Court allows indirect contact between 8-year-old girl and mother

21 Jul 2020

 

The Family Court has allowed indirect contact to continue between a mother and her eight-year-old daughter in a case where there were “no right answers, only least wrong ones”.

 

The girl’s parents had separated in 2013. She remained with her mother and older sister, who is now 18.

 

The separation was acrimonious. In 2015, allegations of sexual abuse had been made by the elder sister against the father but were not proved.

 

The mother and sister had been unable to accept those findings. Following several court hearings, the eight-year-old moved to live with the father but the dispute between the parents continued.

 

An order was made in 2018 for indirect contact between the mother and her daughter.

 

Further litigation followed and a re-hearing was ordered. The mother sought more direct contact; the father and his partner, the stepmother who had become the girl’s primary carer, opposed any variation of the indirect contact order. They both stated that they would be unable to continue to care for the daughter if she had direct contact with the mother and sister.

 

The court held that the indirect contact order should remain.

 

It held that, all things being equal, contact with the mother would bring long-term benefits to the daughter. Overriding that, however, was the inability of the father and the stepmother, because of his mental health, to countenance the idea of direct contact.

 

The risks of further deterioration of the father's mental health, his possible suicide, or the stepmother leaving the marriage or relinquishing care of the girl, was too great.

 

In the balancing exercise, the risk of destabilising the girl’s placement with the father and stepmother outweighed the harm to her which would inevitably be caused by refusing direct contact. It would be more catastrophic to her to lose the father and stepmother, and they were unable to meet her need for direct contact with the mother. There were no right answers, only the least wrong ones.

 

If you would like more information or advice about the issues raised in this article, or any aspect of family law please contact our expert legal team on 02080040065, by email at hello@southgate.co.uk or using the form below.

 

Case Citations: [2020] EWFC 16(1) JD (2) LD v (1) VB (2) B (3) A (BY HER CHILDREN'S GUARDIAN) (2020) Fam Ct (Judge Dancey)

 

The contents of this article is general information only. The information in this article is not legal or professional advice. The law may have changed since this article was published.  Readers should not act on the basis of the information included and should obtain independent expert advice from qualified solicitors such as those within our firm.

 

Share on Facebook
Tweet
Please reload

What We Offer You

Expert

Solicitors

Price

Promise

Skype

Meetings

24/7

Enquiry Line

Out of Hours

Appointments

Quick

Responses

No Hidden

Fees

Modern

Service

Expedited

Services

Law Society

Accreditation

Do you need to discuss your family law matter with a solicitor?
Call us now or send an enquiry below to discuss your options!

Third Floor, Crown House, 47 Chase Side, London, N14 5BP

Tel: 0208 004 0065 - Email: hello@southgate.co.uk

southgate solicitors is a trading name of Southgate Solicitors Limited Company No: 10575376 - Registered Office at above address

We are authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority No: 636415

All prices displayed are inclusive of VAT.

VAT No: 263804305

Privacy Terms of Use - Complaints Process

  • Facebook Social Icon
  • Twitter Social Icon
  • Instagram Social Icon