WA Supervision Report Inaccurate - Impact in Family Court?

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

Madagascar Madness

Well-Known Member
16 April 2018
36
2
124
Hi All...

We have received a copy of the Supervisors Report for Supervised visits due to my granddaughter being seriously physically abused while in the care of her mother. It has misquoted several things in the report and the inaccuracies are quite glaring!

They have stated I often initiated conversations with the supervisors about 'the mother'. The examples being:

On the first visit I said that "K would not come to the visit". She is 16 months old, she didn't exactly have a choice! What I actually said was 'We are not too sure if she will come to the supervisor as she doesn't like strangers very much'.

When we first dropped the children for their first visit, I said, "She is a bit confused about who mum is as she calls everyone who is a young adult female mum". They have stated 'the paternal grandmother stated the children do not know who their mum is', T is 7, I'm pretty sure he knows!

At the last visit, the mother was late and my grandson was becoming anxious as he had had one visit where she did not show up or contact us. We drove the streets for 10 minutes. We have been told the children need to be dropped of at 2.55pm. She had not arrived and we were parked up the road waiting for her. I texted the supervisor and said 'Could you please ask the mother not to be late in the future?'. It was 3.05 when we finally parked at the play centre. That 10 minutes created anxiety in my grandson!

The last one, The grandmother stated T was in a bad mood - he was! And we had to work hard for him even to come to the visit. We had to talk it up the entire way there. Of course when he got out of the car at the play centre, he was all sweetness and light. They stated, 'During the visit the child appeared relaxed and happy'.

They also stated these comments where made in front of the children. Seriously, am I stupid but not that stupid! And even if they where I do not get the big deal! I am also really concerned that they are not transparent and tell the people dropping of the children that they are also being watched.

Look I know this won't change anything, but jeez, it has made me very angry how a professional service has got things so wrong!

Of course they have recommended extended unsupervised contact based on the 6 visits she had with children but they also do not know the baby was a victim of child abuse in her care as the supervisors are not advised of the issues.

I'm frustrated and hope I haven't damaged anything but right now I have a huge feeling of guilt and like I haven't helped our case.
 

thatbloke

Well-Known Member
5 February 2018
335
42
714
Earth
Not good I'm afraid, but if it needs to be challenged, you have to call them to give evidence.

Contact centres = go in, shut up, see the kid, leave and nothing else. Why on earth did you DMS the supervisor? Who went in first? They usually stagger the times and if it was you, you should have gone in and shut up and if you were 2nd, you should have gone in at your time and shut up. Sorry.
 

Nonfiction

Well-Known Member
17 May 2018
111
13
414
Victoria
I think this could be what you would call “damage control”...especially when you already have reports substantiating harm from child protection and other evidence of harm filed in the court.

I know your son has a lawyer, so I will in no way try to usurp/override their far more informed opinion (they’ll know what to do) but will say...Whilst, usually, reports from a contact centre would not necessarily hold much weight, as compared to say, a court appointed expert/report writer, they can still have some influence/sway over the report writers views (mostly if the contact centre report precedes the family report), and also the courts... If the supervised time, as appears to be so in your sons case, has been ordered by the court.

Yes, you should have kept quiet...but what’s done is done...so to me the best thing you can do, for your grandchildren’s sake and your son’s case, at this point, if they are at risk of harm is to let the contact centre report go (do not raise your objections to the inaccuracies with the contact centre), and keep quiet in future...

With regards to recommendations of unsupervised time, as this is the first I am aware of any support of mum having unsupervised time (in this space)...I cannot tell you at this time.
 

Madagascar Madness

Well-Known Member
16 April 2018
36
2
124
Hmmm that’s a bit harsh..

I and my son or partner were just dropping off...

The words written in the two points I would definitely challenge is the one about not knowing their mum and K not wanting to go to visits. Both ridiculous comments given 1. K is a baby and 2. It’s obvious they know their mum but K would get confused and call all young women in our family mum.

I wasn’t being supervised nor was I on visits... I was dropping off!

Have spoken to my lawyer who said not to stress as things are often inaccurate by supervisors - specially when it is a passing comment.

And there is no issue with saying one of the children is in a bad mood or to remind mum to be on time.

Not good im afraid.. but if it needs to be challenged you have to call them to give evidence

Contact centres = go in, shut up, see the kid, leave and NOTHING else. Why on earth did you DMS the supervisor? Who went in first? They usually stagger the times and if it was you you should have gone in and shut up and if you were 2nd you should have gone in at your time and shut up.. sorry
 

Madagascar Madness

Well-Known Member
16 April 2018
36
2
124
The unsupervised time is recommended based on the belief that there is no risk to the child. The supervision agency does not get told the background of the child and has a huge disclaimer on the report saying the unsupervised time is only recommended in the context of what they see on the visit.

I will let it go to a certain point but my lawyer has suggested a letter to the ICL saying that a clarification of how those two point where reported needs to be made for the interest of transparency and context.

I’m going to sleep on it.




I think this could be what you would call “damage control”...especially when you already have reports substantiating harm from child protection and other evidence of harm filed in the court.

I know your son has a lawyer, so I will in no way try to usurp/override their far more informed opinion (they’ll know what to do) but will say...whilst, usually, reports from a contact centre would not necessarily hold much weight, as compared to say, a court appointed expert/report writer, they can still have some influence/sway over the report writers views (mostly if the contact centre report precedes the family report), and also the courts...if the supervised time, as appears to be so in your sons case, has been ordered by the court.

Yes, you should have kept quiet...but what’s done is done...so to me the best thing you can do, for your grandchildren’s sake and your son’s case, at this point, if they are at risk of harm...is to let the contact centre report go (do not raise your objections to the inaccuracies..with the contact centre), and keep quiet in future...

With regards to recommendations of unsupervised time, as this is the first I am aware of any support of mum having unsupervised time (in this space)...I cannot tell you at this time.
 

Nonfiction

Well-Known Member
17 May 2018
111
13
414
Victoria
The supervision agency does not get told the background of the child and has a huge disclaimer on the report saying the unsupervised time is only recommended in the context of what they see on the visit.

That’s good...not all do.


I will let it go to a certain point but my lawyer has suggested a letter to the ICL saying that a clarification of how those two point where reported needs to be made for the interest of transparency and context.

I’m going to sleep on it.

As I have said previously, your son needs to listen to his lawyer over and above...we do not know all of the facts and nor should we be told them on a public forum. I wish your son well!


Contact centres = go in, shut up, see the kid, leave and NOTHING else.

Agree. Certainly can come back to haunt litigants...amazing how the most innocent comments can be viewed as denigration by the court at times and, how many a litigants have been ordered to a post separation parenting course for comments they “think” are not harmful/consequential...
 

thatbloke

Well-Known Member
5 February 2018
335
42
714
Earth
Hmmm that’s a bit harsh

Don't take it the wrong way... you can't change what has been. I suppose my post was more for other people who are going through the contact centre situation right now or about to... just go in and go out