2 total
Court declines to enforce in-person access order due to child's extreme distress, ordering structured inquiry instead.
The applicant father brought an urgent motion to enforce a prior order for in-person supervised contact with his two children.
The respondent mother opposed, citing extreme distress and self-harm attempts by the older child when faced with the prospect of seeing the father.
The court declined to order police enforcement, finding it unwise given the child's distress.
Instead, the court ordered a structured plan involving the Office of the Children's Lawyer or the court-approved supervisors to inform the children of the supervision terms and ascertain their willingness to attend, with virtual contact ordered if they remain adamant against in-person visits.
The court granted the father temporary supervised indoor contact with his children subject to strict COVID-19 protocols, rejecting the mother's request to supervise the visits herself.
The applicant father sought a contact order for his two children, aged 12 and 6, after a period of limited contact since separation.
The respondent mother raised concerns about family violence and COVID-19 risks, proposing supervised outdoor visits.
The court, considering the children's best interests and verified domestic violence risks, granted the father supervised indoor contact three out of four weekends, with supervision by the father's mother or sister, not the respondent.
The court also required the father to adhere to strict COVID-19 protocols, including weekly testing and maintaining a limited social bubble, and rejected the respondent's arguments for outdoor-only visits or her own supervision, citing the need for a more natural environment for the children and the inadequacy of the medical report regarding COVID vulnerability.
