Looking for help in your family court proceedings?Bridge The Gap is a free, community-built guide to UK family court, written by litigants and McKenzie Friends, for litigants. Real observations, plain English, and people who can help..
The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service. Cafcass officers (sometimes called Family Court Advisers) represent children's interests in family court cases and carry out safeguarding checks and, where ordered, Section 7 reports. What people commonly observe: Cafcass (the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service) works with the family court in children cases. Cafcass officers often carry out safeguarding checks, speak to parents by phone before the first hearing and, if the court asks, speak to children and write a report. They do not decide the case; the judge or magistrates do. Their recommendations are usually given considerable weight. What people often find helpful: stay calm and child-focused during calls, give clear dates and examples rather than general complaints, and answer the questions you are asked.
In Plain English
A group of social workers who help the court decide what is best for a child. They check that children are safe and write reports to help the judge make a decision.
This content reflects observational insights and lived community experiences. It does not constitute legal advice — always consult a qualified professional for your specific circumstances.
A "gap" is a common assumption people hold going into family court, set against what the court actually does. The bold line below is the assumption — not a fact. The reality underneath is what the court typically observes.
Gap #558
The assumption
A Cafcass recommendation means they spent proper time understanding your family.
The reality
Parents report recommendations built on a single 40-minute phone call or a 20-minute interview, with one parent receiving multiple face-to-face meetings and the other a brief call. There is no fixed minimum contact time before an officer can recommend, and heavy caseloads mean some officers have limited time per family. The length of contact does not determine the weight the court gives the report, but you can ask the court to question how the recommendation was reached if the contact was minimal or one-sided. Keep a record of how long you were seen, what was discussed, and what was not.
Gap #557
The assumption
Cafcass will look at all the evidence you've gathered.
The reality
Parents frequently report that Cafcass officers declined to review evidence they brought to interviews — texts, photos, police reports, or drug test results. Cafcass officers are not investigators; their role is to assess and advise, and they may not examine evidence you assumed would be considered. If you have evidence you believe is critical, do not rely on Cafcass to find it — file it with the court directly, ask the court to direct that it be considered, and request that its relevance be addressed in the report.
Gap #556
The assumption
Cafcass will speak to your child before making recommendations about them.
The reality
Many parents report that Cafcass officers formed recommendations without direct conversation with their child — particularly older children who could express views. The welfare checklist requires officers to consider the child's wishes and feelings (ascertained in light of their age and understanding), but how those are gathered varies widely between officers. Some parents report their child was never spoken to; others say the conversation was brief or filtered through the other parent. If your child's voice is not being directly heard, you can raise this with the court — the judge decides what weight to give the report, and can direct that the child's views be properly ascertained.
Gap #554
The assumption
Filing a C100 guarantees your children's wishes and feelings will be heard directly by the court.
The reality
A C100 starts the proceedings, but it does not guarantee how the court will hear your children's voices. Since the PD 36G pilot scheme (in force until 31 March 2027), litigants in person can generate and file a C100 online for section 8 orders via the HMCTS online system (PD 36G, para 1.2). Legally represented applicants must use the separate PD 36ZD system instead (PD 36G, para 2.3). The court often directs a Section 7 report (Cafcass or social services) in which the children's views are gathered and reported by a professional, rather than children being heard directly. The process can also shift into an investigation of the parents — particularly where allegations are raised. Filing is the start, not the outcome.
Case B – 2026
A father lost parental responsibility, all contact with his child, and had a long-term protective order made against him after the court found he had continued a coercive and controlling pattern of behaviour throughout the proceedings. The case is a significant example of a court formally recognising and applying the DARVO framework — where a perpetrator Denies wrongdoing, Attacks the person who raised it, and Reverses Victim and Offender roles — as clinically identified by an expert psychologist with direct consequences for orders made.
Re D (Change of Circumstances: Domestic Abuse Allegations) 2026
A second appeal concerning a child arrangements order for a young child, D. The Court of Appeal found the original judge's decision — that D should live with her mother — was fundamentally flawed because the judge had implicitly adopted findings of domestic abuse from a Cafcass officer's report without holding a fact-finding hearing, and because the Cafcass report itself failed to properly assess the impact of changing D's home and school. The order was set aside and the matter sent for a full rehearing.
Navigating court alone?
A McKenzie Friend can help you understand terms like these in the context of your case.
Find your supportWe use essential cookies to stay signed in and remember this choice. With your permission we also use Google Analytics to see which pages help people most. Privacy Policy