Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Lone parents

Use our Single Parent forum to speak to other parents raising a child alone.

CAFCASS advice needed

23 replies

sternstuff · 19/02/2009 03:04

ok, situation is -
young daughter, controlling father, have injunction against him, CAFCASS coming to visit me next week to write report. I need to get accross my concerns about father having unsupervised contact with daughter, am worried that they may not take my worries seriously. Any advice welcomed

OP posts:
N1 · 19/02/2009 08:37

How old is the child and do you have evidence of the concerns?

sternstuff · 19/02/2009 09:59

Daughter is 13 months. Evidence of concerns - injunction? Doesn't this count for something?

OP posts:
sternstuff · 19/02/2009 10:10

Any women out there with experience of CAFCASS?

OP posts:
cestlavielife · 19/02/2009 12:36

still waiting for them to contact me re: my situation - they supposed to have a report for court by mid april...

just have documented all your evidence, concerns and insist on supervised contact.

my veiw is - if after supervised contact the profressionals can reassure me completely that the children are safe with him then it may be possible to move on to wards unsupervised.... tho i doubt i would feel comfortable even then.

GypsyMoth · 19/02/2009 12:48

Was he. Iolent to you or both of you? If the injunction is to keep him away from just you then that won't affect his contact and the courts will work towards eventual unsupervised. My ex was violent,still is to his new partner, but he can still have unsupervised. As far as you're concerned,try and arrange third party handovers.

sternstuff · 19/02/2009 14:19

Violent towards me, not my daughter, though she was present sometimes. I heard that unless he was violent towards my daughter, i ain't got a leg to stand on and he'll get loads of unsupervised access once cafcass have been involved, regardless of my concerns. Is this just someone trying to scare the beejesus out of me or is this about right? Can't see how anyone with an ounce of common sense would think that a young girl would be guaranteed to be safe in the hands of someone i have an injunction against?

OP posts:
N1 · 20/02/2009 00:19

Sadly CAFCASS seem to want violent parents to have contact. The violent person has to have hurt their own children before someone thinks it's good to order "no contact".

The argument you have about CAFCASS is the reason various support groups were formed. Parents who believed that CAFCASS actually felt betrayed at the end. Their discontent caused them to join support groups to help others who still have to meet CAFCASS workers.

It might help to read up about "private law pathway". That's the new CAFCASS guideline, though not all CAFCASS reporters seem to apply that.

The advice, generally seems to be that you should get a recording device and record all conversations, so you can listen again. There is no point asking for permission, the answer is always "no". You should never have any intention of telling anyone that you record the conversations. Consider the recordings private and confidential.

Talking about contact. See what you can agree to and what you can't agree to. Have a good think. The see if there are things that you could agree to later (when the child is older).

CAFCASS will want to force the issue of contact, sadly. Though the flip side of the coin is that some mothers lie about their ex's and claim DV...etc, just to block contact. It's not east to know the truth and lawyers get paid regardless.

sternstuff · 20/02/2009 01:22

Thanks for the info N1, I'll see if I can find info on "private law pathway".

I understand that my daughter needs to know who her dad is and hopefully have a good and healthy relationship with him, slowly building over time. I am not trying to stop contact, it just needs to be sensible and safe, especially as B is so very young and she can't say if something has happened to her or around her at the moment.

I have been accused of making DV up by B's dad in court, but thankfully judge saw all the evidence, which basically spoke for itself, but he still won't admit it or take responsibility for his actions, which is so sad, I have no respect or trust of him now. He, I and God know the truth and I feel that if only he could acknowledge and admit what he's done, we would have some base to move forward from. At the moment, I'm finding it difficult that he is denying everything and trying to put the blame on me -SHE has made it up. Why would I do such a thing? To put myself through hell? My life has been an absolute misery for the last 12 months with court cases and stress.

I struggle with the issue of handing over my daughter to someone who has acted the way he has in front of and around B, together with the fact that after all that has happened, I really am quite frightened of him. It is difficult leaving your precious child with someone that you are scared of yourself! I worry so much when she is with him, even though they are in a contact centre with people around. My major fear is that as soon as he is out of the contact centre, when he knows noone is quietly watching/listening, he will revert to type and act inappropriately around or god forbid towards B. The trouble is, he is so unpredictable - I never used to know what mood he was going to be in - ranging from suffocatingly affectionate to threatening, menacing and violent or anything inbetween.

I don't want to be in a situation where my beautiful daughter has been damaged either by things done to her or things she has seen, and want contact to progress slowly and cautiously. I need to try and get this over to CAFCASS next week, but don't want to be seen as unneccesarily trying to slow down his contact which is what he'll say (sadly, my personal quest to try and understand the man has meant that he has invaded my brain so much that I know exactly what he is going to say next. I'm now working on trying to get him out of my head and to get ME back!)

Do you know what kind of time scale CAFCASS look at in terms of contact - they are obviously not going to map out recommendations for contact for the next 15 years. I was just thinking about what you said about what I might be able to agree to when B is older. Will they make recommendations for then next year? beyond?

Thanks again for advice N1, it's much appreciated

OP posts:
N1 · 20/02/2009 01:48

There is a case in the midlands which is over 5 years - about contact. There is a Devon or Cornwall case - 3 years. Some mothers have penal notices attached to their contact orders but they robustly defend their children (guardians tend to make matters worse).

Look for things that you can agree on and gather reasons why you are against the points that you are against. Where possible, try to offer a suggestion or a plan. It's easier to respond to a suggestion than to think up a new idea.

Time scales - best you present your version of a plan to CAFCASS and see what they say. Give them the reasons why you think your plan is better, then ask them to confirm if your ideas are a good way forward. Try to pick their brain a bit.

Spero · 20/02/2009 22:34

CAFCASS should be clued up about the impact upon children of one parent being violent to the other - it is a failure of parenting and the violent parent has to take responsibility and ensure it won't happen again.

i've been involved with cases where CAFCASS recommend no contact if the violent parent wont for eg take part in an assessment from the Domestic violence intervention Project. but this is quite rare and usually involves the type of violence that got a prison sentence.

If you got a civil injunction but he has not been charged/convicted of criminal offence, he will probably be on the scale of offenders where contact will move to unsupervised after a period of supervised contact goes well.

Try to keep calm, CAFCASS will be very interested in what you have to say and the fact there is an injunction.

glitterfairy · 21/02/2009 08:58

I have mixed feelings about CAFCASS. Had a crap officer to begin with who despite evidence from the kids insisted on shared care. She was totally sucked in by X and cruel to the kids, she didnt listen when they told her x had hit them. I made an official complaint (despite legal advice not to which I had to go against as they were going to make her the kids guardian) and we got a new officer who was completely different and listened to the kids properly. He was very experienced and his reports simply quoted the kids with very little emotional stuff around it. The whole case then turned around.

My X never really owned up to his behaviour but did admit on one occasion he had acted inappropriately towards them. Do not expect your x to admit anything and do expect to have his solicitors say you are making things up.

I had a police alarm in my house because of X and the police only decided not to prosecute x because I couldnt face it even though there was evidence of harassment and theft of my property.

Our second Cafcass officer was fab and a revelation (even when he was really hard on me at times, he put the kids first always) so I think it is a really mixed picture out there.

Remember to collect all your evidence together in the form of notes and diaries and be really clear about what it is you will compromise on and what you wont. Write down before you go to court or see CAfcass what it is you want and stick to your guns but remember that it is never a good thing to go to court for a principle and that you can lose the battles but win the war; try to see the bigger picture and not waste money.

sternstuff · 21/02/2009 10:36

Thanks N1, Spero and glitterfairy, all advice and info is very useful. I don't know anyone who has ever had CAFCASS involvement, so don't really know what to expect that they'll be like.

OP posts:
sternstuff · 21/02/2009 11:32

Just had a thought - will CAFCASS have a copy of my position statement? When they visit next week should I have another copy of any evidence for me to talk about and for them to take away? Or is this not appropriate?

OP posts:
glitterfairy · 21/02/2009 12:36

Have another copy as sometimes they say they havent seen things or havent read them.

N1 · 21/02/2009 13:41

In both my court cases CAFCASS didn't have copies of anything. The only things they had were things I gave them. If you want to be helpful and if you have a copy of your ex's statement - offer a copy of that as well. It's not going to help you much but sometimes CAFCASS ask your opinion about what he wrote. If your comments are not needed, CAFCASS have both statements which should make their life easier.

It would be a good idea to have a copy of your statement with you. The CAFCASS reporter should read it and check that they know the detail they know.

If there are any issues you have about your ex, the start is the time to list them. Adding more issues into the process makes you look like you are changing goal posts or setting up hurdles.

Coincidently, the first court case had a cafcass reporter who believed all my ex's lies. the second court case got another CAFCASS reporter who was open, transparent and who saw right through my ex's vindictive intentions. The second one also spoke to my son and got answers. The questions to my son were clear and the reporter made sure that he got a clear answer back. Sadly, good honest CAFCASS reporters seem to be the minority - almost the exception.

sternstuff · 21/02/2009 20:00

It's a shame that CAFCASS seem to have such a bad reputation. It must be really depressing to have had a 'bad' one.

Thanks for the advice again, I'll spend tomorrow 'preparing' myself and various bits of paper/evidence.

Fingers crossed I get one of the good ones...we'll see

OP posts:
fuzzywuzzy · 21/02/2009 20:41

My personal experience (and I'm hoping it was a one off very bad one).
As I did not spend ages bad mouthing ex to the extremely exhausted CAFCASS officer, he recommended in his report to the courts that I had agreed to unsupervised full day contact. News to me, in fact the first time I heard I was being so reticent of my childrens safety and wellbeing was when I read the CAFCASS officers report

I also had an injunction out against ex, and a prohibitive steps order (the latter is still in place).
Worse ex had several police records which clearly show that he is a violent person, but apparently that did not concern the CAFCASS officer. At the point where I took steps to get out of my marriage I had social services threatening to take my children from me if I allowed ex back into my home.

I tried calling the CAFCASS officer to stop him filing his report in court however he never answered his phone. Upon some desperate googling I finally got hold og his landline number at CAFCASS only to discover that he'd pissed off on holiday, and already filed the pack of lies report.

Luckily for me I had a kick ass legal rep, and we managed to convince a (understandably) singluarly unimpressed judge that the report was incorrect, so now the hearing is going on to a fact finding hearing and ex continues with his supervised fortnightly one hour contact sessions.....The original CAFCASS officer has also been taken off my case (thank God!)

My advice spell out to the CAFCASS officer everything you think they should be aware of, he/she may have your file and it's prolly gathering dust somewhere. Explain in minute detail why you are afraid for your childs safety show him any proof you may have and then repeat ad infinitum.

Btw have only read OP, will now read the rest of the thread

kidsgoape · 14/02/2010 08:32

I have been denyed the right to see my 10 year old for 2 years now because my X accuse me of violence, there was no violence and she made these acusations 6 years after we were divorced, the Cafcas report against me stinks in many ways and up up til now I have been unable to lodge a complaint against them.

StewieGriffinsMom · 14/02/2010 08:35

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

STIDW · 17/02/2010 02:07

I am assuming that this is a Section 7 report produced during the course of a contact dispute.

Although courts draw upon CAFCASS reports to reach a conclusion it's important to realise decisions lie with a judge. Given good reasons a judge may overrule CAFCASS recommendations. S7 reports contain lots of bits and pieces. Some bits simply document what you and your ex tell the CAFCASS officers. Just because they write down what you both said, there is no presumption that you both told the truth. Other bits document the CAFCASS officers' interaction with your child. Finally, some bits document the CAFCASS officers' conclusions and the reasoning behind those conclusions.

Under the Children Act 1989 the paramount consideration is the welfare of children and with DV the main concern is evidence of the effects of any abuse on the child and/or the risk of harm to them. Although sometimes supervised access is awarded whilst investigations are carried out, in the long term it is an uphill struggle preventing unsupervised contact without the evidence of impartial professionals. Injunctions and police, GP or Health Visitor notes of incidences etc are not usually sufficient evidence in themselves but may be useful to persuade the courts further investigation is required into the effects of DV on the children or if they are at risk of harm.

CAFCASS makes lots of errors of fact and errors of law where the CAFCASS officer has asserted a certain point of law to underline their conclusion, but the point of law concerned is wrong. It isn't possible to challenge the faithfully documenting of something merely reported but it is possible to raise errors of fact or law. The place to raise these is in future hearings. A good lawyer will handle this for you.

arfarfa · 17/02/2010 21:58

"In cases of contested custody and access, mental health professionals have been seeing with increasing frequency an extreme form of brainwashing which has been called The Parental Alienation Syndrome. Children who are suffering with this situation have been subjected to an intense and persistent form of brainwashing by one parent against the other. The overt goal is almost always - at a minimum - to dramatically reduce contact by the child with that other parent. Commonly, the goal becomes to virtually eliminate the other parent from the child's life."

Sad, that one human being would sink so low as to try to turn a child against the other parent, but unfortunately often true.

STIDW · 19/02/2010 00:32

"In cases of contested custody and access, mental health professionals have been seeing with increasing frequency an extreme form of brainwashing which has been called The Parental Alienation Syndrome. Children who are suffering with this situation have been subjected to an intense and persistent form of brainwashing by one parent against the other. The overt goal is almost always - at a minimum - to dramatically reduce contact by the child with that other parent. Commonly, the goal becomes to virtually eliminate the other parent from the child's life."

Sad, that one human being would sink so low as to try to turn a child against the other."

I'm interested where that came from. With the mention of custody the States perhaps? In the UK the terms "custody" and "access" were replaced by "residence" and "contact" by the Children Act 1989.

The UK courts have long recognised that some parents will use children as a weapon to get at the other parent and it isn't at all uncommon for a parent to be hostile to contact when they arrive in court. However, despite the proliferation of definitions and descriptions of PAS there is little in the way of scientific data and as a mental health condition it remains unproven and is likely to remain so (I challenge anyone to find scientific data!). Because of this it is difficult to find an expert witness in the UK who will support the theory and courts don't recognise PAS.

Although it doesn't mention PAS by name this is the advice given to psychiatrists recently;

"The expert should not take instructions that go beyond psychiatric expertise, for example in providing opinions as to whether an individual is telling the truth. Care should be taken when the issue is one of novel psychiatric conditions for which there is an uncertain evidence base or a condition, such as ?battered woman syndrome?, ?false memory
syndrome?, ?Stockholm syndrome? or ?sick building syndrome?, that may be recognised by the courts but for which there are no recognised diagnostic criteria, or no general agreement to the syndrome?s nature,
or even no agreement as to its existence."

NHS Evidence has a handful of papers about PAS, but most of them are definitions and descriptions from the States and there little, if anything, in the way of scientific data that one would expect for a mental health condition to be recognised. To my knowledge there is only one mental health professional who supports PAS theory in the UK and he has been described as being at "the lower end of his profession" by the courts. Presumably this was after he was found to have brought his profession into disrepute at a disciplinary hearing after using diagnostic tools not recognised by the profession (not related to PAS).

Although a degree of hostility to contact isn't uncommon in cases presenting to court the reasons for this vary widely. Some parents will have well founded safety fears
because of domestic violence, drug and alcohol abuse, or child maltreatment. For
others the hostility reflects hurt and anger at the breakdown of the relationship,
disputes over property and money or a desire to create a new family unit and cut out
the biological parent. In most cases the court process, if not necessarily in
dealing with the cause of the parent?s hostility and therefore changing their
attitudes, at least overcomes their initial resistance so that contact can take place.

Sometimes hostility is more entrenched and 'implacable' despite the prolonged involvement of the courts. In a few cases mental health experts have found the hostile parent to have a recognisable personality disorder but that is far removed from some of the claims made about PAS.

Apologies for the long post.

arfarfa · 19/02/2010 10:25

Excellent post, STIDW.
I think that you've captured the everyday dilemma which the courts face in your second to last paragraph. In cases where there are "well founded fears", then the safety of the child/parent must be paramount. But, in cases where the ex partner is simply being viewed as something between an irritant and a hate-object, then the rights of the child to enjoy a full, loving relationship with said parent must always be upheld, and, if necessary rigidly enforced. There are too many cases where, up until the break up of the family unit, there exists a close, loving bond between both parents and the child/children, which subsequently(and bizarrely) shifts within a few months to a situation where the child seemingly no longer 'wants' to see the non-resident parent.
The piece below is from an Australian legal perspective:
"Divorce is one of the most stressful experiences that most people in our culture will experience in a lifetime. It is often accompanied by strong feelings of bitterness, betrayal, anger and distrust of the former partner. Each party often feels that they are "right" in many of their views on issues about which the couple disagree. When they have children the picture becomes infinitely more complicated. Among many other reactions, there is often a tendency for each partner to want the support or agreement of the child (or children) on critical issues. The more difficulty and intensity of negative feeling between the two adults, the more likely is this to be the case.

In some cases, the desire to have the agreement of the child can become strong enough to verge into brainwashing. By brainwashing I mean an effort on one parent's part to get the child to give up his or her own positive perceptions of the other parent and change them to agree with negative views of the influencing parent. At this intensity the motivation of the parent goes beyond simply getting the agreement and support of the children. Commonly, brainwashing parents are motivated by an opportunity to wreak a powerful form of revenge on the other parent -diminishing the affections of the children.
The Parental Alienation Syndrome represents an extreme form of brainwashing of children by one parent. It is always seen in the context of disputed custody or access situations. The goal of the brainwashing parent is to get revenge. There is no greater revenge than blocking the other parent from playing a meaningful role in the child's life. The syndrome has clear signs and symptoms and, with appropriate procedures, can be diagnosed and treated. This syndrome is also seen in more complex forms, when it is embedded in situations of alleged child sexual abuse or child kidnapping. It can easily be misdiagnosed by professionals who have not educated themselves about these situations, and misguided efforts at helping can worsen an already bad situation."

The sooner that this form of behaviour is quantified and analyzed, the sooner(in my opinion) it can be properly categorized as a form of Child Abuse.

Apologies for the long response.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page