A separated mother-of-two has been told to buy a mobile phone for contact with her husband after a judge heard the couple’s teenage son was acting as an intermediary between them.
Judge Alison Lindsay was told the mother was "discouraging" and "subtly undermining" her estranged husband's overnight access with their younger son.
His counsel said the father, a professional who lives and works in a different part of the country from his wife and son, had a court order directing overnight access with the boy, but it had not occurred.
Daytime access had not happened as often as it should and the mother had also refused to continue attending family therapy that had been recommended by a psychologist and was “crucial in the development of the relationship” between father and son, counsel said.
Intermediary
She said the mother had also been ordered by the court to provide a contact number to facilitate access arrangements but had only supplied her parents’ number, and the couple’s younger son was acting as intermediary.
The couple’s older son was now an adult and lived away from home, the court heard.
Counsel for the mother said her client was not interfering in overnight access, but the boy did not want it and was making himself “sick and unwell”.
The child had a “complex relationship” with his father, she said. She added that the mother had not been contacted by the therapist for a follow-on appointment. She was also concerned about receiving abusive messages from her husband on her phone.
Judge Lindsay said it was wrong that a boy should be an intermediary between his parents.
“He’s a young adolescent and has had a traumatic enough time with his parents’ separation,” she said.
She suggested the mother could buy a phone to be kept especially for contact with her husband.
The judge ordered family therapy be recommenced “forthwith”, with a view to working toward overnight access. Day access should happen on a regular basis in the meantime, with phone calls between father and son twice a week.
Family home
Separately, in a case involving a father who defaulted on a court order to pay €1,700 a month in maintenance and mortgage payments, Judge Lindsay was told the man’s estranged wife and their two boys were in danger of losing their family home.
Counsel for the mother said the bank had warned that if they missed three payments on their restructured mortgage, they would lose the arrangement and legal proceedings would be taken against them. The father was “well able to pay it, but was unwilling to”, counsel said.
The court was also told that the bank was waiting to hear the outcome of the case.
The father, a professional who was not represented in court, said he had lost his job since the court order was made and could not meet the payments. He had done all he could but had no income, he said.
“How do you expect your wife and children to survive?” the judge asked.
She said the father should have come back to court and applied to reduce the order against him.
Instead the mother had taken proceedings to have him jailed for breach of the court order.
“This is very, very serious; the ultimate remedy is to put you in prison,” said Judge Lindsay.
She suggested he obtain legal advice and adjourned the case for a week.
