Written evidence from Recover Our Kids ROK (CFA0054)
HOUSE OF LORDS CHILDREN AND FAMILIES ACT 2014 SELECT COMMITTEE INQURY
Background:
We are 6 loving mothers who have suffered the grief of alienation – being denied access to our own children in Private Family Law. We have founded the campaign group ROK (Recover Our Kids). We have watched our children suffer this horrendous form of child abuse. , We have had first-hand experience of the devastation the family court can wreak. We are well placed to help in any way we can with any reform ideas. We have founded the campaign group Recover Our Kids, to re-unite children with their loving parents, lost through Parental Alienation.
We have answered the questions relevant to our cause and would welcome the opportunity to discuss the issues raised.
The act has NOT improved outcomes of children, young people & families in England in Private Law Family Court cases.
Parental Alienation is an abuse of both a loving parent and a perfectly safe child, by the alienating parent. There needs to be a system in place to prevent this abuse rather than fuel it through the current court system.
The implementation of the act, and the inability of CAFCASS to recognise and resolve parental alienation is at the heart of the matter. CAFCASS have a framework for PA, but they rarely use it and there is NO solution or remedy in place if they DO find PA. Judges are at a loss as to know what to do to resolve it.
Justice Parker in 2019 “Parents who obstruct a relationship with the other parent are inflicting untold damage on their children and it is, in my view, about time that professionals truly understood this.” Yet still it is ongoing.
The Gillick Competency Law is being used as a screen for professionals to hide behind. A young person who had 3 suicide attempts was assessed as “Gillick competent” by a Nurse psychiatric specialist.
As Parental Alienation is now in the Domestic Abuse Bill, a new CAF Act must include recognition and FAST resolution of this hideous form of child abuse. It is to be noted that the current CMS system provides a financial incentive for Parent Alienation through its “pay by night” system.
There should be a rebuttal presumption of 50/50 shared care in separated parents implemented in the act. There is significant evidence that 50/50 shared care has proven better outcomes for children. If a shared parenting legal presumption were in place, parents would not HAVE to fight. This would prevent family violence which often occurs within the adversarial legal system. (Dr. Edward Kruk Mar 21). Shared Parenting needs to be written into a Children and Families Act 2022 to protect children and allow them to see both parents.
No, the Family Justice system reforms have NOT made it faster, simpler and less adversarial. Expert evidence limitations are not working. One child had serious suicidal ideation yet the mother was denied a psychologist by the court. Psychologists, not lawyers are the professionals who can recognise Parental Alienation. When a child rejects a parent, a psychologist should ALWAYS be appointed by the court.
“Parental Alienation is a common form of family violence, in contested adversarial child custody proceedings. Its a serious form of child abuse and should be recognised as such by MH professionals, policy makers, legal practitioners & courts.” Dr. Edward Kruk, Domestic Violence and Shared Parenting.
There has been little or no recognition of the presumption of involvement of both parents. Family courts are still misinterpreting coercive control of the child as the “child’s wishes”.
From Weinfield, Sroufe, Egeland, & Carlson: "Forming attachments is strongly built into the human repertoire through evolution. Children will be unattached only if there is no stable caregiver, as is the case in certain types of institutional rearing. For all others, even those who are mistreated, attachment relationships are formed with caregivers."
The only place where we see a “child rejecting a parent” is in the Family Court. Nowhere else, it doesn’t exist. Therefore, the CAF Act 2022 must rid the system of this child abuse, incentivised by Family Court by criminalising Parental Alienation.
ROK did our own survey on social media to establish the suicidal ideation impact on the child of alienation. The results were:
80% of respondents said their child had shown significant or severe levels of MH issues.
83% of respondents said the alienation had a detrimental impact on their child’s education.
21% of respondents said that substance abuse was an issue for their alienated child.
44% of respondents said that their alienated child self-harmed.
55% of respondents said that their alienated child experienced suicide ideation.
No. Mainstream schools still fail to understand SEND, particularly medical conditions. New legislation is needed to ensure schools understand young people with SEND, particularly complicated medical conditions. Discrimination on grounds of disability is still very prevalent in mainstream schools and colleges, including exclusion for “bad behaviour” which for example is often due to a medical condition. Schools have little empathy for children dealing with life-changing and life-threatening conditions, and consistently fail to make reasonable adjustments for them.
No. The Children’s commissioner needs to understand that Parental Alienation is a serious form of child abuse. The CC must implement it throughout Social Services, schools, hospitals, police etc. Our children are being systemically abused due to a simple lack of training and understanding.
Social Services need training in Parental Alienation, the long-term effects on the child and the abuse it creates within a family. There should be more early intervention support for families who are struggling, particularly divorcing families, Social Services fail to assist families or provide adequate mediation, especially if a child is rejecting a parent.
April 2022
3