“…Other criteria suggested were the moral, mental and physical fitness of the competing parties, but, at least in one jurisdiction (British Columbia, Canada), these are only considered if they interfere with the capacity to parent (Custody, Access and Guardianship, Fifth Report of Royal Commission on Family and Children 's Law, 1975), An agreement should be established with referring agents (Derdeyn, 1975;Rothschild, 1978;Krell, 1978;McDermott et al, 1978), who are frequendy lawyers for one or other competing party, that all contesting persons should be available for assessment and that the report should be made available to the judge or a lawyer appointed for the child (also known as a "child advocate" or "amicus curiae"). Both Gardner (1978) and Suarez (1978), however, feel that amicus curiae is more hindrance than help. In Michigan state there is an Office of the Friends of the Court , and in Canada Unified Family Courts have been established (McDonald, 1973), both of which try to ensure representation of the child and make the hearings less formal so that all pertinent information can be obtained; the adversary positions of the contesting lawyers can be modified; and in some instances settlements can be made out of court.…”