Cafcass issues new rules to protect abuse victims in family court system

The family court service that represents the interests of children involved in cases such as adoption and parental separation has issued new guidance to better protect domestic abuse victims.

The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) appoints children’s guardians and independent advisers to court proceedings. The new policy makes clear that the “starting point” for recommendations about a parent who is being investigated for or has been convicted of a sexual offence is that their child should not spend time with them.

It also says domestic abuse should not be downplayed as “historical”, nor should a person’s reports of abuse be described as “claims” or “allegations”.

Launching the new policy last week, Cafcass chief executive Jacky Tiotto said that “the consequences can be devastating” if advice given in court does not protect a child or puts their carers in harm’s way.

She added: “We are intent on eliminating practice that isn’t good enough.”

In August, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) reported on a case of a serial rapist who had been granted unsupervised access to his daughter following the recommendation of a Cafcass officer.

Kristoffer Paul Arthur White had been found to have raped the child’s mother on three occassions. He also had a previous criminal conviction for raping a stranger and was on the sex offender register. (The mother successfully appealed the order with the support of a newly appointed officer and White was later stripped of his parental responsibility.)

The judge in the final hearing said senior Cafcass officers had requested previous judgments from the case to see if there “might be some learning”.

‘Significant step’

In June 2020 a report published by the Ministry of Justice, known as the “harm report”, raised concerns over the family court’s ability to protect victims of domestic abuse and described a “pro-contact culture”. In response, Cafcass introduced rules requiring all court advisers and children’s guardians to undertake mandatory training.

Cafcass chief executive Tiotto said the new policy was a “very significant step to further improve the way, together as a system, we protect child and adult victims of domestic abuse”.

Its new policy says that its officers must first consider the possibility of domestic abuse or harmful parenting when assessing why a child might not want to see their parent. This is especially urged in cases involving an allegation of “parental alienation”.

It also says that in trauma-informed practice there is “no such thing as ‘historical’ abuse” and that its officers “must not reinterpret or reword the experience of abuse victims”.

It says: “An adult describing a rape must not be re-interpreted as ‘nonconsensual sex’ or ‘unwanted sexual attention’.”

TBIJ covered another case last year in which a mother, who was found by the court to have been raped by her ex-partner, described the Cafcass officer’s reporting as inaccurate. “She couldn’t bring herself to write the word ‘rape’ in her report,” said the mother.

In the report, the guardian had described the rape as “unwanted and inappropriate sexual approaches” and said the “information” was “largely historical”.

The mother complained to Cafcass and was invited to review the new policy and provide feedback.

“The correct application – because this relies on individuals applying it – should protect many children and their safe parents. It’s unbelievable that this didn’t exist before my case, despite the harm report and the Domestic Abuse Act being in place for several years,” she said.

“Had this policy existed at the start of my proceedings, my child would not have been placed in harm’s way and I would not have had the trauma of handing them over for contact to my rapist.”