Contact With Your Child Has Stopped: What to Do Before the Family Court Treats It as the New Normal

June 4, 2026/0 Comments/in 5. Court Skills for Litigants in Person/by jessica susan hill

Contact has stopped, your messages are going unanswered, and you may be watching a previously close relationship with your child become more difficult to repair with every passing week. You may have received family court papers, discovered that an existing child arrangements order is not being followed, or be unsure whether you need to apply to court urgently. The most important step is not to reach immediately for labels such as “parental alienation”, but to document what has happened, understand the possible reasons for the breakdown and present the court with a calm, evidence-based and child-focused plan.

Contact Has Stopped: What to Do Before a Child’s Relationship With a Parent Becomes Harder to Repair

One missed weekend may become two. Telephone calls may become shorter, less frequent or stop altogether. A child who was previously happy to spend time with a parent may begin saying that they do not want to go, while the adults disagree sharply about why. By the time family court papers arrive, the parent-child relationship may already feel as though it is slipping away.

When child contact breaks down, time matters. A long interruption may affect familiarity, trust, routine and the practical options available to the court. However, the family court must not assume that stopped contact proves “parental alienation”, deliberate obstruction or manipulation. The court must understand the child’s experiences, investigate any allegations of harm and examine the evidence before deciding what should happen next.

This article explains what parents and litigants in person can do when contact has stopped, how the court approaches allegations of alienating behaviour, when enforcement may be appropriate and how to present a clear, evidence-based and child-focused case.

The central point

A breakdown in contact can become harder to resolve over time, but the passage of time does not prove why the breakdown occurred. The court must distinguish between domestic abuse, harmful parenting, justified rejection, harmful conflict, practical difficulties and any proven alienating behaviours.

When Child Contact Begins to Break Down

Contact does not always stop through one dramatic event. In some cases, the change is gradual:

weekend arrangements become shorter or less frequent;
telephone or video calls are missed;
handover arrangements become increasingly difficult;
the child begins to express reluctance or anxiety;
one parent says that the child does not want to attend;
alternative dates are not offered after missed contact;
communication between the adults becomes hostile or stops entirely;
an interim arrangement continues for longer than anyone expected.

A parent who is losing time with their child may feel frightened, angry or desperate. A parent who believes that contact is unsafe may feel pressured, disbelieved or accused of deliberately damaging the relationship. The child may feel caught between adult narratives that they do not fully understand.

The court’s task is not to decide which parent feels more wronged. It is to understand what has happened, identify any risk of harm and determine what arrangements are in the child’s best interests.

Stopped Contact Is Not Proof of “Parental Alienation”

The expression “parental alienation” is frequently used by parents, campaign groups and online communities. It may be the phrase a parent searches for when a child has unexpectedly rejected them or when contact has stopped without an explanation they understand.

However, the modern family justice approach is not to treat parental alienation as a diagnosis or syndrome. The Family Justice Council has stated that so-called “parental alienation syndrome” has no evidential basis. The focus must instead be on the specific behaviour alleged, whether that behaviour is proved and what impact it has had on the individual child.

Cafcass also recognises that there may be many reasons why a child does not want to spend time with a parent. Those reasons may include domestic abuse, fear, harmful parenting, harmful conflict, the child’s own experiences, practical changes, pressure from an adult or a combination of factors.

Current official guidance

What Are Alienating Behaviours?

Alienating behaviours are not established merely because a child is reluctant, resistant or refusing to spend time with a parent.

The Family Justice Council guidance identifies three elements that must be established before a court can properly conclude that alienating behaviours have occurred:

The child is reluctant, resistant or refusing to engage in a relationship with a parent.
The child’s response is not caused by the conduct of the parent seeking the relationship.
The other parent has engaged in behaviour that has caused the child’s reluctance, resistance or refusal.

This means that the court must consider whether the child has a justified reason for their position. It must also consider whether the alleged behaviour is supported by evidence and whether that behaviour caused or contributed to the breakdown in the relationship.

Do not begin with the conclusion

A parent who repeatedly states that the other parent is an “alienator” may appear to have reached a conclusion before the evidence has been tested. A stronger approach is to identify the specific behaviour, the dates, the evidence and the effect on the child.

Why Might a Child Refuse or Resist Contact?

A child may be reluctant, resistant or refusing to spend time with a parent for many different reasons. The explanation may be simple, complex or mixed.

The court may need to consider whether the child’s position is connected to:

domestic abuse, including controlling or coercive behaviour;
fear, distress or a harmful experience;
the parenting behaviour of the parent seeking contact;
a child’s justified rejection of a parent;
harmful conflict between the adults;
pressure, influence or psychological manipulation;
the child’s age, maturity, wishes and feelings;
a long interruption in the relationship;
practical problems with travel, handovers or routines;
the child feeling responsible for protecting or supporting a parent;
a combination of several different factors.

A child’s words must be listened to carefully. They should not be dismissed merely because one parent alleges alienation. Equally, the court may need to consider the circumstances in which the child’s views have developed and whether the child has been exposed to adult information, pressure or conflict.

Why Time Can Matter When Contact Has Stopped

Section 1 of the Children Act 1989 recognises that delay in determining a question about a child is generally likely to prejudice the child’s welfare.

Where a safe and beneficial parent-child relationship has been interrupted, delay may make that relationship more difficult to restore. The child may become accustomed to a new routine. The parent may become less familiar. Anxiety about seeing the parent may increase. A temporary arrangement may begin to look like an established status quo.

However, time must not be used as a reason to force contact before legitimate safeguarding concerns have been examined. The correct approach is to act promptly while remaining focused on safety, evidence and the child’s individual needs.

What the Law Says

Children Act 1989, section 1

The child’s welfare is the court’s paramount consideration when deciding questions about the child’s upbringing. The court must consider the welfare checklist, including the child’s wishes and feelings, needs, the likely effect of any change in circumstances, any harm suffered or risk of harm and the capability of each parent to meet the child’s needs.

Section 1 also requires the court to have regard to the general principle that delay is likely to prejudice the child’s welfare.

Read section 1 of the Children Act 1989

Parental Involvement

The Children Act 1989 contains a presumption that the involvement of a parent in a child’s life will further the child’s welfare unless the contrary is shown. This does not create a presumption of equal time, and it does not require involvement that would place the child at risk of harm.

Read the parental involvement provisions

Domestic Abuse Act 2021, sections 1 to 3

The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 recognises controlling or coercive behaviour as a form of domestic abuse. It also recognises a child as a victim of domestic abuse where the child sees, hears or experiences the effects of the abuse and is related to either party.

Read sections 1 to 3 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021

Practice Direction 12B: Child Arrangements Programme

Practice Direction 12B provides the procedural framework for private law children’s cases, including applications concerning child arrangements and enforcement.

Read Practice Direction 12B

Practice Direction 12J

Where domestic abuse is alleged, admitted or otherwise raises a concern, the court must consider the effect of that abuse on the child and on the ability of each parent to care for the child safely.

Read Practice Direction 12J

Evidence of Contact Breakdown Is Not the Same as Evidence of Its Cause

A litigant in person may be able to show that contact has stopped. The more difficult question is often why it has stopped and what should happen next.

Assumption	Better Evidence-Based Approach
“The other parent is alienating my child.”	Identify the specific behaviour relied upon, the dates, the available evidence and the effect on the child.
“My child’s refusal proves manipulation.”	Consider what the child is saying, whether safeguarding concerns exist and whether alternative explanations may apply.
“Every missed contact is deliberate obstruction.”	Record the reason given, whether an alternative was offered and whether a clear pattern exists.
“The court must restore contact immediately.”	Explain what safe and proportionate interim step may preserve or rebuild the relationship.
“The current status quo proves the arrangement is best.”	Explain how the arrangement arose and whether it continues to meet the child’s welfare needs.

What to Record When Contact Starts to Break Down

A clear, neutral record may help the court understand what has happened. It may also help a parent distinguish between isolated difficulties and a developing pattern.

A useful contact record may include:

the date and time of each planned contact;
the arrangements that had been agreed or ordered;
whether contact took place;
the reason given for any missed or shortened contact;
whether an alternative date or arrangement was offered;
relevant messages or emails about the arrangements;
the child’s words or behaviour, recorded neutrally and without interpretation;
any safeguarding concern raised;
any attempt to resolve the issue calmly;
the effect on the child rather than only the effect on the parent.

Record facts, not conclusions

Instead of writing:

“The other parent manipulated the child into refusing contact.”

Consider writing:

“Contact was due to take place on 14 May 2026 at 10:00am. At 9:15am, I received a message stating that the child did not want to attend. I asked whether an alternative date or a video call could be offered. No alternative was provided.”

What Not to Do When Contact Has Stopped

A parent’s response to stopped contact may later be examined by Cafcass or the court. Even where the parent’s distress is entirely understandable, reactive behaviour can make the situation more difficult.

Do not question, pressure or interrogate the child.
Do not ask the child to provide evidence or repeat adult allegations.
Do not send hostile, threatening or repetitive messages.
Do not describe the other parent as an alienator without a proper evidential basis.
Do not dismiss allegations of harm merely because contact has stopped.
Do not attend unexpectedly or attempt to force contact.
Do not breach an existing court order.
Do not involve the child in court documents or adult correspondence.
Do not wait indefinitely if the relationship is deteriorating and no resolution is being attempted.

A practical communication principle

Write every message as though it may later be read by a judge. Keep it brief, respectful, child-focused and directed towards a practical solution.

When There Is No Child Arrangements Order

If no court order exists and parents cannot agree arrangements, a parent may consider applying for a child arrangements order using Form C100.

A child arrangements order can regulate with whom a child is to live, spend time or otherwise have contact. Before applying, a parent will usually need to attend a Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting unless a valid exemption applies.

An application should not simply state that contact has stopped. It should explain:

the previous arrangements;
when and how contact changed;
the reasons given for the change;
any safeguarding concerns;
the steps taken to resolve the issue;
the arrangements being requested;
why those arrangements promote the child’s welfare.

Applying for a child arrangements order

Form C100: Apply for a Child Arrangements, Prohibited Steps or Specific Issue Order

When an Existing Child Arrangements Order Is Not Being Followed

If a child arrangements order exists and the arrangements are not being followed, a parent may consider applying to the court for enforcement using Form C79.

Enforcement is not automatic. The court will want to understand whether the order has been breached, why the alleged breach occurred and whether there was a reasonable excuse. The court must also consider the child’s welfare and whether the existing order remains workable and appropriate.

Depending on the facts, the court may consider a range of responses, including:

clarifying or varying the child arrangements order;
making directions intended to support compliance;
making an enforcement order where the statutory requirements are met;
considering compensation for financial loss in an appropriate case;
requiring further assessment or information;
considering whether the child arrangements themselves need to change.

Enforcement Legal Framework

Children Act 1989, section 11J

Section 11J provides for enforcement orders relating to a failure to comply with a child arrangements order where the statutory requirements are met.

Read section 11J of the Children Act 1989

Form C79

Form C79 is used to apply for an order related to the enforcement of a child arrangements order or to set aside or change an existing enforcement order.

Download Form C79

HMCTS Enforcement Guidance

HM Courts and Tribunals Service publishes guidance explaining when and how a person may apply to enforce a child arrangements order.

Read the CB5 Guidance on Enforcing a Child Arrangements Order

Practice Direction 12N

Practice Direction 12N applies to certain enforcement proceedings under the Children Act 1989.
Read Practice Direction 12N

Enforcement Is Not the Same as Punishment

A parent may understandably feel angry when an order is not followed. However, the purpose of returning to court should not simply be to punish the other parent. The court’s focus remains the child’s welfare and the practical arrangements that should operate in the future.

A well-prepared enforcement application should explain:

the precise paragraph of the order that has not been followed;
the dates of the alleged breaches;
the evidence supporting each alleged breach;
the explanation given by the other parent;
whether alternative contact was offered;
the impact on the child;
the order or direction being requested;
why the proposed outcome is in the child’s best interests.

Important

An enforcement application may not be the correct response where new safeguarding concerns have arisen, the existing order is no longer workable or the child’s circumstances have materially changed. The court may need to consider variation, further assessment or another form of case management.

Domestic Abuse and Stopped Contact

Allegations of domestic abuse must not be dismissed as an excuse for stopping contact, nor should stopped contact automatically be treated as evidence of domestic abuse.

Where domestic abuse is alleged, the court may need to determine whether a fact-finding hearing is necessary. It must consider the effect of any abuse on the child, the victim parent and the ability of the parties to participate fairly in the proceedings.

A child may refuse contact because they have seen, heard or experienced the effects of domestic abuse. A parent may also use child arrangements, communication or litigation as part of a wider pattern of controlling or coercive behaviour. These possibilities require careful evidence and proper judicial consideration.

Equally, a parent accused of abuse must be given a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations. The court must make findings based on evidence rather than assumption.

Safety and delay must be considered together

The court should not allow a child’s relationship with a safe parent to deteriorate unnecessarily. It should also not force contact before legitimate safeguarding concerns have been examined.

Possible Child-Focused Steps When a Relationship Needs to Be Rebuilt

The correct approach will depend on the child’s experiences, the findings made by the court, the level of risk and the child’s individual needs.

Depending on the circumstances, possible steps may include:

indirect contact through letters, cards, messages or video calls;
supported contact;
supervised contact;
a neutral handover arrangement;
a clearly defined communication method between the adults;
a gradual reintroduction plan;
a section 7 report;
a review hearing after a defined period;
a fact-finding hearing where disputed allegations must be determined;
professional support where appropriate and properly directed.

The aim should not be to force a child to accept an adult narrative. The aim should be to identify what is safe, understand what the child needs and create arrangements that promote the child’s welfare.

Cafcass support services

Cafcass: Enabling Family Time

Recent Judicial Guidance: Re Y

In February 2026, the President of the Family Division handed down judgment in Re Y (Experts and Alienating Behaviour: The Modern Approach) [2026] EWFC 38.

The judgment reinforces the Family Justice Council’s guidance and confirms that allegations of alienating behaviour are factual matters for the court. Expert evidence should not be used as a substitute for judicial fact-finding.

This is important because parents may be encouraged to seek an “alienation expert” or to rely on theories about why a child is refusing contact. The modern approach is more disciplined: the court must identify the allegations, determine the facts and then consider what those findings mean for the child’s welfare.

Read the judgment

Re Y (Experts and Alienating Behaviour: The Modern Approach) [2026] EWFC 38

How to Present a Child-Focused Case

Whether you are asking the court to restore contact, enforce an order, vary arrangements or address safeguarding concerns, your case should remain focused on the child.

A well-prepared case may include:

a concise chronology of the contact arrangements and significant events;
a clear contact schedule showing what took place and what did not;
relevant messages, emails or other documents;
a structured response to allegations made against you;
a careful explanation of any safeguarding concerns;
an analysis of any Cafcass safeguarding letter or section 7 report;
a realistic proposal for safe arrangements;
a clear explanation of the impact on the child;
a willingness to reflect on your own conduct and make changes where necessary.

Less Helpful	More Helpful
“The other parent has destroyed my relationship with my child.”	A dated account of the changes in arrangements and the evidence supporting your concerns.
“My child has been brainwashed.”	A neutral explanation of the child’s previous relationship, the change in behaviour and the surrounding circumstances.
“The court must punish the other parent.”	A clear proposal for arrangements that are workable, safe and in the child’s best interests.
A large collection of unindexed screenshots.	A focused selection of relevant documents linked to the issues the court must decide.

Questions the Court May Need to Answer

What arrangements previously existed?
When and why did contact change?
What is the child saying, and how has the child’s position been understood?
Has the child experienced domestic abuse, harmful parenting or fear?
Has either parent exposed the child to adult conflict or information?
Is there evidence of psychological manipulation or other alienating behaviour?
Has an existing child arrangements order been breached?
Was there a reasonable excuse for any non-compliance?
What interim arrangements are safe and realistic?
What outcome best promotes the child’s welfare?

When to Seek Support

Cases involving stopped contact can become complex quickly. They may involve allegations of domestic abuse, controlling or coercive behaviour, harmful conflict, safeguarding concerns, enforcement applications, Cafcass recommendations or requests for a fact-finding hearing.

Early preparation may help a litigant in person identify the correct application, organise evidence, avoid unnecessary allegations and present a clear proposal to the court.

JSH Law can assist with:

reviewing court papers and existing child arrangements orders;
preparing a contact chronology;
organising messages, emails and other evidence;
drafting or reviewing position statements;
analysing Cafcass safeguarding letters and section 7 reports;
preparing for enforcement, directions, fact-finding or final hearings;
supporting litigants in person as a McKenzie Friend where appropriate.

Has Contact With Your Child Stopped?

If contact has suddenly ended, an existing child arrangements order is not being followed or you have received family court papers and do not know what to do next, early preparation can help protect your position.

JSH Law provides structured litigation support and McKenzie Friend assistance for litigants in person in private children proceedings.

Book a 15-minute initial consultation to discuss your situation and whether JSH Law may be able to assist.

Final Thoughts

When child contact breaks down, it is tempting to reach immediately for a label. A parent may believe they are being deliberately excluded. Another parent may believe they are protecting the child. The child may be struggling with experiences or pressures that the adults do not fully understand.

Time may make a safe parent-child relationship harder to repair, but time does not prove the cause of the breakdown. The proper approach is to identify the child’s experiences, examine the evidence, investigate any allegations of harm and seek arrangements that are safe, realistic and consistent with the child’s welfare.

A litigant in person cannot control every part of the family justice process. They can, however, remain calm, document events accurately, avoid unsupported allegations and present the court with a clear, child-focused proposal.

About the Author

Jessica Susan Hill is the founder of JSH Law. She provides structured litigation support and McKenzie Friend services to litigants in person, with a particular focus on private children proceedings, domestic abuse and safeguarding concerns, Cafcass reports, evidence organisation and hearing preparation.

JSH Law is committed to helping litigants in person understand family court procedure, prepare persuasive documents and present their cases clearly and child-centrically.

Regulatory & Editorial Notice

This article is provided for general information and public legal education only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as a substitute for advice on the facts of an individual case.

JSH Law is not a firm of solicitors and is not regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. JSH Law does not conduct litigation or carry out reserved legal activities. Any assistance provided is subject to the court’s rules, the scope of the agreed service and, where applicable, the court’s permission.

References to legislation, guidance, judgments and third-party organisations are included for commentary and educational purposes. JSH Law is not responsible for the content of external websites.

“`

Your Family Court Case Is Taking Too Long: How to Stop Delay Damaging Your Child and Your Position

June 4, 2026/0 Comments/in 5. Court Skills for Litigants in Person/by jessica susan hill

You received family court papers because something important needed to be decided, but weeks have turned into months and you still do not know when the case will move forward. Contact may have stopped, interim arrangements may be becoming entrenched, and every delay may feel as though it is quietly changing your child’s life. Family court delay is not just frustrating for parents: the Children Act 1989 recognises that delay is likely to prejudice a child’s welfare. The key is knowing how to raise the problem clearly, comply with every direction and ask the court for a practical, child-focused next step.

Family Court Delays Are Harming Children: What Litigants in Person Can Do When Their Case Is Drifting

You applied to the family court because something important needed to be decided. Perhaps contact has stopped, allegations have been made, a child arrangements order is being breached, or your child’s relationship with a parent is deteriorating while you wait. Then the weeks become months, another hearing is listed, another report is requested, and the case begins to feel less like a route to resolution and more like a test of endurance.

For many litigants in person, delay is one of the most difficult parts of private children proceedings. It can drain finances, increase anxiety, harden parental positions and leave children living with uncertainty. The law recognises this. Under the Children Act 1989, delay in determining a question about a child is generally likely to prejudice that child’s welfare.

However, not every delay is unnecessary. Courts must sometimes take time to complete safeguarding checks, investigate allegations of domestic abuse, obtain a Cafcass report, hear evidence or ensure that a final decision is safe. The real question is whether the time being taken is necessary for the child’s welfare—or whether the case is drifting because the issues have not been properly identified, directions have not been followed or the next decision has not been clearly defined.

The central point

Family court delay is not merely an inconvenience for adults. A child’s life continues while proceedings are ongoing. Relationships may weaken, interim arrangements may become entrenched, anxiety may increase and important decisions about the child’s future may remain unresolved.

Why Family Court Proceedings Can Feel Like a Test of Endurance

Parents usually enter the family court hoping for clarity. They want the court to understand what has happened, assess any risks and make arrangements that protect the child’s welfare.

The reality can feel very different. A parent may experience:

long periods between hearings;
temporary arrangements continuing for months;
repeated requests for statements, reports or updated evidence;
delays in Cafcass or local authority assessments;
adjournments because documents are missing or directions have not been followed;
uncertainty about what the next hearing is intended to decide;
financial pressure from legal fees, travel, time away from work or repeated preparation;
emotional exhaustion and a growing fear that the case is moving further away from resolution.

That experience should not be dismissed. A parent who is anxious, exhausted or overwhelmed may find it harder to prepare clearly, respond proportionately or remain focused on the child. The longer a case continues, the more important it becomes to distinguish between understandable frustration and the practical steps that may help the court move the case forward.

What the Latest Family Court Statistics Show

The latest published Ministry of Justice statistics show that Children Act private law cases disposed of during 2025 took an average of approximately 37 weeks. During October to December 2025, the average time was 35 weeks.

Those figures represent an improvement compared with the previous year, but they still mean that many families spend a substantial part of a child’s year waiting for proceedings to conclude.

Cafcass has also reported a significant level of demand in private law children’s cases. Between April 2025 and March 2026, Cafcass received 42,172 new private law children’s cases.

Current data and official sources

Delay Is a Welfare Issue, Not Just a Procedural Problem

The family court is not simply managing paperwork. It is making decisions about a child’s home, relationships, safety and future.

While proceedings continue:

a child may become accustomed to an interim arrangement;
a relationship with a parent, sibling or wider family member may weaken;
a child may become anxious about what will happen next;
parents may become more entrenched in their positions;
conflict may increase;
school terms, birthdays, holidays and important life events may pass without clarity;
evidence may become more difficult to obtain or interpret over time.

This does not mean that the court should rush to make an unsafe decision. It does mean that every stage of the proceedings should have a clear purpose and that unnecessary delay should be avoided wherever possible.

What the Law Says About Delay

Children Act 1989, section 1(2)

Where the court is considering a question about a child’s upbringing, it must have regard to the general principle that any delay in determining that question is likely to prejudice the child’s welfare.

Read section 1 of the Children Act 1989

Family Procedure Rules 2010, Part 1

The overriding objective requires the court to deal with cases justly, having regard to any welfare issues involved. This includes dealing with cases expeditiously and fairly, saving expense, dealing with cases proportionately and ensuring that cases are dealt with by an appropriate level of judge.

Read Part 1 of the Family Procedure Rules

Practice Direction 12B: Child Arrangements Programme

The Child Arrangements Programme provides the procedural framework for private law children’s cases and is designed to support a consistent and effective approach to resolving disputes about children.

Read Practice Direction 12B

Practice Direction 12J

Where domestic abuse is alleged, admitted or otherwise raises a concern, the court must consider the effect of that abuse on the child and on the ability of each parent to care for the child safely. Speed must never come at the expense of proper safeguarding.

Read Practice Direction 12J

Necessary Delay and Avoidable Delay Are Not the Same

It is understandable to want a case resolved quickly. However, a fast decision is not necessarily a fair or safe decision. Some cases require careful investigation before the court can determine what arrangements are in the child’s best interests.

Delay May Be Necessary Where	Delay May Be Avoidable Where
Safeguarding checks are outstanding.	A party repeatedly fails to comply with court directions.
The court needs to determine disputed allegations of domestic abuse.	Statements, schedules or evidence are filed late without good reason.
A Cafcass section 7 report or local authority assessment is required.	The real issues have not been narrowed or clearly identified.
The child’s wishes, feelings or circumstances need proper assessment.	The court bundle is incomplete, disorganised or excessive.
Expert evidence is genuinely necessary and has been permitted by the court.	Repeated applications are made without a clear evidential or procedural purpose.
The court needs evidence before deciding whether contact can take place safely.	An outstanding action is not chased or raised promptly.

A credible litigant in person should acknowledge the difference. Simply telling the court that the proceedings are taking too long may not be enough. The court is more likely to be assisted by a concise explanation of:

what remains outstanding;
why it matters;
how the delay is affecting the child;
what practical direction or decision is being requested.

Why Interim Arrangements Matter

An interim order is not a final determination of the case. It may be made before all allegations have been tested, before a section 7 report has been completed or before the court has heard full evidence.

However, interim arrangements can become significant when they continue for a long period. A child may become settled into a routine. A parent-child relationship may strengthen, weaken or change. A temporary absence of contact may become harder to repair. A pattern that was intended to last for a few weeks may remain in place for many months.

That does not mean that the court should preserve an unsafe arrangement merely because it has existed for some time. It does mean that parents should take interim hearings seriously and should not assume that all important issues can simply be left until the final hearing.

Important

Do not agree to an interim arrangement that you believe is unsafe merely because you feel pressured to appear cooperative. Equally, do not oppose a safe interim arrangement simply because it is not the final outcome you want. Explain your position clearly, identify the evidence and keep the focus on the child’s welfare.

What Litigants in Person Can Do When a Case Is Drifting

A litigant in person cannot control the court diary, judicial availability or professional workloads. However, there are practical steps that may reduce avoidable delay and protect your position.

1. Read Every Order Carefully

Court orders are not merely records of what happened at the hearing. They usually contain the directions that control the next stage of the case.

After each hearing, identify:

what you must do;
what the other party must do;
what Cafcass, the local authority or another professional must do;
the deadline for each action;
the date and purpose of the next hearing;
whether any documents must be filed, served or included in a bundle.

Create a simple directions checklist and update it as each task is completed.

2. Comply With Directions on Time

Late statements, missing evidence and failure to serve documents can cause adjournments and damage credibility. If you cannot meet a deadline, raise the problem promptly rather than waiting until the deadline has passed.

Do not assume that sending a document to the other party is the same as filing it with the court. Filing and service are separate procedural steps.

3. Keep a Case Chronology

A chronology can help you identify whether the case is genuinely drifting and explain the history clearly.

A useful chronology may include:

the date proceedings began;
the date of each hearing;
the purpose and outcome of each hearing;
the dates of court orders;
deadlines imposed by the court;
dates when documents were filed or served;
missed deadlines or outstanding actions;
significant changes in the child’s circumstances;
the effect of delay on the child.

4. Identify the Actual Blockage

Avoid broad statements such as “nothing is happening” or “the court is ignoring me”. Instead, identify the specific issue preventing progress.

For example:

the section 7 report has not been filed;
the other party has not filed a statement;
a fact-finding hearing has not yet been listed;
the court has not determined whether expert evidence is required;
the order does not clearly state the next step;
an interim arrangement is no longer workable;
there has been a material change in the child’s circumstances.

5. Narrow the Issues

Cases become harder to resolve when every disagreement is treated as equally important. The court may be assisted if the parties can identify:

what is agreed;
what remains disputed;
which allegations require findings;
which documents are relevant to those issues;
what decisions the court must make.

Narrowing the issues does not mean abandoning legitimate concerns. It means helping the court focus its time on the matters that genuinely affect the child’s welfare.

6. Organise Evidence Properly

Hundreds of screenshots, lengthy emails and repeated allegations can make a case harder to understand. Evidence should be relevant, proportionate and connected to the issue the court is being asked to decide.

Less Helpful	More Helpful
“The case has been going on forever.”	A dated chronology showing the length of proceedings and the outstanding steps.
“The other parent keeps delaying everything.”	A clear record of specific missed directions, dates and resulting consequences.
A large collection of unindexed messages.	A small number of relevant documents linked to the issues the court must decide.
A position statement focused on unfairness to the parent.	A child-focused explanation of the impact of delay and the next step requested.

7. Raise Missed Deadlines Promptly and Proportionately

If a direction has not been complied with, consider whether the issue can be resolved by a short, professional communication. Keep the tone factual and avoid accusatory or emotional language.

Where appropriate, identify:

the relevant paragraph of the order;
the deadline that has passed;
the document or action that remains outstanding;
the practical impact on the next hearing;
the reasonable step you propose.

Do not copy the court into every disagreement between the parties. The court is not a general correspondence service, and unnecessary emails may obscure genuinely important issues.

8. Explain the Impact on the Child

The court’s focus is the child’s welfare. A parent may feel devastated by delay, but the most persuasive explanation will usually identify how the delay affects the child.

For example:

the child has not seen a parent or sibling for a significant period;
the child remains uncertain about where they will live;
the child is approaching a school transition;
the child’s anxiety or behaviour has changed;
an interim arrangement is disrupting education, healthcare or routine;
the child’s relationship with a parent is becoming harder to repair.

9. Propose a Realistic Next Step

A court is more likely to be assisted by a specific, workable proposal than by a general complaint.

Depending on the case, a parent may ask the court to consider:

a clear deadline for an outstanding report or statement;
a review hearing;
listing a fact-finding hearing where findings are necessary;
clarifying the purpose of the next hearing;
directions for a concise schedule of allegations;
an interim arrangement pending final determination;
a timetable that reflects an important date in the child’s life.

The appropriate request will depend on the facts, the existing order and the stage of the proceedings.

10. Prepare Properly for Every Hearing

Court time is limited. A hearing may be adjourned or fail to achieve its purpose if the parties are not ready, the documents are missing or the issues are unclear.

Before a hearing, make sure you understand:

what type of hearing it is;
what decisions the court can make at that hearing;
what evidence the court has been directed to read;
what orders you are asking for;
what you say should happen next;
how your proposal promotes the child’s welfare.

A useful position statement structure

A concise position statement may explain:

When the proceedings began.
What the court has already decided.
What issue remains outstanding.
What direction or evidence is still required.
How the delay is affecting the child.
What specific order or next step you respectfully ask the court to consider.

The position statement should not attempt to repeat every event in the history of the case. Its purpose is to help the court understand your position for the hearing in front of it.

Example Wording for a Child-Focused Position Statement

“The proceedings have been ongoing since [date]. The principal outstanding issue is [briefly identify issue]. The order dated [date] required [identify action] by [deadline], but this remains outstanding.”

“The delay is affecting the child because [brief child-focused explanation]. I respectfully ask the court to consider [specific direction, listing or interim arrangement], so that the case can progress safely and proportionately.”

“I remain willing to comply with all directions and to consider any safe, child-focused steps that may assist the court in resolving the outstanding issues.”

When Delay May Require Urgent Attention

Not every delayed case is urgent. However, some circumstances may require prompt consideration because the child may be at immediate risk or because an important decision cannot safely wait.

Examples may include:

an immediate safeguarding concern;
a child being removed, retained or relocated without agreement or permission;
contact stopping suddenly where there is no apparent safeguarding reason;
a serious deterioration in a child’s relationship with a parent or sibling;
an imminent school, medical or relocation decision;
repeated breaches of a child arrangements order;
a material change in circumstances that affects the child’s safety or welfare.

Parents should avoid describing every disagreement as urgent. An unsupported urgency application may use court time, increase conflict and undermine credibility. Where urgency is relied upon, explain the facts, the evidence, the risk and the precise order being requested.

Do not contact the judge directly

A litigant in person should not attempt to communicate privately with the judge about the substance of the case. Any communication with the court should be appropriate, procedural, copied to the other party where required, and consistent with the court’s rules and existing directions.

Domestic Abuse Cases Must Not Be Rushed

Delay can be harmful, but so can a decision made without properly addressing domestic abuse.

Where allegations of domestic abuse are relevant to the child arrangements application, the court may need to determine whether a fact-finding hearing is necessary. It may also need to consider the impact of the alleged abuse on the child, the victim parent and the ability of the parties to participate fairly in the proceedings.

A parent should not be pressured into unsafe arrangements simply because the case has been ongoing for a long time. Equally, allegations should be set out clearly and supported by evidence where available so that the court can determine what findings are necessary.

Speed and safety must work together

The aim is not the fastest possible decision at any cost. The aim is a safe, fair and effective decision made without unnecessary delay.

Child Focused Courts: Will the New Model Reduce Delay?

In March 2026, the Government announced that the private law reform model previously known as the Pathfinder pilot would be expanded across England and Wales under the name Child Focused Courts.

The model is intended to improve the experience of children and families by taking a more investigative and child-focused approach. The Government reported that cases in pilot areas had been resolved up to seven and a half months faster and that backlogs had reduced significantly.

The national expansion is an important development. However, the success of any reform will depend on adequate resources, proper safeguarding, effective case management and whether children and families experience genuinely faster and safer outcomes in practice.

Recent family justice reform

Common Mistakes When Parents Feel Their Case Is Taking Too Long

1. Sending Repeated Emotional Emails

Repeated emails may not speed up the case and can make it harder for the court or professionals to identify the important issue. Keep communications concise, factual and purposeful.

2. Making Unnecessary Applications

An application should have a clear legal and practical purpose. Repeated applications may increase delay, cost and conflict.

3. Failing to Comply While Complaining About Delay

A parent who has missed their own deadlines may find it harder to persuade the court that the case is being delayed by others. Protect your credibility by complying promptly and keeping evidence of filing and service.

4. Focusing Only on the Parent’s Distress

The court will understand that proceedings are stressful, but the legal focus is the child. Explain how delay affects the child’s welfare, stability, relationships and needs.

5. Overloading the Court With Evidence

More evidence is not always better evidence. A focused chronology, relevant documents and a clear explanation of the issues are usually more useful than a large volume of repetitive material.

6. Treating Every Adjournment as Proof of Bias

Adjournments can be deeply frustrating, but they do not necessarily show that the court is biased or unwilling to decide the case. Consider the reason for the adjournment and what can be done to ensure the next hearing is effective.

7. Allowing Frustration to Damage Credibility

Anger, accusations and hostile language may distract from a strong case. Calm, structured and child-focused preparation is more persuasive.

How JSH Law Can Help When Your Case Is Drifting

A litigant in person may know that something is wrong but struggle to identify the procedural step needed to move the case forward. JSH Law can assist with structured preparation, including:

reviewing court orders and identifying outstanding directions;
preparing a clear procedural chronology;
organising evidence and identifying the strongest documents;
drafting or reviewing a position statement;
analysing a Cafcass safeguarding letter or section 7 report;
helping identify the issues the court must decide;
preparing for an interim, directions, fact-finding or final hearing;
supporting a litigant in person as a McKenzie Friend where appropriate.

Has Your Family Court Case Stalled?

If you have received court papers, are waiting months between hearings or do not know what you need to do next, early preparation can help protect your position.

JSH Law provides structured litigation support and McKenzie Friend assistance for litigants in person in private children proceedings.

Book a 15-minute initial consultation to discuss your situation and whether JSH Law may be able to assist.

Final Thoughts

Family court proceedings should not become a test of which parent can endure the most delay, stress or expense. The Children Act recognises that delay may prejudice a child’s welfare, and every stage of a case should move towards a safe and effective decision.

At the same time, parents should be realistic. Some cases require careful investigation, particularly where domestic abuse, safeguarding concerns or disputed allegations are involved. The answer is not speed at any cost. It is disciplined case management, proper evidence, compliance with directions and a relentless focus on the child’s timetable rather than the adults’ conflict.

A litigant in person cannot control every part of the family justice system. They can, however, prepare carefully, identify the real blockage, explain the welfare impact of delay and ask the court for a clear, proportionate next step.

About the Author

Jessica Susan Hill is the founder of JSH Law. She provides structured litigation support and McKenzie Friend services to litigants in person, with a particular focus on private children proceedings, domestic abuse and safeguarding concerns, Cafcass reports, evidence organisation and hearing preparation.

JSH Law is committed to helping litigants in person understand family court procedure, prepare persuasive documents and present their cases clearly and child-centrically.

Regulatory & Editorial Notice

This article is provided for general information and public legal education only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as a substitute for advice on the facts of an individual case.

JSH Law is not a firm of solicitors and is not regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. JSH Law does not conduct litigation or carry out reserved legal activities. Any assistance provided is subject to the court’s rules, the scope of the agreed service and, where applicable, the court’s permission.

References to legislation, guidance, statistics, judgments and third-party organisations are included for commentary and educational purposes. JSH Law is not responsible for the content of external websites.

“`

Your Child Refuses Contact and Family Court Papers Have Arrived: What You Must Do Before Alleging “Parental Alienation”

June 4, 2026/0 Comments/in 5. Court Skills for Litigants in Person/by jessica susan hill

The court papers have arrived, your child is refusing to see you, and you may feel as though the relationship is slipping away while you are still trying to find a solicitor. It is understandable to search for answers and to wonder whether the other parent has influenced your child against you. However, the family court will not decide the case on labels such as “parental alienation”, “brainwashing” or “alienated parent”. It will look closely at the child’s experiences, the allegations made by each parent, the available evidence and the steps you take now to present a calm, credible and child-focused case.

When a Child Refuses Contact: What Family Courts Look For Beyond “Parental Alienation”

When a child says that they do not want to see a parent, the situation can be heartbreaking, frightening and extremely difficult to understand. A parent may believe that the child has been influenced against them. The other parent may say that the child is expressing genuine fear, distress or a firmly held wish. The child may be caught in the middle of allegations, adult conflict and court proceedings that they never asked to be part of.

Family courts in England and Wales are increasingly clear that these cases must not be decided by labels, slogans or assumptions. The court must examine the evidence, understand the child’s individual experiences and determine what arrangements are safe and consistent with the child’s welfare.

The central point

A child’s reluctance, resistance or refusal to spend time with a parent does not, by itself, prove that the child has been manipulated. It also does not automatically prove that the parent seeking contact has caused the difficulty. The court must consider all realistic explanations and make findings based on evidence.

Is “Parental Alienation” Still Used in the Family Court?

Parents, campaign groups and some professionals continue to use the expression “parental alienation”. It is also a phrase that many parents search for online when a child has unexpectedly rejected them or when contact has broken down.

However, the current family justice approach is not to treat parental alienation as a medical or psychological diagnosis. The Family Justice Council has stated that so-called “parental alienation syndrome” has no evidential basis. The proper focus is on the specific behaviour alleged, whether that behaviour has been proved, and what impact it has had on the individual child.

Cafcass has similarly stated that it does not use or refer to the term “parental alienation” where it is framed as a condition or syndrome. Instead, Cafcass Family Court Advisers are expected to explore the range of reasons why a child may not want to spend time with a parent and to assess the impact of adult behaviour on the child.

Current official guidance

What Are Alienating Behaviours?

The phrase alienating behaviours refers to conduct by a parent or other adult that psychologically manipulates a child and contributes to the child becoming reluctant, resistant or unwilling to have a relationship with another parent.

The Family Justice Council guidance identifies three elements that must be established before a court can properly conclude that alienating behaviours have occurred:

The child is reluctant, resistant or refusing to engage in a relationship with a parent.
The child’s response is not caused by the conduct of the parent seeking the relationship.
The other parent has engaged in behaviour that has caused the child’s reluctance, resistance or refusal.

This is an important safeguard. A parent cannot simply state that they have been alienated and expect the court to accept the allegation. The court must consider whether the child has a legitimate reason for their position and whether the alleged behaviour is actually supported by evidence.

A warning about labels

Terms such as “alienated child”, “targeted parent”, “brainwashing” and “parental alienation syndrome” can obscure the real issues in a case. They may also make it appear that a conclusion has already been reached before the evidence has been tested.

A litigant in person will usually be more persuasive if they describe the specific behaviour, the dates, the available evidence and the effect on the child.

Why Might a Child Refuse to See a Parent?

There is no single explanation that applies to every child. A child may resist or refuse time with a parent for several different reasons, and more than one reason may be operating at the same time.

The court may need to consider whether the child’s position is connected to:

domestic abuse, including controlling or coercive behaviour;
fear, distress or a previous harmful experience;
the parenting behaviour of the parent seeking contact;
a child’s justified rejection of a parent;
harmful conflict between the adults;
the child feeling responsible for protecting one parent;
pressure, influence or psychological manipulation by a parent;
the child’s age, maturity, wishes and feelings;
practical changes, such as a long interruption in contact or unfamiliarity;
a combination of several different factors.

The court should not assume that a child who refuses contact has been manipulated. Equally, the court should not assume that every expression of reluctance is entirely independent of adult influence. The task is to understand the child’s circumstances carefully and fairly.

The Difference Between Domestic Abuse, Harmful Conflict and Alienating Behaviours

These concepts are not interchangeable. It is important to distinguish them because the court’s response may be very different depending on the findings made.

Issue	What it may involve	Why the distinction matters
Domestic abuse	Abusive behaviour between people aged 16 or over who are personally connected. This may include physical or sexual abuse, violent or threatening behaviour, controlling or coercive behaviour, economic abuse, or psychological and emotional abuse.	The court must consider safety, risk of harm and the requirements of Practice Direction 12J.
Harmful conflict	Ongoing conflict between adults that is detrimental to the child’s welfare but is distinct from domestic abuse.	It may require work to reduce conflict and improve communication, but it should not be used to minimise or mislabel domestic abuse.
Alienating behaviours	Psychological manipulation that causes or contributes to a child’s reluctance, resistance or refusal to have a relationship with a parent.	The court must make findings about the alleged behaviour and its impact. The label alone is not evidence.
Justified rejection	A child’s reluctance or refusal that is an understandable response to the conduct of the parent seeking contact.	A child should not be pressured into contact without proper consideration of the reasons for their position and the potential risk of harm.

What Does the Law Say?

Legal Framework: Child Arrangements, Domestic Abuse and Welfare

Children Act 1989, section 1

The child’s welfare is the court’s paramount consideration when deciding questions about the child’s upbringing. The court must consider the welfare checklist, including the child’s wishes and feelings in light of their age and understanding, their needs, the likely effect of any change in circumstances, any harm suffered or risk of harm, and the capability of each parent to meet the child’s needs.

Read section 1 of the Children Act 1989

Children Act 1989, section 1(2A)

The court is required to presume, unless the contrary is shown, that the involvement of a parent in the child’s life will further the child’s welfare. This does not create a presumption of equal time, and it does not require involvement where that would place the child at risk of harm.

Read the parental involvement provisions

Domestic Abuse Act 2021, sections 1 to 3

The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 recognises controlling or coercive behaviour as a form of domestic abuse. It also recognises a child as a victim of domestic abuse where the child sees, hears or experiences the effects of the abuse and is related to either the victim or the person responsible for the abuse.

Read sections 1 to 3 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021

Serious Crime Act 2015, section 76

Section 76 creates the criminal offence of controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship. The criminal offence has its own legal requirements and should not be alleged casually or without a proper evidential basis.

Read section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015

Practice Direction 12J

Practice Direction 12J applies in child arrangements proceedings where domestic abuse is alleged, admitted or otherwise raises a concern. It requires the court to consider the impact of domestic abuse on the child and on the ability of each parent to care for the child safely.

Read Practice Direction 12J

Controlling or Coercive Behaviour and a Child’s Relationship with a Parent

Controlling or coercive behaviour may be relevant where one parent uses the child, child arrangements or family court proceedings as part of a wider pattern of abuse. It may also be relevant where a child has seen, heard or experienced the effects of abuse and is therefore fearful, protective of a parent or unwilling to spend time with the alleged perpetrator.

However, not every difficult co-parenting relationship amounts to domestic abuse. Not every disagreement about contact is coercive control. Not every allegation of alienating behaviour is a disguised allegation of domestic abuse, and not every allegation of domestic abuse is evidence of alienating behaviour.

The court must identify the factual allegations, determine whether findings are required and then decide what those findings mean for the child’s welfare.

For litigants in person

If you believe that controlling or coercive behaviour is relevant to your case, avoid relying only on the label. Set out the pattern of behaviour clearly:

What happened?
When did it happen?
Who witnessed it?
What documents, messages or other evidence support the allegation?
How did the behaviour affect you?
How did the behaviour affect the child?
What order or protective measure are you asking the court to consider?

What Evidence May Help the Court?

Family court cases are not decided by the number of times a parent repeats an allegation. They are decided by evidence, findings and an assessment of the child’s welfare.

Less Helpful	More Helpful
“The other parent has alienated my child.”	A dated account of the specific behaviour relied upon, supported by relevant evidence where available.
“My child has been brainwashed.”	Evidence showing changes in the child’s behaviour, the circumstances surrounding those changes and why alternative explanations may or may not apply.
“The allegations against me are all lies.”	A structured response to each allegation, identifying admissions, denials, context and supporting documents.
Repeated criticism of the other parent.	A child-focused explanation of the problem, the effect on the child and the safe, realistic outcome sought.
A large volume of unorganised screenshots.	A concise chronology, indexed evidence and a clear explanation of why each document matters.

Questions the Court May Need to Answer

What is the child saying, and how has the child’s position been obtained and understood?
What was the nature of the child’s previous relationship with the parent?
Has the child experienced or been affected by domestic abuse?
Has the parent seeking contact behaved in a way that explains the child’s response?
Is the child’s position consistent over time and across different settings?
Is there evidence that the child has been exposed to adult information or pressure?
Has either parent failed to support a safe relationship with the other parent?
Is a fact-finding hearing required before welfare decisions can be made?
What arrangements, if any, can be made safely and in the child’s best interests?

The Child’s Wishes and Feelings

A child’s wishes and feelings are an important part of the welfare checklist, but they are not the only factor. The weight given to them will depend on the child’s age, understanding, circumstances and the way in which those wishes and feelings have been formed.

The court must avoid two opposite errors:

ignoring a child’s expressed fears or objections because an adult alleges alienation; and
assuming that the child’s expressed position must determine the outcome without considering the surrounding evidence.

Children should be listened to carefully. They should not be interrogated, recruited into adult disputes or made to feel responsible for deciding the outcome of court proceedings.

A practical point for parents

Avoid asking a child to choose between parents, repeat allegations, read court documents, provide evidence or reassure you about the case. Even well-intentioned conversations can place a child under emotional pressure and may later be examined by Cafcass or the court.

Recent Judicial Guidance: Re Y

In February 2026, the President of the Family Division handed down judgment in Re Y (Experts and Alienating Behaviour: The Modern Approach) [2026] EWFC 38.

The judgment reinforces the need for courts to follow the Family Justice Council guidance and to exercise care before permitting expert evidence in cases involving alleged alienating behaviours. The court, not an expert, is responsible for deciding the factual allegations. Expert evidence should not be used as a substitute for judicial fact-finding.

The judgment is particularly important for litigants in person who may be encouraged to rely on an unregulated “alienation expert” or to believe that an expert can diagnose the reason why a child is refusing contact. That is not the modern approach.

Read the judgment

Re Y (Experts and Alienating Behaviour: The Modern Approach) [2026] EWFC 38

Common Mistakes in Cases Where a Child Refuses Contact

1. Treating the label as the evidence

Saying “parental alienation” does not establish what happened. The court needs to understand the specific acts alleged and the effect on the child.

2. Ignoring allegations of domestic abuse

A parent who dismisses all allegations as alienation may appear unwilling to engage with the child’s experiences or with legitimate safeguarding concerns.

3. Assuming refusal must be justified

A child’s refusal should be taken seriously, but the court may still need to consider whether the child has been exposed to pressure, adult narratives or harmful influence.

4. Pressuring the child to resume contact

Demands, emotional appeals, repeated messages or attempts to make the child feel guilty may damage the relationship further and may be viewed as contrary to the child’s welfare.

5. Using adult-focused language

The court is not deciding which parent has been treated more unfairly. It is deciding what outcome best protects and promotes the child’s welfare.

6. Submitting excessive, unstructured evidence

A large volume of messages, recordings and screenshots may obscure the strongest evidence. A focused chronology and properly organised documents are usually more effective.

How to Present a Child-Focused Case

Whether you are the parent seeking to restore contact or the parent raising concerns about contact, your case should remain focused on the child.

A well-prepared case may include:

a concise chronology of significant events;
a schedule of allegations where directed by the court;
a clear response to allegations made against you;
relevant messages, emails, school records or professional records;
a careful analysis of any Cafcass safeguarding letter or section 7 report;
specific examples of the impact on the child;
a realistic proposal for safe, child-focused arrangements;
consideration of whether indirect, supported or supervised contact may be appropriate;
a willingness to reflect on your own conduct and make changes where necessary.

The question to keep asking

Instead of asking, “How do I prove that the other parent is wrong?”, ask, “What does the court need to understand about my child’s experiences, safety, needs and welfare?”

Can a Damaged Parent-Child Relationship Be Repaired?

In some cases, a relationship can be rebuilt. The appropriate approach will depend on the child’s experiences, the findings made by the court, the level of risk and the child’s individual needs.

Repair should not mean forcing a child to accept an adult narrative or requiring the child to resume contact before it is safe. It may involve patience, careful communication, professional support, reduced conflict and arrangements that allow trust to develop gradually.

A parent seeking to rebuild a relationship should consider whether their own behaviour may need to change. A parent who is caring for a child should consider whether they are supporting the child’s safe relationship with the other parent, where that is consistent with the child’s welfare.

When to Seek Support

Cases involving a child’s refusal to see a parent can become complex very quickly. They may involve allegations of domestic abuse, controlling or coercive behaviour, harmful conflict, safeguarding concerns, Cafcass recommendations, applications for enforcement or requests for a fact-finding hearing.

Early preparation can make a significant difference. A litigant in person may benefit from support with identifying the real issues, organising evidence, preparing a chronology, responding to a section 7 report and presenting a clear, child-focused position to the court.

Need Help Preparing Your Family Court Case?

JSH Law provides structured litigation support and McKenzie Friend assistance for litigants in person in private children proceedings.

Support may include reviewing court documents, organising evidence, preparing chronologies, analysing Cafcass reports, drafting position statements and helping you prepare for a hearing.

Book a 15-minute initial consultation to discuss your situation and whether JSH Law may be able to assist.

About the Author

Jessica Susan Hill is the founder of JSH Law. She provides structured litigation support and McKenzie Friend services to litigants in person, with a particular focus on private children proceedings, domestic abuse and safeguarding concerns, Cafcass reports, evidence organisation and hearing preparation.

JSH Law is committed to helping litigants in person understand family court procedure, prepare persuasive documents and present their cases clearly and child-centrically.

Regulatory & Editorial Notice

This article is provided for general information and public legal education only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as a substitute for advice on the facts of an individual case.

JSH Law is not a firm of solicitors and is not regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. JSH Law does not conduct litigation or carry out reserved legal activities. Any assistance provided is subject to the court’s rules, the scope of the agreed service and, where applicable, the court’s permission.

References to legislation, guidance, judgments and third-party organisations are included for commentary and educational purposes. JSH Law is not responsible for the content of external websites.

“`

Latest UK Family Court News for Litigants in Person: What Parents Need to Know Now

June 2, 2026/0 Comments/in 2. Family Court Procedure, McKenzie Friend Support, Procedural Updates/by jessica susan hill

The family court is changing quickly, and litigants in person need to understand what that means in practical terms. With Child Focused Courts being rolled out nationally, new bundle guidance for unrepresented parties, ongoing Cafcass pressures and proposed changes to the presumption of parental involvement, parents cannot afford to prepare their cases casually. Clear evidence, structured documents and child-focused arguments matter more than ever.

Latest UK Family Court News for Litigants in Person: Child Focused Courts, Bundle Rules and What Parents Need to Know

The family court is changing. Child Focused Courts are being rolled out nationally, the Government is moving to repeal the presumption of parental involvement, and new bundle guidance has been issued specifically for litigants in person. This article explains what the latest developments mean in practical terms for parents dealing with child arrangements, safeguarding concerns, Cafcass, section 7 reports and family court hearings.

If you are a litigant in person in the family court, the latest developments matter. They are not abstract policy announcements. They affect how you should prepare your case, what the court is likely to focus on, how safeguarding concerns should be presented, and why your paperwork needs to be clear, proportionate and child-focused from the start.

The family justice system in England and Wales is under significant pressure. Private law children cases remain high. Many parents are representing themselves. Cafcass is carrying a heavy workload. Domestic abuse and safeguarding concerns continue to sit at the centre of many child arrangements disputes. At the same time, the court system is moving towards a new model designed to identify risk earlier, hear the child’s voice sooner and reduce unnecessary delay.

For litigants in person, the message is simple but important: the family court is becoming more child-focused, more document-sensitive and less tolerant of disorganised evidence.

This article explains the key family court news and, more importantly, what you should actually do with it if you are involved in private law children proceedings.

Key points for litigants in person

Child Focused Courts are being rolled out nationally across England and Wales.
The former Private Law Pathfinder model is now being expanded as a wider child-focused approach.
The Government has introduced proposals to repeal the statutory presumption of parental involvement.
The law has not fully changed yet, so litigants must be careful not to overstate the position.
New family court bundle guidance has been published specifically for litigants in person.
Cafcass private law workload remains high, meaning parents need to present evidence clearly and concisely.
The strongest cases are likely to be those that focus on welfare, safeguarding, evidence, chronology and practical proposals.

Child Focused Courts are being rolled out nationally

One of the most important developments for parents in private children proceedings is the national rollout of Child Focused Courts.

The model was previously known as the Private Law Pathfinder. The Judiciary has confirmed that Child Focused Courts are being rolled out across England and Wales, with the President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, describing the development as a “game changer” for the family justice system. You can read the Judiciary announcement here: Judges welcome roll-out of Child Focused Courts.

The Ministry of Justice has also announced that the newly named Child Focused Courts will be expanded nationally following the Pathfinder pilot. The Government announcement refers to cases being resolved significantly faster in the pilot areas. You can read that announcement here: Children to get swifter justice as new family court approach expands nationally.

The practical point is this: private children proceedings are moving away from a model where the court waits for parents to argue their positions across repeated hearings, and towards a model where the court aims to understand the child’s situation, risks and welfare needs earlier.

That matters enormously for litigants in person.

If you are applying for, opposing, varying or enforcing child arrangements, you should not prepare your case as though it is simply about “my rights” or “the other parent’s behaviour”. The court’s central question is the child’s welfare. The newer model reinforces that the court wants to understand:

what the child is experiencing;
what risks may exist;
whether domestic abuse, coercive control, substance misuse, mental health issues or other safeguarding issues are relevant;
what arrangements are safe and realistic;
what information is needed from agencies at an early stage;
what support may help the family move forward; and
what order, if any, best serves the child’s welfare.

Practical takeaway

Do not wait until the first hearing to organise your evidence. If you are a litigant in person, you should prepare a short, structured case summary, a safeguarding summary, a chronology and a clear explanation of what order you are asking the court to make.

The court is not helped by long emotional narratives. It is helped by clear facts, dates, documents, risks and realistic proposals.

What is different about the Child Focused Court approach?

The Child Focused Court model is designed to reduce delay, improve early information-gathering and place the child’s experience closer to the centre of the process.

The Government’s written statement on the Child Focused Model explains that national rollout is intended to support “coordinated early identification of risk”, ensure that children are heard, and provide specialist support where domestic abuse is involved. You can read the written statement here: Child Focused Model written statement.

In practical terms, litigants in person should expect more emphasis on:

early safeguarding information;
the child’s voice;
agency information, where relevant;
clear identification of risk;
avoiding unnecessary repeat hearings;
focused reports rather than broad, unfocused investigation;
practical child arrangements that can actually work.

This does not mean every case will suddenly become quick or easy. It does not mean safeguarding concerns will always be handled perfectly. It does not mean Cafcass will always get it right. But it does mean the direction of travel is clear: private law children cases are being pushed towards a more investigative, child-centred and risk-aware model.

That should change how litigants in person prepare.

The Government is moving to repeal the presumption of parental involvement

The second major development is the Government’s proposal to repeal the statutory presumption of parental involvement from the Children Act 1989.

The Courts and Tribunals Bill factsheet says that the Bill would repeal the presumption of parental involvement from the Children Act 1989 “to prioritise the welfare of the child”. You can read the Government publication here: Courts and Tribunals Bill and the factsheet here: Courts and Tribunals Bill factsheet.

This is a significant proposed change. For years, the family court has operated within a statutory framework that includes a presumption that the involvement of a parent in a child’s life will further the child’s welfare, unless the contrary is shown. That presumption has been controversial, particularly where there are allegations or findings of domestic abuse, coercive control, sexual abuse, serious safeguarding risk or child harm.

The proposed repeal is part of a wider shift towards asking a more direct question: what is safe and in this child’s welfare interests on the evidence?

However, litigants in person need to be very careful here.

The proposal does not mean that the law has already fully changed in every case. A Bill must pass through the parliamentary process and relevant provisions must come into force. Until then, the existing legal framework remains important. Litigants should not write statements saying “the presumption has now gone” unless and until that is legally accurate at the time of their hearing.

The safer way to frame the point is this:

“The Government’s proposed reform reflects increasing recognition that parental involvement must not be treated as automatically safe or beneficial where there are unresolved safeguarding concerns. The court’s paramount consideration remains the child’s welfare.”

Important warning for litigants in person

Do not overstate the law. If you are relying on proposed reform, make clear that it is proposed reform unless it has already come into force by the date of your hearing.

The family court expects accuracy. A good argument can be weakened if it is presented as though a proposed change has already become binding law when it has not.

What does this mean if you are raising domestic abuse or safeguarding concerns?

If you are a parent raising domestic abuse, coercive control or safeguarding concerns, the recent developments may help you frame your case more clearly. But they do not remove the need for evidence.

The court still needs to know:

what happened;
when it happened;
whether the child saw, heard or was affected by it;
whether there is independent evidence;
whether police, social services, schools, medical professionals or domestic abuse services have been involved;
what risk you say exists now;
what arrangements you say would be safe; and
what order you are asking the court to make.

A common mistake made by litigants in person is to assume that because something was traumatic, the court will automatically understand its significance. That is not how court preparation works. The court needs the issue translated into a structured legal and welfare framework.

For example, instead of saying:

“He was abusive and Cafcass have ignored everything.”

It is usually more effective to say:

“I rely on the incidents set out in the attached schedule dated [date]. The incidents include controlling behaviour, threats, intimidation and behaviour witnessed by the child. My concern is that unsupervised contact would expose the child to emotional harm unless these issues are properly assessed.”

The second version gives the court something it can work with.

New court bundle guidance for litigants in person

Another important development is the publication of specific family court bundle guidance for litigants in person.

The Judiciary has published Preparing Court Bundles for Family Proceedings: A Guide for Litigants in Person. It applies to family court and Family Division cases in England and Wales. You can access the guidance here: Preparing Court Bundles for Family Proceedings: Guide for Litigants in Person.

The guidance sits alongside revised bundle practice requirements. This matters because bundles are not a technical afterthought. They are often the way the judge understands the case.

If your bundle is chaotic, duplicated, missing key orders, badly paginated or full of irrelevant material, it can make your case harder to understand. It can also waste valuable hearing time.

A strong family court bundle should usually include, where relevant:

an index;
the application, such as the C100;
any C1A or safeguarding form;
the latest court orders;
position statements;
witness statements;
Cafcass safeguarding letters or section 7 reports;
local authority documents, if relevant;
police disclosure, if permitted and relevant;
school records, if relevant;
medical evidence, if relevant;
a chronology;
a schedule of allegations, if domestic abuse is alleged;
any expert reports, if permitted;
draft orders or proposed child arrangements.

The bundle should not be used as a dumping ground for every email, message, screenshot and historic grievance. The court needs relevant material, not everything you have ever collected.

Bundle checklist for litigants in person

Before filing or relying on a bundle, ask yourself:

Is there a clear index?
Are the pages numbered?
Are the latest orders included?
Is the evidence in date order where possible?
Have duplicates been removed?
Is every document relevant to an issue the court has to decide?
Can the judge find the key document within seconds?
Have you complied with any court directions about filing and serving?

Family court demand remains high

The latest Family Court Statistics for October to December 2025 show that the family court continues to face significant demand. The Ministry of Justice reported that in October to December 2025, 64,336 new cases started in family courts, up 4% on the equivalent quarter in 2024. Private law cases were up 13% compared with the equivalent quarter. You can read the statistics here: Family Court Statistics Quarterly: October to December 2025.

This matters because court pressure affects real people. It affects listing times, hearing length, judicial preparation, Cafcass availability and the speed at which reports are produced.

Litigants in person often feel that nobody has properly read their case. Sometimes that fear is justified. Judges and court staff are under pressure. Cafcass officers are under pressure. The system is busy. That does not mean you should give up. It means your paperwork needs to be exceptionally clear.

A judge should not have to work hard to understand:

who the child lives with;
what order is currently in place;
what has changed;
what the dispute is actually about;
what safeguarding concerns are relied upon;
what evidence supports those concerns;
what order you seek; and
why that order is said to be in the child’s welfare interests.

Cafcass private law workload remains significant

Cafcass publishes monthly demand data. Its data gives an indication of the pressure within the private law children system. You can access Cafcass data here: Cafcass data.

For litigants in person, this matters because Cafcass involvement is often central to private children proceedings. Cafcass may prepare a safeguarding letter, undertake initial safeguarding checks, speak to the parties, speak to the child in some cases, prepare a Child Impact Report in Child Focused Court areas, or prepare a section 7 report where directed.

If you have concerns about a Cafcass report, do not simply say “the report is biased” or “Cafcass did not listen”. You need to identify the specific problem.

For example:

Did the officer fail to speak to a relevant agency?
Did they record something inaccurately?
Did they omit a key safeguarding incident?
Did they misunderstand the court order?
Did they fail to consider domestic abuse guidance?
Did they make recommendations unsupported by the evidence?
Did they fail to consider the child’s expressed wishes and feelings properly?
Did they treat contact as the automatic goal before assessing safety?

The court is more likely to engage with a focused, evidence-based critique than a general attack on Cafcass.

How to challenge a Cafcass report properly

If you disagree with a Cafcass safeguarding letter, Child Impact Report or section 7 report, prepare a short response table with four columns:

Page / paragraph reference
What Cafcass says
Why you say it is wrong or incomplete
What evidence supports your position

This is much stronger than a long emotional statement saying the report is unfair.

Transparency in the family court is continuing to develop

Family court transparency has been developing through reporting pilots and transparency orders. This means that more family cases may be capable of being reported by accredited journalists and legal bloggers, while protecting the anonymity of children and families.

This is part of a broader movement towards improving public understanding and scrutiny of the family justice system. However, litigants in person must be extremely careful. Family proceedings are not the same as ordinary public disputes. There are strict rules about publishing information relating to children proceedings.

Do not post court documents, Cafcass reports, children’s details, allegations, photographs, school information or hearing information online without understanding whether you are legally permitted to do so.

If a transparency order is made, read it carefully. It will usually explain what can and cannot be reported.

Social media warning

If you are involved in family court proceedings, be very careful about posting online. Even if you feel the system has treated you unfairly, publishing identifying material about your child, the other parent, Cafcass, social workers, school records or court documents may create serious legal problems.

If in doubt, do not post. Get proper legal advice before publishing anything connected to ongoing children proceedings.

What litigants in person should prepare now

The latest family court developments all point in the same direction. The court wants earlier clarity, better evidence, better bundles, more child-focused analysis and less procedural chaos.

If you are a litigant in person, you should consider preparing the following documents.

1. A one-page case summary

This should explain who the parties are, who the children are, what order exists, what application is before the court and what the main issues are. Keep it short. The purpose is orientation.

2. A short chronology

A chronology is often one of the most useful documents in a private children case. It should list important dates in order. It should not contain argument. It should help the court understand the sequence of events.

3. A safeguarding summary

If there are safeguarding concerns, summarise them clearly. Identify the nature of the concern, when it occurred, whether the child was affected, and what evidence exists.

4. A schedule of allegations

If domestic abuse, coercive control or serious harm is alleged, a schedule may be needed. It should be specific. Avoid vague wording. Include dates or approximate dates where possible.

5. A welfare checklist analysis

The welfare checklist in section 1 of the Children Act 1989 remains central. A short welfare analysis can help you explain why your proposed arrangements meet the child’s needs.

6. A response to Cafcass

If there is a Cafcass report, prepare a structured response. Identify what you agree with, what you dispute, what is missing and what evidence supports your position.

7. A position statement

Before each hearing, prepare a concise position statement. This should tell the court what has happened since the last hearing, what issues remain, what order you seek and why.

8. A proposed order

Where possible, draft the order you are asking the court to make. This helps the judge understand the practical outcome you want.

What a child-focused position statement should include

A good position statement is not a witness statement. It is not the place for every detail. It is a practical hearing document.

For a private children hearing, a strong position statement might include:

the name and date of the hearing;
the parties’ names;
the children’s names or initials, depending on the court’s requirements;
a short summary of the current arrangements;
a short summary of the application;
the key issues for the court;
any safeguarding concerns;
your response to Cafcass, if relevant;
what directions you seek;
what final or interim order you seek;
why your proposal meets the child’s welfare needs.

The best position statements are usually structured, calm and easy to navigate. They do not need dramatic language. They need clarity.

Example structure for a LiP position statement

Introduction — who you are and what hearing this is.
Current position — what arrangements are currently in place.
Key issues — the issues the court needs to decide.
Safeguarding — any relevant risk concerns, briefly and clearly.
Cafcass / reports — what you agree with and what you dispute.
Welfare analysis — why your proposal meets the child’s welfare needs.
Order sought — the exact directions or order you ask the court to make.

What litigants in person should stop doing

There are some common mistakes that can damage an otherwise important case.

Do not file everything

More paper does not mean a stronger case. A judge may have limited preparation time. If the key evidence is buried inside hundreds of pages of irrelevant messages, it may be missed.

Do not use your statement as therapy

Your feelings matter, but a court statement has a specific purpose. It must help the court decide the legal and welfare issues.

Do not make broad allegations without particulars

“He is controlling” is less useful than a dated example of controlling behaviour, its impact on the child, and the evidence relied upon.

Do not ignore court directions

If the court orders you to file a statement by a certain date, take that seriously. If you cannot comply, you may need to apply for more time or explain the position promptly.

Do not assume Cafcass will collect everything

Cafcass may not see every document you consider important. If something matters, identify it clearly and explain why it matters.

Do not treat the case as parent versus parent

The court is not there to decide who is the better person. It is there to decide what arrangements meet the child’s welfare needs.

The opportunity for litigants in person

Although the system is under pressure, these reforms create an opportunity for well-prepared litigants in person.

If the court is moving towards earlier risk identification, then a clear safeguarding summary matters.

If the court is moving towards hearing the child’s experience earlier, then a child-focused welfare analysis matters.

If the court is relying on better bundles, then a properly organised bundle matters.

If Cafcass is stretched, then a concise response to the report matters.

If the presumption of parental involvement is being reconsidered, then evidence-based safeguarding arguments matter.

The family court may be difficult to navigate, but litigants in person are not powerless. Good preparation can make a real difference.

The JSH Law view

The direction of family justice reform is clear: the court is moving towards earlier assessment, clearer evidence, child-focused preparation and better-organised documents.

But there is a serious access to justice problem. Many parents are expected to manage complex safeguarding, Cafcass, bundle and hearing preparation issues without legal representation.

Litigants in person need practical procedural support: help understanding directions, organising evidence, preparing chronologies, responding to reports, building bundles and drafting clear court documents.

How JSH Law can help litigants in person

JSH Law provides procedural and document support for litigants in person involved in family court proceedings. This may include help with:

understanding court directions;
preparing a case summary;
drafting a position statement;
organising evidence;
creating a chronology;
preparing a safeguarding summary;
responding to a Cafcass safeguarding letter or section 7 report;
preparing a schedule of allegations;
building or reviewing a court bundle;
drafting a proposed order;
preparing for a hearing as a litigant in person.

JSH Law does not replace regulated legal advice from a solicitor or barrister where that is needed. However, for many litigants in person, practical procedural support can help reduce overwhelm and improve the quality of the documents placed before the court.

Need help preparing for family court?

If you are a litigant in person dealing with a child arrangements dispute, Cafcass report, safeguarding concerns, court bundle or upcoming hearing, you do not have to prepare in chaos.

Book a short initial consultation with JSH Law to discuss what procedural support may be available and what documents may need urgent attention.

Use the form below to request a 15-minute initial consultation.

Request a 15-minute initial consultation

Please complete the booking form below and include the date of your next hearing, what documents you have received, and what you need help with.

Please note: A short initial consultation does not create a solicitor-client relationship and does not constitute legal advice. It is an opportunity to understand the procedural issue and consider whether JSH Law may be able to assist with document or litigation support.

Useful source links

About the author

Jessica Susan Hill is the founder of JSH Law. She supports litigants in person with practical family court preparation, including chronologies, position statements, evidence organisation, court bundles, safeguarding summaries and hearing preparation.

Jessica has over 10 years’ experience as a litigant in person and works with parents who need structured, practical support navigating private law children proceedings, particularly where Cafcass, safeguarding concerns, domestic abuse allegations, section 7 reports or urgent court directions are involved.

JSH Law is focused on access to justice, procedural clarity and helping litigants in person place better-organised material before the family court.

View JSH Law pricing or use the consultation form above to request a short initial appointment.

Regulatory & Editorial Notice

This article is provided for general information and public legal education only. It is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as a substitute for advice from a regulated solicitor or barrister about your specific circumstances.

JSH Law provides litigation support and procedural assistance for litigants in person. JSH Law is not authorised or regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority or the Bar Standards Board. JSH Law does not conduct reserved legal activities unless permitted by law and does not go on the court record as acting for clients.

Family court proceedings are highly fact-specific. If your case involves domestic abuse, safeguarding concerns, allegations of harm, relocation, enforcement, non-molestation orders, prohibited steps, social services involvement or urgent child welfare issues, you should consider obtaining legal advice from a qualified family solicitor or barrister where possible.

External links are included for reference and convenience. JSH Law is not responsible for the content of external websites. Court rules, legislation, guidance and procedure may change, so always check the current version of any source before relying on it in proceedings.

“`

Using CourtNav for Non-Molestation Orders: A Practical Guide for Litigants in Person

May 22, 2026/0 Comments/in 5. Court Skills for Litigants in Person, Litigants in Person Support/by jessica susan hill

For many victims of domestic abuse, the hardest part of seeking legal protection is not the law itself — it is the process. Fear, trauma, court forms, safeguarding concerns and trying to explain coercive and controlling behaviour in legal language can feel overwhelming, particularly without legal representation. In recent years, digital tools like CourtNav have started to reshape how litigants in person access protective injunctions through the family court system. Designed to help users prepare non-molestation and occupation order applications more clearly and more safely, CourtNav represents one of the clearest examples of legal technology being used to improve access to justice for vulnerable court users.

CourtNav and the Rise of Digital Injunction Applications: What Litigants in Person Need to Know

Part 3 of the JSH Law Legal Tech & AI for Litigants in Person Series

By Jessica Susan Hill | JSH Law

For many victims of domestic abuse, one of the hardest parts of seeking legal protection is not the law itself.

It is the process.

Fear.

Confusion.

Court forms.

Trauma.

Reliving abuse in writing.

Trying to explain coercive and controlling behaviour in a way the legal system can understand.

And often doing all of that without legal representation.

That is the reality many litigants in person face when trying to apply for a non-molestation order or occupation order through the family court.

In recent years, one digital tool has become increasingly important in this area:

CourtNav

CourtNav is one of the clearest examples of legal technology being used not to replace lawyers, but to help vulnerable people access the justice system more safely and more effectively.

But like all legal technology, it has strengths, limitations and risks that litigants in person need to understand properly.

What Is CourtNav?

CourtNav is an online digital support tool developed by the charity RCJ Advice.

It is designed primarily to help people prepare applications for:

Non-Molestation Orders (FL401 applications);
Occupation Orders;
domestic abuse injunctions;
and related protective orders in the family court.

The system works by guiding users through structured questions about:

their relationship;
the abuse experienced;
children involved;
risk factors;
living arrangements;
police involvement;
and safeguarding concerns.

It then helps generate draft court documents and applications which can later be reviewed and submitted.

Importantly:

CourtNav does not make legal decisions.

It helps structure information into a legally usable format.

Why CourtNav Matters

To understand why CourtNav matters, you first need to understand the reality many domestic abuse victims face.

People applying for injunctions are often:

traumatised;
sleep deprived;
fearful;
isolated;
financially vulnerable;
emotionally overwhelmed;
and trying to navigate an intimidating legal system while still living in crisis.

Traditional court forms can feel impossible in that situation.

Particularly where abuse involves:

coercive control;
psychological abuse;
financial abuse;
stalking;
post-separation abuse;
or long-term emotional manipulation.

Many victims struggle to explain these patterns clearly in legal language.

CourtNav attempts to bridge that gap.

What CourtNav Does Exceptionally Well

1. It Reduces Procedural Overwhelm

One of CourtNav’s biggest strengths is structure.

Instead of presenting users with complex court forms and expecting them to know what matters legally, CourtNav breaks the process into guided stages.

That can significantly reduce panic and confusion.

For many litigants in person, simply having a structured pathway through the application process is enormously valuable.

2. It Helps People Explain Abuse More Clearly

This is particularly important.

Many victims minimise abuse.

Others struggle to explain coercive control because the behaviour developed gradually over years.

CourtNav’s questioning structure often helps users:

identify patterns;
organise incidents chronologically;
focus on relevant information;
and explain risk more coherently.

That can materially improve the clarity of an application.

3. It Improves Accessibility

For people who cannot immediately access legal representation, CourtNav creates a more accessible route into the justice system.

That matters enormously given the ongoing legal aid and access-to-justice crisis.

Without tools like this, many vulnerable people would likely never attempt protective applications at all.

4. It Helps Create More Organised Draft Applications

Many litigants in person submit applications that are:

emotionally chaotic;
chronologically unclear;
highly repetitive;
or missing critical safeguarding details.

CourtNav’s structure often improves overall readability and coherence.

Judges and legal professionals still need to assess the evidence critically — but a clearer application helps everybody understand the issues more quickly.

What CourtNav Cannot Do

This is where realism matters.

CourtNav is useful.

But it is not magic.

And it is not a substitute for legal advice or strategic case preparation.

CourtNav cannot:

verify allegations;
assess witness credibility;
cross-examine evidence;
predict judicial outcomes;
provide emotional support;
fully understand complex safeguarding dynamics;
or advise strategically on wider family proceedings.

It also cannot fully appreciate nuance in the way experienced professionals can.

For example:

counter-allegations;
post-separation litigation abuse;
false allegations;
parental alienation claims;
cross-jurisdictional issues;
and highly complex coercive control dynamics

often require detailed human analysis.

The Hidden Risk Litigants in Person Often Miss

One important issue rarely discussed publicly is this:

Generating an application is not the same thing as proving a case.

Many litigants assume that once the paperwork is completed, the hardest part is over.

In reality, injunction proceedings can later involve:

fact-finding hearings;
cross-examination;
disclosure disputes;
safeguarding investigations;
CAFCASS involvement;
police evidence;
medical records;
and detailed credibility assessments.

That is where many litigants in person begin to struggle.

Because the technology may help them enter the system — but not necessarily navigate the litigation that follows.

Coercive Control and the Difficulty of Explaining “Invisible Abuse”

One of the most difficult aspects of family court litigation is explaining coercive and controlling behaviour.

Many victims arrive at court with:

no visible injuries;
limited evidence;
fragmented memories;
and years of psychologically manipulative behaviour that is difficult to summarise briefly.

This is where structured digital systems can genuinely help.

By prompting users to identify patterns of:

isolation;
monitoring;
financial control;
intimidation;
threats;
harassment;
and fear-based behaviour,

tools like CourtNav can sometimes help people recognise and articulate abuse more clearly than they otherwise might.

That is significant.

The Bigger Legal Tech Question

CourtNav also raises a much wider question:

What happens when legal systems increasingly rely on technology to compensate for reduced access to lawyers?

This is one of the defining access-to-justice issues of modern family law.

Increasingly, the justice system depends upon:

digital forms;
online portals;
remote hearings;
AI-assisted drafting tools;
self-help platforms;
and procedural technology

to help people navigate litigation without representation.

That creates both opportunity and risk.

Technology can improve accessibility.

But it can also create:

digital exclusion;
overreliance on systems;
false confidence;
and a dangerous assumption that guided forms are equivalent to legal understanding.

How CourtNav Fits into the Future of Family Court

CourtNav is likely part of a much larger shift.

Over the next decade we will probably see:

AI-assisted injunction drafting;
automated chronology generation;
risk-identification systems;
integrated safeguarding workflows;
evidence categorisation tools;
and increasingly sophisticated digital court support platforms.

Some of that will improve access to justice.

Some of it will create entirely new legal and ethical concerns.

But the direction of travel is already obvious:

Family court is becoming increasingly technological.

Practical Tips for Litigants Using CourtNav

JSH Law Practical Guidance

Take your time completing the questions.
Focus on facts, incidents and patterns.
Avoid writing emotionally if possible.
Keep dates and chronology clear.
Save supporting evidence separately.
Do not exaggerate allegations.
Do not assume the court automatically knows your history.
Remember that applications may later be scrutinised in detail.
Seek support where possible if you are overwhelmed.
If children are involved, think carefully about safeguarding issues and risk.

JSH Law Practical Verdict

JSH Law Rating: Extremely Valuable Access-to-Justice Tool

Best for:

non-molestation applications;
organising abuse allegations clearly;
reducing procedural overwhelm;
helping litigants begin injunction applications;
improving accessibility.

Limitations:

not legal advice;
not strategic litigation support;
cannot replace safeguarding analysis;
cannot predict outcomes;
cannot fully assess complex abuse dynamics.

Final Thoughts

CourtNav represents something important.

Not because technology solves domestic abuse.

It does not.

But because tools like this acknowledge a reality the justice system can no longer ignore:

Large numbers of vulnerable people are navigating family court without lawyers.

For those people, structure matters.

Clarity matters.

Accessibility matters.

And technology — used carefully and responsibly — may increasingly become one of the few bridges left between vulnerable people and meaningful access to legal protection.

About the Author

Jessica Susan Hill is studying towards SQE1 and SQE2 with BPP Law School and has over 10 years’ experience litigating in person and helping others navigate family court proceedings.

She is the founder of JSH Law and has a particular interest in legal technology, AI, access to justice, safeguarding and practical litigation support for litigants in person.

JSH Law provides practical support including chronology building, evidence organisation, court document preparation assistance and hearing preparation support for litigants in person across England and Wales.

Website: www.jshlaw.co.uk

Part of the JSH Law Legal Tech & AI for Litigants in Person Series

Part 1 — The Truth About Using ChatGPT for Family Court as a Litigant in Person
Part 2 — Advicenow Review for Litigants in Person
Part 3 — CourtNav and the Rise of Digital Injunction Applications
Coming next: Claude vs ChatGPT for Family Court Preparation

Regulatory & Editorial Notice: JSH Law Ltd provides litigation support and McKenzie Friend services to litigants in person. JSH Law Ltd is not authorised or regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. This article is provided for general educational and public-interest purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

BSB AI Guidance 2026: What Barristers Must Now Understand About AI, Ethics and Professional Competence

May 20, 2026/0 Comments/in AI & Legal Process, Legal Reflections, McKenzie Friend Support/by jessica susan hill

Almost a year after the decision in Ayinde v London Borough of Haringey [2025] EWHC 1383 (Admin) should have woken the sleeping bears in the legal profession, the Bar Standards Board has now published its long-awaited guidance on the use of Artificial Intelligence and emerging technologies by barristers. The message is unmistakable: competence in modern legal practice now includes understanding AI, its risks, its limitations and its ethical implications. This is no longer simply a technology discussion. It is now a professional standards issue.

Newsflash for Barristers: AI Competence Is Now a Professional Standards Issue

Almost a year after Ayinde v London Borough of Haringey [2025] EWHC 1383 (Admin), the legal profession has received another clear warning: artificial intelligence is no longer something barristers can treat as optional background noise. The Bar Standards Board’s new guidance on the use of Artificial Intelligence and other technologies, published on 18 May 2026, makes the position plain. AI is now firmly within the territory of professional competence, ethical judgment, client protection and duties to the court.

For barristers, this is not simply about whether they personally use ChatGPT, Copilot, Claude, Gemini or any other AI system. It is about whether they understand how these tools may affect their work, their clients, their opponents, the evidence before the court and the administration of justice itself.

The Core Message

AI is a tool. It is not a substitute for professional judgment.

Barristers remain responsible for every submission, every authority, every factual assertion and every document placed before the court. If AI has assisted in producing that work, the professional responsibility still sits with the human advocate.

Why This Guidance Matters

The Bar Standards Board has made clear that existing professional duties already apply to the use of AI and other technologies. This is important. The BSB has not created a separate “AI rulebook” sitting outside professional conduct. Instead, it has confirmed that the familiar duties of competence, honesty, confidentiality, independence and client protection all apply when technology is used in legal practice.

The guidance follows a period of growing concern about legal professionals relying on AI-generated material without proper verification. The most obvious warning sign came from Ayinde v London Borough of Haringey, where the court considered the use of false legal citations in court material. The case became a watershed moment because it exposed the risk of AI-generated legal content being treated as reliable when it had not been properly checked.

This should have woken the sleeping bears in the legal profession. In truth, some were already awake. Others are only just realising that AI is not simply a productivity tool. It is a professional standards issue.

Key Authority

BSB Guidance: New guidance supports barristers to safely adopt Artificial Intelligence and emerging technologies

Judgment: Ayinde v London Borough of Haringey and Al-Haroun v Qatar National Bank

Core Duties: The BSB Core Duties

Core Duty 7: Competence Now Includes AI Literacy

Core Duty 7 requires barristers to provide a competent standard of work and service to each client. The BSB’s new guidance makes clear that competence now includes maintaining a sufficient level of awareness of technology and AI to understand how they may affect practice.

That does not mean every barrister must become a software engineer. It does mean that a barrister cannot responsibly ignore AI altogether.

A competent barrister now needs to understand, at least at a practical level:

how AI tools may generate inaccurate or fabricated material;
how AI-generated citations, summaries or submissions can mislead the court if not checked;
how client confidentiality and legal professional privilege may be compromised;
how AI may be used by clients, opponents, solicitors, experts or litigants in person;
how AI-generated evidence or prompt histories may arise in proceedings;
how bias may appear in AI outputs; and
what safeguards are needed before any AI-assisted work is relied upon.

Professional Standard

The “I do not use AI” answer is no longer enough.

Even barristers who do not personally use AI still need to understand how it may affect their cases, their clients, opposing parties, evidence and court submissions.

The Lesson from Ayinde

Ayinde was not just a case about fake citations. It was a case about professional responsibility.

The court was concerned with legal material being placed before it without proper checking. That concern goes directly to the administration of justice. Courts rely on lawyers to assist them accurately. When non-existent authorities, inaccurate quotations or unreliable legal propositions are put before the court, the problem is not merely technical. It undermines trust.

AI systems can produce text that looks confident, polished and legally plausible. That is precisely why they are dangerous when used without verification. A hallucinated authority may look entirely credible to a busy reader. It may contain a realistic case name, a neutral citation, judicial language and a convincing summary. But if it does not exist, it is not a minor drafting error. It is a serious professional problem.

Client Confidentiality and Privilege

One of the most important issues raised by AI in legal practice is confidentiality.

Barristers handle highly sensitive material. In family law, that may include allegations of domestic abuse, safeguarding concerns, medical information, children’s wishes and feelings, school records, police material, local authority records and private communications.

Putting that information into a free or general AI tool without proper safeguards may create serious risks. The questions are obvious:

Where is the data going?
Is it being stored?
Can it be reviewed by humans?
Can it be used to train future systems?
Has the client consented?
Has privilege been protected?

Confidentiality Warning

Free or general AI tools should not be treated as safe spaces for client information.

Where sensitive or privileged information is involved, barristers must consider confidentiality, data security, contractual protections, client consent and professional obligations before using AI.

Why Family Law Needs Particular Care

Family law is one of the areas where AI competence matters most.

Litigants in person are already using AI. They are using it to draft statements, prepare position statements, summarise messages, organise evidence, understand procedure and prepare questions for hearings. Some are using it carefully. Some are not.

This creates a new challenge for the family justice system. AI-generated material may appear in proceedings without being clearly identified. A parent may rely on an AI-generated summary of WhatsApp messages. A witness statement may contain legal phrases the party does not understand. A chronology may omit context because an AI tool compressed the material too aggressively. A safeguarding concern may be overstated, understated or framed in language that does not reflect the underlying evidence.

This does not mean AI should be dismissed. Used carefully, AI can help litigants in person organise complex information and reduce procedural overwhelm. But used carelessly, it can distort evidence, create false confidence and introduce material that may not withstand scrutiny.

Family Justice Reality

The family court is already in the AI era.

The issue is no longer whether litigants in person will use AI. They already are. The real question is whether lawyers, barristers, judges, regulators and support professionals can respond safely, ethically and intelligently.

Bias, Safeguarding and Vulnerable Court Users

AI systems are not neutral simply because they are technological. They are trained on data. That data may contain bias, assumptions and patterns that do not translate safely into legal decision-making.

In family proceedings, this matters. Cases may involve trauma, domestic abuse, coercive control, disability, neurodivergence, poverty, language barriers, cultural issues and safeguarding concerns. An AI system may not understand the lived reality behind the material it processes. It may miss context. It may flatten nuance. It may reproduce stereotypes. It may present speculation as analysis.

Barristers must therefore remain alert to bias in AI outputs and must not allow AI-generated material to replace human judgment, evidential analysis or professional responsibility.

The Duty to the Court Comes First

Core Duty 1 requires barristers to observe their duty to the court in the administration of justice. That duty remains central when AI is used.

If AI assists with drafting, research, summarising or analysis, the barrister must still ensure that anything placed before the court is accurate, properly sourced and not misleading. The court is entitled to expect that legal professionals have checked their work.

That includes checking:

case citations;
statutory references;
quotations;
procedural rules;
practice directions;
factual summaries;
chronologies;
and any legal propositions generated or assisted by AI.

The Non-Negotiable Rule

If you put it before the court, you own it.

AI cannot be blamed for inaccurate submissions. Professional responsibility remains with the barrister.

Transparency: When Should AI Use Be Disclosed?

The question of transparency is likely to become increasingly important. Not every use of AI will need to be announced. There is a difference between using AI to improve internal workflow and relying on AI-generated legal or evidential analysis in a way that affects the service provided.

However, barristers should consider whether AI use has a material impact on the work being done, the advice being given or the material being placed before the court. They should also consider whether the client needs to know that AI is being used and whether consent is required in the circumstances.

The safest approach is not performative disclosure. It is thoughtful, risk-based transparency.

The New Competence Standard for Modern Advocates

The future barrister will not be replaced by AI. But the barrister who understands AI may have a significant advantage over the barrister who ignores it.

The modern advocate will increasingly need:

legal expertise;
ethical judgment;
digital literacy;
evidence-handling skills;
data awareness;
an understanding of AI limitations;
and the ability to explain technology-related risks clearly to clients and courts.

This is particularly true in family law, where the volume of digital evidence is increasing and where litigants in person are often trying to navigate complex proceedings with limited resources.

The Bigger Point

AI competence is not about chasing trends. It is about protecting clients, protecting the court process and protecting the integrity of legal work.

Technology does not remove professional duties. It sharpens them.

What Barristers Should Be Doing Now

Barristers should now be taking practical steps to ensure that their use, understanding and supervision of AI is consistent with professional obligations.

At a minimum, that should include:

reading the BSB guidance in full;
reviewing chambers policies on AI and technology;
checking whether any AI tools used are secure and appropriate;
avoiding the input of confidential or privileged material into unsafe systems;
verifying all AI-assisted legal research against authoritative sources;
keeping records of how AI-assisted work has been checked where appropriate;
being alert to AI-generated material produced by clients or opponents;
considering whether AI use should be disclosed to clients;
and undertaking training sufficient to maintain technological competence.

For Those Training Toward Advocacy, the Message Is Clear

This guidance is not only relevant to practising barristers. It is also important for anyone training toward qualification, advocacy or a future role in modern legal practice.

The standards expected of the profession are moving. Those entering the profession now need to understand not only black-letter law and procedure, but also how technology interacts with evidence, ethics, confidentiality, client care and court duties.

That does not diminish the role of lawyers. It raises the standard.

Final Thought

The legal profession does not need to panic about AI. But it does need to stop pretending that AI is optional.

The BSB’s guidance is a significant marker in the development of professional standards. It confirms that AI is now part of the competence conversation. For barristers, the message is simple: understand the tools, understand the risks, protect your clients, protect the court, and never allow technology to replace professional judgment.

Almost a year after Ayinde, the warning has become impossible to ignore. The sleeping bears have been woken.

About the Author

Jessica Susan Hill is the founder of JSH Law, providing practical family court support, litigation strategy and evidence-led case analysis for litigants in person.

Jessica works at the intersection of family justice, access to justice and emerging legal technology, with a particular interest in how AI can be used safely and ethically to support litigants in person, improve procedural clarity and reduce overwhelm in complex family proceedings.

JSH Law is not an SRA-regulated firm and does not conduct reserved legal activities. Support is provided to litigants in person through litigation support, McKenzie Friend services, document preparation, hearing preparation and strategic case organisation.

Visit JSH Law

Regulatory & Editorial Notice: This article is published for general information and commentary only. It is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as a substitute for advice from a suitably qualified legal professional. References to the Bar Standards Board, reported cases, professional duties and external guidance are provided for public-interest discussion and educational purposes. JSH Law is not affiliated with the Bar Standards Board, the Bar Council or any chambers mentioned in related commentary.

The Truth About Using ChatGPT for Family Court as a Litigant in Person

May 20, 2026/0 Comments/in 5. Court Skills for Litigants in Person/by jessica susan hill

For increasing numbers of litigants in person, the first place they now turn for help with family court is no longer a solicitor’s office, legal aid clinic or Citizens Advice bureau. It is ChatGPT. As artificial intelligence rapidly enters the justice system, family court is beginning to face difficult questions about accuracy, access to justice, privacy, ethics and the future of legal support itself. Used properly, AI can help litigants in person organise evidence, prepare chronologies and reduce overwhelm. Used badly, it can introduce dangerous misinformation, fabricated legal authorities and false confidence. The legal profession, judiciary and regulators are now actively responding to that reality.

The Truth About Using ChatGPT for Family Court as a Litigant in Person

Part 1 of the JSH Law Legal Tech & AI for Litigants in Person Series

By Jessica Susan Hill | JSH Law

The legal world is changing faster than most people realise.

While politicians continue debating court reform, legal aid and access to justice, millions of ordinary people have already started turning to artificial intelligence for help with legal problems. Increasingly, the first “person” a litigant in person speaks to is not a solicitor, barrister, Citizens Advice adviser or legal helpline.

It is ChatGPT.

That reality is now impossible to ignore.

The Master of the Rolls, Sir Geoffrey Vos, recently acknowledged that AI is now being used by “almost every individual litigant in person and small business”, noting that the first port of call used to be a lawyer if one was available and affordable — but is now often ChatGPT or Microsoft Copilot instead. :contentReference[oaicite:0]{index=0}

This article is not anti-AI.

Nor is it blind optimism dressed up as innovation.

This is a practical, honest and experience-based examination of what ChatGPT can genuinely do for litigants in person in family court, where it helps, where it becomes dangerous, and how the justice system itself is now responding to the rapid rise of AI-assisted litigation.

The Reality Facing Litigants in Person

The rise in litigants in person has transformed family court.

Many people now find themselves managing:

court forms;
position statements;
witness statements;
chronologies;
Scott schedules;
evidence bundles;
emails to the court;
CAFCASS involvement;
safeguarding allegations;
hearing preparation;
cross-examination;
procedural deadlines;
legal terminology;
and emotionally overwhelming litigation — alone.

Against that backdrop, it is hardly surprising that people are turning to AI tools for assistance.

ChatGPT offers something many litigants in person have never previously had access to:

instant drafting support;
plain-English explanations;
document organisation;
summarisation;
issue spotting;
help structuring arguments;
and the feeling that someone — or something — is helping them think clearly.

That matters more than many professionals appreciate.

What ChatGPT Actually Does Well

There is a tendency in some legal circles either to dismiss AI entirely or to hype it unrealistically. Both positions are unhelpful.

Used properly, ChatGPT can be extremely useful for litigants in person.

1. Structuring witness statements

One of the biggest problems litigants face is structure.

People often know what happened but struggle to explain it clearly in a chronological, relevant and court-focused way.

ChatGPT is often genuinely helpful at:

turning chaotic notes into coherent drafts;
improving readability;
creating headings;
removing repetition;
identifying missing context;
improving chronology flow.

That alone can significantly improve a litigant’s ability to present their case.

2. Chronologies and timelines

Family court cases frequently involve years of fragmented information spread across:

WhatsApp messages;
emails;
school records;
police disclosures;
medical documents;
social services records;
CAFCASS reports;
screenshots;
and court orders.

ChatGPT is surprisingly good at helping organise information into:

chronologies;
event summaries;
issue lists;
hearing notes;
and thematic evidence groupings.

For litigants in person, that can reduce overwhelm enormously.

3. Plain-English explanations

Family court terminology is intimidating.

PD12J, Section 7 reports, threshold criteria, welfare analysis, fact-finding hearings, prohibited steps orders, specific issue applications, directions hearings, final hearings — the language itself becomes a barrier.

ChatGPT is often effective at translating procedural language into plain English.

That improves accessibility.

4. Hearing preparation

Many litigants use ChatGPT to help:

prepare hearing notes;
identify key points;
draft position statements;
prepare questions;
organise submissions;
and rehearse explanations.

Again, used properly, this can genuinely improve confidence and clarity.

What ChatGPT Gets Dangerously Wrong

This is where the conversation becomes critical.

Because while AI can help litigants in person, it can also seriously damage cases if used carelessly.

1. Fake case citations and “hallucinations”

The biggest legal AI risk currently facing the courts is hallucinated authority.

Generative AI systems sometimes invent:

court cases;
quotations;
legal principles;
articles;
and procedural rules.

These fabricated answers often look convincing.

That is what makes them dangerous.

The issue has become so serious that the High Court has already issued warnings regarding the misuse of AI-generated legal citations after fake authorities appeared in court proceedings. :contentReference[oaicite:1]{index=1}

The Bar Council’s updated guidance on generative AI specifically warns barristers about hallucinations and entirely false legal information produced by large language models. :contentReference[oaicite:2]{index=2}

Put simply:

Never put a legal citation into a court document unless you have independently checked it against a reliable source such as BAILII, Find Case Law or a professional legal database.

2. False confidence

AI systems are designed to sound coherent and confident.

They do not “know” when they are wrong in the way humans do.

That creates a major risk for litigants in person who are already emotionally invested in their case and may mistake confidence for accuracy.

In family court, nuance matters.

Context matters.

Credibility matters.

Human behaviour, safeguarding dynamics and judicial discretion cannot simply be reduced to predictive text.

3. Privacy and confidentiality concerns

Family court cases routinely involve:

children’s information;
medical records;
domestic abuse allegations;
school information;
mental health disclosures;
police material;
safeguarding concerns.

Litigants in person often upload highly sensitive material into AI systems without understanding:

how the information is stored;
how it may be processed;
whether data may be retained;
or the confidentiality implications.

The Law Society has repeatedly warned solicitors about confidentiality, privacy and professional responsibility risks connected to generative AI use. :contentReference[oaicite:3]{index=3}

What Guidance Have Lawyers Been Given About AI?

One of the most important developments in the legal world over the past 18 months is that regulators, judges and professional bodies are no longer treating AI as theoretical.

They are actively issuing guidance.

The Law Society

The Law Society has published extensive guidance on generative AI and legal practice, including warnings about:

hallucinated legal authorities;
data confidentiality;
accuracy risks;
ethical responsibilities;
supervision obligations;
professional accountability.

Their guidance can be found here:

Law Society – Generative AI: the essentials

The Bar Council

The Bar Council has issued updated guidance specifically addressing barristers’ use of ChatGPT and other generative AI systems. :contentReference[oaicite:4]{index=4}

The guidance highlights:

hallucination risks;
professional integrity obligations;
confidentiality concerns;
verification responsibilities;
and the need for human oversight.

The Bar Council has also acknowledged the growing misuse risks associated with AI-generated legal material. :contentReference[oaicite:5]{index=5}

The Judiciary

The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary issued updated judicial guidance on AI in October 2025. :contentReference[oaicite:6]{index=6}

The judiciary’s guidance recognises both:

the potential efficiency benefits of AI;
and the substantial risks associated with accuracy, bias, confidentiality and fabricated material.

Importantly, the judiciary expressly recognises that AI chatbots are now being used by unrepresented litigants. :contentReference[oaicite:7]{index=7}

Are Courts Looking at Restricting AI Use by Litigants in Person?

This is where things become especially interesting.

At present, there is no outright ban preventing litigants in person from using ChatGPT or other AI systems to help prepare court documents.

In reality, such a ban would likely be impossible to police.

However, courts and regulators are increasingly focused on:

accuracy;
transparency;
verification obligations;
misleading material;
and abuse of process risks.

The Civil Justice Council established a working group examining the use of AI in preparing court documents. :contentReference[oaicite:8]{index=8}

Current discussions increasingly focus on:

whether AI-assisted material should be disclosed;
whether certification requirements may emerge;
whether professional sanctions should apply for misuse;
and how courts should manage AI-generated inaccuracies.

There is also growing concern that litigants in person may unknowingly rely on fabricated legal material generated by AI systems.

At the same time, the courts are clearly aware that AI may significantly improve access to justice for people who cannot afford legal representation.

This creates a difficult tension:

The justice system is trying to balance access to justice against the risk of unreliable AI-assisted litigation.

The Access to Justice Argument

This is the part of the conversation many commentators miss.

It is easy to criticise litigants in person for using ChatGPT.

But many people are using AI because they genuinely have no realistic alternative.

Legal aid has dramatically narrowed.

Family court representation is expensive.

Court processes are procedurally complex.

Many litigants are traumatised, exhausted and overwhelmed.

Against that backdrop, AI tools can provide:

structure;
clarity;
organisation;
confidence;
and practical drafting support.

The legal profession needs to engage honestly with that reality.

Because whether lawyers approve or not, litigants in person are already using AI at scale.

How I Believe ChatGPT Should Be Used in Family Court

Used responsibly, ChatGPT can be extremely powerful as a support tool.

My view is that litigants in person should use AI for:

document organisation;
chronologies;
draft structuring;
summarisation;
plain-English explanations;
hearing preparation;
question preparation;
issue identification;
evidence management.

But not as:

a replacement for legal judgment;
a source of unchecked legal authority;
a substitute for safeguarding analysis;
a substitute for professional legal advice where needed;
or a machine that can “win” family court.

The Future of Family Court and AI

The direction of travel is obvious.

AI is not leaving the justice system.

The real questions are now:

how responsibly it will be used;
how courts will regulate it;
how litigants in person will rely upon it;
how professionals will supervise it;
and whether it will improve or damage access to justice.

In the next few years we are likely to see:

AI-assisted bundle preparation;
AI chronology generation;
AI hearing summaries;
AI evidence categorisation;
AI-assisted legal triage;
and increasingly sophisticated legal workflow systems.

But the human element will remain critical.

Family court cases involve:

children;
risk;
credibility;
emotion;
trauma;
relationships;
safeguarding;
judicial discretion.

No language model truly understands those things.

At least not yet.

Final Thoughts

ChatGPT is neither the saviour of access to justice nor the collapse of the legal profession.

It is a tool.

A very powerful one.

Used properly, it can help litigants in person reduce overwhelm, improve structure and prepare more effectively.

Used badly, it can introduce inaccuracies, fabricated authorities, procedural confusion and false confidence.

The future will belong not to the people who reject AI entirely, but to those who learn how to use it critically, ethically and intelligently.

The legal profession is already adapting.

The courts are already responding.

And litigants in person are already using these tools whether the justice system is ready or not.

About the Author

Jessica Susan Hill is training to get to Solicitor Advocate level and the founder of JSH Law. She works extensively with litigants in person in family court proceedings, particularly in cases involving safeguarding, coercive control, domestic abuse, procedural complexity and high-conflict litigation.

Jessica has a particular interest in legal technology, AI and access to justice, and regularly writes about the future intersection between family law, litigation support and emerging technologies.

JSH Law provides practical litigation support, document preparation assistance, chronology building, evidence organisation and hearing support for litigants in person.

Website: www.jshlaw.co.uk
LinkedIn: Jessica Susan Hill

Part of the JSH Law Legal Tech & AI for Litigants in Person Series

Part 1 — ChatGPT for Litigants in Person
Coming next: Advicenow Review for Litigants in Person
Coming next: CourtNav and the Rise of Digital Injunction Applications
Coming next: Claude vs ChatGPT for Family Court Preparation

Regulatory & Editorial Notice: JSH Law Ltd provides litigation support and McKenzie Friend services to litigants in person. JSH Law Ltd is not authorised or regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. This article is provided for general educational and public-interest purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Court users remain responsible for the accuracy of documents filed with the court and should seek advice from a suitably qualified regulated legal professional where necessary.

Legal Tech for Litigants in Person: The Tools That Can Help You Survive Court Without a Solicitor

May 19, 2026/0 Comments/in 5. Court Skills for Litigants in Person, 6. Tools Templates Research & Cases/by jessica susan hill

Representing yourself in court is not just legally difficult. It is administratively, emotionally and practically exhausting. Litigants in person are expected to manage forms, evidence, deadlines, bundles, statements, hearings and legal arguments, often while under enormous personal pressure. The right technology will not replace legal advice or court experience, but it can help bring order to the chaos.

Legal Tech, AI and Practical Tools for Litigants in Person: A JSH Law Market Map

Last updated: May 2026

Nearly every litigant in person eventually discovers the same hard truth: the court process is not designed around ordinary people trying to manage their own case. It is document-heavy, deadline-driven, procedurally technical and emotionally exhausting.

Legal tech will not replace proper legal judgment. It will not turn a weak case into a strong one. It will not remove the need to understand evidence, procedure, safeguarding, welfare or proportionality. But used carefully, the right tools can make a real difference.

For litigants in person, the most useful technology is not always labelled “legal tech”. The best practical toolkit usually combines:

official court and government resources;
free legal information and guidance;
AI drafting and research tools;
document and PDF software;
chronology and evidence management tools;
transcription tools;
task management systems;
wellbeing, safety and support resources.

This article sets out a working market map of tools currently available to litigants in person, particularly those navigating family court, civil court, domestic abuse proceedings, children matters, financial remedy issues, enforcement applications and other court processes without full representation.

1. Official Court and Government Tools

These are the first places a litigant in person should usually check. They are not always easy to navigate, but they are authoritative.

Tool / Resource	Use	Link
GOV.UK Court and Tribunal Forms	Official court forms across family, civil, tribunal and other proceedings.	Court and tribunal forms
Family Court Forms	Forms including C100, FL401, Form E and other family court documents.	Family law forms
Help with Fees / EX160	Fee remission for people on low income or certain benefits.	Apply for help with court fees
Online Divorce Service	Digital divorce applications.	Apply for a divorce
Money Claim Online	Online civil money claims.	Money Claim Online
Online Civil Money Claims	Digital service for making or responding to money claims.	Make a money claim online
Judiciary Advice for Litigants in Person	Official court guidance for people representing themselves.	Advice for litigants in person
Family Proceedings Bundle Guide for Litigants in Person	Essential guidance on preparing family court bundles.	Preparing court bundles for family proceedings

2. Free Legal Information and LiP Support

These resources are particularly useful for litigants in person who need practical explanations rather than legal theory.

Organisation / Tool	Use	Link
Advicenow	Excellent practical guides for family, civil and court preparation.	Advicenow
Advicenow Family Court Guide	Plain-English guidance for representing yourself in family court.	Representing yourself in family court
Advicenow Trial Bundle Guide	Practical guidance on preparing a court bundle and index.	How to prepare a trial bundle and index
Support Through Court	Practical and emotional support for people facing civil and family courts alone.	Support Through Court
CourtNav	Online tool for completing FL401 non-molestation and occupation order applications.	Apply for an injunction with CourtNav
FLOWS	Legal support for women experiencing domestic abuse.	FLOWS
Child Law Advice	Information on children law, child arrangements and family court.	Child Law Advice
LawWorks	Free legal advice clinics and pro bono support routes.	LawWorks legal advice for individuals
Citizens Advice	General legal and practical advice.	Citizens Advice
Rights of Women	Legal information for women, particularly in family law, domestic abuse and immigration contexts.	Rights of Women
Family Rights Group	Support for families involved with children’s services.	Family Rights Group
Resolution	Family law guidance and professional directory.	Resolution
Legal Choices	Consumer information about legal services.	Legal Choices

3. Legal Research Tools

Research is where litigants in person need to be especially careful. Reading case law without understanding procedure, facts, context or hierarchy can be dangerous. However, the following resources are useful when used responsibly.

Tool	Use	Link
BAILII	Free access to British and Irish case law.	BAILII
The National Archives Find Case Law	Official free access to court judgments and tribunal decisions.	Find Case Law
Legislation.gov.uk	UK statutes and statutory instruments.	Legislation.gov.uk
Family Procedure Rules	Rules and Practice Directions for family proceedings.	Family Procedure Rules
Civil Procedure Rules	Rules and Practice Directions for civil proceedings.	Civil Procedure Rules
Judiciary.uk	Judgments, guidance, speeches and practice materials.	Judiciary.uk
ICLR	Law reports and case summaries.	ICLR
Westlaw UK	Professional legal research platform.	Westlaw UK
LexisNexis UK	Professional legal research and practical guidance.	LexisNexis UK
vLex	Legal research platform with AI functionality.	vLex
Practical Law	Professional legal guidance, checklists and templates.	Practical Law UK

4. AI Tools for Litigants in Person

AI can be extremely useful for litigants in person, but it must be used carefully. It can help organise thoughts, draft chronologies, simplify legal language, prepare questions, summarise documents and identify missing evidence. But it can also produce errors, invent legal authorities and sound confident when it is wrong.

The Law Society has warned that generative AI creates real risks, including accuracy, confidentiality and data protection issues. Its guidance can be found here: Generative AI: the essentials.

Tool	Possible LiP Use	Link
ChatGPT	Drafting, summarising, chronology building, issue spotting and plain-English explanations.	ChatGPT
Claude	Long document analysis, careful drafting and summarising.	Claude
Google Gemini	Research, drafting and Google Workspace integration.	Google Gemini
Microsoft Copilot	Support within Word, Outlook, Teams and Microsoft 365.	Microsoft Copilot
Perplexity	Web research with linked sources.	Perplexity
NotebookLM	Summarising and querying uploaded documents.	NotebookLM
Genie AI	Legal document templates and AI drafting.	Genie AI
Lawhive	AI-supported legal services marketplace.	Lawhive
Garfield AI	AI-assisted small claims / debt recovery support.	Garfield AI
DoNotPay	Consumer rights and automated complaint-style tools. Use with caution.	DoNotPay
Legal Utopia	UK legal information and legal triage.	Legal Utopia

A warning about AI and court documents

AI should not be treated as a lawyer, a judge, a legal researcher or a source of truth. It is a tool. Anything produced by AI must be checked.

In particular, litigants in person should never put a case citation, quote, legal test or authority into a court document unless they have checked it against a reliable source such as Find Case Law, BAILII, an official court judgment or a professional legal database.

The safest approach is:

use AI to organise and draft;
use official sources to verify;
do not upload sensitive documents unless you understand the privacy implications;
do not rely on AI-generated case law without checking it;
remember that the person signing the document is responsible for its contents.

5. Document Drafting and Formatting Tools

Most litigants in person underestimate how much of court preparation is document work. Clear formatting, pagination, headings, exhibits and structure matter.

Tool	Use	Link
Microsoft Word	Statements, position statements, draft orders and submissions.	Microsoft Word
Google Docs	Collaborative drafting and sharing.	Google Docs
Grammarly	Grammar, tone and clarity checks.	Grammarly
Hemingway Editor	Plain-English editing and readability.	Hemingway Editor
LanguageTool	Grammar and style checking.	LanguageTool
Scrivener	Long-form drafting and complex narratives.	Scrivener
Canva Docs	Visual documents and explanatory graphics. Not suitable for formal court bundles.	Canva Docs

6. PDF, Bundle and Evidence Tools

Bundles are one of the biggest practical barriers for litigants in person. A litigant may have strong evidence, but if it is not organised, paginated and easy for the court to navigate, it can lose impact.

Tool	Use	Link
Adobe Acrobat Pro	PDF editing, paginating, bookmarking, merging and OCR.	Adobe Acrobat Pro
PDF Expert	PDF editing and annotation, especially on Mac/iPad.	PDF Expert
Foxit PDF Editor	PDF editing, compression and OCR.	Foxit PDF Editor
Smallpdf	Merge, split, compress and convert PDFs.	Smallpdf
iLovePDF	PDF merging, splitting, compression and conversion.	iLovePDF
Sejda	Online PDF editing.	Sejda
Bundledocs	Professional document bundling platform.	Bundledocs
Zylpha Bundling	Legal bundle preparation software.	Zylpha
HyperLaw	Litigation document and bundling software.	HyperLaw
Case Center / CaseLines	Digital evidence and court bundle platform used in some courts and jurisdictions.	Case Center

7. Evidence Capture and Message Export Tools

In family proceedings, civil disputes, domestic abuse cases and enforcement applications, evidence is often buried in phones, emails, screenshots, WhatsApp messages, social media posts and PDFs. The problem is rarely that there is no evidence. The problem is that the evidence is scattered.

Tool	Use	Link
WhatsApp Export Chat	Export WhatsApp conversations for review and chronology work.	Export chat history
iMazing	Export iPhone messages, WhatsApp data and device content.	iMazing
Decipher TextMessage	Export and print iPhone text messages.	Decipher TextMessage
TouchCopy	Export iPhone messages, music, photos and files.	TouchCopy
Google Takeout	Download Google account data.	Google Takeout
Meta Download Your Information	Download Facebook and Instagram account data.	Download your Facebook information
Microsoft Lens	Scan documents using a phone.	Microsoft Lens
Adobe Scan	Mobile document scanning.	Adobe Scan
Scanner Pro	Mobile scanning app.	Scanner Pro

8. Chronology, Timeline and Case Organisation Tools

A good chronology can transform a case. It helps the litigant, the adviser and the court see the pattern, the sequence and the consequences. For litigants in person, chronology work is often one of the highest-value tasks.

Tool	Use	Link
Microsoft Excel	Chronologies, schedules, Scott schedules and evidence logs.	Microsoft Excel
Google Sheets	Collaborative chronologies and evidence schedules.	Google Sheets
Airtable	Evidence database, chronology tracker and case management workspace.	Airtable
Notion	Case dashboard, notes, tasks and document organisation.	Notion
Obsidian	Linked notes and complex case mapping.	Obsidian
Trello	Simple visual task boards.	Trello
Asana	Task management and deadline tracking.	Asana
ClickUp	Task management, document tracking and workflows.	ClickUp
Monday.com	Workflow and case process tracking.	Monday.com
Aeon Timeline	Complex timeline visualisation.	Aeon Timeline
TimelineJS	Visual public-style timelines.	TimelineJS
Miro	Case mapping and visual planning.	Miro
Lucidchart	Flowcharts, process maps and relationship diagrams.	Lucidchart
Whimsical	Flowcharts and simple visual mapping.	Whimsical

9. Transcription, Audio and Meeting Tools

Transcription tools can help litigants in person convert voice notes, meetings, consultations and preparation sessions into written notes. However, recordings should only be made lawfully and appropriately. In court, recording is generally prohibited unless expressly permitted.

Tool	Use	Link
Otter.ai	Meeting transcription and summaries.	Otter.ai
Fireflies.ai	Meeting recording, transcription and action points.	Fireflies.ai
Fathom	Meeting recording and AI summaries.	Fathom
Zoom AI Companion	Meeting summaries and transcript support.	Zoom AI Companion
Microsoft Teams	Meetings, transcription and collaboration.	Microsoft Teams
Google Meet	Video meetings and transcripts within Google Workspace.	Google Meet
Descript	Audio/video transcription and editing.	Descript
Trint	Professional transcription platform.	Trint
Sonix	Automated transcription.	Sonix
Rev	Human and automated transcription.	Rev
Notta	AI transcription and meeting notes.	Notta
Read.ai	Meeting summaries and analytics.	Read.ai

10. Hearing Preparation and Advocacy Support Tools

Going to court as a litigant in person is not simply about having the right documents. It is about knowing what you are asking for, why you are asking for it, what evidence supports it, and how to explain that clearly under pressure.

Tool	Use	Link
ChatGPT	Draft hearing scripts, questions, issue lists and oral submissions.	ChatGPT
Claude	Long-form document analysis and hearing preparation.	Claude
Anki	Flashcards for legal tests, facts and hearing preparation.	Anki
Quizlet	Flashcards and revision sets.	Quizlet
Speechify	Read documents aloud for review and preparation.	Speechify
NaturalReader	Text-to-speech for documents and statements.	NaturalReader
Goodnotes	Annotated hearing notes.	Goodnotes
Notability	Note-taking and document annotation.	Notability
OneNote	Case notebook and structured preparation.	Microsoft OneNote
reMarkable	Paper-style digital note-taking.	reMarkable

11. Domestic Abuse, Safeguarding and Personal Safety Tools

Where domestic abuse, coercive control, stalking, harassment or safeguarding concerns arise, litigants in person should not rely on general productivity tools alone. Specialist support matters.

Tool / Resource	Use	Link
Bright Sky	Domestic abuse support app and information.	Bright Sky
Hollie Guard	Personal safety app.	Hollie Guard
Refuge National Domestic Abuse Helpline	Domestic abuse support and helpline.	National Domestic Abuse Helpline
Women’s Aid Survivor’s Handbook	Information for survivors of domestic abuse.	Women’s Aid Survivor’s Handbook
Clare’s Law / Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme	Police disclosure route regarding risk from a partner or ex-partner.	Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme
SafeLives DASH Resources	Domestic abuse risk identification resources.	SafeLives DASH resources
CourtNav	FL401 non-molestation and occupation order applications.	CourtNav injunction application

12. Finding Legal Help, Pro Bono Support and Unbundled Assistance

Many litigants in person do not need — or cannot afford — full representation. But they may still benefit from targeted advice, document review, hearing preparation, direct access counsel, a McKenzie Friend, pro bono assistance or legal clinic support.

Platform / Organisation	Use	Link
Law Society Find a Solicitor	Find regulated solicitors in England and Wales.	Find a Solicitor
Bar Council Direct Access Portal	Find public access barristers.	Direct Access Portal
Advocate	Pro bono barrister assistance.	Advocate
LawWorks Clinics	Free legal advice clinics.	Find a LawWorks clinic
ReviewSolicitors	Solicitor reviews and firm search.	ReviewSolicitors
Clerksroom Direct	Direct access barrister services.	Clerksroom Direct
Valla	Employment tribunal support for claimants.	Valla
Lawhive	Legal services marketplace with AI-supported triage.	Lawhive

13. File Storage, Sharing and Digital Organisation

Litigants in person need a clean digital filing system. A case can quickly become unmanageable if documents are scattered across WhatsApp, email, phone downloads, screenshots and paper piles.

Tool	Use	Link
Google Drive	Cloud storage and document sharing.	Google Drive
Microsoft OneDrive	Cloud storage integrated with Microsoft 365.	OneDrive
Dropbox	Cloud storage and file sharing.	Dropbox
Box	Secure file storage and collaboration.	Box
WeTransfer	Large file transfer.	WeTransfer
Proton Drive	Privacy-focused cloud storage.	Proton Drive

14. Communication, Signature and Admin Tools

Good communication records matter. Litigants in person should assume that emails, letters and messages may later need to be evidenced. Clear, calm, dated communication is often better than long emotional exchanges.

Tool	Use	Link
Gmail	Email communication and searchable records.	Gmail
Outlook	Email and calendar management.	Outlook
Proton Mail	Privacy-focused email.	Proton Mail
DocuSign	Electronic signatures.	DocuSign
Adobe Acrobat Sign	Electronic signatures.	Adobe Acrobat Sign
Dropbox Sign	Electronic signatures.	Dropbox Sign
Calendly	Appointment booking.	Calendly
TidyCal	Low-cost appointment booking.	TidyCal
Loom	Screen recordings and video explanations.	Loom
Snagit	Screenshots and screen recording.	Snagit
CleanShot X	Mac screenshots and annotations.	CleanShot X

15. Practical Productivity Tools for Litigants in Person

Court deadlines can be unforgiving. A missed filing date, a poorly named document or a forgotten direction can create avoidable problems. A simple task management system is often essential.

Tool	Use	Link
Todoist	Task lists and deadlines.	Todoist
TickTick	Tasks, reminders and habit tracking.	TickTick
Apple Reminders	Simple deadline reminders.	Apple Reminders
Google Calendar	Directions, hearings, filing dates and reminders.	Google Calendar
Evernote	Notes, document clipping and case information.	Evernote
Zapier	Automation between apps.	Zapier
Make	Workflow automation.	Make

16. Which Tools Should Litigants in Person Start With?

There is no point overwhelming a litigant in person with fifty tools on day one. Most people need a simple starting stack.

A basic LiP toolkit

GOV.UK forms for the correct application or response document;
Advicenow for plain-English guidance;
Support Through Court for practical and emotional court support;
Google Drive or OneDrive for organised storage;
Word or Google Docs for statements and position statements;
Excel or Google Sheets for chronologies;
Adobe Acrobat, Smallpdf or iLovePDF for bundle preparation;
ChatGPT or Claude for drafting support, with careful checking;
Google Calendar or Todoist for deadlines;
CourtNav where a non-molestation or occupation order application is needed.

A more advanced LiP toolkit

Airtable or Notion for evidence management;
iMazing or Decipher TextMessage for message exports;
Otter, Fireflies or Rev for transcription;
Bundledocs or Adobe Acrobat Pro for serious bundle work;
Find Case Law and BAILII for checking legal authorities;
Direct Access Portal or Advocate where legal advocacy or advice is needed.

17. The Real Gap in the Market

The current legal tech market is full of useful tools, but most were not designed specifically for traumatised, overwhelmed or procedurally inexperienced litigants in person.

That is the gap.

Litigants in person do not just need “information”. They need:

triage;
procedural clarity;
document structure;
evidence organisation;
deadline control;
bundle discipline;
plain-English explanations;
hearing preparation;
support that understands the emotional cost of litigation.

Legal tech can help. AI can help. But the strongest results come when technology is combined with human judgment, procedural experience and a clear understanding of what the court actually needs.

18. Final Thoughts

For litigants in person, technology should not be used to make a case louder. It should be used to make a case clearer.

The court does not need every screenshot, every message, every emotional detail and every grievance. It needs the relevant facts, the correct legal framework, the key evidence, the procedural history and a clear explanation of what order is being sought and why.

The right tools can help a litigant in person move from chaos to structure. But tools are only tools. Strategy still matters. Judgment still matters. Evidence still matters. Procedure still matters.

Used properly, legal tech can reduce overwhelm, improve preparation and help litigants in person present their cases more effectively. Used badly, it can create confusion, false confidence and avoidable risk.

The future of access to justice will not be solved by technology alone. But technology, properly used, is now part of the answer.

How JSH Law Can Help

JSH Law supports litigants in person with practical court preparation, case strategy, document drafting, chronology building, evidence organisation, bundle preparation and hearing support.

If you are representing yourself and feel overwhelmed by the process, you do not have to do everything alone.

Contact JSH Law to discuss practical support for your case.

Regulatory & Editorial Notice: JSH Law Ltd provides litigation support and McKenzie Friend services to litigants in person. JSH Law Ltd is not a firm of solicitors and is not authorised or regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Information in this article is provided for general educational and public-interest purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case turns on its own facts, documents, procedural history and evidence. Litigants remain responsible for the accuracy of documents they file and for decisions made in their own proceedings. Where legal advice is required, you should seek advice from a suitably qualified regulated legal professional.

Shocking, But Not Surprising: What the Latest Family Court Figures Reveal About Parents Going It Alone

May 14, 2026/0 Comments/in 5. Court Skills for Litigants in Person, McKenzie Friend Support/by jessica susan hill

The latest family court figures should stop us in our tracks. Cafcass recorded 42,172 new private law children’s cases involving 63,879 children between 1 April 2025 and 31 March 2026, while the Law Society reports that in 47% of private family law cases in 2025, both parties appeared without lawyers. Behind those numbers are parents trying to restore contact, protect children, respond to allegations, prepare evidence, deal with Cafcass, and stand before a judge without a solicitor beside them. It is shocking — but for anyone working with litigants in person, it is not surprising.

Private Children Proceedings | Litigants in Person | Family Court Support

Shocking, But Not Surprising: The Reality for Families in Private Law Children Proceedings Is Now Impossible to Ignore

Cafcass recorded 42,172 new private law children’s cases involving 63,879 children between 1 April 2025 and 31 March 2026. The Law Society has also reported that, in 2025, both parties appeared without lawyers in 47% of private family law cases. For parents entering the family court without legal representation, these figures are not abstract statistics. They describe the reality they are already living.

The family court system is under pressure — and parents are carrying the weight

The latest Cafcass figures should make everyone involved in the family justice system stop and think. Between 1 April 2025 and 31 March 2026, Cafcass received 42,172 new private law children’s cases, involving 63,879 children. Private law children proceedings usually involve disputes between parents or family members about where a child should live, how much time they should spend with each parent, and how parental responsibility should be exercised.

These are not minor administrative disputes. These are cases about children’s homes, routines, safety, identity, schooling, relationships, emotional wellbeing and long-term stability. They are cases where a parent may be asking to restore contact after months of separation. They are cases where one parent may be raising safeguarding concerns. They are cases involving allegations of domestic abuse, coercive control, alienating behaviours, emotional harm, substance misuse, mental health difficulties, parental conflict and entrenched mistrust.

At the same time, the Law Society has reported that in 2025, in 47% of private family law cases, both parties appeared without lawyers. That means that in almost half of these cases, both parents were trying to navigate the family court process without formal legal representation.

That is shocking. But for anyone who works with litigants in person, it is not surprising.

Why so many parents are now representing themselves

Many parents do not become litigants in person because they want to. They become litigants in person because they have no realistic alternative.

Some cannot afford private solicitors. Some are outside the legal aid threshold but still nowhere near able to fund full representation. Some have had legal aid refused. Some have started with solicitors but run out of money before the case reaches a final hearing. Some feel they have been let down by previous representation. Others are capable, organised and determined, and want to run their own case while paying for targeted help at the points where it matters most.

The difficulty is that private children proceedings are procedurally demanding. A parent may have to understand the C100 application process, safeguarding checks, the role of Cafcass, the First Hearing Dispute Resolution Appointment, interim contact, directions, position statements, witness statements, Scott schedules, Section 7 reports, drug or alcohol testing, psychological evidence, bundle preparation, cross-allegations, enforcement applications and the welfare checklist under section 1 of the Children Act 1989.

Most parents are trying to learn all of this while under extreme emotional pressure. They are worried about their child. They are worried about what the other parent is saying. They are worried about being misunderstood by the court. They are worried about missing deadlines, saying the wrong thing, filing the wrong application or failing to put their evidence forward properly.

That is the gap JSH Law exists to help fill: practical, structured, non-solicitor support for litigants in person who need clarity, organisation and court-focused preparation.

Private children cases are not “simple” just because they are common

One of the most dangerous misunderstandings about child arrangements proceedings is the idea that they are straightforward because they are common. They are not.

A case may start with what appears to be a simple issue: one parent says contact has stopped. The other parent says there are safeguarding concerns. Very quickly, the case can become much more complex. The court may need to consider whether there has been domestic abuse. Cafcass may need to speak to the child. Allegations may need to be particularised. The parties may be directed to file statements. The court may have to decide whether a fact-finding hearing is necessary. There may be questions about indirect contact, supervised contact, handovers, school information, parental responsibility, prohibited steps, specific issues or enforcement.

For a represented party, a solicitor will usually help identify the legal issues, prepare the documents, manage the deadlines and frame the evidence. For a litigant in person, all of that responsibility often falls on the parent directly.

That is a heavy burden. It is also one of the reasons why preparation matters so much.

What litigants in person often need most urgently

When a parent is urgently searching for help before a children hearing, they are rarely looking for theory. They usually need practical answers to immediate problems.

They may need to know:

whether they need a C100, C2 or C79 application;
how to explain that contact has stopped without sounding hostile or emotional;
how to respond to allegations made by the other parent;
how to prepare a short but effective position statement;
how to create a chronology that actually assists the judge;
how to organise WhatsApp messages, emails, school records, police material or professional correspondence;
how to respond to a Cafcass safeguarding letter or Section 7 report;
what to ask the court for at the next hearing;
how to make their case child-focused rather than parent-focused;
what a McKenzie Friend can and cannot do in court.

Most litigants in person do not need someone to take over their entire case. Many need focused support at the right time: before issuing an application, before filing a statement, before a Cafcass call, before a directions hearing, before a final hearing, or when evidence has become messy and overwhelming.

The court needs evidence, not just distress

One of the hardest truths for parents in family court is this: being right is not enough. Being distressed is not enough. Feeling that the situation is unfair is not enough. The court has to make decisions based on evidence, welfare analysis and the law.

That does not mean the emotional reality is irrelevant. It means it has to be translated into a format the court can use.

For example, a parent may say:

“The other parent has completely cut me out and is turning the children against me.”

That may be the truth. But the court will need more than a conclusion. The court will need dates, examples, messages, missed calls, cancelled arrangements, changes in the child’s language or behaviour, school information, professional concerns, previous orders, and evidence of attempts to resolve matters.

Equally, a parent raising safeguarding concerns must be able to explain those concerns clearly and proportionately. If domestic abuse, coercive control or risk of harm is alleged, the court will need to understand what happened, when, what evidence exists, how the child is affected, and what protective arrangements are being sought.

The central question is always the child’s welfare. A strong case is not the loudest case. It is the clearest, best evidenced and most child-focused case.

Why chronology is one of the most powerful tools in a children case

A properly prepared chronology can change the way a case is understood.

Many parents arrive with hundreds of screenshots, years of messages and a strong feeling that there is a pattern of behaviour. But unless that material is organised, the pattern can be lost. Judges do not have unlimited time. Cafcass officers are dealing with heavy caseloads. A litigant in person who can present the key events clearly has a real advantage.

A good chronology should not be a dumping ground for every grievance. It should identify the events that matter. In a private children case, that may include:

when the parents separated;
what contact arrangements were in place;
when contact changed or stopped;
what efforts were made to resolve the issue;
what the child said or did, where relevant;
what professionals became involved;
what allegations were made and when;
what orders were made by the court;
what breaches or safeguarding incidents occurred;
what evidence supports each important event.

A chronology helps the court see sequence, context and pattern. In children proceedings, that can be vital.

Litigants in person need clarity about Cafcass

Cafcass plays a central role in many private children cases. For some parents, the first Cafcass safeguarding call feels like the most important conversation of the case. It can also feel intimidating, especially if the parent does not understand what Cafcass is looking for.

Cafcass is not there to represent either parent. Its role is to advise the court about the child’s welfare. That may involve safeguarding checks, speaking to the parties, identifying risk issues, making recommendations about interim arrangements, and, in some cases, preparing a more detailed Section 7 report.

Parents often make two mistakes with Cafcass. The first is saying too little because they are frightened of sounding difficult. The second is saying too much in an unstructured way because they are desperate to be heard.

The better approach is preparation. A parent should be able to explain the child’s current arrangements, what is working, what is not working, what the risks are, what evidence exists, what outcome they seek, and why that outcome is in the child’s welfare interests.

That requires calm, structure and focus.

What a McKenzie Friend can do for a litigant in person

A McKenzie Friend can provide practical support to a litigant in person. This may include helping a parent understand the court process, organise documents, prepare chronologies, draft position statements, prepare hearing notes, identify key issues, and feel less alone in a system that can otherwise feel overwhelming.

A McKenzie Friend is not the same as a solicitor. JSH Law is not a firm of solicitors and does not conduct litigation. A litigant in person remains responsible for their own case, their own decisions, the accuracy of their documents and compliance with court directions. Rights of audience are not automatic and are always a matter for the court.

But for many parents, targeted non-solicitor support can make an enormous practical difference. It can help them move from panic to preparation. It can help turn scattered evidence into a coherent case. It can help them understand what the court needs to decide and how to present their position in a child-focused way.

The real issue: access to justice

The figures from Cafcass and the Law Society point to a wider access to justice problem. If private children applications are increasing, and almost half of private family law cases involve both parties appearing without lawyers, then the system has to confront the reality of who is actually standing before the court.

These are not trained advocates. They are parents, grandparents and family members trying to protect relationships with children, respond to allegations, raise safeguarding concerns and comply with court orders, often while under intense personal stress.

The family court cannot function properly if the people using it cannot understand the process, cannot present their evidence, and cannot identify what the court is being asked to decide.

Access to justice is not only about whether someone can technically issue an application. It is about whether they can participate meaningfully once they are in the process.

What parents should do before the next hearing

If you are representing yourself in private children proceedings, the most important step is to get organised early. Do not wait until the night before the hearing to gather your evidence. Do not assume the judge will understand the full background unless you explain it clearly. Do not file long, emotional documents that obscure the key issues.

Before the next hearing, ask yourself:

What is the court being asked to decide?
What order do I want the court to make?
Why is that order in my child’s welfare interests?
What evidence supports my position?
What are the strongest points against me?
How do I answer those points calmly and properly?
Have I complied with all directions?
Is my position statement clear, concise and useful?
Are my exhibits properly organised?
Can the judge understand the case quickly?

Family court preparation is not about making the other parent look bad. It is about helping the court make safe, fair and child-focused decisions.

How JSH Law can help

JSH Law provides practical support for litigants in person involved in private children proceedings. This can include help with:

C100, C2 and C79 application preparation;
case strategy and issue identification;
chronologies and evidence summaries;
position statements;
witness statement structure;
responding to Cafcass letters and Section 7 reports;
organising screenshots, WhatsApp messages and correspondence;
hearing preparation;
bundle planning and exhibit organisation;
practical McKenzie Friend support where appropriate.

The aim is not to overwhelm parents with legal jargon. The aim is to help litigants in person understand the process, prepare properly and present their case in a way the court can use.

If your child arrangements case has become urgent, confusing or emotionally overwhelming, it is better to get structured support early than to wait until the case has already drifted, deadlines have passed or evidence has become unmanageable.

Need help preparing for family court?

If you are representing yourself in child arrangements proceedings and need help preparing your application, statement, chronology, evidence, bundle or next hearing strategy, JSH Law provides practical non-solicitor support for litigants in person.

You remain in control of your case. JSH Law helps you get organised, focused and court-ready.

Book a 15-minute enquiry call or send your case papers for an initial review.

Sources

Cafcass, “Our Data”, private law children’s cases, financial year 1 April 2025 to 31 March 2026: https://www.cafcass.gov.uk/about-us/our-data
The Law Society, “Family court cases rise as legal aid sinks”, 26 March 2026: https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/contact-or-visit-us/press-office/press-releases/family-court-cases-rise-as-legal-aid-sinks

About the author

Jessica Susan Hill

Jessica Susan Hill is the founder of JSH Law, providing practical litigation support and McKenzie Friend services for litigants in person involved in private children proceedings. Jessica is training to qualify as a family law solicitor and has extensive lived and practical experience of navigating the family court system, preparing court documents, organising evidence, and helping parents approach hearings with clarity and confidence.

JSH Law supports parents with child arrangements, Cafcass involvement, statements, chronologies, applications, hearing preparation and evidence organisation. The focus is practical, child-centred and court-ready support for people who are representing themselves.

JSH Law is not a firm of solicitors and is not SRA-regulated. Jessica does not conduct litigation or go on the court record. Clients remain responsible for their own case decisions, documents and court filings.

When Abuse Doesn’t End: Coercive Control and the Family Court

May 7, 2026/4 Comments/in 5. Court Skills for Litigants in Person, Family Court Procedure/by jessica susan hill

When Abuse Doesn’t End: Coercive Control and the Family Court

Coercive control often continues after separation. This article explains how family courts can miss patterns of abuse when cases are treated as isolated incidents.

There is a persistent and dangerous misunderstanding at the heart of domestic abuse.

That it ends when the relationship ends.

It doesn’t.

And nowhere is that more visible—or more consequential—than in the family courts.

Coercive Control Is Not an “Incident”—It’s a System

Coercive control is not just a type of abuse. It is the operating system of abuse.

That distinction matters.

If we continue to treat domestic abuse as a series of isolated incidents—arguments, assaults, specific events—we will continue to miss what is actually happening:

a sustained pattern of domination;
a gradual erosion of autonomy;
a strategic restriction of freedom; and
the deliberate creation of fear, dependency, confusion and compliance.

Coercive control works slowly. Subtly. Often invisibly.

Victims frequently do not recognise it themselves until their independence has already been stripped away.

The Shift After Separation: Control Doesn’t Stop—It Evolves

Leaving is not always the end of abuse.

For many survivors, it is the beginning of a new phase.

This phase is often more sophisticated and, in many cases, more damaging because the abuse moves from the private relationship into public systems.

It can include:

weaponising the family court process;
using children as instruments of control;
reframing the victim as the aggressor;
making repeated applications;
breaching arrangements and then blaming the other parent;
using delay, cost and pressure as tactics; and
presenting as calm, reasonable and child-focused while continuing the same pattern of control.

This is not accidental behaviour.

It is continuity of control through different tools.

When direct access to the survivor is reduced, the controlling person may redirect their efforts through systems, professionals, correspondence, children, finances and litigation.

The Family Court Problem: An Incident-Based System Facing a Pattern-Based Harm

Here is the uncomfortable truth:

The family justice system still struggles to recognise coercive control because it is often looking for incidents when it should be looking for patterns.

The court process is naturally evidence-led. That is necessary. But in domestic abuse cases, evidence must be understood in context.

A single message may look ordinary.

A single missed handover may look like poor communication.

A single application may look like a parent seeking contact.

But when those events are placed into a chronology, a different picture can emerge.

The pattern may show intimidation, pressure, harassment, manipulation, emotional destabilisation, economic abuse, litigation abuse, or the use of children as a route back into the survivor’s life.

This is why context matters.

The “No Violence” Trap

One of the most damaging misconceptions is that domestic abuse is only serious when there has been physical violence.

That is wrong.

Coercive control can exist without physical assault.

It can involve fear, surveillance, isolation, financial control, threats, emotional punishment, humiliation, intimidation, and constant psychological pressure.

By the time a survivor reaches court, they may be exhausted, anxious, defensive, hypervigilant and overwhelmed.

That presentation can then be misread.

The survivor may be seen as difficult, obstructive, emotional or hostile, while the controlling party presents as calm, measured and reasonable.

That is one of the most dangerous dynamics in family proceedings.

The “Both Parties” Illusion

Family cases are often framed as conflict between two parents.

But domestic abuse is not mutual conflict.

Coercive control is not “high conflict”.

It is a pattern of power and control.

When the court treats both parties as equally responsible for the dynamic, the abusive pattern can become obscured.

The survivor’s protective behaviour may be mistaken for hostility.

The survivor’s refusal to agree to unsafe arrangements may be mistaken for obstruction.

The survivor’s fear may be mistaken for emotional instability.

That is why the court must ask not only what each parent is doing, but why they are doing it and what history sits behind it.

Post-Separation Abuse and Litigation Conduct

Post-separation abuse is one of the areas where the family court needs particular care.

Not every application is abusive. Not every disagreement is coercive control. Not every difficult parent is an abuser.

But equally, the court must not assume that litigation behaviour is neutral simply because it is happening through a formal process.

Repeated applications, excessive correspondence, threats of enforcement, strategic non-compliance, refusal to provide information, financial pressure and manipulation of professionals can all form part of a continuing pattern.

The question is not simply:

“Has this person used the court process?”

The question is:

“Is the court process being used as a further mechanism of control?”

Children Are Not Bystanders

Children are not passive observers of coercive control.

They live inside it.

They absorb the atmosphere. They feel the fear. They learn the rules of the controlling person. They may be pressured, questioned, rewarded, punished, coached, used as messengers, or made responsible for adult emotions.

In post-separation abuse, children can become the bridge through which control continues.

That does not mean contact should automatically be refused in every case involving allegations of domestic abuse.

But it does mean the court must be extremely careful before assuming that contact is safe, beneficial, or capable of being managed without a proper risk analysis.

The welfare question is not simply whether a child should see both parents.

The question is whether the arrangements protect the child from harm, including emotional harm, psychological harm, manipulation, intimidation and exposure to continuing abuse.

The Legal Framework Exists—But Application Is Inconsistent

The legal framework already recognises the seriousness of domestic abuse and coercive control.

In England and Wales, the court must treat the child’s welfare as its paramount consideration under the Children Act 1989.

Practice Direction 12J requires the court to consider the impact of domestic abuse in child arrangements proceedings and to ensure that any order made does not expose the child or the other parent to an unmanageable risk of harm.

The problem is not that the framework does not exist.

The problem is inconsistent application.

Coercive control requires pattern recognition, contextual analysis and careful consideration of behaviour over time.

That is difficult to do in a pressured court system, especially where evidence is poorly organised, litigants in person are overwhelmed, and professionals are working under significant time constraints.

Why Evidence Structure Matters

In coercive control cases, evidence presentation can make or break the case.

A court cannot assess a pattern properly if the evidence is scattered across hundreds of messages, screenshots, emails, voice notes and allegations without structure.

Survivors often know the pattern because they have lived it.

But the court has not lived it.

The court needs to be shown the pattern clearly, calmly and evidentially.

That usually means:

a clear chronology;
a focused statement;
a properly prepared Scott Schedule or schedule of allegations where appropriate;
cross-referenced exhibits;
examples of behaviour grouped by theme;
evidence of impact on the adult victim;
evidence of impact on the child; and
a clear explanation of why the proposed arrangements are safe or unsafe.

The aim is not to overwhelm the court.

The aim is to make the pattern impossible to miss.

What Needs to Change

1. Courts must look beyond isolated incidents

Domestic abuse evidence should not be assessed as disconnected events. The court must look at the overall pattern and the cumulative impact.

2. Litigation abuse must be recognised

Where the court process is being used to intimidate, exhaust, punish or control, that behaviour should be identified and managed robustly.

3. Children’s lived experience must be central

The analysis must move beyond adult allegations and look carefully at what the child has experienced and what future arrangements would expose them to.

4. Professionals must be trained to recognise coercive control

Coercive control is subtle. It can be masked by calm presentation, professional language and apparent reasonableness. Training must reflect the reality of post-separation abuse.

5. Evidence must be prepared properly

Litigants in person need practical support to organise their evidence in a way the court can understand and use.

Final Thought

Coercive control is not always loud.

It is not always visible.

It is not always easy to prove.

But it is often devastating precisely because it hides in plain sight.

And until the family justice system consistently recognises patterns rather than just incidents, survivors will continue to face the same reality:

They leave the relationship.
But they do not leave the control.

Need Help Making Sense of the Evidence?

In cases involving coercive control, the strength of the case often depends on how clearly the pattern is shown.

JSH Law Ltd supports litigants in person with evidence reviews, chronologies, position statements, Scott Schedules, hearing preparation and McKenzie Friend support where appropriate.

If you are preparing for family court and need practical help organising your evidence, you can book a consultation here:

Book a 15-minute consultation

Regulatory & Editorial Notice: This article provides general commentary on legal and procedural issues within the family justice system. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as a substitute for independent legal advice on your own circumstances. JSH Law Ltd provides litigation support and McKenzie Friend services to litigants in person. JSH Law Ltd is not authorised or regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and does not conduct litigation or carry out reserved legal activities unless specifically permitted by law or by the court.

Need Help Preparing for Family Court?

If your case involves coercive control, domestic abuse allegations, Cafcass, child arrangements, PD12J, or a difficult pattern of post-separation behaviour, the way your evidence is organised matters.

JSH Law Ltd supports litigants in person with practical, structured litigation support, including:

reviewing evidence and identifying patterns;
building chronologies;
drafting position statements and witness statements;
preparing Scott Schedules and schedules of allegations;
organising exhibits and bundles;
preparing for hearings;
PD12J-focused case analysis; and
McKenzie Friend support where appropriate and permitted by the court.

The first step is a 15-minute consultation. This gives us a chance to understand where you are in the proceedings, what deadlines are coming up, what evidence you have, and what practical support may be suitable.

You can book your 15-minute consultation below.

Jessica Susan Hill is Director of JSH Law Ltd and provides litigation support and McKenzie Friend assistance to litigants in person in family court proceedings across England and Wales.

Her work focuses particularly on complex child arrangements disputes, PD12J domestic abuse cases, evidence organisation, court preparation and support for litigants navigating proceedings without legal representation.

Archive for category: 5. Court Skills for Litigants in Person

The central point

When Child Contact Begins to Break Down

Stopped Contact Is Not Proof of “Parental Alienation”

Current official guidance

What Are Alienating Behaviours?

Do not begin with the conclusion

Why Might a Child Refuse or Resist Contact?

Why Time Can Matter When Contact Has Stopped

What the Law Says

Children Act 1989, section 1

Parental Involvement

Domestic Abuse Act 2021, sections 1 to 3

Practice Direction 12B: Child Arrangements Programme

Practice Direction 12J

Evidence of Contact Breakdown Is Not the Same as Evidence of Its Cause

What to Record When Contact Starts to Break Down

Record facts, not conclusions

What Not to Do When Contact Has Stopped

A practical communication principle

When There Is No Child Arrangements Order

Applying for a child arrangements order

When an Existing Child Arrangements Order Is Not Being Followed

Enforcement Legal Framework

Children Act 1989, section 11J

Form C79

HMCTS Enforcement Guidance

Practice Direction 12N

Enforcement Is Not the Same as Punishment

Important

Domestic Abuse and Stopped Contact

Safety and delay must be considered together

Possible Child-Focused Steps When a Relationship Needs to Be Rebuilt

Cafcass support services

Recent Judicial Guidance: Re Y

Read the judgment

How to Present a Child-Focused Case

Questions the Court May Need to Answer

When to Seek Support

Has Contact With Your Child Stopped?

Final Thoughts

About the Author

Regulatory & Editorial Notice

The central point

Why Family Court Proceedings Can Feel Like a Test of Endurance

What the Latest Family Court Statistics Show

Current data and official sources

Delay Is a Welfare Issue, Not Just a Procedural Problem

What the Law Says About Delay

Children Act 1989, section 1(2)

Family Procedure Rules 2010, Part 1

Practice Direction 12B: Child Arrangements Programme

Practice Direction 12J

Necessary Delay and Avoidable Delay Are Not the Same

Why Interim Arrangements Matter

Important

What Litigants in Person Can Do When a Case Is Drifting

1. Read Every Order Carefully

2. Comply With Directions on Time

3. Keep a Case Chronology

4. Identify the Actual Blockage

5. Narrow the Issues

6. Organise Evidence Properly

7. Raise Missed Deadlines Promptly and Proportionately

8. Explain the Impact on the Child

9. Propose a Realistic Next Step

10. Prepare Properly for Every Hearing

A useful position statement structure

Example Wording for a Child-Focused Position Statement

When Delay May Require Urgent Attention

Do not contact the judge directly

Domestic Abuse Cases Must Not Be Rushed

Speed and safety must work together

Child Focused Courts: Will the New Model Reduce Delay?

Recent family justice reform

Common Mistakes When Parents Feel Their Case Is Taking Too Long

1. Sending Repeated Emotional Emails

2. Making Unnecessary Applications

3. Failing to Comply While Complaining About Delay

4. Focusing Only on the Parent’s Distress