Fascinating first-time insight

The recently passed Care of Children Bill allowed some media access to the controversial Family Court. Here, for the first time, a report on a battle over child custody. This is the stuff of nightmares to me. Yet it goes on all the time. Note how much power the pyschologists wield.

"The case turns on the evidence of the court-appointed psychologist. The father is critical of the psychologist's report saying it didn't take into account what happened in his eldest son's early childhood. He's critical too that the psychologist didn't make it clear what was required when she visited his home. He had the impression she just wanted to talk to the children and so kept out of the way, but was dismayed to find the report criticised him for being passive."

It seems the eldest boy who is ten, wants to be with his father but the psychologist says that the child has been filled with bad feelings against his mother and needs complete separation from the father for a period in order to rebuild the bond with his mother.

"Milicich, the children's lawyer, points out that under the new Act, it's his role to explain to the children the decision of the court. He notes too that children have a right of appeal if a decision goes against their expressed views. "They [the two brothers] cried as recently as last week that they do not want to live with their mother and that they will run away "

It's a protracted story but a must-read. The upshot is the father has to undergo a four week total separation from the children and counselling "specifically about the need to promote the mother's parenting to the children". He agrees and no court order is required.

The reporter has done a good job of staying objective but I find the title he gave his piece interesting. "The kids are not alright."