Please please please help, CAFCASS :(

[babyhammock]

Has anyone had a really bad experience with CAFCASS and what happened? Was it ok in the end? Did the court actually end up looking at any of the actual evidence, witness statements, anything aside from the CAFCASS report?

I don't think you'll be automatically expected to go along with what their report says, everyone has a right to object. It's when you go against a Court order that you're in trouble although it wasn't a problem when DDs dad did, he just got made to apologise to the Court.

bongo read and study teh chidlrens act -
as ring said only court can order community service .

adn if you can tell judge you have "reaosnable excuse" for not going long with an order then the judge has to decide toa gre with you or not.

get informed.

you have to show you not just being obstructive and ahve reasonble excuse

search for "resonable excuse childrens act" pn google

eg it links to
www.familylawcourts.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/FLC/Home/Court+Orders/Complying+with+orders+about+children/

What is a reasonable attempt to comply?
When a parenting order is made, each person affected by the order must follow the order. This includes taking all reasonable steps to follow the order. For example, a parent has a positive obligation to encourage a child to spend time with the other parent (if this is specified in the order).

What is a reasonable excuse?
If a court decides a person has contravened a parenting order, it will consider whether the person had a reasonable excuse for contravening the order. Some examples of reasonable excuses that may satisfy the court include:

1. the person did not understand the obligations imposed by the order, or

1. the person reasonably believed that the actions constituting the contravention were necessary to protect the health and safety of a person, including the person who contravened the order or the child, and

1. that the time of the contravention was not longer than was necessary to protect the health and safety of the person who contravened the order or the child.

and from the same apge

Penalties for breaching a parenting order
A court can only penalise someone for breaching a parenting order if another person files a contravention application alleging the person did not comply with the order. After considering all the facts of the case and applying the law, a court may decide:

1. the contravention alleged was not established

1. the contravention was established but there was a reasonable excuse for contravention

1. there was a less serious contravention without reasonable excuse, or

1. there was a more serious contravention without reasonable excuse.

If a court finds a person has breached a parenting order, without reasonable excuse, it may impose a penalty. Depending on the particulars of the case and the type of contravention, a court may:

?order attendance at a post separation parenting program
?compensate for time lost with a child as a result of the contravention
?require the person to enter into a bond
?order the person to pay all or some of the legal costs of the other parties
?order that the person pay compensation for reasonable expenses lost as a result of the contravention
?require the person to participate in community service
?order that a fine be paid,
?order imprisonment.
A court may also make a further order that discharges, varies or suspends the order or renews some or all of an earlier order, or adjourn the case to allow a person to apply for a further order that alters the parenting order.

The penalties are listed under Division 13A of Part VII (seven) in the Family Law Act 1975.

Standard of proof
The decision of a judge or federal magistrate in family litigation must be evidence based. The more serious the allegation or more improbable the supposed event, the stronger the evidence has to be before a court concludes that the alleged event occurred.

Except for more serious contraventions or contempt, a party must prove the allegations or facts relied on to the court's satisfaction on what is called ?the balance of probabilities?. The alleged fact must be more than merely possible; it must be more likely to exist than not. Thus, where the allegation is that one party has not complied with a court order, the alleging party (the applicant in a contravention case) must establish that it is more likely than not that the alleged breach occurred.

In the most serious contraventions, including contempt, a court will not find the case proved unless it is satisfied that all the essential facts have been established ?beyond reasonable doubt?. This is the same standard required in criminal matters. In general terms it, means that the truth of the allegation must be the only reasonable explanation for what has occurred.

i guess 2another person" could eb teh CAFCASS officer - in theory - but read above carefully for how it works and reasonable excuse etc

Sparks 1 - The judge said would give me community service because dc was in a school play at the time of cafcass wanting to speak with dc. I said i could bring dc to do that any other day before or after the play. judge was having none of it. even though ex said he couldn,t do any day that week. and piped up swearing in court that i should be held in contempt of court to which judge agreed. I feel that what cafcass says go and that I have to do it!

bongo if school play was not "reasonable excuse" then is judge's ruling at fault here - not CAFCASS - your solicitor should appeal if this was the scenario.

it sounds a bit nuts,
CAFCASs offcier phone me to arrange suitable time - if you gave alternative times then makes no sense this element ended upbeing discussed in court unless it looked like you were trying to avoid them at all costs?

cestlavielife- Thankyou for your post most helpful. The cafcass officer and court appointed solicitor have said that I always facilitate contact on my dc part.And that ex has been given numerous oppertunity to take this up. dc is always made availible for contact on my part. ex will not have this and has now refused to do any collections or drop off,s. says why should he have to do it, its my turn to do it or he won,t see dc at all. so makes me do it. this is the point where i feel bullied into doing it by cafcass and courts as it will look like i am being obstructive if I don,t. refuses to give his address. I don,t want to know because i,m being nosey it,s just common courtesy really. his unstable behaviour has been noted by cafcass and brushed under the carpet. now starting to effect dc.

Judge and cafcass agreed with ex not to give out his address

whoops sorri for linking to an australian website!!
but similar in UK - try eg
www.batchelors.co.uk/news.asp?step=4&contentID=102&navID=4

or search on keywords : UK childrens act reasonable excuse contact

quote: UK site this time
To enforce a Contact Order, it will be necessary for the applicant to show.

1. A warning notice must have been applied for (unless the contact order was made after the 8th December 2008.
2. The Applicant must be in a position to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that the Contact Order was broken.
3. The Applicant must satisfy the Court that there was not a reasonable excuse for the contact order having been broken (e.g. the child was ill).

In the event that the Applicant can prove beyond reasonable doubt that the order was broken and there was not a reasonable excuse to justify the breach, the Court has the power to:- a) order financial compensation from the party in breach, if the applicant can show that he or she suffered financial loss. Examples would include traveling costs or a loss of session at a contact centre or a cancelled holiday. b) order the party in breach of the contact order to carry out community service work. c) direct that a Cafcass officer monitor or/and assist in contact taking place. d) order the parties to attend Mediation to try and resolve their difficulties. e) order one or both parties to undertaking counseling therapy or anger management counseling. It should also be noted that the Court still has power to change the contact order if the current arrangement is not found to be in the children's best interest or not working and may, in exceptional cases, reverse residence in favour of the non-resident parent or commit to prison the person in breach of the order.

"his unstable behaviour has been noted by cafcass and brushed under the carpet." I can completely relate to that. I'm fully aware that there are many, many doting and wonderful fathers out there and in the past, dads' access to their kids has been made difficult BUT this pro-man thing that Cafcass and the Courts have got going on now, is a new Trend. It's so bad that when our Cafcass officer mentioned that xp had hit me during our relationship he wrote that it merely caused 'discomfort'. Argh!

The problem the courts and Cafcass have is that usually one or both parties are lying and they have to work out who it is.

They're interested in what's best for the children, ime they don't have a bias either way.

xp hitting you merely caused discomfort. wow the whole trend thing is wrong.have never denied access, just that he wants it on his trems and not what is suitable for dc. I bend in every direction to see that contact goes ahead but if he throws a hissy fit then contact doesn,t go ahead. And then cafcass gives him chance after chance. in the meanwhile its leaving me mentally exhausted and scared of my own shadow, questioning myself. surely this is not good for dc to not have consistancy in contact and cafcass allowing it

Everyone's entitled to their own opinion but when I have clear, blatant proof that the other party is the liar in this case, plus a deeply concerning psychiatric assessment of the other party and Cafcass still makes the recommendation that xp is asking for, DESPITE the Judge immediately making an interim order in my favour I HAVE to conclude that - especially with comments like my being hit caused discomfort (it hurt) - this officer IS biased. Sorry.

Truckulentagain- can I ask if you have been involved with courts and cafcass before?

If you don't agree withthe CAFCASS report and you and your ex cannot reach agreement you will need to have a contested court hearing. CAFCASS usually go first so they can be released for rest of the day, you or your lawyer can challenge innacuracies etc. Then you give evidence, your ex or his lawyer will challenge you, then it is other side's turn. The judge will listen to submissions from both sides then give a judgment.

I absolutely agree with sparks earlier. Once CAFCASS are involved by definition it has got very messy and the parents cant or won't communicate with each other.

Going into a case with the attitude that CAFCASS is a 'fucker' is not going to help. Of course you must challenge inaccuracies, but you can do this in a polite and professional manner. But you have to be aware that you may end up with a recommendation you don't like and this may not necessarily be because CAFCASS are populated by 'liars' and 'fuckers'.

I don,t think of the cafcass as a fucker. I approach this with my dc in mind. I really don,t care about ex and his feelings. Just want contact to go smoothly without his stupid shit and not have judges and cafcass involved screwing up the situation further. sod all this its the other sides turn bolloxs, it,s not about the adults. It,s just hard to see and step back from how its effecting dc. only wish that the courts would see that aswell.

You don't have to go to court. It is not compulsory. You can go to mediation, or see if a member of your family can help.

I assume you are in court because it isn't possible to reach an agreement with your ex, so I am not sure what other option there is. The welfare of your children is the first consideration for the court, so the judge will certainly be trying to put them first, even if it doesn't seem that way to you.

I find it hard to believe that the welfare of the child always comes before the rights of the parents when they're willing to allow a drug addict shared residency.

if it has been allowed and ordered then all you can do now is keep close eye and alert SS when something goes wrong.
then they may ahve to take notice.
it sucks but if after all the veidence they have not lsitened (or ahve beleived the person that they have changed etcetc ) then you have to go along with it and wait for something bad to happen/some proof that they have made the wrong decision.

I'm sorry you're going through this babyhammock - and anyone else who's had a negative experience.

I've heard hundreds od stories about CAFCASS letting children down - largely because they get facts wrong and take a he said/she said approach to domestic abuse.

Like all things official, it pays to be aware of how the system works. You also have to go in with eyes wide open and be aware that the natural bias is going to be that anyone claiming abuse is lying unless they can back it up with hard evidence.

It completely ignores the fact that false reporting of DV is no more prevalent than false reporting of any other crime (less than 10%) and that most women never report abuse. (This is one reason why women should always report every incidence - no matter how minor and even if they have no intention of leaving the relationship. You never know when it can be useful in the future.) It also completely ignores the fact that there is a link between partner abuse and child abuse. Today's government announcement is only going to make things worse IMO and I wish so, so badly that the family courts would take abuse much more seriously.

All you can do is challenge it and try to gather more evidence (even if it's only supporting statements from friends who were privy to the abuse at the time). Like all things bureaucratic, the more written evidence you can provide, the better. I hope things get better.

What kinds of drugs? What kind of addiction? Had a client who was on massive amounts of heroin in a state sanctioned programme. He was so used to it he could take enough to kill an elephant and be unaffected. He had overnight contact with his child because his parenting wasn't impacted by his drug use. He wasn't buying off criminals or off hisnface when caring for his child. He and his child had a good time together and contact was clearly in child's best interests.

If someone is a serious street drug user, who is frequently incapacitated through use of drugs I find it very hard to believe that kind of person would be allowed overnight care of a young child.

If the judge has gone insane and ignored the presumably copious amounts of medical and police evidence, then call the police to go round to the house when you know addict is using/dealing and get him arrested.

overnight contact is one thing, shared residency implies that we are equally capable when I know we are not. Besides, he is insane and I am pretty certain years of heavy cannabis use has NOT helped. :)

A shared residence order is generally just a label to recognise the fact that both parents are important to the child. It doesn't follow that a shared residence order equals shared care. Parents don't have to be 'equally capable', they just have to be 'good enough'.

If someone is 'insane' I am surprised that has escaped the attention of a community mental health team or the police.

Provided you can get yourself up in the morning and care properly for a child during the day (or night if he wakes up) the courts aren't going to get worked up over some spliffs in the evening. if however the drug use is so heavy that the parent can't actually care for the child I repeat my earlier advice to get the police involved.

Not quite sure where the smiley face comes into this. Because you know you are exaggerating? If a child is left unsupervised with an incapacitated insane drug addict I wouldn't be smiling and I would be appealing any order for direct contact, armed with all the compelling evidence that surely has got to exist about someone so dangerous.

Oh, it hasn't escaped their attention. Hence the interim order I mentioned..........