The UK’s Children Welfare Courts; Mockery of Justice in Civilised Country or Fathers’ Demonising Venues?

By Denboba Natie, February 14, 2014

Since human beings established socially responsible systems guided by morality, peoples of various regions have developed moral code which later on regarded as law; long time before today’s civilisation came into existence. Our forefathers and mothers have created such morally acceptable systems with the objective of assuring justice and fairness for all, in particular protecting and safeguarding vulnerable, defenceless and the weakest. All religious doctrines widely advocate these noble human values; they all also genuinely believed that we all human beings deserve fair treatment and should be supporting the weakest and vulnerable. The said morally built systems in most parts of world have been practiced for several millennia.

Although on occasions the most powerful groups of society use these laws for their own personal gains as centuries progressed (as we practically witness it today); however, the overall objective of having the aforementioned law (whether the written or unwritten) is entirely based on morality, therefore it remains as a highly regarded human value.  

Child’s life begins from the first date it was conceived and then grows to a fully developed miniature human shape (in mother’s womb) to be born approximately after 9 months. From the date of his birth, the child further develops and grows to a full adulthood after 18 years. In similar manner, the systems created by human society evolved from their embryonic stages to maturity through generations depending on individual societies’ socio-cultural and politico-economic dynamism. While some laws moved to be more progressive, accommodating and timely; others remain stagnant and regressive at times becoming less fair than they were over hundred years ago. Besides, most of legal systems improved to assure their compatibility with modern society and to satisfy ever-growing demands and unquenchable hunger for justice and fairness (involving global, regional and local pressure groups created for equality of all), the others in some legal disciplines are sadly travelling backward.

Since early 1980s in particular, Western democracies are becoming excessively biased towards mothers’ rights under unfairly facilitated systems- unfairly favouring them since the rights of women are highly politicised and the issues are started to be treated with utmost, yet cosmetic sensitivity. As the campaigns of feminist lobbyists become more rigorous the rights of children were severely and unlawfully crushed under various explanations involving automatically labelling fathers’ as abusers and irrelevant part of children’s life once they are separated or divorced. The systems become not only unfair to fathers’ involved, but also the law enforcers already began seriously violating their fundamental rights to family life -by only needing them to pay child maintenance which fathers happily do for their kids. In the processes of such unpalatable sagas, the rights of Children are equally violated when the child is denied access to fathers and obliged to live with only his mother without due considerations for his emotional, psychological, developmental and others natural needs the children naturally deserve to enjoy. Thus, the situation becomes pretty obfuscating and difficult to comprehend.

Additionally, when fathers are continually belittled by the system in a law abiding country where judges, solicitors, social services personnel, police and others law enforcing bodies don’t have pressure from the government concerned, it’s so disappointing to see fathers are becoming victims of miscarriage of justice and deliberately coordinated delays whilst seeking justice for their children and their fundamental rights. This is astonishingly shocking when it’s compared with the formerly treasured values on fairness and justice for all. In particular, the shock becomes severe when this is directly related with the rights of children (vulnerable and defenceless) in their tender ages while the court works hard to entertain lies of majority of mothers’ who are often determined to hurting their estranged husbands’ without slightest consideration for their children’s needs. I however exclude from this accusations millions of responsible mothers who prioritise the needs of their children even under difficult situations; and equally accuse violent and irresponsible fathers.

The topic I’m going to discuss is ‘Child-fathers’ relationship post-divorce and post separation in the UK’s Edinburgh sheriff court. When I am saying this, I’m not going to talk alien issues, rocket science, complicated mathematical and chemical formulae and their calculations. I’m going to discuss simple and real thing which is about my best friend’s life and his ongoing sufferings as justices becomes distant from him and his kid who is left with no choice but confused and bewildered- year after year. The case has taken him for almost half a decade and not over yet. The aforementioned unpalatable story is this; although I’m going to discuss fraction of realities surrounding over 4 and ½ years saga in Edinburgh’s Sheriff Courts’ Child Welfare court (family unit) (Scotland) which can’t be exhausted with this brief article.    

Mr Wallace is a 42 years old Scot, British father who was apparently having unrestricted contacts with his child after his wife and he were separated based on mutual agreement when their relationship becomes irreparably damaged; suddenly his estranged wife denied him contacts to his child under various fictitiously fabricated stories –the stories wholly and unquestionably accepted by the courts and others involved.  

Prior to their separation and subsequent divorce, Mr Wallace managed to get his wife’s agreement therefore they were able to sit down to decide that they won’t be able to live together as doing so wasn’t pleasant to both of them, and more essentially to the child involved simply because Mrs Wallace’s behaviour grown to be irrational and erratic- involving physical aggression. Mr Wallace also sorted out all the necessary financial arrangements including making the necessary preparations by putting order for standing order to pay 15% of his salary on monthly basis to his child’s mother which is ongoing to date. He and his estranged wife also prepared an informal separation agreement which involves child support, care arrangements, property they own and for the place one party to move to. Mr Wallace initiated such wise approach in order for both party the separation to be less stressful and the transition to be smooth for their child most.

Primarily, Mr Wallace has planned to move out, however, eventually Mrs Wallace decided to move herself with the child instead. This was simply because she wanted to avoid mortgage payment so that Mr Wallace can continue living in their property to pay the mortgage for their matrimonial property. She moved with the child to the properly primarily Mr Wallace rented for himself. Mr Wallace fundamentally didn’t complain with her final change of mind as long as his child is safe and has got unrestricted access and continue to be part of child’s life and upbringing. Mr Wallace has shown utmost civility during their separation process although the pain whenever he thinks about the fact that he can’t be with his beloved child on daily basis as he used to be is excruciatingly painful. Moreover, whenever he thinks the unpredictability of his child’s mother’s behaviour whenever she makes any decisions involving aggression; he can’t help worrying about the safety of his child and unforeseen even before the worst case scenario has unfolded.

Nevertheless, he was positive and open to any arrangements as long as the interest of the child remains the centre of all decisions and the child is given the necessary care, love and affection and ultimately unrestricted contact with both parents as long as there is no serious issue obliging both parents to act otherwise. Therefore, Mr Wallace tried to avoid any confrontations and negative approaches by treating all matters relating with Mrs Wallace sensitively. Mr Wallace also remained cautious since the child was born about his estranged wife’s erratic behaviour to him as well as to their child involving treating child violently and unpleasantly when she reacts to any issues without caring for psychological wellbeing of the child; never mind husband and the relationship.

The contact denied for more than a month. The child keeps crying to see dad which never rings bell in mother’s mind. The mother and her relatives pushed with their denial despite child’s lamentation to have his dad around.  

Left with no choice Mr Wallace had to hire a family solicitor (Lawyer) to take the case to the Child Welfare Court. Ever since this case was taken to court, all involved delay the case under numerous pretexts on most occasions based on fictions lies of concerned mother who claims to be nervous when she meets Mr Wallace during the exchange time by systematic support of ‘Curatrix’ hired by the court to represent the interest of the child, what a mockery!! Without questioning how this can be the case- or without even considering whether this overrides the rights of child to have contacts with her father, the judges support erroneous decisions of the said Curatrix and the mother of the child who changes her stories on daily basis. The denial continued for more 2 and a half years.

Mr Wallace appeals the decisions to sheriff principal (high court) where the judge’s decision took over a year and half. Eventually, the principal judge reached the final verdict where he/she unequivocally clarified that Mr Wallace’s case wasn’t treated lawfully- therefore the case was redirected back to the lower court for further reconsideration. Similar saga is taking its shape once again. In the lower court those who have unlawfully decided against Mr Wallace’s case are lined up to defend their indefensible positions.

After over 4 and a half years, the history is repeating itself. Mr Wallace knows all fishy games feel like to him; but he as others hundreds of UK fathers in his situation often feels intimidated where he is not allowed to say a single word (apart from his lawyers) while the rituals of the court takes place. Neither his own solicitor nor the judge allow him to say single word, the action which seems to be not different from bullying and total repression and suppression. During his over 25 court appearances during these entire endless sagas, the feeling is the same and no one with genuine mind can comprehend what is happening against Mr Wallace in a civilised part of the world. Think who is making money during these all endless sagas whilst father and child involved are cursed for eternity. What does a genuine minded person thinks about this all unpleasant injustices imposed on UK’s fathers?

Finally in UK’s child Welfare courts, fathers are continually demonised by most of elements the system legally harbours. However when the system started to be taken into the hands of some interests groups who mainly focus on defending own interests, the values of humanity started to become obscured therefore very difficult to understand the objectives of once noble establishment. Deliberately depriving Children and fathers fundamental rights is both wrong and unacceptable. Those who are entrusted public responsibility repeatedly fail to discharge their duties when it comes to father-child relationships, time and again since Mr Wallace is involved in the process. The judges involved rarely scrutinise the necessary requirements the law demands whenever the curatirx and the mothers embellish their lies with made up fictitious histories which potentially never convinces experienced judges. Yet the judges often make decisions based on false allegations and fictitious corroborations. Doing so is morally incorrect, legally unlawful and intellectually inadmissible in UK.

Such is ongoing reality against several thousands of UK fathers where most of them are bullied, ridiculed and suppressed by usually so intimidating court atmospheres where only black robbed Solicitors, Court Clarks and others involved dictate fathers what to do and how to behave as if the fathers are alien decesneded from another planet who don’t have blood, feelings and soul like them. No civilised country should permit such terrible injustice to continue to unfold against fathers and children under the name of justice!

Denboba Natie, February 14, 2014, UK