Childcare arrangements — professionally supervised contact — exposure to risk — paedophile — lawyer to assist — Care of Children Act 2004, s 132, 133 & 139A — Family Court Act 1980, s 9C. The applicant father, who had day-to-day care of the parties' child, sought an order for professionally-supervised contact when the child was with her mother. The mother in response sought day-to-day care of the child. The mother's former partner was a convicted paedophile currently serving a prison sentence and the mother had faced some charges in relation to the offending. A report commissioned for the proceedings identified the mother as being susceptible to flattery, a technique used by paedophiles against impressionable mothers to gain access to their children. The mother was self-represented and it was unclear whether she qualified for legal aid. Under s 9C of the Family Court Act 1980, a court could appoint a lawyer to assist. Here the lawyer was appointed to assist in cross-examination but the Judge noted that the lawyer had also helped to ascertain the mother's position, which was within the bounds of the legislative provision. In determining whether to grant the order for professionally supervised contact or grant the mother day-to-day care, the child's welfare and best interests were paramount. The Judge considered that until expert psychological evidence addressed the mother's vulnerability, it was not in the child's best interest to grant her day-to-day care. The Judge granted the order for professionally-supervised contact, progressing the current contact arrangements to full day contact over a period of time. Judgment Date: 9 June 2017. * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *