Australia's #1 for Law
Join 150,000 Australians every month. Ask a question, respond to a question and better understand the law today!
FREE - Join Now

Complex16

Well-Known Member
27 July 2016
118
15
454
Hi all,

I am looking for some fresh eyes/perspectives and guidance please on final orders to seek in my matter. Happy to answer questions if you need further info, but will provide a summary to kick things off :-D

Current consent orders are that I have sole parental responsibility on an interim basis, that my son live with me and that he spend two supervised hours per fortnight at a contact centre. There is a current protection order in place naming my son and I (consent without admissions).

The family report summarised what we both said to her during our respective interviews with recommendations that the father undergo further random drug and alcohol screening and that a full psychiatric assessment be conducted for us both. An updated report is due to be carried out shortly which will include the family report writer observing my son and his father during one of the supervised visits.

The psychiatric assessment identified narcissistic and anti-social characteristics in the father and expressed concern about the welfare of my son in his care unsupervised if upon testing of the facts my account was to be believed over the father's. It also recommended that the father commence mental health treatment however stated that it is difficult to treat what is "not acknowledged".

The supervised visits have been going since last July and on the face of it appear to be going well. My son seems to look forward to them and I encourage him (he is 3) to have fun and enjoy his time. However, following each of the visits he displays changed behaviour, mostly clingy and not wanting me to leave him (even to go to the bathroom).

The history of our relationship is one of significant DV (hence the protection order). Drug and alcohol abuse on the part of the father, threats of suicide, abduction of our son, to harm me etc. I have been seeing a psychologist for some time now to deal with what I endured and to receive strategies for how to continue to parent effectively and assist with anxiety and PTSD following the relationship.

Our matter has been set down for trial later in the year. I have a number of witnesses that will be called to recount their own experiences with the father (two partners prior to me, two after) of DV and their children being subjected and exposed to it. One included physical assault where the father was charged.

The father has an extensive criminal history, mostly related to DUI's however it does include the physical assault of his previous partner. There is also record of him punching himself in the head in a police station and screaming that the police were assaulting him.

I have been able to submit evidence to corroborate all I have stated in my affidavit's including copies of text messages, public FB posts made by the father etc. The father continues to rely solely on his affidavit and is his only witness for trial. My GP and psychologist will also be called to detail the effect on me (Russell v Close).

To date I have been seeking a no contact order with a fall back of supervised time continuing indefinitely. The main basis being that he will continue to expose our son to family violence which places him at an unacceptable risk of harm. I honestly do not believe that with what I have experienced and all that I know that I can voluntarily put forward any unsupervised time arrangement (I understand this is likely to be a major flaw). If however the court was to order this I would obviously comply however would require significant assistance from my psychologist in order to do so.

I guess I'm just looking for thoughts or suggestions on alternative final orders if you believe based on the above a no contact order will not likely be made.

Thanks in advance...
 

AllForHer

Well-Known Member
23 July 2014
3,664
684
2,894
What is Dad seeking?
 

AllForHer

Well-Known Member
23 July 2014
3,664
684
2,894
Well, he probably won't get 50/50, that's for sure.

Do I think the Court will order no contact on a final basis? Probably not, but it really depends on how dad reflects on his actions at trial.

Some parents go into a trial adament they have done nothing wrong, that the other parent is exclusively to blame. Those are the parents who wind up with no-contact orders on a final basis.

But if dad goes into Court and finds the judge is essentially telling him he's going to lose a relationship with his kid if he doesn't consider his position more carefully, that might hit a nerve enough for him to actually get the mental health treatment that has been advised to him. If dad makes concessions for his actions, the Court will probably still see value to the child of having a meaningful relationship with dad, so a no-contact order wouldn't be considered in the best interests of the child.

However, in light of what has happened (if, of course, all that you allege aligns with what the Court finds), I think there's a good chance the Court will order the child's time with dad to be supervised on a long-term basis.

Looking ahead 15 years, I think it's better for your son to have an opporunity to develop an opinion of his father, rather than none at all. If your son grows up to know only what you've told him, without any 'balancing' influence from his father directly, then he's eventually going to reach an age of independence where he realises there's two sides to every story. In that context, he might seek his father out to hear his side, and if dad is a narcissist, then who knows what that might be?

Supervised time at a contact centre is safe for children, I don't think your son would be at risk of harm from seeing his dad for two or three hours a month at a contact centre, but it will give your son the opportunity to develop an opinion of his own about his father. I also note your observation that the child seems to enjoy his time with his dad, so if your son's love compels your ex to be a better person and a better father, then your son can probably benefit from that, too.

You could impose conditions - that he is restrained by injunction from consuming any drugs or alcohol for at least 24 hours prior to and during his time with the child, that he shall subject himself to drug tests as requested at random by you, that he shall subject himself to mental health treatment and shall provide you with proof of such, as some examples. You could even seek such orders as conditions for supervised time, and seek no contact orders as the alternative if dad refuses to comply.

Those are my thoughts, anyway.
 

Rod

Lawyer
LawConnect (LawTap) Verified
27 May 2014
7,726
1,056
2,894
www.hutchinsonlegal.com.au
Russell & Close is a high hurdle to achieve and all you can do is try.

Though a 3yr being clingy is not unusual and may have nothing to do with the father per se, but more about missing you.

There is the potential downside as the child grows older he may resent you for removing his father from his life. Sometimes kids need to make that decision themselves as they grow older, not you.

Tough situation and I understand your concerns, just not sure a no contact is the right approach. If the court feels like you are interfering in Dad's access applying for a no contact order may work against you. May be better to say you have no problems once the Dad addresses certain issues and receives the all clear.

Edit update: Just read AllForHer's post after posting my reply. I concur.
 

Complex16

Well-Known Member
27 July 2016
118
15
454
Thanks so much for your responses AllForHer and Rod, much appreciated and I will take everything on board, so thanks again.

AllForHer just to clarify, are you suggesting that I seek the supervised time indefinitely with those conditions (and possibly others) with the fall back position being no contact if the father is unable to satisfy those conditions? I am just wondering how that would work in reality - as aren't the final orders supposed to reduce the likelihood of further court action?

Sorry I'm just trying to get my head around the actual logistics of that scenario. If the conditions are not met does that mean more filing (of say a contravention order?). I imagine it would have to go back before the judge in order to then change to a no contact order?

We have had an interesting experience with this contact centre. I have never truly felt safe during drop off and pick ups, which unfortunately was only exacerbated by some intimidatory action on the father's part. My lawyer wrote to him and requested he cease his actions which he appears to have done which is great. But, the contact centre have allowed him to leave the centre prior to the agreed time which has meant him coming up beside us in traffic (heart stopping moments) and also allow him to bring gifts on "non-special" occasions (their service agreement specifically states special occasions only such as birthdays and Christmas).

My son was starting to correlate a visit with his dad = presents. It is difficult to explain to him when a visit does not produce a gift when he has gotten used to receiving them.

In addition to the above, the father requested that his partner and her children be allowed to take part in the visits. I had my concerns about this, however my lawyer advised me to agree and so I did. It has now come to light that he was seeing another woman at the same time and ceased his relationship with his previous partner not long after the first visit her and her children took part in. My son therefore met the ex partner and her children at the contact centre on just one occasion.

It turns out the ex-partner had previous DOCS involvement for leaving her children in the care of her eldest who was then just 7 years of age so she could go clubbing (probably not relevant). It worries and concerns me that the father pushed for her to take part in visits - I don't see how it was ever in my son's best interests to meet her or her children. They also never lived together, so weren't married or in a de facto relationship.

The contact centre reports are quite "fluffy" if that makes sense. They played with this activity for 20 minutes then moved on to such and such activity. There is no mention of commentary occurring between my son and the father however I am not really sure if there is meant to be? It would be great if there was though. My son has come home from some visits telling me that "daddy is going to buy me new bunk beds for his house" etc. and "daddy says I should stay with him, not you". All of which produces issues on many levels, with the least of which being how to manage my son's expectations in those regards. Not easy...

My fear is that one day my son is likely to provide too much information about where we live (innocently). It appears to me that the father's manipulation has already commenced in the current contact centre environment. The father recently requested a change in contact centre to be closer to where he lived (the current one is not close to either of us) however I indicated that our son was familiar with the staff at the current centre and therefore visits should continue there at least until trial (which he is, and it has taken some time for him to get to that familiar place). However, I would be open to a change in contact centre as part of the final orders but possibly somewhere in between where we both live.

I lay awake every night thinking over our situation and going back and forth between "he should make up his own mind" when he's older about his father and "I need to shield him from the inevitable". Admittedly I do struggle with trying to find the balance with this, which has played a part in seeking your opinions. I sincerely wish he were someone we could "share" our son with and I could just send him a text to see if he is still right to pick him up after daycare on Friday etc.

I do like the notion of placing conditions on the supervised contact - I have been able to demonstrate his lack of ability to follow orders (whether directed by police, a court etc.). He has breached the protection order on multiple occasions (only minor thankfully and not safety related but upon the advice of my lawyer each have been reported to the police) and he recently stated in court that he has never breached the order nor has there been any police involvement.

I obtained a copy of the transcript and provided this to my lawyer - the protection order was due to expire earlier this year and so I sought an extension and that is running concurrently in the magistrate's court. He also made a very public post about what transpired during one of the FCC appearances which identified me and was very denigrating (another breach). My lawyer cautioned him on this and informed him it was a breach of the Family Law Act and the police seem to think they will take that one further...

I will have a look over the minute of orders I previously submittted (I self-represented for the first 4 appearances but it just got too much) and also review additional case law. I have found a great deal about narcissists and the concerns re their parenting as they put their own needs first etc. But I haven't been able to find much re no contact orders being sought and associated outcomes. If anyone knows of any and can suggest these that would be great, thank you.

Thanks again...
 

AllForHer

Well-Known Member
23 July 2014
3,664
684
2,894
In answer to your first question, what you can do is essentially ask the Court to make one of two sets of orders - like a first preference and a second preference.

First preference is no contact.

Second preference is supervised contact, with conditions. If those conditions aren’t met, for example, time is withheld until other conditions are met - a positive drug test might trigger a period of time being suspended until two negative tests are returned in a three-month period, for example.

As to dad’s other actions, like taking a short-term partner and telling the child he’s buying a bed for him, are really only issues for you because you’re burdened with having to deal with the consequences, but when we say to let the child work it out on his own, it’s those very things that are going to hurt your son’s view of his dad over the years to come. Nobody wants their kid to have to deal with these kinds of challenges, but in my experience, children become more resentful toward to the parent they see to have been an obstruction, than to the parent who they see to have been obstructed, even if it was for good reason.

I think it’s better for kids to grow up having an opportunity to decide for themselves because it leads to less resentment and a lot more understanding in the long run.
 

Rod

Lawyer
LawConnect (LawTap) Verified
27 May 2014
7,726
1,056
2,894
www.hutchinsonlegal.com.au
Agreed. Your best role is in support of your child, not as protector. You provide a safe haven where your kid can come back to when he needs it.

By all means look ahead and stop your kid entering into areas more likely than not to cause permanent injury, but do not stop a kid getting experiences where they'll merely be hurt and can recover. A 'fall' can be a good learning experience and teach the kid caution.
 

Complex16

Well-Known Member
27 July 2016
118
15
454
In answer to your first question, what you can do is essentially ask the Court to make one of two sets of orders - like a first preference and a second preference.

First preference is no contact.

Second preference is supervised contact, with conditions. If those conditions aren’t met, for example, time is withheld until other conditions are met - a positive drug test might trigger a period of time being suspended until two negative tests are returned in a three-month period, for example.

As to dad’s other actions, like taking a short-term partner and telling the child he’s buying a bed for him, are really only issues for you because you’re burdened with having to deal with the consequences, but when we say to let the child work it out on his own, it’s those very things that are going to hurt your son’s view of his dad over the years to come.

Nobody wants their kid to have to deal with these kinds of challenges, but in my experience, children become more resentful toward to the parent they see to have been an obstruction, than to the parent who they see to have been obstructed, even if it was for good reason.

I think it’s better for kids to grow up having an opportunity to decide for themselves because it leads to less resentment and a lot more understanding in the long run.

Ok I see what you're saying re the orders. I have reviewed my minute of orders and it looks like I have done that but they might just need rejigging and a few more conditions included. The current orders for instance do require him to refrain from using drugs or alcohol before a visit etc. I did them as part of my response when I was self-represented so prior to the family report and psychiatrist assessment/report.

In the first section I had the no contact request, sole parental responsibility etc. Then I stated that in the event that the Court sees fit to order supervised time between the father and our son that:-

1. The father shall undergo a full psychiatric assessment

2. The father shall attend upon a psychiatrist for treatment and thereafter:

(a) attend upon that psychiatrist at such frequency as deemed appropriate by that psychiatrist;
(b) continue to attend upon that psychiatrist until such attendance is deemed unnecessary;
(c) provide to the psychiatrist an irrevocable authority to enable that psychiatrist to contact and advise the police/the court in the event that he disengages with that psychiatrist against medical advice and/or that his mental health declines such that our son or myself are at risk if we were to have contact.

3. The father shall comply with the recommendations and prescriptions made by his treating psychiatrist.

4. The father shall commence and complete a drug and alcohol rehabilitation program;

5. The father shall commence and complete a domestic and family violence course;

6. The father shall have supervised time with our son as may be facilitated by the XX Contact Centre for not less than two (2) hours per month for a period of 12 months, following which if points 1 through 5 above have been met the frequency shall increase to not less than two (2) hours per fortnight.

7. Both the father and I be restrained from denigrating the other parent or the members of the family or friends of the other parent in the presence or hearing of our son and that we shall use our best endeavours to ensure that no other person does so.
 

Complex16

Well-Known Member
27 July 2016
118
15
454
Agreed. Your best role is in support of your child, not as protector. You provide a safe haven where your kid can come back to when he needs it.

By all means look ahead and stop your kid entering into areas more likely than not to cause permanent injury, but do not stop a kid getting experiences where they'll merely be hurt and can recover. A 'fall' can be a good learning experience and teach the kid caution.

Thanks Rod - totally understand. The potential for physical harm can be minimised (if not completely removed) with visits continuing at a contact centre. I'd like to see the contact centre be more "on the ball" with the conversation that takes place between the father and our son at these visits - however believe that the potential for psychological harm can be managed within the confines of a contact centre also especially if the supervisors remain within earshot at all times (which I don't believe they do now).

I probably don't need to do any major changes to my minute of orders then as I have already put forth a long-term supervision scenario.