A solicitor claims the legal system is “harming” children whose parents are splitting up due to the length of time it is taking to rule on access arrangements.

Shalaleh Barlow, who is based in Essex, described family courts as “undermanned” and “no longer fit for purpose”.

It comes after parents told the BBC the legal process of trying to sort out when they can see their children had taken too long, averaging 41 weeks, in which time irreversible damage was caused to relationships.

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) said it was “committed to improving the experiences and outcomes” of family court proceedings.

Ms Barlow, from the not-for-profit Central Law Group CIC in Chelmsford, said she feared the system was at “breaking point”.

“It’s unempowered, it’s undermanned and the quality of staff and magistrates is below par,” she said.

“I would not say our judges are, but we need to empower our judges to behave in a more practical and sensible way.

“Children have a right to have both safe parents fully in their lives; in our need to protect children [from abusive parents], we’re actually harming them.”

Research by the University of West London suggested about 40% of divorcees, or parents who were separated, said their ex-partner had demonstrated “parental alienating behaviours”.

The term is used to describe a parent who shows negative attitudes towards the other parent to undermine or destroy their relationship with the child.

The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass), an independent body set up by government that advises family courts about the welfare of children, says allegations of alienating behaviours are often used as a counter-allegation to a claim of domestic abuse.

Researchers said children affected by such behaviours were found to have greater signs of “serious mental stress”.

Last month, family safety campaigner Janis James, who is chief executive of Good Egg Safety, which funded the University of West London’s research, described the mental health impact of alienating behaviours as “endemic”.

“This is a massive public health issue, a legislative issue and a child protection issue,” said Ms James, who is from Northamptonshire.

In July-September last year, some 13,103 new child arrangement cases, where no safeguarding concerns were raised, began at family courts in England and Wales.

The average case took 41 weeks to reach a decision.

In the past few weeks, more than 100 parents and carers have contacted the BBC to share their experiences of the court system.

Their identities have been changed to protect those involved.

Tess, from Norfolk, said she had not seen her grandchildren for several years after her son and his wife divorced.

She claimed the family court decided on her grandchildren’s future using incorrect information from their mother.

“All the court got was a small snapshot of the family. How can you possibly make a decision like that, on a child’s life?” she asked.

“They’re called family courts, the name is there – ‘family’ – yet they seem intent on destroying families.”

Tess said they would “never stop loving” their grandchildren.

“They are constantly on my mind. We’re aged now. My husband’s got ill health and the chances of us ever seeing them again are very, very small,” she added.

Tom from Hertfordshire said he was alienated from his father as a child as he believed his mother felt hurt and rejected.

“I was told my dad didn’t care, that he didn’t want anything to do with me and he’d walked away,” he said.

“[Mum] made it all about her; it wasn’t about me. I should have been the focus, knowing I was loved by both parents but ultimately I ended up paying the price.”

Tom has since been through the family courts himself, and said he had been alienated from his own children.

He believed that while the courts often faced challenging cases, they needed to find better ways of dealing with parents.

“It’s toxic parents passing on trauma to their kids and that’s going to stay with them for a long time,” he added.

The Family Justice Council, an advisory body within the legal system, published guidance in December on how allegations of alienating behaviours were handled by the courts.

The report acknowledged those behaviours were increasingly “exploited within family litigation” and shifted the focus away from the “voice of the child”.

Simon Cobb, founder of the support group People Against Parental Alienation (Papa), has been laying wreaths and placards at family courts across the East of England to raise awareness of suicides linked to parental alienation.

“A child would want equal opportunity to spend time with both parents, but the system doesn’t allow that,” he said.

“It creates an adversary, combative situation where ultimately the child loses and ultimately one of the parents will lose… and sometimes will sadly lose their life as a result of not being able to handle the intricacies and the extent of the damage these processes cause.”

Pam Cox, the Labour MP for Colchester who sits on the parliamentary Justice Select Committee, acknowledged that family courts were struggling with backlogs, which she blamed on “decades of underfunding”.

“The [Labour] government takes child welfare extremely seriously and we want to see children’s interests put first in the courts and across the board; it’s really important we drive a court innovation programme to make that happen,” she said.

In response to claims, Sir Andrew McFarlane, president of the Family Division of the England and Wales court system and also chairman of the Family Justice Council, said: “The issue of parental alienating behaviours is a polarising one which has taken up much court time and public debate.

“The [Family Justice Council] guidance note reflects the complexity and challenges of this area of family law. It has been long-awaited.”

He said it was needed to “ensure greater consistency of approach across the courts and to improve outcomes for children and families and to protect children and victims from litigation abuse”.

An MoJ spokesperson told the BBC: “The government believes that where it is safe to do so, a child’s welfare will be furthered by the involvement of both parents in their upbringing.

“We are committed to improving the experiences and outcomes from family court proceedings, and will expand the Pathfinder pilot which has enhanced the support for families and reduced the backlogs by 50% in pilot areas.”

When asked if their staff were “under par”, the spokesperson said family magistrates were trained to work closely with social workers and court advisers to make informed decisions.

In a statement, Cafcass added: “Our understanding and practice guidance on what we refer to as ‘alienating behaviours’ has changed significantly over the past few years with our current position explained on our website.

“Our guidance and training makes it very clear that when our family court advisers assess a child’s case where the child is presenting as resistant or refuses to see a parent, they must first consider whether the child has experienced domestic abuse and if this is the reason they do not want to spend time with a parent.

“They must also always consider whether the risk of allegations of ‘parental alienation’ are being used by perpetrators of domestic abuse within family court proceedings as a form of ongoing abuse or coercive control or to deflect the court’s attention from their own behaviour.”

If you are suffering distress or despair, details of help and support in the UK are available at BBC Action Line.

Follow East of England news on X, Instagram and Facebook: BBC Beds, Herts & Bucks, BBC Essex, BBC Norfolk, or BBC Northamptonshire.