Court ordered supervised contact.

[Pebbledashery]

Forgive me if this is a stupid question. I would put this in legal but won't get much traction. If a court order states that there is to be interim supervised contact in a contact centre, that doesn't mean that contact can take then take place outside the contact centre in the park outside??... Dd has supervised contact in a contact centre with violent, abusive father.. She became very ill after the last session as she was taken to a dirty park outside the centre.. She's approaching her next session and I have asked the centre supervisor to kindly not take her outside to the park as she's only just got better.. He's now asked for her doctors note.. Given the bastard doesn't know where we live, I have said that I cannot source redacted information at such short notice.
Am I being unreasonable? The court order states the contact is to take place in the contact centre. Not in the community. I said the only reason I hadn't said anything about the park is because DD enjoyed it, however I had to take several days off work to look after Dd when she was ill and don't want her going to a dirty park.

I have been in the same position op as a gp carer. We had interim contact in a contact centre and they were so unprofessional. We were meant to have 20 minutes clearance between our arrival and his but he never adhered. His family even parked across the entrance so I had to push past their car. They were told to keep well away.

He took gs out of the Centre to McDonalds and they let him. Apparently it was because he didnt bother bringing gs any lunch.

I complained in Court and the lovely Judge asked what about because he couldn't see anything wrong with this even though the order said it must be in the contact centre.

Sorry I cant offer you more reassurance here op, all I can offer is my own experience along with other posters.

I am really sorry for your experiences past and present op. Like you I got caught up in all sorts of issues where you really need to focus on the important ones you are correct about.

I'm familiar with your previous threads. I appreciate that you are under a great deal of stress, but you have totally lost perspective and in so doing you are making yourself look significantly less credible at a time when you need people to consider you credible.

You have every right to be angry about what happened to you and the injustice and stress of your situation, but being so defensive to the point of aggression is not going to help. Getting into arguments about "dirty parks" and unsubstantiated illnesses does not help your case.

You need people to believe you and want to help you. Kicking off about things that sound slightly deranged achieves the opposite. If you are writing messages back to this social worker in the same way you are writing on here, then you are harming your cause.

Every time you have contact you seem to also have a thread proposing to breach the order, and compared to earlier threads you sound like you are losing it frankly, so I'm not surprised you got the defensive reaction you did from your bizarre accusations about the "dirty park" illness.

I'm not saying this to be a bitch, but out of concern that you are massively sabotaging yourself and therefore your daughter right now. You might not want to hear that, but you do need to hear it.

You need to focus on the fact that he left the contact centre with her and they are not sticking to the 30 minutes for you to leave ahead of him.

This is all that matters. Don't engage in anything else, no matter how pissed off you are or how unprofessional you think someone is.

I have been in your position, I understand what you are saying and why you are getting so flustered but;
You need to get smart quickly op.
The contact centre will report back to Cafcass, currently you look like you are saying and doing anything to stop your DD and her father have fun and bonding in their time together. Everyone knows children don't get seriously sick from a trip to the park or not wearing a coat in August.
Getting annoyed because they refer to her as his child is a big flag for parental alienation... she IS his child.
I would forget about everything else but send the contact centre an email saying that you have concerns for DD as the park gives more opportunity for supervision to slip and DD could potentially be put at risk therefore could it please continue in the centre as per the order. Be very reasonable, very rational, keep the contact centre onside.

Reading your posts I think you have 4 points of concern;

• They don't abide by the 30 minute window.
• The contact supervisor tried to you to engage with him via a communication book.
• Contact is taking place outside of the centre.
• They have asked you for a doctors note.

take the advice toocold54 gave, and focus on those 4 points. Keep your email short and to the point.

@Thelnebriati

Reading your posts I think you have 4 points of concern;

• They don't abide by the 30 minute window.
• The contact supervisor tried to you to engage with him via a communication book.
• Contact is taking place outside of the centre.
• They have asked you for a doctors note.

take the advice toocold54 gave, and focus on those 4 points. Keep your email short and to the point.

I think this is it, 100 % yes I realise I've probably gone a bit batshit with the dirty park etc and probably not looked at it in the right perspective.. Essentially he's been allowed to take her to the park and the contact centre aren't adhering to the court order.. So that's it. And for the record, I actually have only missed one contact session due to illness and self isolation. I've said quite clearly up thread that I don't want to breach the order so I don't appreciate pp saying I post threads about breaching the order etc, I've done everything I can to ensure contact has taken place, including being made to go on mother's day, my birthday and the anniversary of my mum's death, I was forced to go on all of those days. He demanded contact on fathers day which wasn't his weekend, but it was granted because we were in court that week. He seems to get every six throw of the dice.

@Pebbledashery

No. I don't approve of her having a good time with because he is an absolute monster. He's been found guilty of every form of abuse as well as child abuse. I do not approve of anything and I never will but that is kept inside me quietly. I just do the bare minimum and take her to contact because I am court ordered to. Simple as. I didn't complain because she had a good time and I wasn't going to be the unreasonable mother that took that away from her.. She could've enjoyed herself in the park with anyone, it wasn't because it was him. It was because its the park.. This contact isn't to rebuild their relationship.. This interim contact is just to allow her to see him in the interim whilst the section 7 is pending and a final outcome is decided.

You aren’t going to want to hear this but contact is to build relationship actually and If he has been found guilty of child abuse he would have no contact in the interim only video call maybe so If he got supervised contact for now he will likely have contact in the future. I know the system sucks but just be ready.

It doesn't really matter. The local authority where we fled from will be doing our section 7. The local authority we fled from aided us in fleeing and the original reports of child abuse were made via them. We'll see what happens. I can accept he will have contact, but I don't accept I a) have to engage with him and b) have to accept him wanting to know where we live and forcing his way to getting that information. Him not finding out where we live guarantees our safety..so for the contact centre to ask for a prescription, it really does make me wonder.

When she starts school though, he will be entitled to know which school, to receive newsletters/information from them, to have her report cards, to attend her parents evenings.
IF he still has PR then.

Yes I am aware of that, but I also know those reports etc can be redacted.. I've already spoken with the social worker who did DDs 3 year assessment and she said the school only release information to those named at the time of application.. If he does ask for information, the schools safeguarding team can send him redacted reports etc.

He seems to get every six throw of the dice.

You are spot on with that, so you need good tactics. Come here and sound off to let off steam, and get your thoughts together before you act.

I just hope whoever writes the section 7 will see that even if contact is seemingly positive in a supervised setting, doesn't mean he's safe. All it takes is one split second for him to lose it and that's it. He's already shown he's capable of horrific child abuse.

Did you go to the contact centre this weekend OP? How did it go?

If the order says supervised contact in the contact centre then he shouldn’t be allowed to take her elsewhere. However, if the order says drop off/collection at contact centre then that is different.

Hate to say it but I would prepare yourself for the fact that if she is enjoying contact they won't then stop contact pending the section 7.

It is also fairly standard, and I'm surprised if your NMO doesn't, that they state somewhere on the order that communication can only take place regarding the children. A communication book would be a standard expectation otherwise you end up looking in the wrong.

As others have said you must focus on this all objectively. I did get a no contact order both direct and indirect but I had to take all emotion out of it, not focus on 'petty' things and instead present a rock solid case.

How did the court session go @Pebbledashery? Is he still insisting you make sessions up? I'm assuming that got blocked as you are now back having to do these visits.
I think you have to assume the contact centre is not supportive of you and your daughter and you will have to cover them up to protect her as you always have - from their stupidity too!

I don't expect contact to stop pending a section 7. I've already had the judge say because of the findings that unsupervised contact is not at all appropriate and it is down to the former local authority to do the section 7 and perhaps suggest how unsupervised contact might be reestablished if appropriate. I'm not going in with any expectations. Yes, contact may be positive in a SUPERVISED setting.. But he's had numerous findings made against him including child abuse.. When we had the cafcass safeguarding letter and subsequent follow-up letters from cafcass, it said that if contact is ordered in the interim and these findings are made against him then it would have placed DD in an extremely difficult position and that contact moving forwards may not be in her best interests.
The judge has said contact is to be supervised until a final order is made and he will go with the recommendation from the local authority as they are best placed to do the section 7.
No, the non molestation order doesn't have a term regarding child contact, it states all contact is to go through solicitors.
The contact centre isn't my issue anyway with moving forwards, there are there to facilitate contact, it's not down to them to provide any recommendations. It's not their place.

And. Of course, he's completely opposed to cafcass and the local authority doing the section 7. He's suggested an independent social worker that is paid and jointly instructed by both of us does the section 7.. Of course his solicitor had a shortlist of several isw's to pick from. Needless to say that went down like a lead balloon.

Of course he wants you to pay for a section 7 - as he does anything else which is only in his interests. Glad the judge saw through that one!

I think I just worry about the long term future.. It wasn't a voluntary flee where I had time to pack up our stuff and find a new place. Children's services got involved and gave me an ultimatum and helped me flee. It was very much treated as a high risk domestic abuse case. I've lived over a year without him finding us and knowing where we are, the thought of him knowing where we are makes me physically sick.
I know I have good support. The social worker who assisted us in fleeing has already told me if she's spoken to with regards to the section 7 then she won't recommend anything more than letter box contact, my daughters health visitor said the same.. But I think now that she's seeing him supervised. Its unlikely all contact will be revoked. I know that. I just hope whatever is recommended keeps us both safe and him out of MY life.

But she is his child?

I think you need to think carefully about what you are challenging and why. A court orders contact because it is seen as in the best interests of the child (although they do sometimes get this wrong) not as a sop to the NRP.
If she was safe and happy in the park (which by the sounds of it she was) I would leave it.

@RedHelenB

But she is his child?

I think you need to think carefully about what you are challenging and why. A court orders contact because it is seen as in the best interests of the child (although they do sometimes get this wrong) not as a sop to the NRP.
If she was safe and happy in the park (which by the sounds of it she was) I would leave it.

We're past this discussion now if you read the comments and updates. And no, I don't have to leave it if its not stated in the court order. If contact extends to outside the centre then fine. But it does not.

Just to say even letter box contact can be harmful - he is meant to stick to non contentious matters but they rarely do. If they decide to go with that make sure that it is made clear what he can write about and that there is a right to supervise or read what is written before presenting to your child especially if she is still very young.

If he has been accused of child abuse and he’s still allowed access then it wouldn’t surprise me if he’ll be allowed access after the section 7 is done.

The only thing I can suggest is that you don’t act like you’re being difficult or petty in anyway.
From my experience the contact centres seem to quickly side with the dad so don’t give them any ammunition that makes them believe he is a victim.

I would say you are happy to continue contact but it needs to be supervised as he has been accused of child abuse and you want your DD to have a relationship with him but not put her at any risk. Which is exactly why it’s court ordered to be supervised.

If they think you are being unreasonable then they’re going to listen to him over you.

@RedHelenB

But she is his child?

I think you need to think carefully about what you are challenging and why. A court orders contact because it is seen as in the best interests of the child (although they do sometimes get this wrong) not as a sop to the NRP.
If she was safe and happy in the park (which by the sounds of it she was) I would leave it.

I couldn’t disagree more It’s not a case of just leave it if she’s outside in a park and happy. What kid isn’t this in a park? That’s a lapse of judgment given the established risks associated with his abusive conduct of both her and child. The judge has specifically stipulated contact in a contact centre. Where OP can arrive and leave safely and in a contained space their child can be monitored at all times.

You’re lapsing into describing supported contact if they go to a park over the road which has no physical or legal insurance or affiliation with the secure contact centre

Sorry but you don’t flee your hone, fight with everything you have to just be toss away about this sort of thing. If something happened in the park and the OP it transpired had let it slide - pardon the pun - then I suspect there would be some questions asked of her too

It's shocking that so many people think that this man should be given any kind of leeway.

The op fled her home, with no time to prepare and had to leave the area and any support network to keep herself and her child safe.

He has committed horrific domestic abuse and child abuse. The op's Dd would likely be taken away from her if she were to go back to this man, the contact centre with rules for the op and her child's safety has been allowed by the judge. Trips to the park were not agreed and should not happen again. The contact centre can't go against the current order.

I wonder how far an abuser has to go before everyone agrees they no longer have any rights.