When courts make decisions concerning arrangements for children following parental separation, they will obviously do so by reference to what they consider to be best for the welfare of the children.
Sometimes this can mean that the court must make a decision urgently, as the current circumstances are causing, or likely to cause, the child serious harm. Such a situation occurred in a recent case that took place in the Family Court at Crewe and Chester.
The case concerned a young child, “A”. We are not told A’s age, but she is referred to as a ‘toddler’. Her parents were not married, and their relationship ended when A was some months old.
The mother then moved from where the family had lived together to a different area, with the result that the father had to travel a long distance to see his daughter. Contact took place on a supervised basis (by the mother, and at her insistence), but attempts by the father to increase the time and reduce supervision arrangements could not be agreed. The father’s initial application to the court was filed in in the summer of 2023.
The mother made a variety of allegations against the father which were suggestive of abuse by the father against A, including hinting at sexual abuse. She also alleged that the father had mental health issues. Her position was that the father was a risk to A and should not be allowed to have any unsupervised contact with her until she was older, able to vocalise her wishes and able to make up her own mind.
The mother also repeated her allegations to the local authority. The local authority investigated the matter and took no further action.
The court also did not accept that there was any evidence that the father had abused A or was likely to abuse her. The court did not even consider it necessary to hold a ‘fact-finding’ hearing, to examine the allegations in detail.
A court welfare report was prepared, which recommended that contact increase gradually to overnight, and expressed concern that if this had not happened, A could be at risk of emotional harm if she remained in her mother’s care.
The court made an order increasing contact, including providing for overnight contact, and informed the mother that if she persisted with her unfounded allegations and refused to progress contact, a change of residence to the father was a realistic possibility.
The mother refused to allow overnight contact, and then reported the father to the police, again accusing him of abusing A. The police were satisfied that the allegations were false and reported the matter to the local authority, raising concerns regarding the mother.
The mother also began recording the father at handovers, and in addition secretly placed a tracking device with the child, so that she could track her when the child was with her father.
In June 2024 the mother took the child to the hospital, raising concerns that she believed A had been given sleeping pills by her father. The hospital found no evidence of this, but kept the child in overnight so that it could monitor mother and child, as it was concerned about the mother’s mental health.
The local authority again became involved, and expressed concerns that, if nothing changed, A may be placed at risk of emotional harm, either through the mother alienating A from the father, or through A becoming subject to further unnecessary medical testing in the future due to the mother’s anxieties.
The father then issued an urgent application for an order transferring residence of A to him.
The court appointed a Guardian for the child. In the opinion of the Guardian there was clear evidence of extreme alienating behaviours by the mother. The Guardian questioned what further lengths the mother would go to and was concerned for A’s safety in her mother’s care. She therefore recommended a change of residence (i.e. that the child no longer lives with his mother) and that the mother would have supervised contact with A.
The mother, meanwhile, made further unsupported allegations against the father, as well as repeating her earlier allegations. She accused the Guardian of failing to act in A’s best interests, and also wholly erroneously claimed that the father had accepted that all of her allegations were true.
As the judge stated, the mother’s spurious allegations had been dismissed by the local authority, the health visitor, the father, the police, the court, and two court welfare officers, yet she continued to repeat them.
In the event, however, at the hearing of the father’s application the mother did not contest the immediate change of residence for A. However, this in itself was of concern to the court, considering the mother’s historic position. The judge expressed her deep concerns about the mother’s wellbeing and mental health.
We are also told in the judgment that on the day of the hearing the child was at the mother’s home with a carer, and both were locked in the house, unable to leave as the mother had deliberately left taking both sets of keys with her to court. The police were therefore called to attend urgently to ensure safety, and also to assist with the transfer of residence thereafter if necessary.
The judge made a number of findings, including that the negative and harmful behaviour exhibited by the mother had undermined A’s relationship with the father and caused her harm, and that the mother’s intractable hostility, along with her inability to distinguish the impact such behaviour had on A, would likely create parental alienation if allowed to continue.
In the circumstances the judge found that the potential harm that the child would suffer if she remained in her mother’s care outweighed any harm, she would suffer from being removed from her mother. She therefore ordered an immediate transfer of residence to the father. She also ordered that the mother have twice weekly contact for two hours at a time, supervised by the father’s sister.
The judge also ordered that there should be a further hearing, when the case would be reviewed.
If you would like to contact Marks Law or have any queries, please get in touch with Lucy Marks at co*****@**********co.uk or call 0207 1234600.