To not understand the logic of social services and the family court?

BarbiesDreamhouse1 · 2023-08-29T18:51:51+00:00

I'm really struggling and at a complete loss to understand this. A woman in an abusive relationship is threatened by social services for removal of her child if she continues to stay in said relationship. The woman flees and social services inform the father that contact is suspended and to make an application to court. One fact finding, one section 7, one psychological report later.. the father is then treated like the victim and is on the way to getting everything he wants.. despite denying perpetrating any abuse. It's almost like the mother is being punished for leaving. Help me understand this??

bellac11 · 29/08/2023 19:54

If there has been a fact finding hearing then the judge has set the 'facts' of the case, and made whatever findings they see fit based on the evidence

The mum will have been legally represented, what was the solicitors view of that?

Is this someone you know or youself?

Merryoldgoat · 29/08/2023 19:54

You don’t understand because it makes no fucking sense and it’s outrageous.

Utterly broken system.

HermioneWeasley · 29/08/2023 19:56

Agree with PP - you don’t understand because it makes no sense. The family courts allow men to keep on abusing women and children, and then believe men when they claim “parental alienation”. It’s a national scandal.

Original poster

BarbiesDreamhouse1 · 29/08/2023 19:58

bellac11 · 29/08/2023 19:54

If there has been a fact finding hearing then the judge has set the 'facts' of the case, and made whatever findings they see fit based on the evidence

The mum will have been legally represented, what was the solicitors view of that?

Is this someone you know or youself?

Yes. Me.
The fact finding did set the facts. It found that both parents were as bad as each other but his findings were significantly worse as he was found to have abused the child quite significantly as an infant. My findings were that I was also physically abusive and verbally abusive to him but no findings made in respect of our child.

OP posts:

AnneLovesGilbert · 29/08/2023 20:01

So what’s going to happen now?

Original poster

BarbiesDreamhouse1 · 29/08/2023 20:04

We have just had an experts report thrown out because the father didn't like it and unfortunately the Guardian agreed. So we've now got a new expert to undertake the assessment we did previously and to produce a new report.. a directions hearing will be listed with a final hearing listed after that. I just don't feel like I stand a chance. I felt like I was made to feel like the abuser this last hearing.. it was very "woe is me" from his side.

OP posts:

Original poster

BarbiesDreamhouse1 · 29/08/2023 20:20

Feel very despondent.

OP posts:

bellac11 · 29/08/2023 20:21

Having heard your update OP, I think you are (understandably) jumping teh gun

If you havent had your final hearing yet, nothing is finalised. Things can look very different once under cross examination

What is your solicitor saying.

You need a very robust barrister

Original poster

BarbiesDreamhouse1 · 29/08/2023 20:24

I've not yet had a debrief with my solicitor.. I had a good barrister but unfortunately the Guardian agreeing with the father did not help..
There will be a new psychological assessment which I hope is largely the same as the last one but perhaps a bit more balanced. The father didn't like the last report as it was so against him.

OP posts:

Woush · 29/08/2023 20:31

Are the children on a CP or CIN Plan currently?

Original poster

BarbiesDreamhouse1 · 29/08/2023 20:33

Not currently no. CIN when I was with him but since discharged when I left him.

OP posts:

Woush · 29/08/2023 20:45

With due respect then, social care were not at the stage of looking to remove the children. You'd be at CP conference if that was the case, especially so if the DV was two-way.

They also wouldn't have told you that you have to leave the relationship. They may have said it would be better for the children not to live around the domestic violence, but the decision to leave was yours, not on social care's insistence (because they cant insist) - own that choice as your own.

I'm am not negating the suffering and trauma you (and your children) have been through. But over-stating things and exaggerating is exactly the reason CAFCAS have difficulty in finding the truth in any situation and can be suspicious and weary if accepting one person's view as fact. Which sort of answers your OP question if wanting yo understand why.

Original poster

BarbiesDreamhouse1 · 29/08/2023 20:51

Woush · 29/08/2023 20:45

With due respect then, social care were not at the stage of looking to remove the children. You'd be at CP conference if that was the case, especially so if the DV was two-way.

They also wouldn't have told you that you have to leave the relationship. They may have said it would be better for the children not to live around the domestic violence, but the decision to leave was yours, not on social care's insistence (because they cant insist) - own that choice as your own.

I'm am not negating the suffering and trauma you (and your children) have been through. But over-stating things and exaggerating is exactly the reason CAFCAS have difficulty in finding the truth in any situation and can be suspicious and weary if accepting one person's view as fact. Which sort of answers your OP question if wanting yo understand why.

This is actually wrong.. a section 47 was raised and I had to flee. My daughter was put on a CIN after I had fled. I was forced to flee by SS. Didn't even have time to take my belongings. SS then dropped us several weeks after I left him as they said I wasn't a risk to her so there was no need for further input.

OP posts:

Woush · 29/08/2023 21:00

Saying SS made/forced you to flee suggests that you wouldn't have left if they hadn't insisted. That's why I said about owning the decision - surely you knew you needed to leave anyway?

This is what I mean about SS not insisting. They can say very strongly that children should not live in households with DV - but the decision to leave has to come from the individual, not social care, otherwise it shows very poor parenting.

Wasywasydoodah · 29/08/2023 21:17

Woush · 29/08/2023 21:00

Saying SS made/forced you to flee suggests that you wouldn't have left if they hadn't insisted. That's why I said about owning the decision - surely you knew you needed to leave anyway?

This is what I mean about SS not insisting. They can say very strongly that children should not live in households with DV - but the decision to leave has to come from the individual, not social care, otherwise it shows very poor parenting.

Edited

Maybe social workers can’t technically force someone to leave an abuser, but they can explain the consequences of not leaving, which (to most people) sounds very similar to being forced.

bellac11 · 29/08/2023 21:23

What other posters are saying though, is that having experienced DV and a father who is a risk to the child which OP says is the case, she would leave surely

Why wouldnt she?

Why would she need the consequences explained to her, she would be the first to say, he isnt come back, he isnt being around my children.

Original poster

BarbiesDreamhouse1 · 29/08/2023 21:50

I was forced.. I was told if I didn't leave there would be a child protection conference...

OP posts:

Woush · 29/08/2023 21:51

The inference (in fact insistance) that the decision to leave the relationship was forced on her by social care will not look good to CAFCAS. Because:

CAFCAS know social care processes and will know that's an exaggeration (which leads to, what else us being exaggerated?)
OP inferring she wouldn't have left if not forced suggests she does not prioritise the needs of the child.
OP was a perpetrator of DV, as well as a surviver of. This being done whilst there are children in the home - also showing lack of prioritisation of the children. Even now the relationship has ended, that perpetrator label endures as equally as the victim/surviver lable.

None of these things will look, to CAFCAS, as World's Greatest Mum. Equally, sounds like the child also doesn't have World's Greatest Dad either. Therefore CAFCAS need to do some balancing of judgement here. It's not going to be a straight forward decision.

Woush · 29/08/2023 22:11

BarbiesDreamhouse1 · 29/08/2023 21:50

I was forced.. I was told if I didn't leave there would be a child protection conference...

CP conference isn't at a level of the children being subject to a Care Order. It is at a level if CP Plan - which I appreciate feels scarey to a layman, but CP Plans are for keeping the child with the parents, not removing them.

Original poster

BarbiesDreamhouse1 · 29/08/2023 22:33

Not parents.. parent.
I was also warned of the consequences if I returned back to him.
I am with you on everything you said in your previous post. However, there's no exaggeration on my part of fleeing the relationship after social services threatened me.. its all documented.

OP posts:

HousePrices · 30/08/2023 00:06

I hate all this. Op. I believe you are not exaggerating as I’ve been on the rough end of both SS and Family Court.

Fact finding, I found, is something they try to keep equal. This makes no sense. Rather than take the DV seriously it was considered I may have been overly anxious after 'some' DV 'tendencies' against the DC and against me. This was not acknowledging the whole picture but then bending to the Dad.

Another thing that scares me is how easy it is for people to make false accusations and there is no effort to find the truth: the better voice in the room wins. The best looking person wins. The one favoured by their status in society wins. I dunno? Maybe it boils down to the male wins if he cries Parental Alienation.

Even CAFCASS warn on their website that it has to be considered a DC may reject the parent because of their treatment in DV rather than the other parent turning them against that parent. Yet all too easily the DV is swept under the carpet and minimised while blaming Mum for everything.

I cannot wait for the day family court is made public. Then, and then only, I think we will have a more fair and just system.

The family courts are broken. Or maybe they aren't broken because they were never whole in the first place to get broken. Half of me thinks it's a man's world and always ever will be, the other half really hopes I am wrong. But society has always favoured the strong; women and children remain the weakest link in family court.

Original poster

BarbiesDreamhouse1 · 30/08/2023 05:28

HousePrices · 30/08/2023 00:06

I hate all this. Op. I believe you are not exaggerating as I’ve been on the rough end of both SS and Family Court.

Fact finding, I found, is something they try to keep equal. This makes no sense. Rather than take the DV seriously it was considered I may have been overly anxious after 'some' DV 'tendencies' against the DC and against me. This was not acknowledging the whole picture but then bending to the Dad.

Another thing that scares me is how easy it is for people to make false accusations and there is no effort to find the truth: the better voice in the room wins. The best looking person wins. The one favoured by their status in society wins. I dunno? Maybe it boils down to the male wins if he cries Parental Alienation.

Even CAFCASS warn on their website that it has to be considered a DC may reject the parent because of their treatment in DV rather than the other parent turning them against that parent. Yet all too easily the DV is swept under the carpet and minimised while blaming Mum for everything.

I cannot wait for the day family court is made public. Then, and then only, I think we will have a more fair and just system.

The family courts are broken. Or maybe they aren't broken because they were never whole in the first place to get broken. Half of me thinks it's a man's world and always ever will be, the other half really hopes I am wrong. But society has always favoured the strong; women and children remain the weakest link in family court.

Edited

Thank you x
Did your ex end up with unsupervised access?

OP posts:

HousePrices · 30/08/2023 05:35

Yes, but nowhere near as often as he wanted to and it doesn't include overnights.

It actually ended much more in our favour despite every leading court case and ss looking like it would go against me and the DC.

Even though we got a good outcome in the end, I still have utterly zero faith in the system because of the amount of court cases that had previously gone against me and I began to give up all hope in true justice.

I realise family court is very different to criminal court but all the same, I think it's reasonable to look to them for just judgement. I didn't always see that, not until the very bitter end when I represented myself before a judge who gave me time to have a voice. A previous judge had not given me the opportunity to talk when I needed to and it went very badly but luckily had only been an interim order, not the final order.

Original poster

BarbiesDreamhouse1 · 30/08/2023 05:43

I'm hoping something will happen to turn our case around :(

OP posts:

RexWillKillYou · 30/08/2023 05:48

Woush · 29/08/2023 20:45

With due respect then, social care were not at the stage of looking to remove the children. You'd be at CP conference if that was the case, especially so if the DV was two-way.

They also wouldn't have told you that you have to leave the relationship. They may have said it would be better for the children not to live around the domestic violence, but the decision to leave was yours, not on social care's insistence (because they cant insist) - own that choice as your own.

I'm am not negating the suffering and trauma you (and your children) have been through. But over-stating things and exaggerating is exactly the reason CAFCAS have difficulty in finding the truth in any situation and can be suspicious and weary if accepting one person's view as fact. Which sort of answers your OP question if wanting yo understand why.

Well there you have it…. Look what you made me do.

Its so disingenuous, I’m not saying to leave, but mothers who stay tend to lose their children.

It is the language and tactics of coercion.