Too many hoops to jump through
Notifications OFF
Long story short for those who do not know my partner's 'story'- he had the knock in 2017 when living with his wife and two young kids at the time. Hasn't seen his kids since as the wife didn't want him to have any contact at all.
He tried through the family courts to have some sort of contact whilst under investigation. The courts stated he would have to try again once sentenced, and all they would agree is the ex wife would give monthly update on the kids wellbeing, schooling and general interests. Social services closed the case soon after the knock when they found the ex wife was not going to allow any contact. The family courts didn't consult any other party on whether contact could be agreed/arranged whilst waiting sentencing (back to this point later).
Sentenced in late 2019, two years suspended with 10 years on SOR and a SHPO, which despite not being a contact offence he has the no contact with any child under 16 clause (which has made his request for seeing his kids difficult).
He then saved up for the family court again to request contact centre arrangements to see his kids -applied two weeks before COVID lockdown hit...and COVID (as many of you have experienced) delayed the Court process.
We are now in 2023 (6 years since the knock, his youngest has no memory of him and the oldest has no real connection due to this length of time). Over the past three years my partner has had to have two private assessments done (the first the courts threw out despite they were the ones who instructed the specific specialist to do the work- all because CAFCASS were not clear on their criteria).
My partner has done the Inform course (whilst under investigation), and was co operative during the two year probation. He found the course and support from probation helpful and hasn't sought additional support (such as one to one counselling) because he feels like the inform course was enough and he can't afford to go private (he needs to focus his savings on this family court case).
The two assessments both agree that he is low risk to contact offending, primarily because he has not demonstrated a risk of going from online to offline from his previous behavior and his latest attitude (he offended by chat rooms pretending to be teens and chatting to others sharing iiocs...). Both assessments however have showed concern he is at low to medium risk that he could reoffend by going back to online offending behavior.
The latest assessment on my partner basically stated that the inform course was not enough (fyi this assessment was done by Lucy Faithful) and that my partner should have had one to one and that they recommend he does this. What bothers me is if the inform course is not enough then why don't the courts require all those convicted to go through one to one therapy, or be part of probation. Basically, I feel like my partner is being penalized because he can't afford to go private. Does it mean he is less rehabilitated than those who can go private? That is how I feel the assesser and the courts are going to see it.
Bare in mind he has been on this up and down journey for over 6 years now! He has been monitored by the police since 2019 etc.
I do agree that my partner should have 'top up' therapy and refreshers when he can. But the focus has been him seeing his kids, and unfortunately he can't really do both (go through Courts and have counseling).
The other issue has been that my partner has been representing himself, which I feel has back fired because he didn't do the research and it was about two years into this family court case where the judge asked why he had not arranged for a guardian to represent his kids. As a consequence NYAS have been brought in.
The NYAS rep I met a few months ago and she basically said she was annoyed NYAS or another other similar party was not involved alot sooner, because the main issue now (besides the fact my partner is on the SOR as an offender) is the long time the kids have had zero contact and the much higher concern on how to reintroduce the kids to my partner.
So my partner has his latest assessment (concluding he needs to have one to one therapy and medium risk of online reoffending), and NYAS have assessed the children and have warned my partner their conclusion and recommendation to the courts is that regardless of the output on my partner and if he takes on further courses etc- the amount of time of him being absent is too detrimental to the kids at this time, and should wait for the kids to be older before any reintroduction. Their report hasn't been written up yet so not sure if they will state at what age they recommend.
Tbh I thought this would be NYAS' opinion, as stated earlier they are not impressed that it has taken this long to get this far. If this process was handled better and in a more timely manner then the risk to the kids on reintroduction would be far reduced.
The final court conclusion should be next month. But we have heard this before....I would be surprised if the courts don't go with NYAS' recommendations. I do respect and understand how NYAS' got to this recommendation, for me it has always been about the kids. I feel like they should have some sort of relationship with their dad, but the 6 years since last contact is so long.
For me I feel that it is only worth trying to continue to pursue contact with the kids if we can be certain the kids get support to help reduce the impact of reintroduction (the stress, upset, confusing the kids will experience). But I am not clear if Social services have the expertise or resources to do this.
I'm here to support my partner, but I don't know how to tell him that perhaps he should just take NYAS' recommendation and drop he family court case. The kids have been assessed that reintroduction is too risky for their well-being. They are both doing well at school, but his daughter appears to more of a sensitive soul (she currently has issues sleeping, which is being medicated), and his youngest is suspected ADHD. Reintroduction could make these concerns worse, and could lead to other issues.
I feel like a lot of factors have lead to the lengthly delay in getting to this point. Some parties have stated that contact could have been arranged before his sentencing, that the ex wife could have been challenged as she has been putting her foot down the whole time. But she has been criticized for keeping the kids in total darkness -which I feel will cause issues in the future.
Sorry for the essay- just needs to get it off my chest. My partner really wants to fight to see his kids, but I feel like he isn't taking on the feedback on his kids wellbeing. He wants to have the evidence in place so that if his kids ever ask where he was and why they didn't get to see him, he can show he tried his hardest.
I don't think anyone could blame him if he 'stop the fight' based on the NYAS recommendation, as they represent the kids.
Anyway, we continue to jump through hoops, and I feel like it is little too late.
He tried through the family courts to have some sort of contact whilst under investigation. The courts stated he would have to try again once sentenced, and all they would agree is the ex wife would give monthly update on the kids wellbeing, schooling and general interests. Social services closed the case soon after the knock when they found the ex wife was not going to allow any contact. The family courts didn't consult any other party on whether contact could be agreed/arranged whilst waiting sentencing (back to this point later).
Sentenced in late 2019, two years suspended with 10 years on SOR and a SHPO, which despite not being a contact offence he has the no contact with any child under 16 clause (which has made his request for seeing his kids difficult).
He then saved up for the family court again to request contact centre arrangements to see his kids -applied two weeks before COVID lockdown hit...and COVID (as many of you have experienced) delayed the Court process.
We are now in 2023 (6 years since the knock, his youngest has no memory of him and the oldest has no real connection due to this length of time). Over the past three years my partner has had to have two private assessments done (the first the courts threw out despite they were the ones who instructed the specific specialist to do the work- all because CAFCASS were not clear on their criteria).
My partner has done the Inform course (whilst under investigation), and was co operative during the two year probation. He found the course and support from probation helpful and hasn't sought additional support (such as one to one counselling) because he feels like the inform course was enough and he can't afford to go private (he needs to focus his savings on this family court case).
The two assessments both agree that he is low risk to contact offending, primarily because he has not demonstrated a risk of going from online to offline from his previous behavior and his latest attitude (he offended by chat rooms pretending to be teens and chatting to others sharing iiocs...). Both assessments however have showed concern he is at low to medium risk that he could reoffend by going back to online offending behavior.
The latest assessment on my partner basically stated that the inform course was not enough (fyi this assessment was done by Lucy Faithful) and that my partner should have had one to one and that they recommend he does this. What bothers me is if the inform course is not enough then why don't the courts require all those convicted to go through one to one therapy, or be part of probation. Basically, I feel like my partner is being penalized because he can't afford to go private. Does it mean he is less rehabilitated than those who can go private? That is how I feel the assesser and the courts are going to see it.
Bare in mind he has been on this up and down journey for over 6 years now! He has been monitored by the police since 2019 etc.
I do agree that my partner should have 'top up' therapy and refreshers when he can. But the focus has been him seeing his kids, and unfortunately he can't really do both (go through Courts and have counseling).
The other issue has been that my partner has been representing himself, which I feel has back fired because he didn't do the research and it was about two years into this family court case where the judge asked why he had not arranged for a guardian to represent his kids. As a consequence NYAS have been brought in.
The NYAS rep I met a few months ago and she basically said she was annoyed NYAS or another other similar party was not involved alot sooner, because the main issue now (besides the fact my partner is on the SOR as an offender) is the long time the kids have had zero contact and the much higher concern on how to reintroduce the kids to my partner.
So my partner has his latest assessment (concluding he needs to have one to one therapy and medium risk of online reoffending), and NYAS have assessed the children and have warned my partner their conclusion and recommendation to the courts is that regardless of the output on my partner and if he takes on further courses etc- the amount of time of him being absent is too detrimental to the kids at this time, and should wait for the kids to be older before any reintroduction. Their report hasn't been written up yet so not sure if they will state at what age they recommend.
Tbh I thought this would be NYAS' opinion, as stated earlier they are not impressed that it has taken this long to get this far. If this process was handled better and in a more timely manner then the risk to the kids on reintroduction would be far reduced.
The final court conclusion should be next month. But we have heard this before....I would be surprised if the courts don't go with NYAS' recommendations. I do respect and understand how NYAS' got to this recommendation, for me it has always been about the kids. I feel like they should have some sort of relationship with their dad, but the 6 years since last contact is so long.
For me I feel that it is only worth trying to continue to pursue contact with the kids if we can be certain the kids get support to help reduce the impact of reintroduction (the stress, upset, confusing the kids will experience). But I am not clear if Social services have the expertise or resources to do this.
I'm here to support my partner, but I don't know how to tell him that perhaps he should just take NYAS' recommendation and drop he family court case. The kids have been assessed that reintroduction is too risky for their well-being. They are both doing well at school, but his daughter appears to more of a sensitive soul (she currently has issues sleeping, which is being medicated), and his youngest is suspected ADHD. Reintroduction could make these concerns worse, and could lead to other issues.
I feel like a lot of factors have lead to the lengthly delay in getting to this point. Some parties have stated that contact could have been arranged before his sentencing, that the ex wife could have been challenged as she has been putting her foot down the whole time. But she has been criticized for keeping the kids in total darkness -which I feel will cause issues in the future.
Sorry for the essay- just needs to get it off my chest. My partner really wants to fight to see his kids, but I feel like he isn't taking on the feedback on his kids wellbeing. He wants to have the evidence in place so that if his kids ever ask where he was and why they didn't get to see him, he can show he tried his hardest.
I don't think anyone could blame him if he 'stop the fight' based on the NYAS recommendation, as they represent the kids.
Anyway, we continue to jump through hoops, and I feel like it is little too late.
Post deleted by user
Hi, I have read a number of your posts, and in my view - despite the obvious and massive errors he's made - your person is showing remarkable committment, resilience, fortitude and determination. Everything single thing he's doing to puruse a relationship with his children is a tangible act of love. I really hope that one day his children are able to see and feel the strength and power of his love for them.
You are also being amazing - what a tower of strength!
You seem to have all bases covered, but if you haven't already, I wonder if you might consider contacting 'Circles'. They specialise in this world, and offer a wide range of services, including liaison/mediation with wider family, liaison with SS, one-to-counselling (I believe free of charge if you self-refer), risk assessments, safeguarding courses etc etc. They may just be able to offer some guidance.
My children's dad is in prison (my god, I'm so angry, sad, shocked, ashamed, traumatised, heartbroken and downright scared for all of our futures). We had a video call yesterday, and we agreed that if only the perpetrators could have a glimpse into the future to see the utter devastation and destruction of their selfish, revolting behaviour it would be a very strong deterrent.
But we 'can't' give those warnings, we 'can't' raise awareness because we 'can't' open up the desperately needed dialogue on this growing problem as the societal stigma is so enormous that even being associated with these offences leaves us open to even greater harm than already inflicted on us.
I do wish you all well.
You are also being amazing - what a tower of strength!
You seem to have all bases covered, but if you haven't already, I wonder if you might consider contacting 'Circles'. They specialise in this world, and offer a wide range of services, including liaison/mediation with wider family, liaison with SS, one-to-counselling (I believe free of charge if you self-refer), risk assessments, safeguarding courses etc etc. They may just be able to offer some guidance.
My children's dad is in prison (my god, I'm so angry, sad, shocked, ashamed, traumatised, heartbroken and downright scared for all of our futures). We had a video call yesterday, and we agreed that if only the perpetrators could have a glimpse into the future to see the utter devastation and destruction of their selfish, revolting behaviour it would be a very strong deterrent.
But we 'can't' give those warnings, we 'can't' raise awareness because we 'can't' open up the desperately needed dialogue on this growing problem as the societal stigma is so enormous that even being associated with these offences leaves us open to even greater harm than already inflicted on us.
I do wish you all well.
@majestictopaz,
I have followed your partner's story for a while now and I really wish him all the best and that he can see his kids again soon.
If only his ex wife would allow supervised contact, I'm sure it would do the kids a world of good.
I have followed your partner's story for a while now and I really wish him all the best and that he can see his kids again soon.
If only his ex wife would allow supervised contact, I'm sure it would do the kids a world of good.