Employer letter for shared lives with order?

[KF31]

He has always communicated with her, she won’t let him have her number but then asks to call him and withholds the number. He’s never said no to her calling and she emails to and he’s never said no to that either. She just has an issue saying she wants no communication but then contacts him anyway.

Anyway it’s all over until the judgement comes through. Apparently she went to him with Cafcass again to ask if he would accept shared residence of just the one child and the other child can decide if they want to go for contact but can’t be made to go if the child doesn’t want to, obviously he turned this straight down and she turned to Cafcass saying that this was what she had to deal with and he’s never willing to co-operate.
So the judge spoke to Cafcass with regards to dads concerns that they have been pretty much useless (obviously he didn’t put it across that way). Cafcass stuck to their guns and said she was sticking by her reports, but the judge did ask if she thought shared care could work and the Cafcass officer reluctantly said yes. Dad had spoken to Cafcass alone to explain what he was asking for but she just didn’t accept it and told the court she didn’t think his proposal of extra days would work.
Basically he gets Fri to Mon every other week and he’s asking for thurs to Tues with contact increasing by a day each month to reach this so there’s a stepped approach for the kids.

Cafcass didn’t even bother to explain his proposal properly to the judge, just said that dad wanted an extra 2 days. Luckily he had the draft order so he asked to give the judge a copy so she could see what his intentions were. Cafcass officer was not bothered about the breaches mum had admitted to. Seems funny that Cafcass recommend equal share of school holidays but then say extra time in the week wouldn’t work

So now the judge will do a written judgement which will take 1-2 weeks. McKenzie friend is optimistic that the judge seems to be considering shared care. The school holidays have been near enough agreed, so it’s basically a case of deciding if it’s shared care, if he gets the extra days and if the order will be enforced and a sanction given. With the last point I don’t see how they can’t enforce it seeing how many breaches mum admitted to.

 

[Ash]

Cafcass officer was not bothered about the breaches mum had admitted to. Seems funny that Cafcass recommend equal share of school holidays but then say extra time in the week wouldn’t work

Cafcass don't give a flying monkeys that a Mother has breached an order. In fact they usually act as if the Mother is always right and above the law! That is my experience and is why I think enforcement is a joke. A tip for the future - if you need it. I believe it's better to apply to vary than to enforce. It's the same thing with all the same reasons but doesn't get caught up in the convoluted inadequate enforcement system.

They say extra time in the week "won't work" because they are intrinsically programmed to think children should live with Mothers and midweek is "care time"., It's all compelete bollocks - it makes no difference whether it's a school day or a week-end. But there is this ganging up with Mum thing that if it's day to day things like getting ready for school, doing packed lunches and donating to the jumble sale - it should be the Mother and nobody else. It's reverse feminism!

Hope he gets his Thursday to Tuesday with both kids. Every other week-end isn't enough. Shared care should be ordered to show the Mother that she has some aspect of PR removed if she breaches orders. I hope you get one or the other - either the time or the shared care. I think he may find he will need to return to court again in the future by the sound of it - unless he gets everything he wants at this hearing. But at least he gets half the holidays (that's important).

Sometimes it takes a few stages before the court really come down on a difficult ex.

 

[KF31]

That’s exactly how Cafcass acted by all accounts, agreed with everything mum suggested and fobbed off all dads suggestions as “unable to work”.
Funny thing is Cafcass called at the weekend to speak to the children to get an update on their wishes. It was done in a separate room but dad heard and both children were asked how they would feel about spending more time with him in the week and both children said they would like it. So even when the child tells them what they would like they still don’t listen.

 

[Ash]

It's disgusting isn't it. How dare they have power over when a parent sees their own child! How dare they assume that they know best! Some Cafcass officers are ok - some are outrageously biased and bigoted. Karen Woodall (PA expert) gets wound up about it and says the problem is that Cafcass (who are social workers) are still trained to a 1970s feminist model of "Mother knows best". What gets lost in the middle of all this is, the only reason it's in court in the first place is because a Mother won't be reasonable over sharing the children with the other parent!

I think the courts should get rid of Cafcass and replace them with psychologists. And accept that when there are no welfare issues, the children need BOTH parents equally. Cafcass are notorious for protecting Mums and not protecting children. Rant over.

 

[KF31]

Oh I completely agree, they are so biased it’s unreal. I don’t know how someone can be there supposedly for “the best interests of the child” and then go against everything that would be best for the child. As for PA they are useless with it, they state no PA has taken place yet mum admits to just under 30 breaches of obstructing contact. You couldn’t write it.
Through all of this I’ve helped with statements, I’ve made bundles etc, drawn up documents last minute, and done endless online research and I see sites that state that despite belief the courts are not automatically in favour or biased to the mother, but they are. They follow what Cafcass say and if your male your lucky if Cafcass want to know

 

[Km5]

I think the courts should get rid of Cafcass and replace them with psychologists. And accept that when there are no welfare issues, the children need BOTH parents equally. Cafcass are notorious for protecting Mums and not protecting children.

I've long thought this far better and would give a better representation in Court Hearing circumstances of what 'parental alienation' is and the long lasting damage it causes to children. It is abuse and nothing else and should be severely punished.

I would welcome a far harsher penalty for making allegations against the the other parent in any Court document / statement to which if they cannot be clearly substantiated, then that parent should automatically lose any rights to having a lives with both parent order.

For those that breach Court Orders which should be viewed as serious documents to be complied with ( given after considerable expense and time not to mention the emotional roller coaster of spending months going through the Family Court process, I would make it much simpler so that the consequences of breaching / disregarding Court Orders is fully understood.

First breach a suspended prison sentence and costs awarded for a breach hearing given to the other parent.

Second breach would be a week spent in prison.

Sadly neither will happen as there is not the political will to any make meaningful change and too many vested interests in keeping the broken Family Court system hobbling along. When we read of some of the cases and go back to our own painful, expensive and mentally challenging
experiences the notion that the system upholds the Children's Welfare Act as it's absolute priority is often utterly disgraceful.

 

[Ash]

The issue with enforcement is the breach has to be "without reasonable excuse" - which can be hard to prove. Sometimes it's obvious. No doubt the Mother's reasoning is - I can't make the child go, they don't want to. That is usually viewed suspiciously (and yes is an excuse alienators believe) but Cafcass tend to believe Mothers. To be fair I think most people would struggle to believe the abuse of Parental Alienation because that would mean accepting that a parent - a Mother in this case, was capable of damaging their child out of hatred for the other parent. ie they couldn't put their children first.

Cafcass will go with the - child doesn't want to go - thing. And believe the Mother. I have had a bad experience with this and I will never forgive that Cafcass officer for enabling my ex to put my son through something (and Cafcass basically blamed my son - without knowing him - and said he must be lying). I hope the woman rots in hell frankly. It affected the whole of my son's teenage years (the pandemic coming along didn't help).

And it gave his Mother total control over him.

Sorry I'm digressing again. How old are the kids - particularly the one she is witholding? Their ages can affect the strategies now.

 

[KF31]

They are 9 and 10, she tried to stop the contact with the older one. He barely had any contact for almost a year. Mum gave three different excuses for none contact until she found one that stuck. At one point there was a call between mum dad and child. Mum slated dad on the call and kept reinforcing bad things to the child about dad. I told him to record the call before it went ahead. After that I did a full transcript, the call was 40 mins long. The video was also submitted but It was that transcript that yesterday made the judge realise just what mum had been doing and allowed her to see that dad had been trying to help but all she did was belittle him and tell the child what she thought of him

 

[KF31]

First breach a suspended prison sentence and costs awarded for a breach hearing given to the other parent.

Second breach would be a week spent in prison.

Trouble is they’re reluctant to give prison Sentences because they say it’s not in the child’s best interest for their mother to go to jail. Yet it’s the mothers actions of not doing what’s in the children’s best interest that will have caused the situation in the first place. Oh the hypocrisy!

 

[Km5]

Sadly a very clear example of cruelty inflicted on very young children of having to listen and be a part of that call and the mother believed was perfectly acceptable behaviour and parenting. Yet a CAFCASS officer being a part of the hearing and chooses not to fully stand up for the child's best interests shows how far the system is broken and failing our children. A Judge being pushed to read the evidence makes it even worse.

Both you and your partner seemingly could not have done anything more in both hearings and your patience, tenacity and belief is to be applauded.

I very much hope you get the decision that is deserved.

 

[KF31]

Sadly a very clear example of cruelty inflicted on very young children of having to listen and be a part of that call and the mother believed was perfectly acceptable behaviour and parenting. Yet a CAFCASS officer being a part of the hearing and chooses not to fully stand up for the child's best interests shows how far the system is broken and failing our children. A Judge being pushed to read the evidence makes it even worse.

Both you and your partner seemingly could not have done anything more in both hearings and your patience, tenacity and belief is to be applauded.

I very much hope you get the decision that is deserved.

Thank you, my partners not the best at paper work so I did that side, but it’s obviously his pushing along with the mckenzie friend in court that got him as far as he did. Luckily I made the decision to keep a written record of every handover and contact he had with mum or anyone associated with her, so when this happened we had a timeline history already established.
My partner spoke to Cafcass alone today and asked her directly if she had bothered to look at the evidence of the breaches, she admitted she hadn’t. He suggested she did to have an idea of what the children have had to go through, she refused. He then told her that he didn’t feel she had supported the children adequately but he said it was like talking to a brick wall.

 

[Km5]

Trouble is they’re reluctant to give prison Sentences because they say it’s not in the child’s best interest for their mother to go to jail. Yet it’s the mothers actions of not doing what’s in the children’s best interest that will have caused the situation in the first place. Oh the hypocrisy!

.....and every Court Order says that failing to adhere to its conditions can result in unpaid work, a fine or a prison sentence. Very very rarely does this ever happen of which the CAFCASS Officers, Family Solicitors and Barristers know all too well.
The abusing parents know this equally as well and so it continues to a race to the bottom - with stress, heartache and a feeling of helplessness in that there are no real consequences for being able to do as you want if you see yourself at all times as being the most important parent rather than an equal parent.

It breads contempt of the system and furthers alienation and abuse of those it should be protecting.

 

[Ash]

However the best penalty is curbing the Mother's parental responsibility by taking away sole residency. Because this is a deterrant to not following court orders in case they take even more away.

If they are 9 and 10 you are doing well to act now. The Mother will be doing what so many do, playing the "old enough to choose for themselves" card. Mine did it when my son had just started secondary school.

 

[KF31]

Yes, he got an email basically saying that off her. I said to him yesterday that to me the only reason for her to offer shared residence of one child and not the other is cause she will have plans to try and continue the alienating.

 

[Ash]

It's important to try and get the shared care now, yes. And it's a shame Cafcass are too dense to see there is an agenda for the future here.

Also important to have the order say the children come straight from school and are dropped off directly at school. Otherwise you;ll get the situation where you go to pick them up from hers and she'll say "he's out wiht his friends" or - he's busy and doesn't want to come.

 

[KF31]

Yes the interim order already says pick up and drop off at school and he’s requested to the judge that if stays that way. We can’t put anything else forward now cause the case has ended. Dad has submitted his interim order, the judge asked mum if she had one or wanted to submit one and she said no. So now it’s just a case of waiting for the judgement

 

[Ash]

It should be for a final order shouldn't it? What the Judge will need to look at is - what will work best for the child long term - and whose proposal sounds most reasonable and workable. Bearing in mind children have a right to a significant relationship with both parents.

 

[KF31]

Yes it’s final order. Judge asked them both to do a draft order on Monday ready for Tuesday. Dad submitted his and when the judge asked mum for hers she said she hadnt bothered doing one. Judge asked if she agreed with what dad had put forward she said she agreed but not about shared residency, that he could have shared residency of one child but the other should be able to decide if she wants contact and if she doesn’t want to go she don’t have to. By all accounts mums attitude throughout the hearing was I don’t care. When the judge asked if she admitted the breaches she told the judge “yeah I’ve got nothing to hide, I’m not bothered”

 

[KF31]

Dad has submitted his interim order, the judge asked mum if she had one or wanted to submit one and she said no. So now it’s just a case of waiting for the judgement

Sorry, I said previously that dad had submitted his interim order but i meant draft order

 

[KF31]

So as of yet my partner is still waiting to receive the order from the judge, so we’re still waiting to find out if he has shared care, if the extra time he has requested has been granted and if any sanction is going to be given to his ex for multiple breaches of the previous order.
The judge told my partner he should get the order within 7-14 days, last week he contacted the court to get an update and they told him it hadn’t been written yet and that it can sometimes take longer in more serious cases. They advised him to call again on Wednesday if he hasn’t received anything.
Does anyone know how long we could potentially be waiting? In previous cases the judgement has always been given at the final hearing.