Welcome to Community Care. This article was published in 2025. For the latest news and analysis, please visit the Community Care homepage and sign up to our free newsletters.
Family court advisers (FCAs) have been given updated on guidance on understanding why a child does not want to spend time with a parent.
The Cafcass guidance is designed to inform FCAs' reports to the family courts in private law cases involving decisions about children's contact or residence with parents following separation.
It focuses on cases where a child does not want to spend time with a parent, which are often accompanied by that parent making claims of so-called "parental alienation" -
Originally issued in 2018 as guidance on "children’s resistance or refusal to spending time with a parent", it has been renamed to emphasise the importance of understanding the child's point of view, rather than inadvertently placing blame on them.
Significant increase in 'parental alienation' claims
Since the original guidance was published, there has been a significant increase in claims of so-called "parental alienation" - the idea that the child's feelings are a result of them being manipulated by the other parent.
The idea of parental alienation as a diagnosable syndrome is discredited and has no evidential basis, said separate guidance for practitioners issued last year by the Family Justice Council (FJC), which comprises senior judges and family court practitioners and oversees the system.
The FJC guidance said accusations of parental alienation were often raised in response to allegations of domestic abuse and raised concerns that they were used as a form of post-separation control.
Considering domestic abuse first
Similarly, Cafcass's domestic abuse policy, also published last year, said practitioners' first step when allegations of what it refers to as "alienating behaviours" are made is to consider whether domestic abuse or other harmful parenting are present.
This is emphasised in the updated guidance on understanding why children do not want to spend time with parents, which urges FCAs to meet with the child to consider whether domestic abuse or harmful parenting are the cause.
It references as relevant the statutory guidance under the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, which lists, among a set of perpetrator behaviours, making counter-allegations or false or vexatious allegations against victims, using the courts to continue abuse and using children as a form of control.
If the child is a victim of domestic abuse - through having seen, heard, or experienced the effects of the abuse - their wish not to see the relevant parent should be respected and acted upon and they should not mistakenly identified as having been harmed by alienating behaviour.
Alternative explanations for children not wanting to see parents
The guidance also suggests other explanations, besides alienating behaviour, why a child may not want to spend time with a parent, including affinity with, or a developmentally appropriate reaction to separation from, the other parent.
It sets out the short- and long-term impacts of a child being exposed to alienating behaviour, including the loss of important relationships, experiencing severe guilt or betrayal in later life for having rejected a parent and mental health problems, such as depression or anxiety.
Where an FCA assesses that a child has been emotionally harmed, they should consider, with their manager, referring the case to the relevant local authority, it adds.
Guidance on use of experts
The revised guidance also uses covers circumstances in which FCAs may recommend that a court instruct an expert where practitioners have found that alienating behaviour has harmed the child.
Quoting the 2024 Family Justice Council guidance, it says that only Health and Care Professions Council-regulated psychologists can assess, diagnose, and recommend treatment or therapy, and warns that self-described parental alienation "experts" who are unregulated should not be appointed.
Under planned changes to family court rules, the courts would not be able to permit the instruction of an expert who was not regulated or on an accredited register other than in exceptional circumstances.
