LETTER:Royal divorce: a monarchist's loyalty betrayed

Ruth Blacklock Salisbury,District Family Mediation Service,Salisbury,Wiltshire

Monday 04 March 1996 19:02 EST

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: The Independent has been excellent in its reporting of the progress of the Family Law Reform Bill through Parliament and in its comments about the concept of mediation in divorce.

However, in the reporting on Diana's and Charles' divorce (29 February) the terms "custody" and "access", which were replaced in the 1989 Children's Act by "residence" and "contact", continue to be used.

Would it not be an example to us all if the young royals used mediation to resolve their difficulties amicably for the sake of the children?

Ruth Blacklock

Salisbury & District Family Mediation Service,

Salisbury, Wiltshire

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

LETTER:Royal divorce: a monarchist's loyalty betrayed

Join our commenting forum

Thank you for registering