ANNEX A – FURTHER DETAIL ON FAMILY JUSTICE PROVISIONS: Example 2
729.Parent A and Parent B are married and have one child together. Parent A left the marital home and Parent B refuses to let Parent A see their child. Parent A wants to be able to see the child at the weekends. Parent A applies for a child arrangements order that sets out that the child should stay over with Parent A from Saturday evening until Sunday morning.
730.The court receives a section 7 “welfare report” from the Cafcass officer that Parent B has suffered continual emotional abuse at the hands of Parent A and that such abuse was witnessed by the child and distressed the child. The court decides that it is not able to decide whether Parent A can be involved in the child’s life without causing a risk of harm, without hearing further evidence.
731.The court hears evidence regarding the emotional abuse and the effect that it has on the child. It also hears that the child wants to see Parent A and has a very good relationship with Parent A’s mother (Grandmother A) who is on good terms with Parent B. The court decides that Parent A could have involvement in the child’s life that does not pose a risk of harm if the child has indirect contact with Parent A or contact with Parent A at Grandmother A’s house in a situation where Parent A does not come into contact with Parent B (so Grandmother A could collect the child to take home and Parent A would visit at Grandmother A’s house).
732.The presumption therefore applies and the court has to presume that it will further the welfare of the child for Parent A to be involved in the child’s life. Parent B is very scared of Parent A as a result of years of emotional abuse. Parent B does not, however, allege that it would be contrary to the child’s welfare for Parent A to have any involvement with the child. Parent B would prefer that Parent A has indirect contact only of the nature of occasional letter writing. The court has evidence before it that the child often used to spend time at Grandmother A’s house when Parent A used to take the child to visit her and that the involvement by Parent A in the child’s life in that context was found enjoyable by and rewarding to the child.
733.The presumption stands in respect of both Parent A and Parent B. The court makes its decision, weighing the presumption alongside the other considerations in section 1 of the Children Act 1989, with the child’s welfare remaining at all times the court’s paramount consideration.