Cafcass, Section 7 Report :(

[oodlesandnoodles]

I am so stressed and worried.

Currently in dispute with my ex about residency of the children. We have previously had shared residency but for the last few months they have been mainly with me. We have recently been to Court and the Judge ordered a Cafcass Section 7 report, which I understand takes about 12 weeks.

It has already been recommended by Social Services that our children need more stability and that our previous shared care "probably" isn't best for them. The Judge has Ordered Cafcass to decide if they feel it is better for the children to live with one parent and if so which one.

There isn't much for them to decide on either way though. No serious safety concerns, no alcohol/drug issues - nothing to say either of us isn't a normal capable parent. So how will they choose? Ex doesn't work, I work part time, ex has no other children but they have a half sibling and a step sibling here. We are both near their school. They will however have been with me most of the time for about 7/8 months at the time of the next hearing however historically it has always been shared care.

Anyway have any experience of Section7 reports? Or any experience of Cafcass choosing which parent the children should live with?

[LittleBabyLucas]

Cafcass are pretty fair in my experience. As long as your meeting the physical and emotional needs of the kids you've got nothing to worry about!

A section 7 is just a form that they fill in once they've seem you and the kids to give feedback to the court you should get a copy from your solicitor once your back in court for directions.

The terminology they use is daunting but trust me Cafcass are easier to deal with than the La children's service!

[LittleBabyLucas]

Oh if your kids can talk or write their thoughts and feelings MUST be considered. And since they've been living with you and have siblings a court will not usually split up a family unit xx

[cestlavielife]

Cafcass cannot decide. Only a court can.
Cafcass report give information to the court and might recommend.

Why is the current arrangement not providing stability ?

[oodlesandnoodles]

Embarrassingly the children have been assessed by Children's Services as at risk of emotional harm due to parental acrimony. Basically ex and I are both good parents, there's no question of our parenting or the children's safety, we just absolutely hate each other. We have only been able to co parent up until recently but having all communication via email, never meeting, never speaking- zilch. We had one argument when the children were present but not in earshot (I'm very ashamed) and as it was in public it was reported to police (no action taken it was just a verbal altercation lasting about 60secs) and they made a referral to SS as matter of course- hence SS involvement albeit minor. Sounds awful. We are normal people and have managed for 2 years to co parent reasonably effectively until that incident.

[oodlesandnoodles]

Basically now SS and Cafcass feel the kids have two separate lives in each home and that it will be better for them to have one main home. I know they don't decide but I also know it's very likely the Judge will go with their recommendations.

[3xcookedchips]

When you say they have seperate lives - what exactly do they mean?

What is their definition of main home? Where the majority of care takes place.

Are they saying one household has less boundaries, less discipline, less structure that the other?

Really depends on the parenting issues but dont worry, CAFCASS will probably favour you as the main or majority carer, based on what you say regarding the last 8 months.

However, in the absence of any concrete info how they are basing this view I'd say they are talking out of their arses.

In many separated families the kids have two homes, where the parenting style will differ. Just because the parents 'don't get on' as long as this is kept away from the kids then this no bar to shared care/shared parenting/shared residence model.

[oodlesandnoodles]

Yes 3chips. Different structures, routines and boundaries in each house. Ex is very relaxed about discipline and routine, no set bedtime, so set activities on set days, allowed to get on with things and pretty much do as they please. SS state they are not coming to harm and it's his parenting style so not a problem in itself. Here we have rules and the kids stick to them- dinner at 5pm bedtime at 7pm, no jumping on the furniture, no running off in the street- that sort of thing.

One thing SS as Cafcass have mentioned lots is discipline. Ex doesn't do it often, as I said he's very laid back but to be fair they are good kids and it isn't necessary but when he does tell them off he shouts and smacks. SS said again this is fine, is his choice of behaviour management style. Here we don't smack (can't honestly say I don't shout though-who doesn't sometimes) but we have time out and/or loss of TV time/computer time/console time etc.

I think my way is better or course, but that's just my opinion. It's been said the kids are happy healthy and safe in each home, they are doing well at school and have no other issues- but that it's too emotionally damaging for them to lead "dual lives" spending half tier time in each house.

[3xcookedchips]

Dual lives? You have different parenting styles - where is the emotional damage, unless they are exposed to your conflict?

Unless the kids are exposed to neglect and their welfare is at risk, SS/CAFCASS cant really comment on or use parenting styles as a stick.

If you want conflict in a 50/50 scenario - check out A v A its a case then went to appeal, where you couldn't get much higher conflict yet the kids had two homes where they spent time equally between the two parent.

You're in court now, you've rolled the dice - now it will be down to your ex to challenge the recommendations of the report and need to justify why its in the kids interest to revert back to your previous regime.

[STIDW]

I think you need to wait until you see the report and recommendations.

Every case depends on the particular circumstances. Father's rights people often quote AvA when shared residence 50:50 was granted to equalise the power between parents. However there are plenty of other examples when residence is granted in favour of one parent to redress power issues or when shared care is granted in different proportions from 50:50. There are are many different ways of sharing care. The gold standard is co-operative shared care. When that isn't possible it usually boils down to the courts choosing the lesser of all the evils.

Even the perceptions of children too young express their wishes and feelings may be taken into account through play and art work. However their views are considered in light of their age and maturity. The older a child is the more they can understand the implications of a decision so more weight is given to older children's views. However older children's views aren't determinative until they reach the age of 16 when normally child arrangement orders end.

Parenting styles which differ greatly can be a deciding factor. For example a young teenager might want to live with a permissive parent who lets them stay out late drinking on a school night. Clearly it would be in the interests of the child to live with the other parent if they are more authoritative and capable of establishing ground rules.

Above all arrangements for children should be focussed on meeting their changing needs. Children need to maintain many of their routines to feel secure. Very young children need firm boundaries and consistent arrangements. Greater flexibility is required when children are older and start taking an interest in pursuits outside their home.

Teenagers are at a development stage when they need to develop relationships with their peers to start becoming independent from their parents rather than focussing on the time they spend with parents. Rigid shared care arrangements may not work for adolescents who may not like being forced to live 50:50 so that parents don't feel they are loosing out. Teenagers often prefer one base.

In reality arrangements for children should be based around what children need and not on notions of equality and rights that parents feel they have the right to demand.

[3xcookedchips]

CAFCASS regularly state, because there is conflict between the parents then means there should be a limit to how much time the children should spend with the minor parent. It's as if they have a template they cut and paste from. Would be interested to know if they use the same reasoning in your report.

AvA contradicts that view, and it is an extreme case. Point out the inconsistencies in the family courts.

Which Fathers rights people are you referring to?

[oodlesandnoodles]

Thank you both. I too think this is all rather ridiculous. I am very upset that one small incident has led to all of this. Yes the dice is about to be rolled as you said and it seems from what SS and Cafcass have said so far that one of us will be very unhappy with the conclusion of the Section 7.

Our children are not teenagers or even preteens, they are both young primary school children. They are currently being showered with gifts and days out by my ex every single time they see him. They think it's great (they have no idea of why of course) as usually they only get toys and gifts for Birthdays and as special treats. Every meal time is a meal out, every weekend day is an expensive trip. It's not possible for him to keep this up, he can't afford it, I just worry that their "wishes and feelings" may be temporarily swayed, but as you say children don't often know what is best for them just what seems best for them right now. I don't want to play his game, I will not spoil my children or try and buy their love/favour - it's sad because they love him anyway, it's not necessary.

[STIDW]

Oh dear, the father really isn't doing himself any favours is he? If he is letting the children do whatever they want, showering them with gifts and treating them to days he isn't providing the children with what they need to develop properly. The courts have seen it all before and Disneyland Dads is the term sometimes coined to name the behaviour.

It's sad really that some parents feel the need to buy their children's love. Children don't appreciate it the long term and expect more and more so in the end they are left disappointed and resentful because the parent can't continue to fulfil their expectations.