Thank you very much for inviting me to speak. The issue is close to my heart, as I have two children—a son who is six years old and a daughter who is three years old. They are my life; hence why I am before you this morning. I have been refused contact with my children for reasons that I do not understand, as I am not an alcoholic or a drug addict. I am unemployed for health reasons, but that does not make me a bad father. I have not seen my children for more than a year, and there is an on-going legal battle that I find difficult and frustrating. Legal aid is especially frustrating, as it takes an extremely long time to process applications in relation to child contact.
Children need a routine, consistency, security, love, nurture, guidance, protection, care and many other things. They also need both parents. When a legal battle is on-going, the absent parent is not there to provide all that to the child. I would understand if contact had been terminated for a reason—for example, if I was a drug addict or an alcoholic. However, that is not the case. Even if I had one of those issues, the proper route and legal channels should have been gone through to prevent me from seeing my children.
The legal aid process is a big issue that causes a long period when there is no contact. As I said, when contact is terminated, the non-resident parent has to go through an extremely long process. They have to find a solicitor, who will write to the resident parent to ask for the contact to be reinstated. The resident parent can, in a way, postpone a lot of the legal process by not responding to letters. Then, obviously, there has to be an application to the Scottish Legal Aid Board for assistance. The non-resident parent’s solicitor will have to write to the Legal Aid Board with a statement from a neighbour or family member in support of the application. The application takes between four and six weeks. While that is on-going, letters are being passed back and forth between the non-resident parent and the resident parent.
As I said, it takes an extremely long time even before a writ is issued, once legal aid has been granted by the board, and then a child welfare hearing is allocated by the sheriff court. Again, it is frustrating for the non-resident parent to have to sit and wait for the process to happen. Obviously, in that time, the bond between the non-resident parent and the child will be severely affected. In my experience, it is also a waste of public funds. Applying for legal aid is an on-going process that is not in the child’s best interests.
I gave the committee an article—“After parents divorce, regular overnight stays with dad are best for most young children”—by Professor Richard Warshak, who is a clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of Texas. I emailed the article, which has been endorsed by 110 mental health experts from 15 countries, to the clerk late last week, and I hope that the committee will have the opportunity to read it.
As well as that interesting article, I would like to point out a few articles from the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. I am sure that the committee will know about them. Article 9 states that children have the right not to be separated from their parents against their will, except where that is necessary to protect their best interests. To my mind, that article is breached the minute a resident parent stops contact without the intervention of a court, because who is to say that the resident parent’s decision to terminate contact is in the child’s best interests?
Article 18 of the convention makes it clear that
“both parents have common responsibilities for the upbringing and development of the child.”
I believe that that article is also being breached, along with article 19, which states that children should be protected from
“all forms of physical or mental violence”.
If a resident parent terminates contact, how can the non-resident parent meet their responsibilities as a parent to assist with the child’s upbringing and development? Also, it will mentally scar the child not to have regular contact with the non-resident parent. That will have a significant and long-term effect on the child.
The petition asks for the Scottish Legal Aid Board to prioritise the processing of applications relating to child contact so that legal aid can be granted, and a child welfare hearing can be allocated on application to the court, fairly quickly. Where there are concerns, social work services can intervene and possibly supervise contact and assess those concerns.
We must remember that contact can be terminated only in the child’s best interests and not because there is bitterness between the parents. I find that normally there is such bitterness. The children’s panel always discusses contact. I am not 100 per cent sure whether the children’s panel can facilitate the contact issue. Maybe the committee can think about whether that is possible.
To my mind, children’s welfare is paramount. It will help their long-term development to have regular contact with both parents, rather than having big gaps in contact, which will be detrimental to them mentally and to their welfare and development. I understand that there have been previous petitions on issues to do with enforcing contact and on the rights of unmarried fathers. However, my petition is based on the termination of contact and asks whether we can change the process to have quicker access to legal aid and quicker allocation of child welfare hearings.
I have been quite lucky because my contact with my son was recently reinstated by the sheriff court. There was an order in place but that does not mean that the resident parent cannot stop that contact. I am sure that the committee has discussed that in relation to previous petitions.
Since April this year, contact with my daughter has been an on-going legal battle. To date, the Scottish Legal Aid Board has not granted my application.
I do not know what else to say to the committee except that, as a father, the difficulty and frustration of the process can be killing. I have not seen my daughter since April this year. Given the time that the legal process takes to run its course, I probably will not see her until April next year. That is a year of her life during which I have been unable to assist with her upbringing and development.
I will continue to fight on, whether or not the committee takes any action on the petition. I do not want to be forced, as a last resort, to have to climb the Scottish Parliament building in a Batman suit, if you know what I mean.