CAFCASS - HUGE COCK UP’S AS CHILDREN ARE RIPPED FROM LOVING PARENTS

We have all heard reports and reviews of distain for CAFCASS, they’re hardly the UK’s favourite organisation because even when they do their job correctly, they will usually leave one parent disappointed. However, today we are going to look at not only when they do their job badly, but when they behave in such a disgraceful manner which so far has gone unpunished. I will break the rules of writing by using the same word repeatedly but let me explain why; The word ‘allegedly’ is designed to avoid me being sued by CAFCASS, but I can assure you that I have been reading reams of evidence to back up what I have to say.

CAFCASS are an agency designed to protect children, they are a key component of in every case that enters Family Court where there are children involved, such as child arrangement orders etc. They are supposed to be impartial and therefore should be trusted to behave in such a manner that is expected of people in such an important role. They aren’t there for mum and dad, they’re there for the children. What they do is not and should not be gender specific, they’re supposed to be neutral.

I will today be lifting the lid on CAFCASS and the secret world of Family Law. A world in which we are supposed to keep quiet about, but I asked you to open up about CAFCASS, as the stories I was hearing shocked me to the core, and you did on-mass. A warning, if you are easily shocked and it has a negative effect on your mental health then please stop reading here.

So let’s start by describing one incident that shocked me more than any other. A mum who was fighting to keep her children in court was met with a male CAFCASS officer who seemed to have taken a shine to mum, this happens I hear you say, but it really shouldn’t given the role the officer was having in the case, the man who was to recommend to the court whether the mum should keep her four children or not. So what did this CAFCASS officer allegedly decide to do about it? The answer to this question should be ‘He did nothing, resisting the fact he fancied her and got on with his job.’, no that’s not the route he took. He decided the best thing he could do is send her a photo of what was obviously his penis. This led to the mother getting angry and reporting him to CAFCASS. Whilst the investigation went on, this CAFCASS officer stayed in place and subsequently made recommendations that this mum would lose her four children. Not only should this officer have been removed from this, but he should also have been taken off any other case he was working on whilst investigations were ongoing. What happened was almost as shocking as the action itself, he was left on this case and we can only assume others whilst CAFCASS investigated. They had evidence of WhatsApp screenshots, so there could be no doubt. The conclusion CAFCASS came to was that because it couldn’t be proven that it was his own penis, the investigation was closed. These are people working for the protection of our children, surely the point is that he should not have sent a picture of anyone’s penis. This CAFCASS officer still works for them as far as we are aware. I put this accusation to CAFCASS separately to the rest of the allegations you’ll read about today, their response to this allegation was complete radio silence, whereas I got a reply about everything else.

Next up we look at the other allegations (with evidence) that I have been informed about, unfortunately I cannot give names, dates etc as Family Court is a closed court where anything can happen, almost without reprisals. Many parents gagged, but despite that, despite the fear of getting caught, lots of people came forward, I only wish I had more space to go on and on, I’ve only described one case and I’m already way past the normal length of an article, I’m not going to let that stop me though. I’ll begin with the CAFCASS officer who on the telephone call told mum that they’d do a Section 7 report, that’s where they take the children’s feeling into consideration, the officer went on to explain how they’d do that through play, thus understanding the child’s feelings, The child was only 4, the dad had paid no attention to the child for 4 years, so you can almost guess what the child would’ve said. When it came to court the CAFCASS officer said there was no need for a section 7, that’s despite there being allegations of domestic abuse towards mother and child (however the mum still encouraged contact, which was subsequently used against the mum). This child was taken from the only home life she knew, and 50/50 shared care was ordered. Now the child is displaying behavioral issues and saying she doesn’t want to go; she’s claimed that she’s requested to call her mummy when she’s upset and is being told ‘no’ she can’t. The other way round mum always allows the child to call dad if she requests it. So, by not doing a section 7 report the poor child’s wishes were not taken into consideration and for 7 days mum and daughter are completely cut off from each other. That to you the reader may seem like a small mistake, but it’s a mistake that puts the child in direct harm.

I want to talk now about a subject that has come up again and again, CAFCASS appointing experts that suit their agenda, especially when it comes to parental alienation, the favourite defense for abusers to use in court. Now don’t get me wrong, I know parental alienation does go on, but for some reason CAFCASS don’t employ experts like child psychologists, instead they allegedly employ unqualified parental alienation experts to make decisions on whether this is really happening. This is important because in one case in a contact centre, a CAFCASS officer allegedly overheard the mother telling her children to “Go and have a good time with daddy, don’t worry as I’ll be close by.” This was after the child had been crying hysterically, not wanting to go, this is normal surely, as it happens it wasn’t normal and was classed as parental alienation. This father had been a regular user of drugs and had never met the youngest child, but as the father allegedly knew the CAFCASS officer (The father had already said to the mother that as he worked for social services, he would be able to sway the case in his favour through the CAFCASS officer.), this case may well take a nasty turn. So prior to the final hearing taking place there were things missing from the CAFCASS report, instead they used what she’d said to reassure the children in the contact centre and they decided to recommend that the children be taken from mother and be placed in full time care of the father, giving the mother one hour a week contact to start with. Don’t forget that one of these children had never met the father. All based around one sentence described as parental alienation. Prior to the court case the father and the CAFCASS officer were seen and heard laughing and joking together, regardless of everything else, that was unprofessional.

edit — Parental Alienation does occur and when it does occur it’s quite frankly a disgrace. Sometimes, sadly, there are parents out there using this to gain an unfair advantage, forgetting about how damaging this is to the children. I believe CAFCASS should be trained along with judges & magistrates in how to spot a fake Parental Alienation allegation.

There have been several allegations that CAFCASS are funnelling money to solicitors with whom they have a personal friendship with. This allegation is hard to prove in isolation, but when reports of the same thing are coming from round the country with the results of Freedom of Information requests backing them up, then this allegation needs to be taken seriously. How is this important to the welfare of our children? The solicitors appointed are those who act as a guardian for the children, they’re supposed to be random from an approved list, but instead huge percentages of cases are going to a small percentage of the solicitors on the approved list. The allegation here is that the CAFCASS officers could potentially sway some cases in favour of what CAFCASS wants. This has backed up several cases I’ve been made aware of, cases where the CAFCASS officer has befriended one side of the case then the solicitor has reported back a different story than that which the child has been saying for months prior the case. I can’t reveal sources, however I have seen the spreadsheet showing the majority of legal aid payments made to a small percentage of the approved solicitors. In most cases huge chunks of the £25,000 legal aid allowance have been taken.

I’m aware this article is longer than normal but it’s such an important article that I feel the need to take up more of your valuable time.

One story which really struck me was the sickening case of a CAFCASS officer who used a child’s allergies to get at mum, but it doesn’t start there. First, the CAFCASS officer assigned to this case was socialising with the father outside of court. She told the mum to drop everything, because if she continued in court then she would lose her child forever. However, how could she drop the case when the abusive father had a criminal record as long as your arm (and I mean that literally as I’ve seen it), he was a dangerous man allegedly involved with criminal gangs. The criminal checks were supposed to be in the bundle, but they weren’t, this was excused as an error but the court never got to see them as CAFCASS had never requested them. It is the responsibility of CAFCASS to do these checks as part of the safeguarding letter, why did they miss this out? Who knows, but could the fact that the CAFCASS officer was socialising with the ex made her deliberately leave them out, knowing that it would be damning evidence for her new friend. It doesn’t end there, the mother informed CAFCASS of the child’s allergies but in a voicemail CAFCASS said not to bring the child’s bag of medication to school, later on down the line CAFCASS allegedly said that the mother had failed to take the child’s medication into school despite the allergies reported on the doctors notes, the mother spoke to the surgery and no third party had ever requested the medical records, something she has in writing. This meant that CAFCASS had no right to make recommendations on the child’s health whatsoever. That day that the mother followed the CAFCASS officers voicemail (which she still has) could’ve been the day the child has an allergic reaction that could’ve killed the child. The final nail in the coffin of this CAFCASS case is that they reported the child was happy and settled with the father, but the child was anything but happy. Old enough now to speak for themselves, they could describe how truly unhappy they really were.

One of the most common complaints was doctored or missing documents in the bundle when guardian’s have been appointed. Police records disappearing, doctors letters going missing. Psychological assessments appearing when no psychological assessment has been carried out. It almost feels like it is more of the same when it comes to guardians. There seems to be a favourite list of solicitors in each area, both soaking up legal aid in the thousands of pounds when in reality they’ve done next to no work. Allegedly they are doing what the CAFCASS officers want them to do which is very little apart from provide a statement that is in the favour of what the CAFCASS officer requests.

As a McKenzie Friend I have witnessed a lot myself, things I can’t report on because in family court you are gagged from saying anything. My experiences have made me question what I am doing, made me question if I am comfortable not speaking out about these things. I was only able to write this article due to the bravery of some people willing to tell their story.

I wrote to CAFCASS putting all my allegations to them, to give them a fair right to reply, however I was met with a bog-standard response, telling me that they take every complaint seriously, they can’t discuss individual cases with me, but they will take on board my concerns and urge anyone with a complaint to direct it to CAFCASS direct so they can deal with it. This is all well and good but what about the cases that have already gone through court? If we prove all these allegations (and most of you who responded to my call for CAFCASS complaints had evidence to back up what you told me). My question to the Ministry of Justice is that if allegations of corruption at CAFCASS could be proven, should all the cases that have relied on CAFCASS recommendations be reopened? Trust me, I will be making the Ministry of Justice aware of this article, but I’ll also be telling the Ministry of Justice that change needs to happen in family court fast, before any more children are harmed or killed.

If you don’t already know, I have a petition running to enforce judges, magistrates, legal advisors, CAFCASS officers and anyone else who works in the Family Court system to do domestic abuse training, ensuring that the authorities understand what domestic abuse is or can spot it when it’s continuing in the courtroom. Trust me when I say that Practice Direction 12J is virtually unknown or misunderstood in family court. A law set up to protect domestic abuse victims. Please sign it, we need thousands of signatures, you can sign it via this link here — PETITION