DragonofAna Posted September 4, 2005 Share Posted September 4, 2005 Whenever a thread starts edging towards a fathers rights to see his children and the fact it is the childs mother who is responsible for this with no other reason than to destroy the father - the thread gets deleted or moved to where it cannot be accessed. So - best to keep well away from that side of the subject and stay on with the critisism of Cafcass. Dragon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wendygs Posted September 4, 2005 Share Posted September 4, 2005 Originally posted by Dragon Whenever a thread starts edging towards a fathers rights to see his children and the fact it is the childs mother who is responsible for this with no other reason than to destroy the father - the thread gets deleted or moved to where it cannot be accessed. So - best to keep well away from that side of the subject and stay on with the critisism of Cafcass. Dragon Dragon I think that makes very sound sense. Unfortunately I havent been able to find the volunteer site which states CAFCASS is looking for volunteers. Personally I find it a tad disturbing that they are using volunteers who may or may not be suitably qualified to care for children in emotionally stressful situations. Personally I think providing such a service on the cheap is the height of irresponsibility. My recollection of issues from previous threads are that mediation, evidence and supposedly impartial service seem to be unfairly biased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madblast Posted September 4, 2005 Share Posted September 4, 2005 sorry, better stick to caffcass then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H.P Posted September 4, 2005 Share Posted September 4, 2005 Originally posted by wendygs Dragon I think that makes very sound sense. Unfortunately I havent been able to find the volunteer site which states CAFCASS is looking for volunteers. Personally I find it a tad disturbing that they are using volunteers who may or may not be suitably qualified to care for children in emotionally stressful situations. Personally I think providing such a service on the cheap is the height of irresponsibility. My recollection of issues from previous threads are that mediation, evidence and supposedly impartial service seem to be unfairly biased. Well said wendy..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjlaw Posted November 3, 2010 Share Posted November 3, 2010 my son has had dealings with cafcass for the last 3 years due to his ex partner persisting to be very awkward.i dont know if anyone on here has had dealings with the same one,but my son complained to his bosses because he was not happy with the way he was being treated .what a waste of time.hes supposed to be non biassed in cases where there are disputes between ex partners over their children.not in his case,he wont have anything wrong said about the mother,even though the family background is ,well, not very family orientated to say the least.yet this cafcass officer is very persistant in making it as hard as possible for my son to see his kids,so much so that the case has now gone backwards instead of moving forward.hes even resorted to blackmail.telling my son that if we even try to try to try to get the rights to see our grandchildren,who we havnt been allowed to see for over a year,he will stop my son from being able to have anything at all to do with his kids.does that sound like a non biassed person,i dont think so.cafcass and the courts should be grateful that theyre not having to chase after these fathers because theyd rather shirk their responsibility.my son will continue to fight on as long as he is able and until he gets what he wants.in the meantime,maybe we should all apply for jobs as cafcass officers as we could probably all do a far better job than the ones that are presently employed.and the debate will go on....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Vader Posted November 3, 2010 Share Posted November 3, 2010 Fathers 4 Justice can't be that ineffective, as I hear of them on the news quite a bit (albeit not as much recently). Write to your MP would be my advice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newboy2011 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 I want to respond to Peg Leg! Mediators are not Family Court Advisors and not the authors of the Court Report filed in family cases. Mediators are there to try to find some compromise and agreement which causes the least harm to the child between quarrelling parents. Children are caught in the middle of fighting parents, they often blame themselves for the mess parents create. This causes them emotional harm. It is cheaper and more effective for parents to reach a compromise between themselves than to have a protracted dispute aired in court. Some parents have legal aid and others represent themselves, some have to pay for the cost of a hearing. It is not a level playing field. The best thing a parent can do is to see things from the childs view point and stop arguing with each other. Children love both parents and each parent should recognise this and agree reasonable contact. Contact is not an opportunity to score points on the other parent. Cafcass is there to promote the childs interests and to find a way to allow the child to have contact with both parents if it is safe to do so. Protracted disputes do not benefit the child. Some times it can get so bad that contact has to be denied in the interests of the child. It is better to cooperate with Cafcass and keep moving contact forward. It takes time but if the parent with contact is consistent and puts the childs needs first there has to be a very, very good reason for the courts to deny contact. It is the court that decides not Cafcass. Family Court Advisors are qualified social workers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.