To not display a photograph of my rapist in my home

[FreedomAnniversary]

I have been told off in court by a NYAS barrister because I do not have a picture of my ex husband in my home. This is a person who has raped me, hit my while I was holding my newborn and also put his hand on my throat and threatened me.

NYAS have accused me of not encouraging the relationship with their father on purely that basis.

Am I being unreasonable to not have a picture of my abuser in my home?

To answer the questions:

The judge asked if there was a photo up. My barrister said no, my children (3 and 4) had asked for it to be taken down. The barrister representing my children under guardianship said that 'the mother is clearly not encouraging a relationship with their father'. I do not know if the judge agreed as she ruled against contact starting immediately against the barrister for the children and my ex husband.

Regarding not seeking medical care, before I had representation I had to go to court alone. The judge and my ex husbands barrister put an order in place that said that I was not allowed to discuss my ex husband with anybody at all for any reason. I clarified if that meant medical care and was told yes. When I got a barrister she was horrified and had it overturned as it was illegal.

The mental health assistance needed is for ptsd for me and my eldest.

My children are very young, they remember him hurting me, my eldest points with his middle finger after seeing my ex constantly swear at me and was told it was just pointing. There are child locks on their drawers still as they will play with them and I can't have them shutting their fingers in the drawer.

No I do not feel confident in my barrister. She kept on recommending contact and suggested I was also at fault for the abusive atmosphere I exposed my children to because I did not leave. I had to be very assertive which is hard for me, and demand she run my argument the way I wanted her to.

It was said in court, but NYAS are due to now assess the children and make their recommendations to court. As they are recommending contact despite everything else I don't think they are going to change their minds given that they seem to think I am alienating the children with the photo comment. They ignore that I am being stalked and have been saying for literally years (I can prove it has been years) that I am scared my ex will kill me.

There has not been a section 7 ordered yet. There was meant to be but not now.

He has admitted to several incidents of abuse, so they are taking those as fact but still recommend contact as it was "only the mother" who was abused despite me holding one of the children in one incident.

I could male a complaint but I'm worried that it will bias them against me further. I've looked at reviews for NYAS and they say they they will lie, covered up child abuse and have caused multiple children to need counselling.

I just don't know what to do. I'm never going to escape from his control.

@prh47bridge

I don't know if I just comply

Has the court ordered you to put a photo up? If not, don't. The NYAS barrister saying you should have a photo up has no legal force. You do not have to do what the barrister says unless the court tells you to.

The NYAS position as set out in your posts doesn't make sense. If he is being investigated as a possible child abuser, there is no way he should have contact until that investigation is complete. That is basic safeguarding.

I know it doesn't make sense, but I have their written recommendations and they honestly want to investigate him and also give contact!

They keep mentioning that supervised contact is safe, but that won't prevent mental harm to the children.

@Lovemusic33

So sorry you are going through this OP, I have been through the tedious police interviews and being told “it’s your word against his” and eventually being told that there wasn’t enough evidence to take him to court. He got away with everything other than harassment which could be proved. Luckily I didn’t have dc with him or he would have been granted some kind of access because obviously he wasn’t guilty of rape or abuse. The system isn’t fit for purpose, why would anyone allow a child to have contact with a rapist and abuser?

Stick to your guns and refuse to have a photo up, it’s crazy that they are suggesting it.

There is evidence of conspiracy to assault me, that he hit me and threatened me, of coercive control, pictures of bruises. That still isn't enough to guarantee anything though.

@Southernbellenot

OP you must feel like you are going insane. Family, courts are not friendly towards women and children at all often putting them both in danger.

My friend started a new life after being in a womens refugee after her husband battered her. He also smacked her dd. Her In-laws started court proceedings for full custody of her dd, during the process my friend found out that her husband was a convicted pedophile. She had no idea. The family court would not look at all the circumstances and would only focus on the contact/custody case. So she had multiple legal cases going on at the same time. My friend had to pull her dd out of the school she had been in for 18 months and move back in to her old family home ( where she had been viciously beaten) whilst her husband moved in to his parents.

She was forced to have psychiatric assessments, the psychiatrist said my friend has 'anger issues' - not surprising considering what his family were putting her though. She was told by her barrister that if she didn't comply his parents had a good chance of gaining custody.

Despite being the victim she was treated like a criminal.

Family courts are evil and a terrifying place for women to be.

What happened to her children?

They keep mentioning that supervised contact is safe, but that won't prevent mental harm to the children.

He almost certainly WILL get contact, and more contact if you refuse all contact. The system is wrong, but that's the system.

Supervised contact is more protection than most children will ever be able to achieve and if you manage this for your kids you'll already have done better than most mothers even can under this system.

Otoh, if you are found to be obstructing contact, the courts can and do change residency - even to an abuser.

If I were you, I would very seriously consider accepting supervised contact at a contact centre. That is honestly an amazingly unusual deal, which will be why the barrister is recommending it. She knows the misogynistic system and the limits of what is possible.

@PicsInRed

They keep mentioning that supervised contact is safe, but that won't prevent mental harm to the children.

He almost certainly WILL get contact, and more contact if you refuse all contact. The system is wrong, but that's the system.

Supervised contact is more protection than most children will ever be able to achieve and if you manage this for your kids you'll already have done better than most mothers even can under this system.

Otoh, if you are found to be obstructing contact, the courts can and do change residency - even to an abuser.

If I were you, I would very seriously consider accepting supervised contact at a contact centre. That is honestly an amazingly unusual deal, which will be why the barrister is recommending it. She knows the misogynistic system and the limits of what is possible.

Supervised contact will move to unsupervised eventually though.

My 5 year old has PTSD. At age 5! He was being investigated for autism before I stopped contact and the symptoms have almost vanished since contact stopped. My ex likely exposed him to sexual behaviour with one of his mistresses based on how he plays with dolls.

Supervised contact is not going to protect him from that returning is it?

Supervised contact is not going to protect him from that returning is it?

The problem is that if you steadfastly refuse to engage in any way with the recommendations of the system, you face the possibility of a change of residence.

It's not right and it's not fair, but it IS.

We cannot protect our children under this this system, all we can do is minimise harm as much as possible without having residence reversed.

To allow contact is to allow him to be harmed, he was selectively mute before. He is a normal child with friends and everything now. Contact is risking all of his progress being undone.

I cannot believe that courts honestly think traumatised children with contact with both parents is better than happy children with one parent.

Supervised contact puts multiple barriers in the way, not to mention objective people there to watch and monitor how the children respond, how the parent being supervised behaves, engages with them, how consistently they show up. It does not always move to unsupervised, sometimes it provides the needed evidence. Although sadly it works to discourage the faint hearted and easily bored or obviously incompetent; the determined and well disguised offenders get away with it.

It's hell on a stick OP, I am so sorry. However once the court processes are done things do settle. And situations change. I've seen a friend and many other women on MN talk about this and the utter hell of being in the middle of it but it does move on. For you and the children's best interests it is sadly about placating the officials as much as possible and accepting there is a hell of a lot of politics at play and no sense or humanity to be expected in the process. It's an endurance test sadly.

@THisbackwithavengeance

Everyone needs to calm down.

This was something said by the barrister representing your XH?

So their job for which they are paid shedloads of money is basically to make your XH look like a fantastic father and you like a spiteful bitch who is stopping a good man seeing his kids. If they don't at least try and do that, they are not doing their job properly. This isn't personal. I used to work in courts. When you see barristers snarling at each other in court and then laughing and chatting together at lunch because they are actually besties from law school, you realise that the whole thing is just a fucking game.

If the fact that you do not have a photo of your ex in your house is the worst thing that they can level at you, then I probably wouldn't worry.

But please do not kick off in the court or say some of the things that people have suggested on here. Do not under any circumstances call your ex a rapist if that has not been proven in a court of law. Do not get angry or call him names. That is what they want. They are looking to provoke you so you get angry, kick off and then you look unhinged.

Just say there is no photo of your ex currently hanging up in your house but if the children would like to have some photos of their dad in an album or a frame, then you are happy to facilitate that if XH would like to provide some. Job done.

It was the National Youth Advocacy barrister who challenged the OP. The woman tasked to ensure the best interest of the children NOT the abuser.

Your advice is very sound none the less.

For me it just proves yet again that the Family court is there for abusive males and not the best interests of children and their mothers.

I cannot believe that courts honestly think traumatised children with contact with both parents is better than happy children with one parent.

You're dealing with ideology, not reason, so they do believe their way is best, even though it's not.

However, they have the power, so you need to be very measured and wise in your dealings with them. You cannot get a decent outcome from Family Court where there is abuse, you can only minimise harm within the bounds of the broken and ideological system we have.

Sadly men using their children to get access to women they abused before is very common. Judges and lawyer either won't or can't do anything about it. They don't care. It's easier to blame a traumatized woman then to hold the man who traumatized her accountable. It's so very chilling.

OP. I wish I could advise you. I hope you're able to get another barrister. The one you have sounds like an insufferable handmaiden doing men's dirty work for them.

They're trying to diffuse parent alienation which is rife these days, however, no one (not even a judge) can force you to display images you find deeply disturbing in your home

We don't know the details so we don't know if your ex was convicted of anything, without the details I'm not going to comment further

@Cait73

They're trying to diffuse parent alienation which is rife these days, however, no one (not even a judge) can force you to display images you find deeply disturbing in your home

We don't know the details so we don't know if your ex was convicted of anything, without the details I'm not going to comment further

I understand some parents do try and alienate the children, but I haven't done that. How can I protect them if it will be interpreted as alienation?

I hate to say this, but you can't, unless he is convicted of something that would put them in actual physical danger (and even then it's not always a given, which is lunacy)

How can I protect them if it will be interpreted as alienation

Its impossible isn't it? My son experienced awful abuse from his dad and didn't want to see him, and essentially I felt incapable of supporting my son as I knew the risks of being accused of parental alienation. I couldn't gaslight him either, it didn't sit right with me. It was such a difficult path to tread. I found him an excellent therapist and she supported me too in treading that path and also helped me feel like my son had an adult in his life who was completely neutral.

Hi,

I know this is my old thread but I have another question for people who have been through this.

NYAS visited at the weekend, my children were happy to see her, showed her all their toys etc. They told her they were happy all the time and my 5 year old said that he saw my ex hit me and that made him sad. They also didn't like the video of him and wouldn't make one in response or discuss it which is in line with what I have told the court their reactions are when I read them postcards from my ex. I did show the assessor the stack of cards to show I was keeping them and the drivel that he writes on them and she didn't seem impressed by the contents.

How much will NYAS take my 5 year old's wishes into account? I pointed her towards his school and old nursery to discuss his behaviour with them as nursery could not believe the change in him once I stopped contact.

I'm well aware that even if I "win", my ex is going to take me back to court for parental alienation which he has stated at the last hearing. So this is not going to be the end of it anyway.

Of course YANBU OP, you should not be being treated like this, it's outrageous, I'm so sorry!
An yes, who the FECK voted YABU?? The lack of compassion is astounding!

My DS has indirect contact from his father one card per month maximum.
My ex also assaulted me with DS in my arms at 2 years old.
We had the section 7 done, visits to home, discussions with preschool and childrens services & social services, health visitor.
They stated that the 'potential risks outweighed any benefits' in regard to face to face contact.
Its a hard time, good luck.

OP

If supervised contact looks likely to happen, can you think of things that would help there, in terms of not letting it progress to unsupervised?
That is, to get ex to show his true colours.

E.g. pre and post contact interviews of DC by psychologists at centre; recording of contact; anything else???

@Bonheurdupasse

OP

If supervised contact looks likely to happen, can you think of things that would help there, in terms of not letting it progress to unsupervised?
That is, to get ex to show his true colours.

E.g. pre and post contact interviews of DC by psychologists at centre; recording of contact; anything else???

I have begged for the court to assess my eldest if not both children and they just don't seem inclined to.

There was a psychological assessment done on both of us but they were restricted in what information they were given. My ex calculated what he knew she would have and lied to her based on that and got a good report. However I have asked that the psychologist be brought to court because it is very easy to point out where he has lied to her on important things. Literally it's all over the paperwork and the judge has actually read it all so will be quick to point it out.

My report is also a shambles as she has previously said she has no knowledge of neurodiversity and she has attempted to diagnose me with something that is easily explainable by my conditions so I will be having those questions asked of her in court too. She was meant to take my conditions into account but she knows nothing about them and hasn't even attempted to, even trying to write one off as anxiety about court when if she asked about how long I had the symptoms she would have accepted the diagnosis.

I do not want contact as I don't know the effect on my children's mental health. I don't care that people tell me they will be physically safe at a contact centre, my son wet himself at the mere thought of being asked about my ex.

OP

Re the psychologist. I'm afraid if you're trying to refute her points, no matter how obviously right you are, you're better off to engage your own expert - i.e. psychologist in this case.
Often the litigant's points are given little consideration unless they come from an expert. It's absolutely not right but it's what happens.

The psychologist is coming to court, so can be questioned on her assessment in light of the information she was denied.

Will the court take my 5 year olds opinion into consideration?

One more update, the NYAS caseworker has lied in her report and misquoted me and the children. Thankfully I recorded the entire thing so I can prove this.

Words fail me.