THREE SOCIAL workers have asked the High Court for an order restraining a separated father from threatening or harassing them, or others involved in the care of his three children, on grounds that they fear for their safety.
The social workers claim the man has threatened them a number of times, described them as “child abusers” and “abductors” and referred to one or more of them as “bitch” and “whore”.
In opposing the order, which would apply pending full legal proceedings, the man contends there are no grounds for the social workers’ claims to be in fear of him, and says incidents complained of happened several years ago and were due to his frustration at having very limited access to his children.
Mr Justice Michael Hanna will give judgment on the application next Tuesday. The social workers had secured an interim court order against the man last November.
The man’s three children were taken into HSE care in 2005 with the consent of their mother, who became severely disabled in 2001 as a result of a stroke. Last November the court was told foster parents had declined to keep the children after receiving threats from the man.
The man claims that incidents where he was aggressive and abusive of social workers were due to his being under enormous pressure some years ago due to the break-up of his marriage, loss of his home, frustration at his children being taken into care without his consent and his having limited supervised access for some years.
His lawyer, Kevin Brophy, said the incidents complained of had all occurred in 2005 when the man was under enormous pressure.
Mr Brophy said the social workers should be more sympathetic to people in the position of his client and, while there were written communications from the man in November last, these were “not threatening”. His client was permitted access to his children on average once a month for a maximum of two hours over the past year, and despite there having been no incidents with the social workers for some three years, access had not improved.
In affidavits, social workers said they had become concerned from 2003 about the man’s parenting and relationship, and referred to incidents where the man was allegedly physically and psychologically abusive to his wife, locked his children in their rooms and slapped one girl so hard as to cause bruising, after an incident when she ran into the road. His wife had later secured a barring order.
Roddy Horan SC, for the social workers, said communications from the man to social workers last October and November were “utterly outrageous” and had to be regarded as threatening.
While there was no doubt the man had suffered and his life had been “turned upside down”, all that had happened to him had ultimately been sanctioned by the courts, counsel said. He could not seek to exact retribution on social workers who were engaged in thankless and very demanding work. He had “behaved outrageously” towards the social workers and their families and was conducting a campaign, enlisting journalist John Waters and others.
Mr Horan said the man had e-mailed one of the social workers last November, saying he would be sending copies of her letter to him to a parish church during Christmas, along with copies of her previous letters telling him to leave his children’s Christmas presents at a Garda station, and concluding the e-mail with the words “Adious Bitch”.
The HSE believed the man had sent one of the social workers a text message in October 2008 containing her name and saying “Stop Now, First Warning”. The man had denied sending that message.
In another letter to the HSE solicitors, the man said a named social worker “abducted” his children and would not allow him see them for a fourth Christmas in a row. He also said the social worker “is either menopausal or suffering from memory failure”, and wrote: “Your clients have giving me the ultimate motive to commit serious crimes on them, but I am not going to fall into their trap.”
In an affidavit, the man said his family’s lives had changed after his wife had a stroke in 2001. Their children were all under four then and he had done his best to look after his family and to earn adequate income to support them.
He found all of that very difficult and accepted he made mistakes in parenting, but “rejected utterly” his behaviour was so extraordinarily bad his children had to be taken away from him. While he initially welcomed HSE involvement with his family, he believed, had the HSE not become as involved, he and his wife would have overcome their difficulties.
He accepted he had been “argumentative and abusive” at times with all social workers involved in the case but added that his definition of abuse differed from theirs.
He believed the social workers were “guided almost entirely by their animosity towards me rather than the welfare of the children”.
