Judge gives guidance to social workers drawn into disputes between parents

A Family Court judge has made recommendations on social work practice following a case in which a mother falsely accused the fathers of her two children of harming them.

YD, a boy aged 11, and XB, a girl aged four, have the same mother but their fathers are respectively AB and CD.

The case brought by the unnamed local authority was that the children had suffered and were likely to suffer significant emotional harm arising from the mother's false and inaccurate allegations that during permitted contact times that AB was physically and sexually abusing XB and that CD had physically harmed YD. Both denied the mother's allegations.

The mother had “reluctantly conceded that the court would proceed on the basis that AB had not sexually or physically abused XB”, the judge noted but had denied that she had been the author of either actual or likely significant emotional harm to both children as the local authority asserted.

In Y and X (Children) [2020] EWFC 15 Mrs Justice Knowles said she could not determine what caused the mother to act in the manner in which she did.

“Her behaviour was clearly a product of her state of mind at the time and requires further expert assessment,” Knowles J said.

She said the mother accepted at an earlier hearing that she no longer pursued findings of fact about alleged physical or sexually inappropriate behaviour by AB.

“That concession means this case will proceed on the basis that AB has not physically or sexually abused XB and I make a finding to that effect, as all the parties accepted I should.”

An incident in which YD alleged that his father pushed him and he then fell over was one where “the parties are now agreed that this was a trivial incident which should not have resulted in the cessation of contact between Y and his father”.

The judge said: “What strikes me as beyond argument was the unhelpful nature of the piecemeal assessments conducted by the local authority in this case.

“Assessments were brief and conducted in response to allegations made by the mother. This case cried out for a comprehensive assessment of the family which might have led to a more informed understanding of both the mother's anxieties around XB's contact with her father and her failure to promote YD's contact with his father once that broke down in November 2017. It may also have identified at a much earlier date the need for either a psychological or a mental health assessment of the mother.”

Turning to recommendations for social work practice, Knowles J said social workers were not to blame for the repeated allegations made by the mother which disrupted the children's relationship with their respective fathers.

She said social work professionals working with complex private law disputes should note that repeated section 47 investigations, not anchored to a comprehensive family assessment, “are ultimately of little benefit”.

Greater respect should be given to the views of professionals who see families more often than most social workers, but social workers may, on occasion, “have good reason to challenge the views of other professionals”.

The judge said families should be referred to sources of guidance and support “sooner rather than later”, and that delay in commissioning expert assessments was damaging.

Such complex cases should not be given to trainee or inexperienced social workers, she added.

A further welfare hearing in the case will take place later this year.

Mark Smulian