Child Focused Courts 2026: What Parents Need to Know

Quick answer

The Child Focused Model is a new approach to private law children cases designed to put the child’s experience, safeguarding and early information gathering closer to the centre of proceedings.

The Government announced in March 2026 that it will be rolled out across England and Wales over three years.

It does not mean that every Family Court is already operating the model.

Where it applies, the process can involve earlier engagement with the family, earlier information gathering and a Child Impact Report prepared before the court determines what further steps are required.

For parents, the practical lesson is simple: organise the child’s story, safeguarding information and supporting evidence early — but keep it focused.

What is a Child Focused Court?

The Child Focused Model is the next stage of the private-law reform programme originally known as Pathfinder.

It applies to private law proceedings concerning children in participating court areas.

That includes many disputes about:

• where a child should live;
• how much time a child should spend with each parent;
• specific issues concerning a child;
• prohibited steps;
• and enforcement of child arrangements orders.

The model is intended to move away from a process which can become dominated by a succession of hearings and towards a more investigative and problem-solving approach.

The judiciary describes it as involving earlier information gathering and earlier engagement with the parties.

There is also an explicit focus on:

• the child’s voice;
• the child’s experience of parental conflict;
• domestic abuse;
• safeguarding;
• multi-agency information;
• and reducing unnecessary delay.

The Ministry of Justice says that cases within the pilot were resolved around seven and a half months faster than under the conventional model.

That performance is one reason the Government decided to expand the system nationally.

Is every Family Court already a Child Focused Court?

No.

This is important because national rollout has been announced, but national implementation is not instantaneous.

The Government announced on 17 March 2026 that the Child Focused Model would be expanded across England and Wales over approximately three years.

The existing model already operates in a number of areas, including courts covering:

• Birmingham and Solihull;
• Dorset, Bournemouth and Weymouth;
• West Yorkshire;
• Wolverhampton;
• Stoke;
• Hereford and Worcester;
• and Hampshire and the Isle of Wight.

The judiciary has identified a further eight court areas for implementation during the 2026–27 financial year:

• Northumbria and North Durham;
• Cleveland and South Durham;
• Lancashire;
• Cumbria;
• York and North Yorkshire;
• Cheshire and Merseyside;
• Northamptonshire;
• Coventry and Warwickshire.

What actually changes?

The conventional Child Arrangements Programme has often involved information being gathered progressively through hearings.

The Child Focused Model tries to move more of that work towards the beginning of the case.

That matters.

Instead of repeatedly asking:

“What report should we order next?”

the model aims to give the court a better evidential picture earlier.

That can include information from:

• Cafcass or Cafcass Cymru;
• the parties;
• the child;
• police;
• local authorities;
• domestic abuse services;
• and other relevant agencies.

The objective is not simply speed.

Speed without good safeguarding would be dangerous.

The intended objective is earlier understanding.

That should allow the court to identify sooner:

• what the real issues are;
• whether the child may be at risk;
• whether domestic abuse requires investigation;
• whether findings of fact may be necessary;
• what the child is experiencing;
• and what further evidence the court actually needs.

The Child Impact Report becomes extremely important

One of the central documents in the Child Focused Model is the Child Impact Report.

The title tells us something important.

The focus is not supposed to be:

Which parent presents the better argument?

It is:

What is happening to this child?

A Child Impact Report may consider matters including:

• the child’s wishes and feelings;
• the child’s relationships;
• the impact of parental conflict;
• safeguarding information;
• domestic abuse;
• the child’s lived experience;
• current arrangements;
• risk;
• and what the court may need to do next.

That changes how parents should think about presenting their case.

A 25-page account of everything the other parent has ever done may be much less useful than a clear explanation of:

what happened → what evidence supports it → what the child experienced → what the current risk or impact is → what the court needs to decide.

Is a Child Impact Report the same as a section 7 report?

This has caused understandable confusion.

Under amendments which took effect on 26 June 2026, the pilot Practice Direction was clarified so that the Child Impact Report covers the same ground as a report under section 7 of the Children Act 1989.

That means litigants should not assume that the court must automatically order a separate traditional section 7 report afterwards.

The purpose of the reformed process is partly to avoid unnecessary duplication.

But that does not mean that no further investigation can ever be directed.

If the court concludes that additional evidence, assessment or investigation is necessary, it retains its case-management powers.

What happens if domestic abuse is alleged?

This is one of the most important aspects of the reform.

The Child Focused Model does not displace Practice Direction 12J.

Where domestic abuse is raised, the court must still address the applicable safeguarding and procedural requirements.

PD12J itself was materially updated from January 2026.

Among other things, the terminology and procedure now place clearer emphasis on holistic assessment of allegations and any pattern of coercive and controlling behaviour, rather than forcing complex behaviour into an artificial incident-by-incident format.

That is particularly relevant to the Child Focused Model.

Domestic abuse may not be properly understood by asking only:

“What happened on 14 March?”

The more useful questions may be:

• What pattern developed?
• How did behaviour change over time?
• What was the cumulative effect?
• How did the child experience it?
• Did behaviour continue after separation?
• Did litigation, money, communication or child arrangements become mechanisms of control?
• What evidence corroborates the pattern?
• What is the present safeguarding significance?

That does not lower the evidential threshold.

Allegations remain allegations unless admitted or determined.

But it does mean that evidence should be organised in a way which allows the court and Cafcass to see context and trajectory, rather than merely a pile of disconnected incidents.

What evidence should you prepare for a Child Focused Court?

The answer is not:

everything you possess.

That is one of the easiest mistakes for a litigant in person to make.

A useful evidence set might include:

• the existing child arrangements order;
• relevant previous findings or judgments;
• a concise chronology;
• important communications between the parents;
• records showing contact arrangements or missed contact;
• school information where genuinely relevant;
• medical information where relevant and properly obtainable;
• police or local-authority information;
• evidence concerning domestic abuse;
• relevant professional reports;
• and documents showing what has changed since an earlier order.

The operative word is relevant.

Five strong documents which demonstrate a pattern can be more useful than 250 screenshots nobody has time to understand.

A good chronology may become one of your most valuable documents

A chronology is not merely a list of dates.

Done properly, it helps somebody unfamiliar with your family understand the case quickly.

For example:

Notice what this does not do.

It does not turn disputed allegations into established facts.

It shows:

event → source → potential significance.

That is much easier to analyse.

How should you prepare for Cafcass?

Do not approach a Cafcass conversation as though you are making a closing speech.

The Family Court Adviser needs usable information.

Before speaking to them, be able to explain:

• the present arrangements;
• what you say is working;
• what is not working;
• your principal safeguarding concerns;
• the evidence supporting those concerns;
• what the child has actually said, if anything;
• how you know what the child has said;
• what has changed;
• and what outcome you believe would meet the child’s needs.

Separate three things carefully:

what you know;

what you believe;

what somebody else has told you.

That distinction protects your credibility.

“Child focused” does not mean making the child choose

This is another important distinction.

Children should have opportunities for their wishes, feelings and experiences to be understood appropriately.

That does not mean turning a child into the decision-maker.

Nor does it mean that:

“The child said X, therefore the court must order X.”

The Children Act welfare analysis remains broader than that.

A child’s wishes and feelings must be considered in light of matters including age and understanding.

And where a child is expressing strong resistance, fear, alignment or rejection, the task is not simply to record the words.

The court may need to understand:

• what sits underneath them;
• how stable the view is;
• the child’s experience;
• whether pressure or influence is relevant;
• whether domestic abuse or fear is relevant;
• and what arrangement best promotes welfare.

A child-focused process should therefore mean understanding the child better, not merely quoting them more often.

Can AI help you prepare for a Child Focused Court?

Yes — but only if it is used as an organisational tool rather than a substitute decision-maker.

Useful tasks include asking AI to help:

• sort dates;
• identify duplicated evidence;
• build a draft chronology;
• compare an order against later events;
• organise messages by theme;
• turn disorganised notes into headings;
• identify questions which still need evidence;
• and shorten an overlong draft.

Less safe uses include asking AI:

• which parent is lying;
• whether a child has been manipulated;
• whether behaviour legally “proves” coercive control;
• to invent missing dates;
• to strengthen allegations beyond the evidence;
• or to generate legal authorities which are then filed without verification.

Seven mistakes to avoid

1. Waiting for the first hearing before organising your case

The new model deliberately moves information gathering earlier.

2. Sending everything

Volume is not the same as evidence quality.

3. Treating allegations as findings

Keep disputed assertions accurately labelled.

4. Talking only about the other parent

The court’s statutory concern is the child.

5. Describing incidents without explaining impact

Where relevant, explain why the event matters to welfare or safeguarding.

6. Ignoring contradictory evidence

If a document appears inconsistent with your account, deal with it rather than hoping nobody notices.

7. Asking AI to turn your case into legal language

Clear facts supported by identifiable evidence are usually more valuable than dramatic terminology generated by a machine.

The JSH Law preparation check

Before sending a document, allegation or piece of evidence into a Child Focused Court process, ask:

The opportunity — and the risk — in Child Focused Courts

The reform is ambitious.

Earlier safeguarding information, fewer unnecessary hearings and better understanding of children’s experiences could address some persistent weaknesses in private children proceedings.

But faster does not automatically mean better.

The quality of early information becomes crucial.

If an incomplete or inaccurate picture is formed early, speed can simply accelerate the wrong analysis.

That is why litigants in person need to understand the change.

You do not need to become a lawyer.

You do need to make it possible for professionals and the court to distinguish:

evidence from assertion;

pattern from noise;

the child’s experience from parental conflict;

and the issue requiring a decision from the history surrounding it.

That is what good preparation should achieve.

Preparing for a Child Focused Court case?

If you are representing yourself, the amount of information can become overwhelming very quickly — particularly where there are safeguarding concerns, a long history or disputed allegations.

JSH Law provides defined-scope, non-reserved support for litigants in person, including:

• evidence organisation;
• chronologies and timelines;
• witness-statement preparation support;
• position statements;
• Cafcass and Child Impact Report responses;
• domestic-abuse evidence mapping;
• urgent court documents;
• appeal paperwork;
• court-bundle preparation support;
• and hearing preparation and McKenzie Friend support.

You do not necessarily need more evidence. You may need the evidence you already have organised so that somebody unfamiliar with your case can understand why it matters.

Book a consultation

Primary sources and further reading

• Ministry of Justice and HMCTS — March 2026 announcement confirming national rollout of Child Focused Courts.
• Courts and Tribunals Judiciary — judicial announcement on the Child Focused Court rollout and 2026–27 implementation areas.
• Cafcass — guidance on the Child Focused Model and existing pilot areas.
• Family Procedure Rules — Practice Direction 36Z and annexed PD12B (Pilot).
• Family Procedure Rules — Practice Direction 12J: Child Arrangements and Contact Orders: Domestic Abuse and Harm.
• Children Act 1989, section 1 — welfare principle and welfare checklist.