Napo Documents Database

While it is correct that CAFCASS is a mess and damages children, please, now that Chairman Hewson has resigned, please do not take your eye off the ball and recognise that the main force within CAFCASS continues to be NAPO.

NAPO operates in the tradition of the almighty powerful English Unions of yesteryear. They know that they can bring CAFCASS to a hold by both active and passive methods. CAFCASS is the monopoly provider for reports on children, and so the courts are at their mercy.

Where NAPO differs from unions of yesteryear is that it functions an ideological instrument to bring about change as set out by a brand of (anti-male) radical feminist activists at the head of NAPO.

Yes, CAFCASS is a mess, however it is a small cabal of social engineers who are driving NAPO, and this should not be ignored if you want to address the damage that the UK Secret Court System does to children, fathers, grand-parents and society.

Below ( red highlighted to avoid wasting your time) read the ideologically driven NAPO approach to fathers, equal treatment and research to children after divorce/separation - it is clear: NAPO can not be relied upon to write unbiased reports. NAPO has ruled itself out of Children Proceedings!

"The Trade Union and Professional Association for Family Court and Probation Staff

Domestic Violence

Posted to the Napo website by jenetta - Office - on 22-Sep-2003

Safety and Justice - Napo's response to the Government's Proposals on Domestic Violence

‘Safety and Justice - The Government’s Proposals on Domestic Violence’

Napo’s Response

About Napo

Napo, the Trade Union and Professional Association for Family Court and Probation Staff, represents staff working within the Family Justice System as Family Court Advisors within CAFCASS, and within the Criminal Justice System as Probation Officers and Probation Service Officers. Within their respective roles, our members face and respond to the victims of domestic violence, the perpetrators of such violence, and children who have experienced or witnessed domestic violence, on a daily basis. Napo believes that there is considerable expertise amongst its members in respect of this issue, and that as an organisation that overreaches the criminal and family justice sectors it is in a unique position to comment on the strengths and inadequacies of current sanctions and support services, and the proposals contained within this White Paper.

Napo defines domestic violence as the perpetration of violence by a more powerful person against a less powerful person. It is defined as assault, abuse or harassment which occurs between persons who have a sexual, familial or other close personal relationship. Generally, domestic violence is perpetrated by men against women. The assault or harassment may take the form of physical, sexual, emotional, mental or economic abuse, damage to property or a combination of these.

Napo’s domestic violence policy states that all work with domestic violence must include a focus on prevention, the protection of survivors and changing the behaviour of perpetrators. Responsibility for this work should be based on inter agency initiatives within the community justice and criminal justice sectors.

Napo believes that response to and work with perpetrators of domestic violence must be non collusive, must not condone abuse, and must at all times prioritise the protection of the survivor.

Napo identifies the need for the impact of domestic violence on children within any relationship to be carefully assessed, taking into account recent research which challenges the assumptions that after separation or divorce, contact with the perpetrator is beneficial to children.

Napo believes that national and local policies and strategies must include and specifically aim not to exclude black women who are victims of domestic violence. Policies and strategies should not impose cultural assumptions on black women. Response to and work with perpetrators and survivors of domestic violence should seek to avoid imposing cultural assumptions on black men.

Response to and work with perpetrators and survivors of domestic violence should recognise that domestic violence occurs between same sex partners and should prioritise the protection of the survivor without heterosexist stereotyping or undermining lesbian or gay relationships.

Foreword

Napo welcomes the opportunity to respond to this White Paper.

Napo endorses the view that domestic violence should not be seen as a private matter but one which impacts upon society as a whole, and that as such the government and community should assume responsibility for challenging the underlying attitudes which condone such behaviour. This should improve the chance of holding perpetrators to account and supporting victims and survivors, including child witnesses, so that they are free from further abuse.

This White Paper is welcomed as a step forward towards a more collective and cohesive response to domestic violence, and thus improving the prospect of all community members to be able to live without fear.

Napo has responded to those questions that we feel we are in a particular position to comment upon based on the employment of our members and their experiences within CAFCASS and the Probation Service. We have outlined our response to the issues raised by grouping some of the questions together so as to avoid unnecessary repetition and to establish a link we see as appropriate.

Napo’s Response

1. Questions 2, 3, 4,5,19,43
Awareness raising of domestic violence/support services and options

If domestic violence is to be responded to as a serious matter then it is crucial that it is formally addressed within criminal justice policy and strategy making at all levels, including the Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships.

Domestic violence should form an integral part of the school personal and social education curriculum. Research suggests that young people are particularly vulnerable to domestic violence, both as a result of their experience of living with adults where violence occurs, and within their own peer relations, so access to information and support services at this age is vital. Such information could include a specific youth and domestic violence telephone helpline.

All public service employees should be required to undertake specific domestic violence training. Ideally, such training should be both multidisciplinary, thus increasing knowledge of the experience and likely response of other professional agencies to domestic violence, and specific to the particular employer with a concentration on local policy, procedure and practice.

Ensuring that the needs of all are met, irrespective of ethnic origin, disability or sexual orientation is an issue for both national and local strategy. At a basic level, funding needs to be provided for written information to be available in different languages, including Braille, for the provision of interpreters, for refuges and safe houses geared to the specific needs of certain ethnic groups, or to LGBT members, to ensure that refuges have full accessibility for those with mobility problems. At a local level, there is a need for the domestic abuse forums, perhaps in conjunction with the local authority and the CDRP’s to identify the particular needs of specific groups within their area, to establish links and to be proactive in ensuring that these needs are met. For all victims there needs to be a range of options from which they can choose the most suited to their particular circumstances.

2. Question 6
Practitioners views of the work with those who have abused drugs and alcohol

On 20th November 2001 Napo gave evidence to the Home Affairs Select committee on Drugs. The full evidence will of course be available in Hansard, but we wish to re-iterate the following points as we believe they have relevance to the issue of domestic violence.

i) That there is a severe shortage of treatment facilities in the community for those who wish to beat their addiction to drugs.
ii) That as with countries such as Switzerland and Germany the possession of heroin and cannabis should be decriminalised.

iii) That more resources should be directed towards treatment facilities, and to Probation and Social Services departments in order that existing treatment facilities such as Drug Testing and Treatment Orders are better supported.

3. Questions 11 and 12
Sharing of information between civil and criminal courts/guidelines for courts in respect of bail applications /contact with children

Napo supports the premise that there should be greater sharing of information between civil and criminal courts. A system needs to be in place whereby a procedure is activated in one court to alert another court that there are simultaneous proceedings taking place. The difficulty is that court proceedings will not always start at the same time and, initially, there may not be another court to notify of an application/prosecution. The information that should be shared should include the following;

· Civil court orders relating to harassment allegations
· Family court orders relating to residence and contact applications
· Criminal court bail conditions where an allegation centres upon a domestic violence linked crime
· Notification of final outcomes in criminal and civil matters including access to papers filed with the courts in the event that the National Probation Service or CAFCASS have been asked to report in their respective roles

Napo believes that a criminal court decision concerning bail should not be allowed to supersede a family court order where the latter has made an interim or final decision either refusing or severely limiting contact. In the event that there have been no family court proceedings at the point when a bail application is being heard, the criminal court should have before it a statement by the alleged victim for consideration.

4. Questions 14, 20 and 43
Support for victims

a. Recording of Information
Research has indicated that victims of domestic violence often suffer a significant number of assaults before they feel able to confide in another agency or take matters to the police. Even at this point no civil orders or criminal prosecutions may be sought. An important factor in decision making for the individual, the police and the courts is the availability of independent evidence to support the victim’s account. All agencies should adopt a means of recording information received which highlights when issues of domestic violence have been raised or are suspected. There should be an agreed protocol between public bodies that allows for such information to be readily shared in an appropriate format.

Given that there is also research that indicates that at least as many as one in three children on the ‘at risk’ register have witnessed domestic violence, the sharing of this information would also allow an improved assessment of the risk of harm to children and be in line with recommendations made in the Laming enquiry.

In a recent survey undertaken by our members in CAFCASS preparing reports within the civil courts, and where domestic violence was alleged, a number of staff reported problems accessing criminal records from the police, and also relevant information from police domestic violence units, the probation service, social services and the health service. This issue was referred to within the recent Select Committee Enquiry into CAFCASS.

b. Support within the criminal justice arena /civil courts
Napo supports the right of victims of domestic violence to automatically be awarded the status of vulnerable and intimidated witnesses, as defined by the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 unless the victim chooses otherwise. Many of our members have experience of victims who have withdrawn from proceedings because they have felt unable to continue as a result of intimidation, fear of reprisal, or simply the level of emotional distress caused by having to face the perpetrator in Court. Having to apply for protected status can serve to reinforce the notion that the problem lies with the victim. Automatically awarding protection gives the message both to the victim and the perpetrator that the offence is being treated as a serious matter.

Napo also expresses concern at the lack of similar provision available to victims within the family courts arena. In 1991 the Advisory Board on Family Law Children Act Sub Committee reported to the Lord Chancellor on the question of parental contact in cases where there is domestic violence. Since the introduction of the recommended guidelines, there have been an increasing number of ‘finding of fact’ hearings heard by the courts. The experience of Napo members is that victims are rarely afforded any support measures available to vulnerable or intimidated witnesses in the criminal courts. Furthermore there continues to be a lack of provision in respect of safe and separate waiting areas, and no established witness support services offered. Victims coming into contact with the family courts are provided with little forehand information about how the courts might approach the matter of domestic violence, both in practical terms of ensuring their safety whilst at Court or in legal terms in respect of knowledge about the guidelines. This position is exacerbated by increasing numbers of parties within family proceedings representing themselves, due to the lowering of the legal assistance threshold. This in turn leads to an increased likelihood of the alleged perpetrator cross examining in person the victim in the ‘finding of fact’ hearing.

5. Question 18
Sentencing

Napo would support referral of cases involving perpetrators of domestic violence to the Sentencing Advisory Panel. It has long been Napo policy to support the creation of this panel and it seems entirely consistent to deal with criminal offences involving domestic violence in the same way as other offences of violence.

6. Questions 21-22
Associated person criteria

In Napo’s view, same-sex couples that are living together should have the same protection under the law as heterosexual couples. This would be consistent with other recent Government initiatives in the field of social policy and justice.

Napo believes that violence in relationships is not restricted by boundaries and that partners in non-cohabiting relationships should be allowed to apply as an “associated person” for protection under the Act. It is feasible that married partners, presently eligible to apply, might not have lived together (or only very briefly). The threat or act of violence is the most important consideration rather than the previous legal status of the relationship.

The persons eligible to seek “associated” status under the present legislation cover those who are, or have been, in a relationship with another party. Normally that would be an adult relationship. The definition seems to exclude the relationship of parent and child, but that is one where a more powerful person can impose his or her violent will upon a weaker person. Napo believes that the “associated person” criteria should include parent/child relationships.

7. Question 23
Breach of Non Molestation Order

Napo believes that it is important for the protection of victims that Orders made to ensure their safety are enforced. This is particularly important where children are involved.

8. Questions 26–30
Increased use of Magistrates Courts for Non Molestation/Occupation order applications

Napo expresses concern about the possibility of applications for non-molestation and occupation orders being encouraged to start in the magistrates’ courts rather than the county courts. Our Napo members in CAFCASS report that increasingly when contact or residence applications are issued within the magistrates courts, remain contested, and domestic violence issues are raised, matters are transferred up to the County Court on grounds of complexity. The suggestion that applications for non molestation or occupation orders are first issued at the magistrates courts seems at odds with this current practice and surely there is the same risk that cases will be transferred upwards. In our members’ experience, often transfer between courts leads to delay and a lack of continuity and clarity for the victim.

It is also our members’ experience that current training for both magistrates and clerks within the Magistrates courts on the subject of domestic violence is limited and often voluntary. As such, whilst individuals may bring with them knowledge and expertise through their own other professional or personal experience, it is likely that generally speaking that understanding of the sophistication of domestic violence offending and its impact upon the victim and any children of the family is limited. This is a training issue that needs to be addressed in any event, but in particular if more cases are likely to be brought into this arena.

9. Questions 33-35
Register of civil orders/domestic violence offenders.

Napo would welcome the creation of a register of civil orders, to include both current and expired orders, as a beneficial step towards greater efficiency and enforcement, offering the potential of increased protection for those at risk, and ensuring appropriate information is accessible for those making decisions in respect of risk to victim or children.

The introduction of a register of domestic violence offenders would allow better access to information that was likely to be useful to police and those agencies holding responsibility for protecting those at risk of violence. However, consideration would need to be given as to how practical this was given the numbers of domestic violence offenders, and whether this was the most appropriate use of resources.

Napo would support the introduction of multi-agency reviews following domestic violence homicides. Where either the perpetrator or the victim had children the welfare of that/those child(ren) should be the main focus of the review. Social services should be the lead agency in such reviews.

Experience of Napo members involved in Multi Agency Protection Panels shows that most criminal justice agencies struggle to find enough resources in terms of staff time to make MAPPs work effective. In our view, this is the case with most agencies including representatives of the Police Education and Probation departments. Therefore it is vital that if multi-agency reviews were extended beyond domestic homicide to other offences of violence that resourcing issues are addressed.

10. Question 38
Do the current child contact arrangements provide the right level of support and safety for all family members and, if not, what else should be done?

Napo welcomes the Government’s proposal to amend contact and residency application forms (para 79) to allow the subject of domestic violence to be raised early on in an application. Such a move would assist in improved application of the current guidelines for use in child contact cases where there is domestic violence. However, it believes that other actions are necessary to support, complement and follow through that proposal.

Access to information and information sharing is a critical element in ensuring the most appropriate services are available to survivors of domestic violence. While data protection considerations and civil liberties issues should not be ignored, there should be a more systematic procedure in place to enable those working in this field to have the fullest information about a particular set of circumstances. This can be achieved by the issuing of a National Information Sharing Protocol that can be applied at a local level. For this to be achieved, all Government departments need to be signatories to the protocol. Such a recommendation goes hand in hand with Recommendation 16 of the Laming Report.

Napo also considers that it is necessary for there to be improved risk assessment and risk management procedures. The proposal in para 79 provides a starting point in Children Act applications, but needs to be consolidated by subsequent actions within the system. There is a responsibility on the part of the judiciary and magistracy to ensure that the matter of domestic violence is taken into account when cases are passing through the family courts. This should not be confined to judicial decision making i.e. findings of fact, but also in respect of information that is passed on to organisations and individuals who are asked to report to courts e.g. local authority SSDs, CAFCASS, experts such as psychologists and psychiatrists. Similarly, those organisations have to have risk assessment procedures in place not only to protect victims of domestic violence but children as well. In respect of risk management, the Government needs to consider whether domestic violence is deserving of the type of statutory focus that applies through child protection procedures and/or Multi Agency Public Protection Panels (MAPPPs).

The investment by the government through the Children’s Fund and other sources is welcomed. Napo hopes that, in supporting the development of more comprehensively available supervised contact facilities, the role of the existing child contact centre supported services is not forgotten. To enable contact to safely occur there needs to be a range of provision and, while supervised facilities are at one end of a spectrum, partnership funding by the Government, through CAFCASS, will continue to financially support what are, primarily, volunteer, community based organisations. The pilot projects focussing on referral procedures (para 85) will complement and practically assist the supported contact services. In respect of supervised services there will need to be clarity as to whether the facilities exist to provide secure contact arrangements or whether it also includes (risk) assessments for courts and programmes for working with perpetrators.

11. Questions 41 and 42
Does the current framework and guidance provide a sufficient safety net for people who are vulnerable as a result of leaving their homes because of domestic violence?
How do housing policy and support services affect victims’ ability to stay in their homes or, in an emergency, to go to refuge accommodation?

In private family law disputes, where residence is disputed, courts sometimes make orders that allow both parents to remain in the marital home until such time as the Children Act dispute is resolved. The position with regard to the financial settlement i.e. possession of the marital home can also have some influence on the situation at that point in the proceedings.

Napo recognises the developments within the housing sector in recent years both in terms of services to the victims of domestic violence and their families and the policies and procedures introduced. However, from the experience of its members working for CAFCASS there are frequent examples of intolerable and prejudicial circumstances in which victims have to live and operate.

Referrals are received where parties continue to both reside in the marital/family home. Some victims choose to leave the family home (with and without their children) and find themselves in temporary and unsuitable accommodation (for themselves and their family). When children are left at the family home with the other parent, apart from any concerns of risk to the children, the arrangement is potentially prejudicial to the victim in respect of the eventual outcome of a residence dispute if they are alleged to have ‘abandoned’ their family. The above examples, apart from highlighting the different risks to victims, also give an indication of the vulnerability of children left or placed in those circumstances. Napo recognises the minefield that is housing law and the need for civil courts to maintain its impartiality. Nevertheless, Napo is concerned that the present arrangements do not sufficiently protect the welfare interests of children where a couple split up and there are contested issues of property.

Liz Moxham
Napo/Chair Family Court Committee

Homepage

Latest Demo