Smileless, I should be less wordy, clearly!
I also didn’t want to bring up too many specific exmaples from my experience, as you don’t know who may think they recognise themselves in a story. But I really cannot leave your accusation that I have been biased against my own clients on the table. It stands as a gross insult to both my personal and professional ethics. I would not think to traduce your personal ethics or slander your experiences with this painful subject in what is (in the absence of OP) an increasingly generalised and hypothetical discussion, and I would be most grateful if you would extend me the same courtesy.
I would also caution all those reading not to project their own painful situations onto what the OP has said herself here. I think all reading are aware that some posters are in extremely difficult and distressing family situations. I understand the natural impulse to comfort those in similar painful situations, but very, very few individuals in these troubles are entirely blameless - which I think, Smileless, was your own well made point. It is entirely possible to recognise OP’s distress without unquestioningly accepting her narrative of her actions.
She posted asking for advice, not on the estrangement support thread. That thread is a place where it is completely inappropriate to question those who gather there to share their feelings. But this was an advice request. OP certainly does not need to like the advice, but it has been asked for and has been given by a number of posters.
I have dealt, and have colleagues who have dealt with, some estranged parents who were determined to “have their day in court”. Yes, ‘herded’ may have been an overly informal word choice, but these clients were strongly, strongly encouraged away from the courts as a first line of approach. The widely held belief that “everyone gets their full say in court” and “the judge will see right through [other individual]” is one of the most pernicious in family matters, and it is not appropriate for a representative not to attempt to disabuse their client tactfully of this notion. I understand Yogagirl had a particularly awful court experience on this point, which I deeply regret. We all as clients go to the court hoping for the best. It is the job of our representatives to align our expectations with the likely outcome. I saw too many people who had fallen out with the other family firms in the area because they had been given deeply unrealistic prospects of success, which had then vanished like snow off a dyke after proceedings, and were now much poorer, much sadder and without fail, in a worse position than when they had first come to the other firms. (There is one in particular in my area which has a legendarily bad reputation for this; I have comforted too many of their tragically disappointed former clients to have anything pleasant to say about this practice.)
I will turn to some of the examples I purposely did not give earlier of the behaviours that you say display my alleged bias. Please do note that in some of these cases, I acted for the grandparent rather than the parents, and as a result have not merely evidence these occurred but an admission directly from the horse’s mouth. There is one case in which I withdrew from acting due to the grandmother stating in my office that if she did not get to see the grandchildren, she would put petrol through the door of her daughter’s flat and light it. She was under the impression that I was in some way barred from passing this threat on to the authorities. I refuse to act for anyone willing to make such threats.
In relation to the meaningful contact issue, I acted in a very sad case where a child had been removed at birth from the mother and placed in long term fostering with a view to eventual freeing for adoption. Mother obviously contested this. Mother and grandmother had contact in a contact centre, supervised, once a month for three hours. The little lad’s social worker, despite diligent and careful reinforcement including by the fosterers, could not disabuse him of the firm belief that the person he went to see at comtact was in fact “Anne”, the social work assistant who supervised the contacts. It was Anne he bonded with. Indeed it was arranged for him to keep in touch with Anne for a while whilst he settled into his eventual adoptive placement. He simply developed absolutely no bond at all with mother and grandmother. Life story work etc was carried out so that he was aware they were related, amd in what way, but he simply formed no bond at all. The contact did not meet any need of his. It clearly fulfilled a need for mother and grandmother, but that is not the question the court is charged to answer. It is extremely difficult when a relative has limited or no existing relationship with a child to forge one in the atmosphere of a contact centre.
I made quite clear that it is the parent who is being forced to grant the grandparent contact with their child that they otherwise would not agree to. I am unsure as to how I was unclear about this. Parents in the normal exercise of their parental rights have almost unfettered discretion to decide who their children shall and shall not associate with. The reason a court order is sought by estranged extended family members is specifically to override the parents’ discretion on that specific point. This is obvious since in families who are not estranged, the children have contact with grandparents etc without the need for any court order to regulate that.
Persecution - I have acted on both sides of proceedings relating to harassment by an extended family member. I can unequivocally state that in all four cases, the behaviour by the extended family member was experienced as persecution by the subjects of it. There was one case that involved three house moves, one change of name and the instruction of a private investigator/search agent. The case that troubles me to this day was where the person (and I regret to say it was a grandmother) lay in wait for the eldest child on their route home from school every day to speak to them and since the child did not choose to speak to them, they followed her almost to the door of her home, often with the child in great distress and crying. I am not able even now to excuse that conduct towards a child. The child eventually moved school and the police became involved with the grandmother.
I am well furnished with further examples of times the children were directly caused distress and fear by the grandparents’ own actions. I had in my files numerous examples of very distressing letters sent (or in some cases hand delivered) to the children. These included threats of suicide, distressing drawings of violence against the child’s parents, false claims about the child’s parentage, accusations of sexual abuse against the child, and threats to kidnap the child by force. I want to say at this point that even after these missives had been delivered, in all of these cases bar one the parents were still willing to countenance some type of future relationship with the grandparent(s) provided some fairly strong safety boundaries were met. Aside from letters, I also was aware of many attempts by the grandparents to contact the children in person. This usually involved turning up at school, or at extra curricular activities. One small girl refused to go at all to her dance school due to “the scary man” loitering near the exit at all her lessons. Playgrounds were another flashpoint and one nine year old boy was physically taken from his nearby swing park by one grandmother. He was found in her home very quickly.
I appreciate, Smileless, that you no doubt would never consider taking these sort of actions towards your estranged family. That does not mean that other people who have become estranged have not. I have seen many individuals behave with great grace and fortitude in the face of what surely is a quite shattering life event. I have sadly also seen many other behave in a way which is completely unacceptable.
I do not think it fair to expect those with grace and fortitude to white knight for those in a similar predicament who have behaved inappropriately. That is not ‘bias’. It is only fair to hold people, even in grief, responsible for their course of action.
I can see that my intervention in this thread has negatively affected you, although I assure you it was in no way directed at you personally. Would it be of benefit for me to leave you with your thoughts at this point? I have no desire to upset or anger you any further.
.
