© 2026 JSH Law Ltd. All rights reserved.Dame Esther Rantzen’s Legacy: Childline, Safeguarding and Why Children Must Be Heard
Dame Esther Rantzen changed child safeguarding by creating somewhere children could speak when they felt unable to tell anyone else. Her legacy raises an important question for the Family Court: when we say a child has been heard, have we actually listened?
Family Justice | Safeguarding | Children’s Voices
Dame Esther Rantzen’s Legacy: Childline, Safeguarding and Why Hearing a Child Means More Than Recording Their Words
Dame Esther Rantzen spent decades creating ways for people who were frightened, isolated or unheard to speak. Her death leaves an important question for family justice: when we say that a child has been “heard”, have we actually listened?
JSH Law | 30 September 2026
The key point
Giving a child a voice is not the same as understanding what that child is experiencing. Wishes and feelings matter. But so do context, fear, loyalty, relationships, safeguarding concerns and the circumstances in which those wishes were expressed.
Dame Esther Rantzen’s legacy was about being heard
Dame Esther Rantzen died on 30 September 2026, aged 86.
Many will remember her as the presenter of the BBC programme That’s Life!. But one of her most important legacies lies in safeguarding.
She founded Childline in 1986, creating a confidential service through which children could speak about abuse, fear and problems they often felt unable to tell anybody else about.
She later founded The Silver Line for older people experiencing loneliness and isolation.
There is a common thread running through both projects.
People can be experiencing serious harm or distress while appearing, from the outside, to be coping perfectly well.
Sometimes what is missing is not a problem to disclose.
It is somewhere safe enough to disclose it.
What Childline taught us about safeguarding
When Childline launched on 30 October 1986, around 50,000 attempted calls were made on its first night.
Think about what that means.
Those children already existed.
Their experiences already existed.
The harm already existed.
What changed was that somebody created somewhere they felt able to speak.
A fundamental safeguarding lesson
Silence is not proof of safety. A child may not disclose abuse, fear or distress immediately. Whether they speak can depend on who is asking, where the conversation takes place, whether they feel believed and what they think may happen if they tell the truth.
That lesson remains relevant nearly forty years later.
It is particularly important in family proceedings, where professionals are often required to understand a child’s wishes and feelings within an already complicated family situation.
Hearing a child is not the same as recording what they said
Family courts quite properly want to understand what children think and feel.
Cafcass and CAFCASS Cymru professionals may speak directly with children. Section 7 reports frequently record what a child has said about where they want to live, who they want to see and how they feel about family relationships.
But safeguarding analysis cannot stop there.
It is not always the end of the analysis.
Children are affected by the relationships and circumstances around them.
They may feel frightened.
They may feel responsible for keeping an adult happy.
They may experience loyalty conflict.
They may be angry about something that has happened.
They may desperately want parental conflict to stop.
They may minimise abuse, defend somebody they love, repeat explanations they have heard or struggle to put complicated feelings into words.
None of this means that a child’s expressed wishes should be ignored.
Nor does it mean that an uncomfortable answer should automatically be blamed on manipulation or influence.
It means something much simpler:
The child’s words need to be understood in context.
What does the law actually require?
In England and Wales, the starting point is the Children Act 1989.
When a court determines a question relating to a child’s upbringing, the child’s welfare is its paramount consideration.
The welfare checklist requires the court to consider:
“the ascertainable wishes and feelings of the child concerned (considered in the light of his age and understanding)”
Those final words matter.
The law does not say that the court must simply implement whatever a child says.
Wishes and feelings are considered alongside the rest of the welfare checklist, including:
- the child’s physical, emotional and educational needs;
- the likely effect of any change in circumstances;
- the child’s age, background and relevant characteristics;
- any harm suffered or risk of harm;
- the capability of each parent or other relevant person to meet the child’s needs.
Practice Direction 12B also places children and young people at the centre of proceedings and recognises the importance of their wishes and feelings being properly considered.
The child’s voice matters. But the court must still decide what arrangements best promote that individual child’s welfare.
What if a child suddenly says they do not want contact?
This can be one of the hardest situations in private children proceedings.
A child may previously have had a close relationship with a parent and then begin refusing visits, overnight stays, telephone calls or other communication.
Sometimes the explanation may be clear.
There may have been frightening, neglectful, abusive or otherwise harmful behaviour.
But sometimes the picture is more complicated.
There may have been:
- prolonged parental conflict;
- exposure to adult information;
- domestic abuse or coercive control;
- a genuine unresolved grievance;
- anxiety or disrupted attachment;
- loyalty conflict;
- pressure from one or more adults;
- a major change in the child’s family life;
- or several factors operating together.
The answer should not be predetermined.
A safeguarding assessment should follow the evidence.
Questions worth asking
- What did the child’s relationship with each parent look like before the current difficulties?
- When did the change begin?
- Did anything significant happen around that time?
- What explanation has the child given?
- Has that explanation changed?
- Has the child been spoken to independently?
- Who was present during important conversations?
- What do school, medical or other independent records show?
- Have domestic abuse or safeguarding concerns been investigated?
- What support has been attempted before concluding that a relationship should end?
Asking these questions does not mean trying to talk a child out of their feelings.
It means understanding how the current situation developed.
Children do not always disclose harm neatly
This may be one of the most important lessons from Childline.
Adults often expect disclosure to be clear and chronological:
something happened, the child tells somebody, the adults investigate it.
Real life is often much less tidy.
A child may disclose gradually.
They may test whether somebody is safe to tell.
They may describe the effect rather than the cause.
They may say something and later withdraw it.
They may protect somebody they love.
They may fear what will happen to their family if they speak.
At the same time, professionals must avoid suggestive questioning, contaminating evidence or assuming that every behavioural change proves abuse.
Good safeguarding requires both things at once: taking children seriously, while assessing what they say carefully and fairly.
Domestic abuse makes context even more important
Where domestic abuse is relevant to child arrangements proceedings, Practice Direction 12J requires the court to consider the effect of that abuse on the child and on the child’s relationship with each parent.
Children do not experience domestic abuse only when violence or abuse is directed personally at them.
Living with intimidation, coercive control, threats, surveillance, instability or fear can affect a child’s emotional wellbeing and relationships.
But serious allegations must also be considered through evidence and proper procedure.
Allegations should not be ignored.
Nor should they automatically be treated as findings of fact.
The goal must be evidence-led safeguarding.
Cafcass: more than finding out what a child prefers
Cafcass advises the Family Court about children’s welfare and safety.
In section 7 work, a Family Court Adviser may meet or communicate directly with a child and report their wishes and feelings to the court.
That direct work can be extremely important.
But in a complex case, the court may need more than a quotation from the child.
It may need to understand:
- how and where the child was seen;
- whether anybody else was present;
- what evidence the professional reviewed;
- whether important historical information was considered;
- whether competing safeguarding explanations were explored;
- how the professional moved from the evidence to the recommendation.
“What did the child say?”
It should continue:
“What is this child experiencing, and what does all of the evidence tell us about what they need?”
A child should not be made responsible for the decision
There is another danger in talking about the “voice of the child”.
Adults can unintentionally make children feel responsible for the outcome of proceedings.
Asking a child what they think is important.
Making them feel they have to choose between parents is something else entirely.
Children should be able to express fear, affection, anger, confusion and preferences without believing that the eventual court order rests on their shoulders.
Their voice should inform the decision.
It should not make them responsible for making it.
What can a parent or litigant in person actually do?
If you believe the court does not yet understand what is happening to your child, simply repeating that “my child has not been listened to” may not move the case forward.
Identify the gap.
1. Build a clear chronology
Show what the relationship looked like before the current problem, when things changed and what happened afterwards.
2. Separate evidence from conclusions
Compare these two statements:
Evidence: “My daughter stopped answering my telephone calls on 12 March.”
Conclusion: “My daughter has obviously been manipulated.”
The court needs the evidence before it can evaluate the conclusion.
3. Look for independent evidence
Depending on the issues, this might include:
- school records;
- medical information;
- police or social care records;
- previous Cafcass material;
- contact-centre records;
- messages and correspondence;
- earlier court orders and findings.
4. Read the section 7 report critically
Do not look only at whether you agree with its recommendation.
Ask:
- Does it accurately explain the history?
- Does it answer the court’s questions?
- Does it address important safeguarding evidence?
- Is the reasoning clear?
- Can you see how the evidence leads to the recommendation?
5. Keep your case child-focused
Try not to use the child as evidence against the other parent.
Instead explain:
- what you say the child needs;
- what evidence supports that position;
- what information is missing;
- what proportionate step you want the court to take.
6. Ask the court for something specific
Depending on the individual case, that might include clarification, disclosure, further direct work, an addendum section 7 report, consideration of separate representation or another case-management direction.
The appropriate application will depend on the existing proceedings, evidence and orders.
When the paperwork looks right but the child is still missing
This connects directly with a wider problem I have written about at JSH Law.
A case can contain court orders, statements, Cafcass reports, safeguarding letters and professional recommendations and still leave one crucial question unanswered:
What is actually happening to this child?
Read: When the Paperwork Looks Right but the Child Is Still Missing
The lesson family justice should take from Dame Esther Rantzen
Dame Esther Rantzen was not a family lawyer, judge or social worker.
But Childline changed safeguarding because it recognised something institutions sometimes struggle to see:
A child can be living with serious distress while the adults around them believe everything is broadly normal.
Childline did more than tell children they had a voice.
It created somewhere designed to listen.
Family justice now has legislation, court rules, safeguarding checks, professional assessments and specialist services.
Those protections matter.
But process must never become a substitute for understanding the child.
A child can become a paragraph in a section 7 report.
A relationship can become a line in an order.
Years of family history can become:
“The child does not wish to have contact.”
Sometimes that may be the correct conclusion.
Sometimes it may tell us almost nothing about how the situation developed or what the child actually needs next.
Dame Esther Rantzen spent much of her life creating places where people who were not being heard could speak.
The challenge for family justice is not merely to provide children with a voice. It is to build systems capable of listening properly when they use it.
Listening means remaining curious when the evidence does not fit neatly.
It means recognising that a child can love somebody and fear them.
They can miss somebody and still refuse to see them.
They can be influenced by adults and still hold genuine feelings of their own.
They can experience distress without having the vocabulary to explain where it comes from.
Above all, it means remembering that safeguarding is not an administrative exercise.
It is an attempt to understand the reality of a child’s life.
That is a legacy worth carrying forward.
Sources and further reading
- Sky News — Broadcaster and campaigner Dame Esther Rantzen dies
- NSPCC — Childline
- Childline — About Childline
- Children Act 1989 — section 1
- Practice Direction 12B — Child Arrangements Programme
- Practice Direction 12J — Child Arrangements and Domestic Abuse
- Cafcass — Our role in private law proceedings
Is your child’s voice getting lost in the paperwork?
When a child’s wishes, safeguarding concerns or a sudden breakdown in contact become central to a family court case, the evidence needs to show more than competing adult accounts.
JSH Law can help with:
- chronologies and evidence organisation;
- Cafcass and section 7 report analysis;
- identifying evidential gaps;
- position statements and schedules;
- hearing preparation;
- practical support for litigants in person.
The aim is simple: make the evidence easier to understand and keep the child’s welfare at the centre of the case.
JSH Law provides legal information and litigation support. Information on this website is general in nature and is not a substitute for advice from a regulated legal professional on the individual facts of your case.
