By 
Family law guide
“With social services investigating my ex, can I stop the children seeing her?” A father asked us that after his former partner became subject to a child protection enquiry. His two children live with him. The enquiry concerned her other children, not his. Even so, social services advised that her contact with his children should pause while it ran. We advised him on keeping the children safe without shutting their mother out. This is an anonymised account.
A father caught between safety and fairness
He felt pulled two ways. He did not want to block the other parent, and he feared an alienation claim. Yet if anything happened to the children, he would never forgive himself.
The allegations against the mother were unproven, and she disputed them. Our guide to stopping child contact covers the wider law.
Social services investigating my ex: what the law says
Under section 47 of the Children Act 1989, a local authority must make enquiries in some cases. The duty arises when it has reasonable cause to suspect that a child in its area is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm. The enquiries help it decide whether to act to safeguard the child’s welfare. An enquiry is not a finding. Our guides to the section 47 report and the social services investigation process explain each stage.
The advice to pause contact was not a court order, and no order existed about these children. The decision was his, guided by that advice.
If your ex applies to court while social services are investigating
The children’s welfare would be the court’s paramount consideration under section 1(1). If he opposed her application, section 1(2A) would apply. The court would then presume, unless the contrary is shown, that her involvement will further their welfare. Involvement can be direct or indirect. However, section 1(6) limits this to a parent who can be involved without putting the child at risk of harm. A parent is assumed to qualify, unless some evidence before the court suggests any form of involvement would put the child at risk. Under the welfare checklist, section 1(3)(e) asks about any harm the child has suffered or is at risk of suffering.
Before the first hearing, Cafcass checks with the local authority and the police. It then sends the court a safeguarding letter under Practice Direction 12B. Under section 16A, a Cafcass officer with cause to suspect a risk of harm must make a risk assessment for the court. Under section 11(3), the court can also make an order part way through the case.
How we advised him to protect the children fairly
First, we advised him to follow the local authority’s advice. He should also ask the social worker to confirm it in writing. Then nobody could say the pause was his idea alone.
Next, we helped him keep a calm, factual record. It covered dates, what social services said, the mother’s messages and how the children seemed. We advised him to leave out opinions about her.
We also helped him write a short message to the mother. It said he was following social services’ advice for now. He wanted the children to keep their bond with her and would review things when the enquiry ended.
Then we advised him to ask social services what contact would be safe meanwhile. They agreed to cards and letters, which he read first, and later to short video calls with him present.
We advised him not to make any lasting decision in anger. He should not talk to the children about the enquiry beyond what social services suggested for their ages. If he ever needed an order, he would apply on form C100.
A MIAM is usually required first under section 10 of the Children and Families Act 2014. Rule 3.8(1)(b) of the Family Procedure Rules has a child protection exemption. It applies where the child in the application, or another child of the family living with that child, is currently the subject of section 47 enquiries or a child protection plan. Her other children lived elsewhere, so we advised him not to assume the exemption applied.
The outcome: a pause, with the bond kept alive
The mother was upset and said she would go to court. Once she saw his message and the cards began, she agreed to wait for the enquiry to finish. Neither parent applied.
When the enquiry concluded, social services updated their advice. The parents then agreed a cautious step: supervised daytime visits at a contact centre. They set it out in writing, with a date to review it.
Every case turns on its own facts, so this is not a promise about any other family.
If social services are investigating your ex
Follow the safety advice and get it in writing. Keep a calm record and short, child-focused messages. Ask social services what contact is safe meanwhile, such as cards, letters or supervised calls.
Take advice before you rely on a MIAM exemption, because the child protection exemption is narrow. Read how we prepare these success stories.
“While the enquiry runs, give the children a simple reason for the pause that does not blame their mother, and note any questions they ask. Ask the social worker to tell you when the enquiry ends and what its outcome means for contact. A section 47 enquiry is how a council decides whether it should act to safeguard a child, so a pause during one is a holding step, worth revisiting as soon as that decision is made.”
Hannah Overton, Complex Children Specialist, Kabir Family Law
Talk it through with us
If social services are involved with your ex, you do not have to work out contact alone. A free initial consultation is confidential and carries no obligation. Tell us what social services have said and what your ex wants. Our family law specialists will explain your options.
The legal issue
A father's two children lived with him. No court order had ever been made about them. Their mother became the subject of a social services child protection enquiry under section 47 of the Children Act 1989 about her other children, not these children. The allegations were unproven and she disputed them. Social services advised that her contact with these children should pause while the enquiry ran. He wanted to protect the children but feared being seen as blocking their mother or being accused of alienation.
The law this rests on
- Children Act 1989 s.47(1): a local authority with reasonable cause to suspect that a child in its area is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm must make such enquiries as it considers necessary to decide whether to take action to safeguard or promote the child's welfare.
- Children Act 1989 s.1(1): the child's welfare is the court's paramount consideration.
- Children Act 1989 s.1(2A) and s.1(4)(a): where the court is considering whether to make, vary or discharge a section 8 order and that is opposed, it is to presume, unless the contrary is shown, that involvement of each parent within s.1(6)(a) will further the child's welfare.
- Children Act 1989 s.1(2B): involvement means involvement of some kind, direct or indirect, but not any particular division of a child's time.
- Children Act 1989 s.1(6): the presumption covers a parent who can be involved in the child's life in a way that does not put the child at risk of suffering harm. A parent is treated as within that group unless there is some evidence before the court in the particular proceedings to suggest that their involvement would put the child at risk of suffering harm whatever the form of the involvement.
- Children Act 1989 s.1(3)(e) and s.1(4)(a): where a section 8 order is opposed, the welfare checklist includes any harm the child has suffered or is at risk of suffering.
- Children Act 1989 s.16A: if a Cafcass officer has cause to suspect that the child is at risk of harm, the officer must make a risk assessment and provide it to the court.
- Children Act 1989 s.11(3): the court may make a section 8 order at any time during the proceedings, even though it is not in a position to dispose of them finally.
- FPR Practice Direction 12B paras 13.1, 13.3 and 13.5: on an application for a child arrangements order, before the first hearing, Cafcass seeks information from the local authority, carries out police checks and records safety issues for the court in a safeguarding letter.
- Children and Families Act 2014 s.10(1): before making a relevant family application, a person must attend a MIAM, subject to exemptions in the court rules.
- FPR rule 3.8(1)(b): MIAM exemption where the child in the application, or another child of the family living with that child, is currently the subject of section 47 enquiries or a child protection plan put in place by a local authority.
How we approached it
We advised him to follow the local authority's advice and ask the social worker to confirm it in writing. We helped him keep a calm, factual record of dates, what social services said, the mother's messages and how the children seemed, without opinions about her. We helped him write a short message to the mother explaining that he was following social services' advice for now, wanted the children to keep their relationship with her, and would look again when the enquiry ended. We advised him to ask social services what contact would be safe in the meantime, not to make any lasting decision in anger, and not to talk to the children about the enquiry beyond what social services suggested. We explained what the court and Cafcass would do if the mother applied, that any application of his own would be on form C100, and that the MIAM exemption for child protection concerns covers the child in the application or another child of the family living with that child, so he should not assume it applied here.
The outcome
Social services agreed that cards and letters could pass between the children and their mother, read by him first, and later short video calls with him present. The mother was upset at first and said she would go to court, but once she saw his message and the cards began, she agreed to wait for the enquiry to finish. Neither parent applied to court. When the enquiry concluded, social services updated their advice, and the parents agreed supervised daytime visits at a contact centre, set out in writing, with a date to review them. Every case turns on its own facts, and this is not a promise about any other family.
What to take from this
- Follow social services' safety advice while an enquiry runs, and ask for it in writing.
- An enquiry is not a finding, so keep your tone about the other parent neutral and fair.
- Keep a calm, factual record and keep messages to the other parent short and focused on the children.
- Ask social services what contact is safe in the meantime, such as cards, letters or supervised calls.
- If the other parent applies to court, the children's welfare is paramount. Where the application is opposed, the presumption of parental involvement only covers a parent who can be involved safely, and some evidence that any form of involvement would put the child at risk of harm removes the automatic assumption that they can.
- The MIAM exemption for child protection concerns is narrow, so take advice before relying on it.
Checked and approved for publication by Iblal Iqbal.
Last reviewed .
![Prest v Petrodel [2013] UKSC 34: What It Really Decided](https://www.kabirfamilylaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/Prest-v-Petrodel-1024x572.jpg)
![Radmacher v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42: What It Decided](https://www.kabirfamilylaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/Radmacher-v-Granatino-1024x572.jpg)
