The Children and Family Courts Advisory and Support Service exists to help Judges in the family courts to make the best decisions about the children whose cases are brought before them.

 They deal with both 'private' and 'public' law cases. Broadly the first is where parents cannot agree on the parenting of their children and go to law about it. The second is where state authorities feel they have to intervene to protect children who may have been abused or neglected.

ASP is mainly concerned with the first group. Most of CAFCASS's work, however, is with the second. That is the one that gets nearly all the attention of the media.

 There is probably not enough room in cyberspace for a summary of all that is wrong with CAFCASS. Broadly, however, it is that there is a lot they don't do to promote the rights of children to both their parents. There could be still more that they could do - if they were given the right and resources to do it.

But it is an agency to promote the welfare of children, and with appropriate changes it could do a lot better than it does.

 Their senior management is more positive than their staff on the ground. Again and again when one of our people has a bad experience - and there are enough of them - , there is a willingness of senior management to do better.

Other posts will come back to this.

 But the best of intentions have been derailed by the 'Peter Connelly case'. He was a baby killed by his carers as a result of the failures of public authorities to take action.

As a result, Social Services are intervening spectacularly more often - and CAFCASS and the Courts have been simply overwhelmed

Though the problem is nearly all in 'public law',  children under 'private law' have lost out, because resources and attention has been diverted into the cases that might get into the media.

CAFCASS-baiting has become a sport for politicians, other agencies and the media.

ASP is fair minded, and has got to come to their defence when it is due.

The latest slating has come from the 'Public Accounts Committee' of the House of Commons. CAFCASS is 'not fit for purpose', its senior management defective  etc.

Excuse me, the issues are child welfare ones. What is the expertise of specialists in public accounts? Perhaps the issue is that their new Chair, Margaret Hodge, is a former Minister for Children. She is considered the worst performer in that post since it was instituted. And was the person responsible, in that capacity, for setting up the current CAFCASS management.

A not too unfair summary of their report would be as follows. CAFCASS management were incompetent in not being prepared for a development that no-one could have anticipated. And since they did not have the resources to cope, they resorted to doing their job more hurriedly and less well.

ASP's attitude to CAFCASS is like that of a good parent whose child has got into trouble. We cannot condone the behaviour, but we are still there for you.

We hope our fair criticism will have more impact if we rally to their defence against palably unfair ones.