Family Rights Group | Parents’ Forum

Story is Father made a mistake and did an act considered emotionally harmful to the child, while Mother was present throughout and did not intervene, making her fail to protect. Child was taken into foster care for 2 months under an ICO, but has now returned home to Mother under an ISO.

During the ICO, Father was seen as the risk so he moved out of family home to facilitate the return, while Mother affirmed she is able to protect from Father. Solicitors advised at the time that Mother and Father saying they are separated (without saying divorce) to strengthen the Mother's position as the carer, so both kept saying Separated without elaborating.

Parenting assessments are ongoing now and will complete in a month.

Father and child are clearly in a close and loving relationship despite all the claims of harms against the Father.

How should the Mother and Father position for a reunification?

- both have been saying they are separated in their statements since the proceedings

- parenting assessments are ongoing

- Father, Mother, child all want Father to return home

- if Mother continues saying separated and will care by herself, that should help her assessment and child at home but pave no path towards unification

- if Mother says she is seeking Father to return home, solicitor advised that might negatively affect her assessment, cause concerns about her ability to protect, and risk the child being taken again. Solicitor always ends up saying "who do you choose?" as if the child and father are now mutually exclusive which is ridiculous.

- Father is saying he will work on his understanding and knowledge now during separation, until he is deemed safe to return home

- our view is that Mother should say She is separated from Father to protect the child because there are concerns about his emotionally harmful act(s), but also stress the many good parenting the Father has done and the very close relationship with the child. She should say it is in best interest of the child to live with both parents, so if the Father has done his work and can improve himself such that he will not cause any emotional harms, he should return home, else she will continue the separation.

Please advise.

Dear bayescr

Thank you for your further post. It is good to read that your child is now still in your care under an interim supervision order. You are concerned now about the fact that father is out of the family home and you have both indicated to children’s services and the court that you are separated.

It seems from looking at your posts that your child’s father is seen as the risk factor because of his previous behaviour and the emotional harm this has caused your child. You have demonstrated that you are the protective parent and it appears that the decision to move from an interim care order to an interim supervision order, relied heavily on the agreement (I imagine) of both parents that father would not be involved in the day-to-day care giving for your child. Father would not be living in the family home.

You are now considering how you and father can reconcile without your child being removed from your care. Your solicitor, who knows your case, has advised against this course expressing to you the likely impact on your case going forward.

From your post, what you are saying is that both parents said they are separated but only to have the outcome of child returning home. I believe that children’s services and possibly the children’s guardian would be concerned about this and your ability to safely parent your child. The argument to the court would, I think, be that you are only doing what is helpful to you and not putting your child’s needs first. Father has harmed the child and there is an expectation that you as the protective parent actively ensure the child is not put at risk.

Stating that father has good parenting and a close relationship with child may be seen as minimising his risk to child’s emotional wellbeing.

You may wish to reconcile with father, and this is understandable but to do so now would not be seen as protective. Father must do whatever work has been recommended for him and in time when he can demonstrate how he has benefitted from the work and a clear understanding of what led to children’s services concerns about his harmful behaviour towards his child, would be the time to work towards reconciliation.

Whilst father is out of the home he will be able to maintain contact with his child likely to be supervised until it is accepted it is safe to move to unsupervised contact.

It is good for children to live with both parents but only when it is safe for the child or children concerned to do so. In your case, there are care proceedings because it is not considered to be in child’s best interests to be in both parents’ care currently due to the harm and risk of future harm to the child.

Now is not, in my view the best time to be focussing on reconciliation. Father has not completed the work and you are both still going through parenting assessments.

I think it is important to demonstrate that you put your child’s needs at the forefront and not a reconciliation. It would not be helpful to your parenting assessment or outcome of your case. Also, I suggest you allow father to make his own requests to children’s services about what he hopes to achieve going forward for and with his child. It would be best you for you not being seen as justifying or minimising his behaviour. Both you and he should be guided by your respective solicitors regarding your cases.

You may find it helpful to read the information in the links below:

1. Care (and related) proceedings
2. Guide to working with a solicitor
3. Guide to working with a social worker

Please consider having a further discussion with your solicitor and if possible a conference with the barrister who represents you in court so you can get clear advice about your position and the expectations.

Should you wish to speak with one of our experienced advisers, you can telephone our free confidential advice line on 0808 801 0366. The advice line is open from 9.30am to 3.00pm Monday to Friday (excluding Bank Holidays)

Hope this is useful to you.

Best wishes

Suzie

Thank you for your reply. Your assumptions are correct.

The reunification is not just for myself, but for the family as a whole. We work well as a family despite the father caused the emotional harm.

What should I say, during the parenting assessment, to pave the path for future reunification?
Should I say I think the father should complete the work recommended and I would welcome his return once we agree he can safely parent.
If I keep insisting separation as advised, I am afraid I am closing the path. Or should I change my stance after the parenting assessments, which are expected to be positive for both?

Dear bayescr,

Thank you for your further post.

It is clear that you have a strong desire to reconcile with your child’s father and you feel that you work well as a family unit.

As I explained in my previous post, I still believe that now is not the best time to be focussing on reconciliation. I would be concerned that by focussing on reconciliation, professionals may feel that you are not able to be child-focused and that you may not be able to prioritise protecting your child.

However it is absolutely crucial that you are open and honest with the social worker (and other professionals). If you do plan to reconcile once the father has completed the recommended work then it is important that you are honest about this. I would not recommend that you wait until after the parenting assessments before you change your stance. This will come across as dishonest, and then professionals may be concerned about whether they can trust you. It is better to be honest about your hopes for reconciliation, so that you can work with children’s services to come up with a plan that you are all happy with, and which prioritises your child’s safety and wellbeing.

As I suggested previously I think it would be helpful for you to consider having a further discussion with your solicitor and if possible a conference with the barrister who represents you in court so you can get clear advice about your position and the expectations.

I hope that this is helpful.
Best wishes,
Suzie

When you mention Completing the recommended work, it has been 3 months in the process and there are no works whatsoever being recommended to us despite we repeatedly chased. We are considering privately funded psychiatric works to show we have proactively done the work, with a letter stating the analysis, work, and clear timeline. We don't want the LA to control all the work recommendations and timeline, which will take ages.