Judge stops mother’s court action after children refused to see her

A Family Court judge has written directly to children who refuse to see their mother to say they will be protected from further immediate litigation.

Her Honour Judge Suh made an order preventing the mother in Mother v Father from making any further applications to spend time with the children for another three years.

The judge acknowledged the mother’s genuine desire to play a part in the children’s lives but said they ‘need a break’ from adults coming to check on them and from court applications.

In a letter to the children, the judge wrote: ‘I heard loud and clear that you do not want to see your Mum and you want people to stop bothering you. I take what you say seriously. I respect your views. Your welfare is my number one concern.’

She explained that the order would place a hurdle in the way of the mother coming to court again in the next three years and instead asked that she send them an email message to a bespoke address once a month which they could choose to read or not.

These emails would be ‘like a bridge towards a relationship with her if you want. It is up to you whether you cross that bridge’.

Finishing her letter, the judge added: ‘You only ever get one Mum in your life. She loves you all so very much and misses a relationship with you greatly. She has had a difficult time and things have not been easy for her. “Well, things have not been easy for us”, you might say. You are right. Both of those things are true.

‘But I want you to know that you are loved by your Mum. She is not perfect. None of us are. But you should know that she came to court not to upset you but because she genuinely does not want to lose the possibility of a relationship with you. I am clear that the choice of whether you want that relationship to develop, and when, is yours.’

The court heard that none of the four children, now aged 14, 13, 11 and nine, have seen their mother since 2018 and they have lived since 2016 with their father.

The children had rejected emails from their mother as well as gifts and videos she had sent. The judge warned forcing the children to have contact would backfire and undermine the chance of building a relationship in future.

One of the children had told a welfare officer they ‘feel frustrated our mum is bothering us and taking us away from [a] happy life with our dad’. Another said that the mother ‘keeps disturbing our peace’.

An earlier judgment from Her Honour Judge Atkinson had noted the central issue was whether the mother was able to commit to regular contact and whether or not she was suffering problems with her mental health. The court heard that at once stage she failed to attend three hearings in a row.

Suh HHJ told both parents it had taken ‘real courage’ for them to come to court and answer questions and they had both done so with ‘great dignity and both clearly wanted to help me make the right decision’.

She said that a three-year order would be proportionate and necessary to allow the children to develop and mature, while leaving open the possibility of some relationship in the future. She added that the older pair would have a ‘degree of respite’ until they are 16 from legal proceedings.

‘Their welfare is the golden thread which has been woven into this judgment and I hope they understand that I have done my very best to put their welfare first,’ added the judge.