Supervision Order for boy who assaulted mother – 2014vol4#24

A Supervision Order for a boy who was misbehaving at home and threatening and assaulting his mother were among the orders granted in a District Court in a provincial city. The judge granted the Supervision Order with a direction that the boy was not to threaten or physically assault his mother and was to attend appointments with addiction services. The mother consented to the Supervision Order.

In the same case the judge asked the boy how things things were since he had been last in court. The boy replied that things were good and everything was nicer at home, there had been no trouble he said. The judge asked the boy had he read the social work reports concerning him and he said Yes. The boy told the court that in the past he had been abusive to his mother.

The judge asked the social worker whether she had any plans to address the root causes of his behaviour. She said that the boy had a difficult time and the social work department wanted to secure Cognitive Behavioural Therapy to try and help him to change his behaviour. When the judge asked the boy whether he thought he had had a difficult life, he replied that he did not think so and the judge said most people would think he had.

During a review of a Supervision Order the father’s solicitor told the court that he was extremely concerned that mother had made allegations of excessive drinking which he denied. The father’s solicitor also told the court that he had concerns about the child being given driving lessons and being left in company of another man who had been convicted of paedophilia, with whom the mother was living.

In relation to access the father asked the judge how he could have a loving relationship with his child when he only saw him for three hours a week. The judge said that “the priority was not building a loving relationship but making the child as good as can be; sometimes the relationship has to suffer so other parts of the child can come up.” The judge suggested that the father discuss the matter with the social workers and if he was still not happy that he could come back to court.

Another matter had been re-entered by the father because access with his child had been suspended by the mother. The father’s solicitor told the court that he felt that the mother was deciding the terms of access herself regardless of the position of the CFA and the court.

The solicitor for the mother said she was trying to facilitate access but the child was too upset for her to leave during access. The mother’s solicitor told the court that she had suggested that the father see the child at the mother’s house and this had occurred. The child had played outside and the father played with him outside. The mother’s solicitor went on to say that she had told the mother that she needed to make a bigger effort with facilitating access with the father. The judge directed that one more supervised access take place so that the father could be observed with the child.

In another review of a Care Order the court was told that one of the children had received a diagnosis of Aspergers Syndrome but there had been an improvement in his behaviour since the diagnosis. The court heard that the boy was looking for contact with his mother. The judge asked, in respect of another sibling, whether there had been any suggestion of a mentor “to give her a lead on what teenage girls have to face”. The CFA solicitor said that a child care worker had been allocated. The matter was listed again for four months time to see if the general improvement had been sustained and to get the views of the child care worker.

During another review of three children under Care Orders the court heard that the two boys were attending special schools due to their autism and learning difficulties. Their sister was doing well in her placement. The court was told that the mother had expressed a desire for her access with the children to take place at a different time to the father’s access. A concern was expressed to the court by the mother’s solicitor that the foster mother could at times be moody and put the boys down. However the same solicitor assured the court that it was a good placement and the foster parents had said that they would look after the boys after they reached 18.

In the same case the father’s solicitor told the judge that the father wished for more access but his solicitor had told him that there would need to be a period of stability and that he understood that and he appreciated that he had to act appropriately and be in the right frame of mind and that if he did that for a consistent period of time there would be a possibility of applying for further access.