Cafcass has announced a new DOMESTIC ABUSE PRACTICE POLICY. The Press release accompanying the publication of the document is forthright in determining that cafcass has to do better in order to ensure they protect women and children within the family court system. Chief executive Jacky Tiotto states……
“I am sorry that some four years on from the Harm Panel Report, there are still children and adults in family court proceedings who do not receive the protection they deserve and require.”
It is about time that cafcass take responsibility for their inconsistencies, lack of accountability and quite frankly unsafe assessments. In our support of women in the family courts we see so many cases where women are judged, dismissed and made subject to flawed judgments from cafcass – whose authority and knowledge can and does get accepted by magistrates and judges, often without critical analysis of judgments. Most recently a magistrate stated at a hearing that they knew the cafcass officer well and outlined they believed them to be experienced and excellent in their role. Well I am glad to hear that this particular cafcass officer has such a reputation but in my opinion, and having trained and worked as an IDVA Independent Domestic Violence Advocate, I assessed this particular section 2 letter to be rushed, superficial and dismissive of risks – falling into the lazy, one size fits all conclusion that the issues were merely “parental conflict” concluding that if the parents spoke kindly to one another then all would be well.
The policy outlines a number of considerations for professionals including….
No more references to domestic abuse ‘claims’
This includes not dismissing or minimising domestic abuse as historical or as a one-off incident. To do so “not only reveals a lack of understanding of the ongoing and long-term trauma of domestic abuse for victims but also perpetuates it”, the policy says.
Practitioners must also not “not reinterpret or reword the experience of domestic abuse victims”, but use their words about what happened to them and the impact it has had, in all reports to the court. They must also not use the words “claims” or “alleges” when referring to reports of domestic abuse.
“To do so minimises and diminishes the experience of the adult and child living with the impact and trauma caused by abuse,” the policy says, adding that it is for the court to determine the facts of any case.
Social workers must also not describe someone as anxious or suffering from mental ill-health, unless they have been clinically diagnosed, without considering that this may be a trauma response to abuse.
Recommendations around contact
The policy also includes several measures related to Cafcass social workers’ recommendations to the court on children’s contact with parents accused of abuse.
It stipulates that practitioners’ “starting point” should be to recommend that children do not spend time with a parent who is being investigated by the police for a sexual offence, has been convicted of such an offence or has served a prison sentence for violent or sexual offences.
Where practitioners depart from this starting point, this must be “supported by a compelling rationale, discussed with a manager, and recorded contemporaneously in the child’s case record”.
More broadly, FCAs or guardians must provide “a clear, unequivocal, and compelling rationale in their reports” for discounting domestic abuse as a risk to the child when recommending contact after abuse has been reported by either parent or the child.
Assessing perpetrators
When assessing a parent who has been domestically abusive, practitioners must not recommend contact with the child and the other parent without clear evidence that the perpetrator:
- Recognises the harm their behaviour has caused their victims.
- Has taken responsibility for the harm they have caused.
- Has taken action to sustain change in their attitude and to stop their harmful behaviour, which has been demonstrated over time.
These changes must result in an assessment that the risk of them perpetrating that behaviour has been removed to the point of enabling a recommendation that contact is in the child’s best interests.
As with sexual offences, any departure from this starting point must be supported by a compelling rationale, discussed with a manager, and recorded contemporaneously.
‘Parental alienation’
The guidance also addresses cases where a child does not want to see a parent following separation and the non-resident alleges this is because of “parental alienation”. This involves accusing the other parent of manipulating the child into holding negatives towards them.
There are a number of other policy points within the document that you can find here.
https://www.cafcass.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2024-10/Domestic%20Abuse%20Practice%20Policy.pdf
The domestic abuse commissioner Nicole Jacobs and SAFELIVES have commented on the announcement by Cafcass and new domestic abuse policy. However I would recommend reading Lucy Reed for her very pertinent and well balanced blog on this new policy, its application (or not) and it’s impact.
If you are a woman going through the family court and would like support and assistance with child arrangement orders, prohibited steps orders, specific steps orders or enforcement of an order please contact us at Women’s McKenzie Friend. We are specialists in supporting women and children who have experienced abuse and coercive controlling behaviour. We can help.
info@womensmckenziefriend.com
www.womensmckenziefriend.com