Child-Focused Courts Are Coming: What Litigants in Person Need to Know Now

General information only. This is not legal advice. If you are involved in court proceedings, you should seek independent legal advice specific to your situation.

If you're preparing a child arrangements application, or you're already in the system, you may have heard the term "child-focused courts." It's the new name for what used to be called the Pathfinder pilot, and on 17 March 2026 the government confirmed it will be rolled out to every family court in England and Wales, on a region-by-region basis over the next three years. Wales already has it everywhere. Ten court areas in England and Wales were running it at announcement, with more added through 2026 and 2027.

For litigants in person, this isn't just a rebrand. It changes when you need to have your case ready, and it changes what "being heard" actually looks like.

Why it's changing

The model was developed off the back of a 2020 review into how family courts handle domestic abuse, which found the old system often failed victims and let cases drag on. First piloted in Dorset and North Wales in 2022, it's since spread to Birmingham, the West Midlands, West Yorkshire, and beyond. The government says pilot areas resolved cases up to seven and a half months faster and roughly halved their backlogs, and the number of children actually seen by social workers has more than doubled.

How a case actually moves through the new process

1. Administrative check. The court confirms your application is complete.
2. Gatekeeping 1. Within days, a judge or legal adviser reviews the application without you or the other party present, and will usually direct a child impact report.
3. Child impact report. Prepared by Cafcass, Cafcass Cymru, or social services, this takes roughly six to ten weeks depending on the area. It covers safeguarding checks, the child's views where possible, and domestic abuse risk assessment. This report carries serious weight, since it's often the main document the judge relies on.
4. Gatekeeping 2. Again without parties present, the court decides what happens next: a paper order if you've agreed terms, a referral toward mediation (sometimes called the adjudication path), or a route allowing further evidence to be filed (the case management path, though the names vary by court).
5. Decision hearing. This replaces the old FHDRA. It's judge-led and can result in a final order at that hearing, rather than a string of further directions hearings.

How Cafcass writes these reports now

One detail that doesn't get much attention: Cafcass's own guidance for writing child impact reports now instructs practitioners to write them on the assumption that the child may read the report themselves one day. In practice that means plain language instead of jargon ("spending family time" rather than "contact with the child"), acronyms explained or avoided altogether, and inflammatory language kept out of the report entirely. Practitioners are also expected to check with the child and the parents how they want to be referred to.

It's a small detail, but worth knowing before you speak to a Cafcass officer or write your own statement. What you say, and how you say it, isn't only being weighed for the judge, it may be something your child reads for themselves in years to come.

Why this matters if you don't have a lawyer

Because so much is decided before your first hearing, the biggest risk for anyone representing themselves is being too slow. Family law practitioners working under the new model are advising a real shift in how applications get prepared:

• Put real detail into your C100 and C1A. Gatekeeping hearings aren't attended by either party, so your written application may be the only chance to get information to the court before the child impact report is written. Don't write a narrative statement, but do include far more detail than you would have under the old system, including an indication of what evidence supports any allegations you're making.
• Collect your evidence now, not when it's asked for. Directions for a statement can come with as little as seven days to comply. Have your timeline, key documents, and any witnesses lined up before that direction lands, and if you want a witness's evidence considered, say clearly why it matters to the decision the court has to make.
• Know your seven-day window to challenge a gatekeeping order. This is done through a C2 application. If you want to challenge something in the child impact report itself, such as asking for its author to be questioned, you have to actively justify why, not just say you disagree.
• If you're a victim of domestic abuse, set out the special measures you need clearly, and keep reminding the court as the case goes on.
• File your response even if you're used to waiting. Because there may not be another opportunity before the child impact report is prepared, respondents are being encouraged to file a C7 or C1A response promptly rather than holding evidence back for later.

It's not a finished process

Family law practitioners who've worked under the model describe a system still finding its feet. There's inconsistency between court areas over things as basic as how long your statement is allowed to be, some courts have limited it to two sides of A4, and how enforcement applications are treated. Practitioners are openly calling for national guidance to replace what's currently a patchwork of local practice.

There's also a genuine, unresolved debate about whether speed comes at a cost. Feedback gathered from victim survivors has been mixed. Some report that faster proceedings reduced their ongoing stress and limited the chances for an ex-partner to use the litigation itself as a form of control. Others, and the Domestic Abuse Commissioner's own reporting, have raised concern that the pace leaves less room to properly investigate serious allegations, particularly coercive and controlling behaviour, which is often harder to evidence than physical abuse. Practitioners have also flagged cases where the author of a child impact report has gone further than expected, forming views on disputed facts or even on who the "primary victim" is, when that's meant to remain a decision for the judge. Expect this to be tested through appeals as the rollout continues.

None of this means the reform is a bad thing. Many practitioners describe it as long overdue for the more straightforward disputes, arguing that freeing up court time from arguments over handover times or school holidays lets judges give proper attention to the genuinely complex and high-risk cases. But it does mean the margin for error, especially for someone representing themselves, is smaller than it used to be.

---

You Don't Have to Work This Out Alone

A faster, front-loaded process means less room to catch mistakes later. If you're facing a child-focused court and don't have legal representation, a McKenzie Friend can help you prepare your application, organise your evidence against these new timelines, and sit with you at hearings.

Find a Verified McKenzie Friend Near You

Bridge the Gaps: What Litigants in Person Actually Found in Court

Has your case already gone through a child-focused court? Your experience could genuinely help someone else preparing for theirs.

Share Your Experience