared.
What issues remain unresolved?
The court needs to know what is actually still disputed. If some matters have been agreed, they should not be reargued unless there is a good reason.
What evidence supports the position?
A parent’s belief is not always enough. The court will look at the evidence. That may include reports, messages, school records, medical information, safeguarding evidence, or patterns shown through previous arrangements.
What can realistically be agreed?
Agreement is not weakness. If an issue can be resolved sensibly, it may help the court focus on what genuinely needs deciding.
What outcome would work for the child?
A proposed arrangement should be practical. It should take account of school, travel, routines, the child’s age, any safeguarding concerns, and the child’s need for stability.
A focused position might sound like this:
“I am asking for the child to live with me and spend alternate weekends with the other parent, with one midweek video call. I agree the other parent should receive school updates. The unresolved issues are overnight stays and handovers. My concern is not contact itself, but the impact of late-night arguments at collection. I am asking for handovers to take place at school or through a neutral third party.”
That is much clearer than:
“They have behaved badly for years, and I do not trust them.”
The second statement may reflect real pain. But the court still needs a workable proposal.
Not every unfair event needs to be fought.
Family cases can become overloaded with history. Separation often leaves people hurt, angry, frightened, or exhausted. Old arguments can feel inseparable from current concerns.
At an IRH or DRA, one of the most useful skills is separating what feels unfair from what the court actually needs to decide.
That does not mean serious concerns should be minimised. Allegations of abuse, neglect, coercive control, violence, substance misuse, emotional harm, or unsafe parenting may be central to the case. If they affect the child’s welfare, they may need careful attention.
But not every past argument will assist the court.
For example, a parent may feel strongly about who ended the relationship, who sent an unpleasant message two years ago, or who was rude at a handover. Some of that history may provide context. Some of it may not help the court decide the present arrangements.
The question is not simply whether something happened. The question is whether it matters to the decision the court must now make.
A useful test is to ask:
Does this issue affect the child’s safety?
Does it affect the child’s emotional welfare?
Does it affect the practicality of arrangements?
Does it show a current risk or pattern?
Would proving this point change the order the court might make?
If the answer is no, it may not be worth spending limited court time on it.
That can be difficult to accept. Court proceedings often feel like the only place where a parent can finally explain everything that has happened. But trying to prove every injustice can dilute the strongest parts of a case.
Ten weak arguments can distract from two important ones.
Sometimes narrowing the case makes it stronger.
Preparation should be practical and child-focused.
Good preparation for an Issues Resolution Hearing is not about writing the longest document or collecting the largest bundle of complaints. It is about knowing the case well enough to explain it clearly.
Before the hearing, it helps to go back to the existing orders and directions. Read them carefully. Check what the court has already asked each person to do. Make sure any deadline, statement, report, or disclosure issue has been dealt with.
Then read the evidence with a specific purpose.
Look for factual errors.
If a report says something incorrect, note exactly what is wrong and where the correct information can be found. Avoid broad statements such as “the report is full of lies”. Courts need specifics.
Identify what is agreed.
If something no longer needs arguing, say so. Agreement can save time and show the court that the focus is on the child rather than conflict for its own sake.
Identify what remains disputed.
Be clear about the live issues. For example, the dispute may not be whether the child should see both parents. It may be whether overnight stays should restart immediately, whether contact should be supported, or whether handovers need safer arrangements.
Know what order you want.
This is crucial. A parent should be able to explain the actual order they are asking the court to make. That does not mean every detail must be perfect, but the proposal should be clear enough for the court to understand.
Connect the proposal to the child’s welfare.
The court’s focus is the child. Arguments should be framed around the child’s needs, safety, routine, relationships, emotional wellbeing, and stability.
A practical preparation list might include:
the current order and any directions
key dates and deadlines
the main reports and statements
the issues that are agreed
the issues still disputed
the outcome being requested
the evidence that supports that outcome
any factual corrections needed
any further directions being requested
a short explanation of why the proposal supports the child’s welfare
Preparation also includes being realistic. A proposal that cannot work in practice may be less persuasive, even if it sounds fair in principle.
For example, a handover plan that requires a parent to travel across the country during school hours may not be workable. A contact plan that ignores a child’s school routine, medical needs, or anxiety may need rethinking.
The court needs proposals that can be turned into real arrangements.
The hearing is not just about proving the past.
Evidence matters. Facts matter. Where serious allegations are made, the court may need to decide what happened.
But an IRH or DRA is also about moving the case forward.
At this stage, the court may ask whether the evidence already available is enough to make decisions. It may ask whether further evidence would actually help. It may consider whether the disputed issues are proportionate to the time and cost of a final hearing.
This is why a parent should avoid arriving with only one message: “Here is everything the other person has done wrong.”
That may be part of the case, but it is not the whole case.
The stronger approach is usually:
here is what remains disputed
here is why it matters to the child
here is the evidence
here is what I am asking the court to do
here is what I can agree
here is what I believe still needs a final hearing, if anything
That structure helps the court. It also helps the parent stay calm and focused.
Proceedings involving children can feel personal because they are personal. The outcome affects daily life, routines, relationships, safety, and the future. But the court process rewards clarity more than emotion.
That does not mean emotion is irrelevant. It means emotion needs to be organised into a clear case.
Go in with a strategy, not just a story.
A parent may know every painful detail of what has gone wrong and still struggle to explain what should happen next. That is a problem at an IRH or DRA.
The court needs a strategy, even if that strategy is simple.
A good strategy does not mean being tactical in a manipulative way. It means understanding the purpose of the hearing and preparing for it properly.
That includes knowing:
what the court can decide at this stage
what directions may be needed
what evidence is missing
what issues can be narrowed
what concessions can sensibly be made
what outcome is being requested
how to explain the child-focused reason for that outcome
A calm, clear position can be more effective than an angry, unfocused one. Courts deal with conflict every day. What stands out is the parent who can separate the important from the irrelevant and keep returning to the child’s welfare.
PAPA Plus supports members with ongoing one-to-one case support, help preparing statements and case strategy, specialist resources, courses, and PAPA AI. For parents approaching an important hearing, that kind of preparation can make the difference between walking in with a pile of frustration and walking in with a clear plan.
Do not attend an important hearing knowing only what went wrong. Know what you are asking for, why it matters, what evidence supports it, and what can realistically be agreed.
The real value of an Issues Resolution Hearing is in its name. It is a chance to resolve what can be resolved, narrow what must still be decided, and move the case towards an outcome that works for the child.
In need of help or support?
If you are an alienated parent reading this article and feel you are in need of help and support then please make sure to join PAPA today by signing up here on our website.
This will give you access to our community support forum as well as our Resource Centre, which includes downloadable guides and on-demand courses to help through the process of being alienated and regaining contact with your children.
We also have our Facebook support group that you can join here.
Our Facebook support group has several dedicated chat rooms where you can get immediate support.
If you are a member of PAPA you can also send us a message here on the website and we will try to get back to you as soon as possible but please bear in mind, we have hundreds of messages weekly so it may take us a while to get back to you.
We are currently prioritising PAPA Plus members due to high demand.
Regardless of circumstance you are not alone and at PAPA we are here to support you.
Become a PAPA Ambassador
If you like our resources, articles and support networks and agree with what we stand for then why not get involved and help us push PAPA further by joining our Ambassador Program?
We would love for you to join us and help spread awareness for parental alienation and all of the dynamics involved so that we can continue to help parents and children towards a better future.
Our Ambassador Program allows you to grow your involvement with the cause by earning points on your membership.
To earn points we have created rewards for actions such as completing one of our courses, booking a case review, or ordering supply.
We will be adding new rewards and actions to our Ambassador Program as we continue to grow our awareness efforts.
We want our members to feel rewarded for their support as we continue to look for new ways to improve the lives of those impacted by parental alienation.
You can also become a PAPA Plus member, which will give you exclusive access to even more help and resources.
Each PAPA Plus membership makes a huge difference to the cause as it really helps us to improve our services and our awareness campaigns.
Proceeds from memberships and supply allow us to push the cause much further towards raising awareness and improving our services and resources so that we can continue to help more and more parents and children.
Thank you for reading and for your continued support of PAPA and our mission to end parental alienation.
Comments