F&C 7 Supervised Access

What I couldn't do
by Rob Fitzpatrick

ssue: 7, June 1999
Page: 7

Abstract:

A Dunedin solo Dad and Supervised Access

Keywords: Children, fathers, supervised access.

Dunedin single Dad Rob Fitzpatrick had once been falsely accused of abusing his son. He couldn't stand the humiliation of being supervised while seeing him. How he is working towards making Supervised Access a meaningful experience for others, both fathers and children.

There are a variety of reasons why some parents need supervision and assistance with their kids, physical and mental handicaps, inappropriate sexual desires, drug and alcohol abuse, violence or a lack of knowledge in the needs of kids.
Family law requires that the needs and safety of children are to be paramount in custody and access cases therefore protection from abuse from a parent may be necessary. To ensure protection can be given without delay the law requires no proof to be presented. Claiming that the possibility for abuse during access exists is enough for the court to order supervision. Unfortunately the need for immediate protection of children has produced a new set of victims.
Any time a law allows guilt without proof being required, it is open to abuse by anyone wishing to cause harm or embarrassment. The breakup of a marriage brings out emotions of bitterness and anger, and creates the desire for revenge and to hurt more than anything else in our social structure.
As most women retain custody of children in marriage dissolutions. with men given limited access it is easily recognised that herein lies the easiest or maybe the only weapon to satisfy that need to hurt.
During my divorce experience in California I was ordered to undergo visitation with my 3 year old son at a police station as my ex claimed I intended to take flight with him to New Zealand. This was only an ex-parte order for 30 days when the full case had to be presented before a judge, before any permanent orders could be given. I refused to see my son at all for a month rather than go through the humiliation and suffer the indignity of being watched while being with him. The case never proceeded as it was purely an attempt to use the system to hurt me.
I felt by accepting the conditions I was admitting that it was somehow warranted. The idea that I could be thought of as a father, who could harm his own son if not supervised, hurt me more than any of the many negative insults and put downs during the 3 year battle.
So when I was approached to give input into creating a centre to provide access service in Dunedin, my mind went back to my experience which enabled me to view the issue from a different perspective.
The image most people have of a man who is ordered by the court to be supervised while visiting his own kids is that of a violent drunk, a gang member or a hardened drug addict. Not some average guy who loves his kids with no history of violence.
My experience, however, showed me that a "supervised father" is a guy who loves his kids so much that he would rise above the stereotypes of others, put up with the suspicious attitudes of his watchers and the gloating from a vindictive ex, just to spend a couple of hours with his kids. A guy who could do what I couldn't, although I knew I had only 30 days without seeing my son. I still wondered if I could allow myself to be treated in such a degrading way over a long period.
What long term impression would my son have of me? He wouldn't understand the real reasons but probably accept that dad was a bad person that he required protection from, even though he had never felt afraid or had been hurt by him. This could also instill a lasting impression that dad (and men in general) is hiding a dark side of Jekyll & Hyde proportions in the fertile child's mind.

In Dunedin there are plans currently being drafted to obtain premises for the sole purpose of operating an access centre which will cater for the needs of children and parents involved in conflict. The Father&Child Trust (Otago) is involved with Barnadoes, the Family Court and some local lawyers to provide a facility which will be designed with fathers' needs and concerns considered with the same importance as the children's and mothers'. The discussions that have taken place over the past few months have hown that fathers' needs are not being met, but maybe more due to the abscence of input than the presence of malice. And current providers may be appreciative of the concerns fathers have about the way that they are treated if approached in a positive way and modify programmes and attitudes to help all partners benefit from the negativity that is currently felt by being under observation while attempting to enjoy the father/child relationship.

The Domestic Violence Act

Think about it for a minute: what would you do if you were regularly beaten up by your spouse? Perhaps you would go to the police one day, tell them about it and try to put an end to it. But perhaps not. Because the beatings will have destroyed your self-esteem, have taken away much of your ability to communicate your feelings to other people, and you might simply lack the strength to do something about it.
If you are a woman, the macho culture of the police doesn't help. In the cities, at least, you will now be passed on to a female officer, but in many areas you will have to deal with a guy, who may even know the person you accuse. You may think that a whole pile of paperwork is waiting for you and that you will have to prove that you are a victim, which you may think you can't.
For men, the idea of disclosing that you have been abused by a woman (or a gay partner) to the tough guys at the police is equally frightening. But unlike women, men have virtually no other places to go for help in such situations. And men may believe they are not entitled to help, because Domestic Violence is always portrayed as violence by men against women. Even the official information brochure by the Department of Courts "Standing up to Domestic Violence", while attempting to be gender-neutral, occasionally slips into gender-specific language. "What if he starts abusing me again after I stopped/suspended the non-contact conditions?" asks the brochure on page 15, for example. The cover only features pictures of female victims, except for one elderly man. This leaves the impression with men that they are not protected by the Act - but they are.
But the Act does not only cover physical or sexual violence, but also psychological abuse. This includes a child witnessing domestic violence, or "controlling someone's money, time, car or contact with friends as a way of having power over them". Men are especially prone to fall victim to psychological abuse when they are unemployed and live with a spouse with superior verbal skills. The only direct defense such a man would have would be to lash out - which, in the eye of the law, would instantly turn him from victim into abuser.
The Act recognises that, in cases of Domestic Violence, there needs to be intervention first, and questions asked later. Victims of violence need to file a sworn statement, usually through a lawyer, and the Court will respond the same day with a Protection Order against the accused, usually banning the accused from making any contact with the complainant. If there are children in the relationship, custody will practically automatically go to the complainant, and the accused will only be able to see the children under supervision.
The Protection Order stays in place for 3 months. If it is not challenged, it will become final after this period. This is unique in New Zealand legislation, as it turns around the usual presumption of innocence into a presumption of guilt. It is also fairly unique in the world. In most states of the US, for example, an Order only stays in place for a certain period of time, unless corroborating evidence has been produced. And even though the fact that a Protection Order has been taken out against you does not prove you are a criminal, people who have had to have their access to their children supervised feel they are being treated as such by the institutions that provide such supervision (see story.....).
While the Act fails to protect many victims, because the threshold for disclosing the abuse and going through the system still appears too high to a victim, it has at the same time created a new class of victims: the wrongly accused. The Act carries no penalties for making a false allegation, and it will in most cases secure full custody for the person making this allegation.
In the wrong hands, the Domestic Violence Act can become a tool of abuse itself, and there are no penalties for doing so. Consider this situation: a woman is upset because she has found out that her partner had a fling with another woman. She feels hurt, and wants to hurt him in return. She uses the fact that her partner normally looks after the family's finances as a way to take out a Protection Order against him. That will remove him from the people he loves most: his children.
She may go even further: After a while she may give him a ring and invite him along to her house to see the children and talk about things. As soon as he arrives she can have him arrested and fined for breaching the order. When human emotions become a battlefield, the Domestic Violence Act becomes a weapon. In mutually violent relationships, a significant proportion of Domestic Violence cases acording to a growing body of international research, the Domestic Violence Act simply shifts the balance of power to the person who uses it first.
There is no doubt that the Act is being abused, especially when custody is being disputed, but also as a way of exerting power and control over another person. There is only debate about the extent of it.
False allegations of violence are particularly vicious, as they have the potential to take away the protection the Act intends to provide to victims. There are signs that judges are becoming more cautious when such allegations are made at a time, when parents are fighting over who sees how much of the children. But this would put true victims in more danger that their story is not being believed! A false allegation is also an act of violence in itself. Where children are coerced into making false statements about the other parents, this is child abuse, which also has the potential to take protection away from genuine victims.
But if you are falsely accused, you can defend yourself and clear your name, right? Only if you have a few thousand dollars at your disposal to pay lawyers and legal fees. There are many other reasons, why men do not defend themselves - one of them is that it may be nearly impossible to prove your innocence, especially when you have been accused of sexually abusing a young child. And as the Act allows a complainant to cancel the Order at any time, you may find yourself out of pocket only to never be given a chance to clear your name.

Protection order: It's a powerful tool in the hands of an abusive spouse.

Domestic Violence Act: A father tries to protect his daughter.

When things turn sour: Not all parents can work out their differences without the Domestic Violence Act.