Disagree with Cafcass Section 7 - how to do it?

[cinammonbunsandcoffee]

What's the best way of approaching it if you do not agree with the content and also the recommendations in Section 7 report? Based on these reasons:

1. Factual errors - they have amended some but not all even though agreed with all in phone follow-up.
2. Things I didn't say - how do I prove this, I can't as the zoom call wasn't recorded and noone else present, so how do I approach it in my response?
3. Things my children say they did not say - the words aren't theirs - easily proved by the names that have been used to call the other parent and me - but how to actually prove as children can't come to court and they were interviewed alone and not recorded.
4. In my response is it a good idea to use academic literature to back anything up, and/or legal precedent if I can find? To do with neglect and need of safeguarding children with Autism specifically due to delayed emotional maturity.
5. Was agreed no Fact Finding to take place regarding DA but Cafcass has repeatedly referred to DA, analysed the relationship, spent the interview discussing it, and made recommendations based on her opinion that it did not place. As I made it up (according to Cafcass) ths anxiety has now extended to the children which is why, in her opnion there is a concern regarding the safeguarding of the children. Conversely, the other parent is described as loving, laid back etc etc. and not a perpetrator because he has said he is not. But the point being is I did not ask for a Scott Schedule and have not raised DA in my application, or asked for it to be taken into account. I do not see or have any interaction with the other parent, or any need to in terms of the children so it is irrelevant. So Cafcass have managed to paint me as an anxious fantasist despite me saying I did not want DA to be considered as it was historic and not relevant to safeguarding of the children.
6. Report not child-centred - the officer repeatedly told me about personal aspects of their own life and appeared to be then applying it to this case. How do I say that to the Judge? Any tips on how not to rub Cafcass and Judge up the wrong way? I have to self represent. Thank you.

Consider which incorrect facts were worth disputing and ignore those which are not. For instance in mine they stated that my DS was told he was adopted at 5 (based only on asking him at 9 and not running this by me). He has always known since birth but maybe only able to understand this at 5 I guess as no idea where that number came from. However since the adoption was not relevant to the case I did not mention this inaccuracy.

However, when they stated a person that had contact with the children had drug convictions I did dispute this- my solicitor argued in court it wasn’t true, that the person worked in schools so was DBS checked to be safe around children and that these were only allegations made by the other party that had never met the person and when questioned on why they thought this person had drug convictions they quoted hear say as their evidence so this was dismissed.
As this was not based on any evidence we didn’t provide court with a copy of DBS check or anything to prove our point- but if the other person had some “evidence” I would probably have provided this as proof.

I have also seen a Cafcass report that claimed the father was reported for attacking someone with a hammer as a weapon and the police did find the hammer on them. He was charged.
Turned out Dad was walking down the street and saw a guy acting shifty concealing a hammer- he reported this to the police. Police arrested the stranger and charged him. Nothing to do with Dad except he was a (very minor) witness.
So they can be inaccurate. Court won’t be surprised in inaccuracies.

It sounds like from your post that they are trying to say the other parent is not the problem, and any issues with your children not wanting to see them for contact are because you are being precious and telling the children too much information about your relationship with their father? This is causing the children anxiety of their own. So your mental health/anxiety is affecting the children’s own well-being and their relationship with the other parent. Is this correct that you think this is what they are implying?

I guess firstly consider if this is true…. We have stipulation in our court order that neither of us can speak negatively about each other or Allow others to in front of the children. Do you already stick to this? If you do then this is your “defence”?
If you do not stick to this and do speak poorly or him/her and tell the children about cases of DV they wouldn’t remember themselves then this would not be healthy and I would stop this immediately.

Hi, thanks a lot for your detailed response. Yes I wondered about that, it's hard to know whether relevant or irrelevant in terms of the recommondentations. It's more they appear to have been said to build a picture of me as an anxious parent, which is not the case at all. They met with the father a day before writing the report, and it is very much his voice. Its really strange, and not at all what I got from the interview with me which was three weeks prior.

Yes, its as if they have come to the situation with a formulated view based on their own experiences of DA. I don't ever discuss their father with the children, I actively encourage contact, talk about his family and show them photos of when we were together, as its important they know there was a time when it was all ok. They both remember the DA from when he lived at home though but we don't discuss it. I answer questions that they sometimes have. They are both scared of him which is why I have no direct contact with him, and why we use a court ordered parenting app for communication etc, that's all standard with DA. I guess my question is despite me asking for no fact finding they have gone ahead and done a sort of subjective fact finding of their own, and not focussed on neglect or safeguarding issues which were what the court requested for the section 7, instead they have focussed on that. Which is strange.

I was very concerned after my first phone call and report with Cafcass, as they had also spoken with Dad first the day before, and so were “on his side”.
Exactly like you this was the opposite of the actual Cafcass representative that met us in court a month before and spoke in person with us both.
I felt like I was trying to turn their opinion….
I just kept acting like a normal person and over each report/court date he let more and more of himself out, not sticking to the court orders etc and so the reports got more and more bias towards me.

Hmm…. I guess Cafcass’ job is to find out what is causing the issues which mean the kids can’t see their dad, and if you tell the the truth, but the kids and dad don’t all say the same it could come across as you being anxious….
Luckily both my kids told the Cafcass worker exactly what I would have liked so it was their accusations not mine I guess.

I was very concerned after my first phone call and report with Cafcass, as they had also spoken with Dad first the day before, and so were “on his side”.
Exactly like you this was the opposite of the actual Cafcass representative that met us in court a month before and spoke in person with us both.
I felt like I was trying to turn their opinion….
I just kept acting like a normal person and over each report/court date he let more and more of himself out, not sticking to the court orders etc and so the reports got more and more bias towards me.

Hmm…. I guess Cafcass’ job is to find out what is causing the issues which mean the kids can’t see their dad, and if you tell the the truth, but the kids and dad don’t all say the same it could come across as you being anxious….
Luckily both my kids told the Cafcass worker exactly what I would have liked so it was their accusations not mine I guess.