makes you the enemy
When being a parent
It is often difficult for separated parents to put aside issues they
might have with their former partner and promote a healthy
relationship between that parent and the child, particularly in
circumstances where one parent has been hurt by the other.
The very lack of love, trust and goodwill
that led to the b reakdown of the
relationship in the first place can often
permeate into the relationship between the
parents and the children, particularly when
one parent is set upon ensuring that the
children are aware of what the other parent
might have done to cause the breakdown
of the relationship and when one wants
to ensure the other parent pays for their
actions as a consequence. However, one
must be extremely cautious not to do
exactly that.
In the case of W v G [2015] EW Misc B47,
the Judge ordered that in circumstances
where the mother had sought to distance
the children from their father and diminish
him from their lives, the children (aged 4
and 5) should live with their father as a
result of their mother not being able to
meet their emotional needs due to her
ill-feelings towards the father. In this case
there were previous proceedings which
resulted in a shared care arrangement for
the children to split their time between
their mother and father. Unfortunately,
the mother continued to demonstrate her
lack of ability to support the children’s
relationship with their father and continued
to denigrate him in front of the children.
This led to the father returning the
matter back to court by making a further
application for a Child Arrangements Order.
Having considered the evidence provided,
the Judge turned to the Welfare Checklist
for guidance on what would be in the
76
children’s best interests. The Welfare
Checklist is as follows;
1. T
he ascertainable wishes and feelings of
the child concerned
2. H
is/her physical, emotional and
educational needs
3. T
he likely effect on him/her of any
change in his/her circumstances
4. H
is/her age, sex, background, and any
characteristics of his/her which the court
consider relevant
5. A
ny harm which he/she has suffered or
is at risk of suffering
6. H
ow capable each of his/her parents
and any other person in relation to
whom the court considers the question
to be relevant is of meeting his/her
needs
Having considered each of the above
issues, the Judge in this case decided
that he had little confidence in the mother
changing for the better and is unlikely to be
able to promote and prioritise the children’s
needs above her own. In circumstances
where the father was able to demonstrate
that he is capable of meeting the children’s
physical, practical and emotional needs, it
was ordered that the children should reside
with him permanently and spend time
with the mother on a fortnightly basis. In
addition, the mother’s exercise of parental
responsibility was also curtailed.
When delivering Judgement, His Honour
Judge Lochrane reported the following;
‘I appreciate that this order, or these
orders, may be regarded as an interference
with the family rights of the maternal family.
All rights under the Convention, however,
apply to all family members and must, in
my judgement, be balanced. For reasons
which have become apparent, I regard it
as necessary and proportionate in these
two boys’ welfare interests to interfere
to the extent that I have done with the
maternal family’s rights. They are entitled,
in my judgement, if possible, to a safe and
secure environment, in which they have the
best prospects of achieving their potential,
without the distracting burden of the
irrelevant and destructive adult agendas. In
my judgement, they would find that more
obviously in their father’s home than in their
mother’s.
Usually, the court must look at the status
quo being maintained so as not to disrupt
the children’s usual routine and lifestyle.
Only in exceptional circumstances will
there be a departure from the status quo.
It is clear that any attempt by one parent
to denigrate the children and make them
‘pick a side’ will not support the idea of the
status quo being maintained and could
potentially invite an order being made to
the contrary. When it can be demonstrated
that one parent has misused parental
responsibility to frustrate the other parent’s
relationship with the child, one is at real risk
of their right to be involved in the important
decision making relating to the child’s
education or health being withdrawn and
the children being moved to lived with the
other parent.
What can be done in situations where
you feel as though your alleged actions,
or lack of, are being used against you?
Parents must look at other ways to
resolve their differences for the sake of
their children. It is absolutely essential,
now more than ever, that parent’s are
able to put their differences aside and
get on with co-parenting their children
in an effective way. A Parenting Plan is
a good method of trying to at least build
bridges and understand what each parent
needs to maintain a healthy and balanced
relationship with their children.
Parents need to think very carefully about
the ‘next step’ if they find themselves in
a position where their relationship is not
being promoted by the other parent or the
children are being used as battering rams
against them.
By Tia Clarke