Y (A Child) (Private Law)

In private-law proceedings concerning a young child, contact arrangements must be determined by the child’s welfare and kept under review. Where existing contact is causing tiredness, disruption or exposure to adult tension, a reduction may be justified, but it should be gradual and responsive to progress. A rigid long-term plan may be inappropriate where parents and professionals are undertaking time-limited work directed to improving contact. A Family Assistance Order may be made to secure advice, assistance and support for the parents and child, particularly where professional intervention is needed to improve parental co-operation and maintain contact.

These private-law proceedings concerned arrangements for a two-year-old child, Y, following earlier fact-finding and welfare decisions that resulted in Y living with her father. The remaining issue was the frequency and supervision of Y’s contact with her mother. Contact had been taking place twice weekly for three hours. The father, the guardian and the supervising authority sought a reduction to fortnightly contact, while the second local authority proposed a phased reduction to monthly contact. The mother sought more frequent contact. The court also considered whether to make a Family Assistance Order under section 16 of the Act as amended.

The court determined the contact issue and made a Family Assistance Order.

1. Contact frequency. Twice-weekly contact was unsustainable. It had left Y very tired and exposed her to disruption, adult tension and emotionally intense exchanges. A child of Y’s age could sense tension and be worried or confused by adult displays of emotion, even without understanding the subject of the discussion.
2. Gradual reduction. Contact should be reduced progressively, first to weekly and then to fortnightly intervals over approximately two months. A fixed or rigid plan extending further into the future would not serve Y’s welfare well. The continuing success of contact would depend substantially on the mother’s ability to work positively with the local authority, obtain recommended therapeutic help, re-engage with the father and his family, and accept that the father presented no risk to Y.
3. Future assessment. The local authority’s intervention should be time-limited and directed towards determining whether genuine and lasting progress could be achieved. If the mother remained fixed in her belief that the father posed a danger, a further reduction in her role in Y’s life might become necessary because repeated exposure to that view would be unhealthy and psychologically inappropriate for Y.
4. Family Assistance Order. Under section 16 of the Act as amended, it was appropriate to direct the authority to make an officer available to advise, assist and befriend both parents and Y. The principal focus was to improve and maintain the mother’s contact with Y and the parents’ relationship with one another. Brief reports were directed at three, six and twelve months.

The judgment records earlier stages of the same private-law proceedings, including a fact-finding judgment on 26 February 2014, an interim welfare judgment on 2 April 2014 and a final residential decision on 4 June 2014. The present hearing determined the outstanding contact arrangements and related support measures.