Rule 14.Litigant Education Programs in Family Court

Last amended July 30, 2012 · Last verified September 12, 2026

In one sentenceRule 14 authorizes the judges of the Family Court in each county to develop litigant education programs — orientation to court procedure, orientation to mediation, education about parental rights and responsibilities or domestic violence, and referral to community services — and sets the terms for waivers, fees, and sanctions.

Full Text of Rule 14

Text sizeJump to: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f)

(a) In General.

(1) The judges of the Family Court in each county are authorized and encouraged to develop litigant education programs of the following types:

(A) Orientation of litigants to court procedure in order to aid their understanding of the litigation process.

(B) Orientation of litigants to the benefits and availability of mediation and other methods of alternative dispute resolution; provided that, when domestic violence is involved in an action, the litigants shall not be required to attend such an orientation program.

(C) Education concerning the legal and social aspects of the substantive matters underlying certain types of litigation, such as that involving parental rights and responsibilities or domestic violence.

(D) Orientation and referral to available community and social services.

(2) All Family Court litigant education programs should have the basic goal of rendering the courts and the legal system more accessible and more humane in their effect on litigants and others affected by litigation and should respond to the particular needs of the population of the community and region in which each court sits.

(b) Assessment and Evaluation. There should be a method for ongoing assessment and evaluation of the program and its effect on litigants, with provision for annual summarization of the results in reports to the Court Administrator.

(c) Local Advisory Committee. In each county, the Family Court should establish a local advisory committee on litigant education programs with representatives of the community at large, organizations representing groups who are affected by the programs, the local bar, and community social service agencies. The function of the advisory committees is to assist the judges and case managers of each court in devising programs that satisfy the criteria of subdivision (2) of this order.

(d) Waiver of Attendance. Each program should contain appropriate provisions permitting the court to waive any requirement of attendance on a showing by a litigant of a constitutionally protected interest that would be invaded by participation in a particular program, a personal disability or vulnerability that would render participation onerous or dangerous, or other good cause.

(e) Fees. Litigants may be charged fees for participation when necessary to meet the cost of a program, but provision must be made to permit attendance by individuals who cannot afford the fees.

(f) Sanctions. The court may require attendance at a program when appropriate, but the sanctions for nonattendance by an individual who is not granted a waiver may not include dismissal or default or other sanctions that materially impair rights at stake in the litigation or prevent the proper presentation of a claim or defense.

End

Notes

REPORTER'S NOTES--2012 AMENDMENT: V.R.F.P. 14(d) is amended to add “other good cause” to the grounds for waiver of attendance at a litigant education program that are to be incorporated in the terms of each such program. The amendment, requested by the Family Division Oversight Committee, is to give the court discretion to recognize valid grounds for nonattendance other than constitutional interests, disability, or vulnerability in a spousal or other relationship.

REPORTER'S NOTES: Rule 14 is adopted to provide a framework within which individual Family Court judges may continue to develop and experiment with litigant education programs in a variety of contexts. A number of such programs are now in use for divorce, domestic abuse, and other proceedings. The rule is intended to serve the basic purpose set forth in subdivision (a)(2) by both authorizing and encouraging continued development of the several types of programs enumerated in subdivision (a). The rule establishes certain requirements for and limitations on programs that are developed. Both subdivisions (a)(2) and (c) emphasize that litigant education programs must be responsive to the needs and other conditions of the areas in which they are used. All constituencies affected by a program should be involved in its design and review. The final clause of subdivision (a)(1)(B) recognizes the inherent problems in the use of mediation or other ADR methods in cases where abuse may be a factor. The risk that a pro se victim may be forced into a judicially unsupervised ADR process with a dominant abuser outweighs the benefits to the court system of litigant education in this area. The court should deem domestic violence to be involved when the court suspects it, when one party has credibly asserted that it is present, or when it appears as a matter of record. Judges will be expected to use their discretion to protect victims in cases where mediation orientation is incorporated in a single program with other components. Subdivision (f) is not intended to abridge the inherent judicial contempt power.

Amendment History

[Adopted effective March 20, 1995. Amended May 30, 2012, effective July 30, 2012.]

Plain-English Summary

Rule 14 is the charter for the education programs Vermont's family courts offer the people who appear before them. It lets the judges in each county develop programs that orient litigants to court procedure so they understand the process they are in, introduce them to the benefits and availability of mediation and other forms of alternative dispute resolution, teach the legal and social background of what their case is about, such as parental rights and responsibilities or domestic violence, and point them toward community and social services. The goal the rule sets is plain: courts and a legal system that are more accessible and more humane for litigants and for everyone else a case touches.

The rule protects litigants in an action involving domestic violence. They cannot be required to attend the orientation on mediation and other methods of alternative dispute resolution. Each program should also contain provisions letting the court waive a requirement of attendance, on a showing of a constitutionally protected interest that participation would invade, a personal disability or vulnerability that would make participation onerous or dangerous, or other good cause.

Money cannot be what keeps someone out. A court may charge litigants fees when that is what it takes to meet the cost of a program, but it must make provision for people who cannot afford them. Attendance cannot be enforced with a hammer either. The court may require a litigant to attend when appropriate, and a litigant who skips a program without a waiver can face consequences, but not dismissal, not default, and nothing else that materially impairs the rights at stake in the litigation or prevents the proper presentation of a claim or defense.

Oversight is built in. Each program should be assessed and evaluated as it runs, with the results summarized each year in a report to the Court Administrator. And each county's family court should establish a local advisory committee with representatives of the community at large, organizations representing the groups the programs affect, the local bar, and community social service agencies, to help the judges and case managers design programs that meet the rule's criteria.

Frequently Asked Questions

What kinds of education programs does the family court run?

Rule 14 encourages family court judges in each county to develop programs of several kinds: orientation to court procedure so you understand the litigation process, orientation to the benefits and availability of mediation and other methods of alternative dispute resolution, education on the legal and social aspects of what cases like yours involve, such as parental rights and responsibilities or domestic violence, and orientation and referral to available community and social services.

What is offered varies by county. Programs are supposed to respond to the particular needs of the community and region where the court sits, so ask the court where your case is filed what it runs.

Can the court require me to attend a program?

Yes. The court may require attendance at a program when appropriate. One limit is written into the rule: when domestic violence is involved in an action, litigants cannot be required to attend an orientation on the benefits and availability of mediation and other methods of alternative dispute resolution.

Every program should also include a way for the court to waive a requirement of attendance, so an order to attend is not the end of the conversation.

What happens if I do not attend?

The court can respond, but the rule caps how hard. If you were not granted a waiver and you do not attend, the sanctions cannot include dismissal or default, and they cannot include anything else that materially impairs the rights at stake in the litigation or prevents the proper presentation of a claim or defense.

Missing a program cannot cost you the case itself. That is a ceiling on the sanction, not a license to skip. The court can still order you to attend and can impose consequences that stay within the limit.

Can I be excused from attending a program?

Each program should contain appropriate provisions permitting the court to waive any requirement of attendance. The rule names the grounds: a constitutionally protected interest that would be invaded by participation, a personal disability or vulnerability that would render participation onerous or dangerous, or other good cause.

The showing is yours to make, and the court decides. Raise it early, in writing where you can, rather than after the session has come and gone.

Do I have to pay to attend?

Sometimes. Litigants may be charged fees for participation when the fees are necessary to meet the cost of a program. The rule then requires provision to permit attendance by individuals who cannot afford the fees, so a program cannot price you out of it.

If the fee is a problem, say so to the court or to the program staff before the session rather than staying away. The rule exists to make room for you.

Source & verification. Rule text, official Reporter's Notes, and amendment history are reproduced verbatim from the Vermont Rules for Family Proceedings, adopted by the Vermont Supreme Court. Last verified September 12, 2026. · Official source

Also known as: litigant education programfamily court orientationmediation orientationwaiver of attendanceprogram feessanctions for nonattendance