[2025] EWHC 1713 (Fam)

At the outset of the hearing I was informed by Ms. Guha of “very serious developments earlier this week”.These were summarised in an email received fromthe Cafcass Officer (Ms. Veitch). The email recorded she had received a telephone call from a social worker at City X children’s social care. They had received a referral from B’s General Practitioner (‘GP’). M had reported to the GP that B had told her that “papa” had tickled her on her “front bottom” and described a “rusty earring” that he had “put in” her. M was concerned about sexualised play and possibly abuse. The GP did not examine or speak with B but made a referral to social care. A social worker from City X’s safeguarding hub thereafter spent a significant period of time speaking with B and completing direct work with her. B did speak about papa’s rusty earring but did not say he did anything of concern with it and she did not repeat any of the allegations M had reported to the GP. The social worker told Ms. Veitch she spent a long time and used various creative methods to explore B’s experience, for example asking her to point to the places on her body where F tickled her, but she only pointed to safe and expected areas of her body and made no allegations. The social worker also spoke to B about her body parts to ascertain the words she uses for her bottom, vulva and vagina. She did not use the words alleged and made no allegations about those parts of her body during this. B spoke positively about the time she spent with F and the games they played.