I wanted to update you on this harrowing case in case you naively think lay judges are informed about ASD or give credence to the views of 14 year olds. At the final court hearing I managed to negotiate with XH for 14 year old DS to be able to live at home full time ie residence with me but XH demanded DS had to see him at set periods during the week and alternate weekends at XH's convenience rather than accommodating DS's schedule and wishes. My barrister managed to get the phrase, "subject to [DS's] wishes and feelings" into the final court order wrt visitations. The lay judges - same panel as presided over the first trial - were again dismissive of DS's ASD and his desire to live at home full time because they are driven by the ideology of shared residence at all costs.
XH ceased to pay child maintenance - during the court trial he paid the statutory minimum - immediately after the final hearing. No surprise.
After the final hearing, DS told XH to f* off and that he was not a very nice man and he never wanted to see him again.
DS cried with relief when he found out he would not be "taken away" to a stranger's home (XH lives in his GF's house) but it has taken DS almost a year to recover from his anxiety. XH has threatened to sue me again for contempt of court for not physically forcing 6' DS to see him etc.
A year after the trial and I still have hundreds of thousands of pounds of legal fee debts and my health has been severely compromised by the accummulated stress of the court trials - BUT I would do it all again. DS is happy, secure and thriving, despite moments of anxiety.
Any parent who sues their DC to force them to live with them should think long and hard - you are only harming your DC. Nobody, and especially a child with ASD, should be threatened with forcible removable from their loving family and home against their wishes because of a non-resident parent's desire to punish and control their ex.