Social worker issues pre-action letter over CAFCASS Gender Identity Guidance

The proposed claim contends that the guidance presents “a series of contested propositions” concerning childhood gender identity, social transition, affirmation and parental responses as though they represent “settled professional practice”.

It is argued that the guidance does not acknowledge the substantial clinical, safeguarding and legal debate concerning the matters, nor direct practitioners to consider competing explanations and evidence.

The first proposed claimant, Christopher Plummer, was a social worker and Family Court Adviser at CAFCASS from January 2005 to February 2026.

In December 2023, following a meeting the previous month, Mr Plummer wrote to a senior manager, setting out detailed concerns regarding the guidance.

He stated that, “in my view, this guidance is not fit for purpose given it is written from a wholly ideological perspective and is not evidence-based,” and warned that “if this guidance is followed, it could result in harmful outcomes for children.”

Mr Plummer argued that the guidance “assumes throughout that ‘gender identity’ is a universally accepted concept and that there is such a thing as a ‘transgender’ child”, whereas these concepts “remain highly contested among professionals”.

The second proposed claimant is Bayswater Support Group (BSG). BSG is a British support group for parents of children and young people who have a transgender identity.

Its members include parents of young people who are currently receiving, or have previously received, support or advice from CAFCASS.

The third proposed claimant is O, the mother in O v P [2024] EWHC 1077 (Fam), in which a CAFCASS Guardian was appointed.

The matters challenged are set out in the pre-action protocol letter as follows:

the defendant’s continued maintenance, publication and promotion of the guidance; and
the content of the guidance insofar as it authorises, approves or encourages approaches inconsistent with the statutory and procedural functions of CAFCASS and its officers.

“Further or alternatively, the Defendant has acted irrationally in maintaining the Guidance without adequately addressing material legal, clinical and safeguarding developments since its publication.”

Charles Plummer, who is represented by law firm Conrathe Gardner LLP, said: “The legal action concerns the impact of Cafcass’s guidance on the ability to ask exploratory questions and practice in a way that is fundamental to effective safeguarding. Social workers must employ professional curiosity and sometimes approach that with 'respectful uncertainty' – including when working with children who present with gender-related distress. The current Cafcass guidance discourages that.

“The lessons from the Tavistock GIDS Service are that professionals there didn’t explore the issues underlying children’s distress sufficiently, and many were harmed by being put on a medical pathway. The Cass Review provided similar warnings about the impact of 'social transitioning' – particularly in relation to younger children.

“As a Cafcass employee, I raised concerns repeatedly about our working guidance – which did not give any consideration to these risks. The Evidence-Based Social Work Alliance also wrote to Cafcass more than once raising the same concerns. It fell on deaf ears. It was as if the Cass Review had never happened.”

He added: “The children and their families going through the Family Courts deserve an analysis of their situation that is objective, evidence based, and properly informed by established knowledge of child and adolescent development – not ideological considerations. Judges and magistrates who are tasked with making life-changing decisions in the Family Courts expect that too.”

A Cafcass spokesperson said: “We can confirm that Cafcass Legal received legal correspondence sent on behalf of Mr Plummer on Wednesday 28 October 2026. This correspondence will be dealt with by the legal team who will provide a response to Mr Plummer’s lawyers in due course. Cafcass will not be making any further comment in relation to this.

“Cafcass practitioners have a statutory duty to safeguard children and promote their welfare throughout proceedings. Our guidance on working with children and gender identity is intended to provide advice and assistance to those practitioners working with children and young people who are exploring and/or questioning their identity in respect of gender. It is therefore directly relevant to understanding and promoting their welfare and providing advice to the family court.

“The guidance was reviewed and updated in 2026 to reflect relevant legal, professional and practice developments.”

Lottie Winson