[Solved] Indirect Contact Only

Dec I am sorry I can't help with the legal side of things just wanted to give some support ,

I am very sorry to read that you have only been recommended indirect contact because the mother will not allow contact

I read that the government believes that where it is safe and in the child’s best interest, the law should make it that children benefit from

having both parents actively involved in their lives, with both sharing responsibility in decisions about their upbringing.

How is this possible if your ex is allowed to dictate like this ?

surely the judge will not really accept this report as it's not in the child's best interest but the mothers IMO

I truly am at a loss as to what to suggest but I do not see the logic or reasons for such a recommendation

Thank you Eric. My solicitor put it to me that direct contact is being ruled out in the future but is for now. The court order asjed Cafcass a few questions, should contact happen and if so how. Her reply to that is maybe and didn't answer the 2nd question. She even says in the report and the previous reports contact should happen if it's safe to and that if it's not allowed my child will be deprived of a relationship with his father. The report does have positive things but it's like they dont want to upset mother. They are saying because my child is young for the first few sessions he needs someine familure with him But no one from her family is willing to do that because of my ungoing harassment etc. Not for one second has it been considered this harrassment is made up.

Do you know reading your post did make me feel so angry because ‘these’ woman are so happy for you to be the father when it comes to financially support the child they don’t refuse that but they can pick and choice if you can be in your child’s life or not ,

Maybe the plan is indirect to build the relationship and then maybe supervised contact even at a centre with a view to moving forward to spending quality time together

A child should not be denied the opportunity to have a loving , caring parent in their life ,
How can ‘these’ woman sleep at night they are hurting their own children as well

Hi Dec,

I would not listen to your solicitor if they do not think direct contact is an option now.

I would make a complaint to CAFCASS and the officers manager. The officer has demonstrated impartiality and lack of fairness.

You need to demonstrate how implacibly hostile the mother is to undermine your relationship with your daughter and that if it is deferred the situation is only going to get worse to the point your child is made to feel they should not have a relationship with you.

I'm lost for words at what you have described Dec, I really am.

It boggles the mind just how biased CAFCASS are and how much they just bow down to "mothers" wishes time and time again. A spiteful mother says no contact, so CAFCASS buckle and side with mother. I'm convinced most CAFCASS employees are plain and simply feminist sympathisers - it's sickening.

I agree with Boycie, your solicitor is waste of space, time and money - you shouldn't have to settle for indirect contact if their are no legit safeguarding concerns. If your solicitor won't fight your corner properly, drop them like a hot potato.

If your ex is making allegations, and it is due to the allegations that contact is being denied, then you need to once and for all have the allegations investigated i.e a fact find hearing, or just a straight up contested hearing.

What stage of proceedings are you at Dec? Is it just a directions hearing you have had? What CAFCASS report was it you had done, S2 or S7?

The problem you have is you can't really complain about the CAFCASS officer's opinion. You can complain if he/she had made factual errors.

Like most people, me included, its going to be in the court room when you attack the argument of the CAFCASS officer. You can overturn the [censored] recommendation.

There is so much case law that supports normal contact with a child. LJ Mostyn made it quite clear in one of his judgments that unless there is clear and compelling evidence why a father should not have normal unsupervised contact with a child, then the father will have that contact.

There is plenty of case law to support the fact that a mothers anxiety is not a bar to contact also.

You need a proper gameplan going into court in order to overturn this garbage. If I were you I would get in touch with a decent Mckenzie friend, get along to a Families need Fathers meeting in your area and discuss your case with people who know what they are talking about and that can get your case sorted going into court.

It sounds like your solicitor will not get you decent contact Dec.

Don't give up mate. I had a recommendation for unsupervised contact turn into a recommendation for supervised contact on a reduced level, all because the original cafcass officer is off work due to stress, and got replaced by a bra burning womens liberal.

Bunch of clowns CAFCASS are mate - but get focused and destroy their arguments in court with good planning and prep.

You can do it!

Simon.

hello mate well lets not forget the number one principle that the court MUST consider. The welfare of the child is number one and if you can argue that this is in the interests then you win.

Of particular intrest will be the childs wishes and feelings and I didn't see an age for him or her. the age is important too as older kids waf will hold more clowt.

cafcass are a bunch of retards only beaten by the ss. social sevices. let us know the age and we may be able get a strategy together and some case law.

as for complaining then save all ur energy for the real battle . complaining will distract you and get u nowhere. what kind of report was the cafcass report. was it sec 7.

I agree, your solicitor isn't up to muster... They sometimes err on the side of caution and give worse case scenarios as the probable outcome, then anything above becomes a bonus and a good result!

Listen you are already in discussion with the manager about the one sidedness of the officer compiling the report. The fact is that you have already been a party to two years of indirect contact and its time to move it forward.

Contact centre staff are trained to facilitate contact between estranged parents and their children and as Simon states there is case law about this. Check out the contact centres website and get some information about how they are equipped to deal with the first steps when contact is being re established. Have these arguments to hand for the hearing, along with information about contact centres, where they are and what they offer.

www.naccc.org.uk/

Do you know reading your post did make me feel so angry because ‘these’ woman are so happy for you to be the father when it comes to financially support the child they don’t refuse that but they can pick and choice if you can be in your child’s life or not ,

Maybe the plan is indirect to build the relationship and then maybe supervised contact even at a centre with a view to moving forward to spending quality time together

A child should not be denied the opportunity to have a loving , caring parent in their life ,
How can ‘these’ woman sleep at night they are hurting their own children as well

I can't describe how I feel right now. I suppose I feel numb and in shock. The ex has been gloating about it on social media too which doesn'thelp. My ex sleeps very well at night because she got full control of her child. The main reason for refusing contact I believe is because she wants the child all to herself, if he slept at mine etc that would drive her crazy and secondly shes settled down with another man playing happy families.

The original plan was a period of supervised sessions at contact matters and then progressing to supported contact and then unsupervised. This was because of his age. Now there appears to be no plan Other than a unknown period of indirect contact then after that however long that is then I may have liberty to restore my application. I've already had two years of that so does it need to be another 2 years?

Hi Dec,

I would not listen to your solicitor if they do not think direct contact is an option now.

I would make a complaint to CAFCASS and the officers manager. The officer has demonstrated impartiality and lack of fairness.

You need to demonstrate how implacibly hostile the mother is to undermine your relationship with your daughter and that if it is deferred the situation is only going to get worse to the point your child is made to feel they should not have a relationship with you.

Hi Boycie, I've not spoken to my solicitor yet, I had an email from them. My solicitor hasn't given their views yet just said what the report appears to say.

I already have a complaint ongoing, I was ment to hear aboutthat complaint today but surprise surprise I didn't. I don't know if I am able to add my new complaint onto my exisiting one or if I should make a fresh one?

I'm lost for words at what you have described Dec, I really am.

It boggles the mind just how biased CAFCASS are and how much they just bow down to "mothers" wishes time and time again. A spiteful mother says no contact, so CAFCASS buckle and side with mother. I'm convinced most CAFCASS employees are plain and simply feminist sympathisers - it's sickening.

I agree with Boycie, your solicitor is waste of space, time and money - you shouldn't have to settle for indirect contact if their are no legit safeguarding concerns. If your solicitor won't fight your corner properly, drop them like a hot potato.

If your ex is making allegations, and it is due to the allegations that contact is being denied, then you need to once and for all have the allegations investigated i.e a fact find hearing, or just a straight up contested hearing.

What stage of proceedings are you at Dec? Is it just a directions hearing you have had? What CAFCASS report was it you had done, S2 or S7?

The problem you have is you can't really complain about the CAFCASS officer's opinion. You can complain if he/she had made factual errors.

Like most people, me included, its going to be in the court room when you attack the argument of the CAFCASS officer. You can overturn the [censored] recommendation.

There is so much case law that supports normal contact with a child. LJ Mostyn made it quite clear in one of his judgments that unless there is clear and compelling evidence why a father should not have normal unsupervised contact with a child, then the father will have that contact.

There is plenty of case law to support the fact that a mothers anxiety is not a bar to contact also.

You need a proper gameplan going into court in order to overturn this garbage. If I were you I would get in touch with a decent Mckenzie friend, get along to a Families need Fathers meeting in your area and discuss your case with people who know what they are talking about and that can get your case sorted going into court.

It sounds like your solicitor will not get you decent contact Dec.

Don't give up mate. I had a recommendation for unsupervised contact turn into a recommendation for supervised contact on a reduced level, all because the original cafcass officer is off work due to stress, and got replaced by a bra burning womens liberal.

Bunch of clowns CAFCASS are mate - but get focused and destroy their arguments in court with good planning and prep.

You can do it!

Simon.

Thank you Simon, I am currently a year and a half through proceedings. There has been about 12 hearings in total with all but the 1st being a review hearing. You know how it goes get close to contact and another allegation pops up. The Cafcass officer is saying if contact were to happen the child needs someone he knows there(I think that is bull) but because of everything I've done to my ex and her family according to the allegations they have made then none of them are willing to help. I know for a fact I never did any of what the alledge so i'm angry that that is a reason for me not to see my son.

This was the 3rd or so s7 report.

Even in this report it says social services have no concerns about his other children who he shares the care of following a thorough investigation which included speaking to my children twice, their teachers etc. So i'm baffled how this report ended up with indirect contact.

hello mate well lets not forget the number one principle that the court MUST consider. The welfare of the child is number one and if you can argue that this is in the interests then you win.

Of particular intrest will be the childs wishes and feelings and I didn't see an age for him or her. the age is important too as older kids waf will hold more clowt.

cafcass are a bunch of retards only beaten by the ss. social sevices. let us know the age and we may be able get a strategy together and some case law.

as for complaining then save all ur energy for the real battle . complaining will distract you and get u nowhere. what kind of report was the cafcass report. was it sec 7.

The problem is mother is saying I will beat him, neglect him etc.

My child is two so it's assumed that he would want a relationship with me however mothers arguement would be that its to be assumed that he would also want to be safe.

Under the bit where it says what affect do the proceedings have on child I was annoyed it said none because of his age. It should have said these proceedings are denying him his rights to a normal family life and a sense of identity.