A Very Unusual Case (Family Law)

escapegoat

Hello all. I'm not looking for legal advice although it is hard to come by round these parts. I was intended to be a solicitor myself as an aside.

I am embroiled in a family law case which is now in it's 9th year ongoing in what should have been a routine open and shut access hearing.

Except for some very unusual decisions and events, to say the least.

Initial background: The child’s mother went back to work shortly after he was born so I was the stay-at-home dad by default. They were both staying with me at my address. When the child was approximately 2, his mother acquired an apartment in another town - hence the access case.

As the child had been living with me until then but was also recently as of then attending the creche where his mother worked, I believed that the most logical and feasible solution was to request that he spent weekends with me so as to not interrupt his (or her) routine. It would also have suited me as I was looking to get back to work.

He was among the brightest and happiest of children by all accounts. Kind, considerate, caring etc. and many people had commented at the time on our great relationship and the good parenting that I was doing. We would be out in the community daily at the playground, in the swimming pool, at funfairs/the circus etc. or simply kicking a ball around the estate. The usual things.

At the first hearing some 9 years ago, in spite of the above, the judge not only didn't grant us weekend access but decided 'in the child's best interest' that access would take place then fortnightly, but at a 3rd address... i.e. not my house, nor his mother’s newly acquired residence, but in a third town which was not personally connected to either of us at the time, and most certainly not to the child. A decision I found very strange in general, and had not heard anything similar to that before.

It just so happens that this address was a location where a person lives under whose care I was abused for decades (more on that later). So that was the first hearing wherein the first unusual decision took place, which I am sure most of you will probably agree upon.

Naturally of course this was immediately distressing for me. For the next few years, this court decision was mostly not adhered to (it was completely impractical for one thing) as my address was in close proximity to the creche that the child was attending and where his mother worked. So they would visit me on most days and I would mind him if his mother had appointments or went out on weekends, or on holidays etc.

It's pretty clear though that his mother had struck up a relationship independent from me with the people at said 3rd address (where the judge was sending the child) to an extent of which I can only speculate at this point.

The next major unusual event took place some time after the child had begun school. The school noticed some 'inappropriate sexual behaviour' and informed his mother of same. As I wasn't his legal guardian at the time (the judge continually adjourned a hearing for this despite him being the one who had promoted the idea in court) the school wouldn't discuss any details with me.

The child subsequently saw a play therapist for a number of sessions, the results of which I am still trying to obtain through a solicitor (some 5 years later although, I am the child's legal guardian now).

Again this was extremely distressing for me. The child’s mother refused to discuss the topic, stating only when asked about the results of the play therapy: "That's sorted now. His future is sorted. Worry about your own life". I had actually spent the years previous appealing to his mother that we needed to get on the same page with regards to the child and the address in question, which she continuously just dismissed or obfuscated in some way or another.

Me and the child became separated for a considerable amount of time after this, through more unusual events and circumstances. Not least of which was the fact that I was able to discern evidence that the 'inappropriate sexual behaviour' was likely originating from the address which is - or rather, should be - in question (3rd address).

When I finally did muster the courage and support to re-enter in court the same judge kept on adjourning the case (it took me over 9 months to get a hearing) until he had no option left but to grant access (I was told), which is when he instead recused himself from the case, after presiding over it for 7 years, stating that he "knows the families involved".

That is most certainly true because he has been involved in my life one way or another throughout it's entirety and has connections with the person under whose care I was abused myself, dating back further still (there was a tradition of priests, judges and solicitors in this person’s previous generations).

The judge who then replaced the first judge immediately granted me access and guardianship which has enabled me to legally contact the school, Tusla, and the play therapist in order to get some clarification on what exactly has been taking place (but to not much avail, as of yet).

I have tried to keep this post brief because a lot more has come to light in the course of these proceedings. Most notably for me is that I myself am a lifelong victim/survivor of childhood sexual and other forms of abuse. I have been living with complex post traumatic stress disorder and dissociation as a result of the continued effects of the trauma, only recently recieving the appropriate support despite presenting to various authorities with all the signs and symptoms for the majority of my life.

Any helpful and supportive comments are appreciated, and thank you if you are reading this.

Regards,
Escapegoat.

endacl

'Helpful and supportive comments'? Is that not just a roundabout way of saying 'advise me'?

lifeandtimes

First off you should have got legal advice through this situation.

Also I am unsure as to why you did not appeal any decision made by the courts at any interval.

A random 3rd address not connected to you 2 parents just materialised in the judges head for access to take place?

I'm sorry but I find this all very confusing And believe there is more (to the already lengthy post)to it

Robbo

Moderation: As per the charter, legal advice cannot be sought or given. You have a situation here where professional legal advice should be sought. Thread closed.