Family Courts and CAFCASS explained: roles, limits, and common misunderstandings
How family courts and CAFCASS operate — and what they are not designed to do
Family courts and CAFCASS (Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service) play a central role in decisions about children following separation, disputes, or safeguarding concerns.
They are frequently misunderstood. This explainer sets out How the family court system works, what CAFCASS is responsible for, and the legal limits that apply.
This page is for public understanding only. It does not provide legal advice and does not address individual cases.
What the family courts are
Family courts in England and Wales are responsible for resolving disputes and making decisions about:
- Where children live
- How children spend time with parents or carers
- Parental responsibility
- Certain safeguarding and welfare matters
Their guiding principle is the welfare of the child, set out in the Children Act 1989.
Family courts are civil courts, not criminal courts. They do not determine criminal guilt or innocence.
Official legislation:
What CAFCASS is
CAFCASS is a statutory public body that advises family courts about children’s welfare.
CAFCASS officers (Family Court Advisers):
- Carry out safeguarding checks
- Speak with parents and, where appropriate, children
- Prepare reports for the court
- Make recommendations focused on child welfare
CAFCASS does not make final decisions. Its role is advisory.
Official CAFCASS information:
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/children-and-family-court-advisory-and-support-service
Evidence and standards in family courts
Family courts use the civil standard of proof — the balance of probabilities.
This means:
- Criminal convictions are not required
- Some concerns may remain unproven
- Information can influence decisions without criminal findings
This creates a risk of evidential drift, where untested information can take on unintended weight.
Safeguarding checks and information sharing
CAFCASS safeguarding checks involve information from:
- Police
- Local authorities
These checks:
- Identify known concerns
- Do not establish guilt
- Do not certify safety
- Are limited to lawfully shareable information
The absence of information does not mean absence of risk.
Relationship to police powers
Police involvement in family proceedings is limited to lawful information sharing and criminal investigation where applicable.
Police powers are governed by statute and common law and are separate from family court decision-making.
Official guidance:
Police powers in England and Wales
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/police-powers-and-procedures-england-and-wales
Relationship to disclosure schemes
Family courts and CAFCASS frequently encounter information from police disclosure schemes, which are often misunderstood.
Claire’s Law (Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme)
Claire’s Law allows police to disclose limited information to prevent harm.
It is:
- Preventative
- Discretionary
- Not evidential
Official guidance:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/domestic-violence-disclosure-scheme-pilot-guidance
Sarah’s Law (Child Sex Offender Disclosure Scheme)
Sarah’s Law allows police to disclose limited information to protect children where safeguarding thresholds are met.
It:
- Is safeguarding-focused
- Does not provide public access to records
- Does not prove abuse or safety
Official guidance:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/child-sex-offender-disclosure-scheme-guidance
Public information page:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/find-out-if-a-person-has-a-record-for-child-sexual-offences
Common misunderstandings
- “CAFCASS decides outcomes”
CAFCASS advises; courts decide. - “No criminal case means allegations are ignored”
Family courts operate independently of criminal outcomes. - “Disclosure equals proof”
Disclosure schemes are not evidence-finding mechanisms. - “No disclosure means no risk”
Absence of disclosure does not equate to safety.
What the law actually requires
Family courts and CAFCASS must:
- Prioritise child welfare
- Act proportionately
- Respect human rights
- Decide cases using available evidence
They are not required to:
- Reach criminal-level certainty
- Eliminate all risk
- Treat disclosure schemes as proof
What the research shows
What the research shows
- Family courts operate under time and information constraints
- Advisory reports influence but do not determine outcomes
- Disclosure schemes support safeguarding but do not establish facts
- Misunderstanding system limits increases distress and mistrust
Disclaimer:
This explainer is for general information only. It does not provide legal advice or comment on individual cases.