The father brought a motion to change a final order to seek parenting time with his child at a supervised access centre.
The mother opposed the motion, citing a history of domestic violence and the father's unresolved anger issues, and sought a restraining order and child support.
Relying on an Office of the Children's Lawyer report and evidence of the father's past violent conduct, the court found it was not in the child's best interests to grant access at this time.
The father's motion was dismissed, access was suspended, a non-communication order was issued, and child support was ordered based on the father's fluctuating income.
