Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Re A, B and C (Children) [2021] EWCA Civ 451
(Court of Appeal, Civil Division, Macur, Baker, Arnold LJJ, 01 April 2021)Public Law Children – Fact finding – Lucas Direction – Sexual abuse allegations – Judge found...
Eight things you need to know: Personal Injury damages in divorce cases
The “pre-acquired” or “non-matrimonial” argument is one which has taken up much commentary in family law circles over recent years.  However, the conundrum can be even...
HMCTS launches updated online court and tribunal finder
HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has launched an updated version of its online court and tribunal finder tool to help those in search of a court, its location, opening times, disabled access...
NFJO publishes report on supervision orders in care proceedings
The Nuffield Family Justice Observatory (NFJO) has published a report following its survey into the use of supervision orders in care proceedings. The survey focused on...
Villiers - the Anglo/Scottish perspective
Heard by the Supreme Court in December 2019, with its judgment last July, this case attracted much interest (or “lurid publicity” as per Mr Justice Mostyn in his judgement this week) as it...
View all articles
Authors

Cafcass guardians not scrutinising local authorities, study reveals

Sep 29, 2018, 17:23 PM
Slug : cafcass-guardians-not-scrutinising-local-authorities-study-reveals
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jan 28, 2010, 04:23 AM
Article ID : 89743

Local authorities' care plans are not always being sufficiently scrutinised by Cafcass guardians which, in the current risk-adverse climate, could lead to children being removed from their families unnecessarily, according to a survey by Nagalro.

The professional association for children's guardians conducted the survey to assess the impact of recent changes in family court services on children across the country. The survey is based on the responses to a questionnaire completed by children's guardians, all of whom carry out work for Cafcass.

The responses raise significant questions about the effectiveness of the duty systems set up by Cafcass to deal with backlogs. Respondents describe managers instructing frontline staff to undertake an arms-length, paper exercise of risk assessment where the child is often not seen.

In some Cafcass offices, guardians follow a duty advisor rota system, taking turns to provide urgent guidance to solicitors at the first hearing of a new case, but they may then hand the case on to a named guardian or the case will remain unallocated. Responses to the survey indicate that duty advisers risk making the wrong recommendations because of a lack of full information and a pressure to respond quickly.

Case examples in the survey indicate that the local authority case was being accepted uncritically, raising the fear that the wrong decisions may have been made and the options for the child not fully explored.

James Kingsley is an independent social worker and former Cafcass employed guardian who believes that Cafcass is failing to protect and promote the best interests of children.

"Under the current duty system, the guardian has probably not met the children, and almost certainly is likely to be followed by another guardian who might take a completely different view of what is best for the children but has played no part in the earlier decisions. If a third guardian is then introduced, as I am told happens, yet another view is taken of the proceedings and the best interests of the children. Knowing this, of course, the initial or duty guardian, who may be well aware that his upcoming colleagues may disagree with his assessment, plays safe", Mr Kingsley commented.

"This significant Nagalro survey comes at a very important time and must lead the thinking about how to rescue a dying service which, by the day, is losing the credibility which its professional workforce once held with distinction".

The survey also highlighted an increase in bureaucracy with over 80% amongst Cafcass employed guardians saying they had witnessed a significant increase in the administrative burden in 2009. Over eighty per cent of respondents also said that they were being instructed to prioritise tasks other than the work done with and for the child.

Several respondents to the survey said that they were being bullied by management at Cafcass. One Cafcass employed guardian in the South West responded: "Management styles - bullying. Colleagues sat at their desks in tears but too frightened to speak out. Pre-Ofsted - Family Court Advisors called into meetings and told what they could and could not say to Inspectors."

Nagalro surveyed its members during August and October 2009. The 73 respondents included employed and self-employed guardians who held 469 public law cases in total.

To download a copy of the Nagalro study click here.

Categories :
  • News
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from