Who needs Doctor’s
- Sonny's Dad
- Mar 27
- 6 min read
As the attempt by CAFCASS to improve matters between us all had crashed at the first hurdle we were now heading back to court, this was in evitable now.
At this stage I was persistent at seeing the application through to the end and I knew that if CAFCASS were to say to the court that they didn’t understand why Sonny was behaving the way he was and Sarah was sat pointing fingers at him to say she had nothing to do with it, then the court was going to refer Sonny on medical grounds to be psychologically assessed by a pediatrician.
I was disgusted at Sarah for allowing this, it was disgrace on her part. Even though she railed against it it was inevitable because she wasn’t supporting contact.
She always tried to play to victim but the reality was she wasn’t smart enough, her emotions always got in the way of her strategy.
I couldn’t help remember when we were trying to sort issues out previously when Sony had decided he no longer wanted to see us (when he was 6) Sarah didn’t not want us near him to try and find out what was going on.
I remember saying to her “Sarah, if Sonny said to you one day that he didn’t want to see your Mum & Dad, or didn’t want to go to school you’d tell him to behave himself, but when it comes to us, when it comes to him saying he doesn’t want to see his Dad and his Nana & Grandad you seem to think it’s ok” – her response, “that’s different”.
And that was always the problem, Sarah never ever encouraged Sonny how important it was for him to have his paternal family around him, she was too emotional, too self-centered and was unable to see what was right for him.
So Sonny now had to be assessed by a Dr. formally and we had to wait for the results of the report.
The day this referral was made we were at court – I remember being sat outside the court room where meetings were taking place in the corridors with my solicitor, Sarah’s solicitors and Jacqui Knott. I remember at one point as Jacqui was walking passed me she winked at me, my only assumption from that was that she still felt she could turn things around.
Her report though after having met with Sonny following our meeting was so limited by way of positives the pediatrician asset had to be put forward. Just like in the report Jacqui had prepared the court in November 2015 where she stated “whist Sonny was of an age to articulate his views he was not of an age or understanding to be aware of the longer term consequences of not having a relationship with his father or paternal father” (notes taken from report by Kathryn Patricia Ward Consultant Pediatrician).
What was really sad to me was in the report the Dr. asked Sonny what were the 3 things he would like the most. He said the number one thing that he wants the most was not too see his Dad.
I was upset by that, only a parent that has suffered at the hands of parental alienation and fought tooth and nail through a court system can feel the stabbing of something like that, it went through my heart.
Ironically, his 2nd most wanted to thing to have was “to be loaded with money” – very sad.
The report by the Dr. Ward was about 90% accurate, if basically consisted of the history of Sonny medically and in more detail in relation to the court proceedings. It only reflected me in a way that a Dad just wants to see his son, and for his son’s best interests. It reflected Sonny as a normal little lad who suffered from a period of anxiety and that he never wants to see me. Any I’d say in respect of Sarah, it was mixed. The report wasn’t to asses out situation on it was to asses Sonny medically but there was reference to Sarah in the following way – “Sarah King stated that she was very aware of the significance of the relationship between a child and a father……..However she stated that she was unable and unwilling to support any further contact”.
In preparation for this post I have re-read the report multiple times; I have also read my explosive response to my solicitor about it! My issue was that she just wasn’t pressing Sonny enough and wasn’t highlighting enough the important of Sonny seeing his Dad. In retrospect she was clearly kid gloving Sonny and being indecisive in what was good for him long term. I actually pulled the report apart line by line but in the end it was futile.
Maybe a bit of advice for Sonny here, if he ever ends up in a situation like his Dad did where he has his child taken from him. If he takes it to court, no matter what evidence he has that sheds him in a good light and proves his value as a Dad it will count for nothing.
This report by Dr. Ward was actually a follow up report that had to be done as a previous pediatrician called Dr. Matthai that had met with Sonny privately but refused to work on the case any further because of Sarah and was unwilling to answer any questions about her report of clarify a number of
Inaccuracies. It was quite a bizarre situation for a medical professional to behave like that but she was annoyed at Sarah.
You’ll see below correspondence from my legal team regarding the situation -
“Dear Chris,
I wrote to confirm the outcome of yesterdays ‘Advocates Meeting’ at Anderson solicitors.
The Guardian as you know wanted to ask additional questions of Sonny’s paediatrician Dr Matthai.
We all agreed those questions when last at court.
However, as you will now be aware, Dr Matthai was annoyed that Sarah had released that letter she sent to the GP into the court proceedings and refused point blank to answer any additional questions about her assessment of Sonny.
At the meeting yesterday the Guardian confirmed she still sought to ask questions of a paediatrician and if Dr Matthai won’t do it then she sought for an independent paediatrician to see Sonny instead and answer the questions raised. I confirmed that we had no objection to this albeit we have yet to see how much this will cost us!
Sarah in contrast has instructed her solicitor to oppose the Guardian’s application for an independent paediatrician. Sarah’s position is that there is nothing wrong with Sonny, save that the idea of contact with you causes him stress and anxiety and that these symptoms have reduced since he has not had to worry about having contact. She proposes that you should withdraw your application and respect Sonny’s wishes. She is also concerned about the potential costs.
I pointed out to Vanessa that at the last hearing Sarah agreed that the additional questions were necessary, as did the judge, and the only thing that has changed is that Dr Matthai wont answer them. This isn’t a reason to abandon the process that we had all agreed as the right way forward.
Sarah’s solicitor appeared to back down at that stage and said she would now take Sarah’s further instructions on the matter.
In the meanwhile Tessa Dunleavy on behalf of Sonny will ask the court for a hearing date quicker that 5th July 2016 (when one is already scheduled for) and file an application for an independent paediatrician to see Sonny on the basis that it is opposed by Sarah and the court will need to decided. I will of course keep you further posted on any potential court dates. Please let me know of any dates to avoid over the next 3 weeks.
Otherwise there was nothing further to update you on.
Kind regards”
So this was how Dr. Kate Ward ended up involved, not that she would have cared as she pocketed £900+vat for report she did.
The report however was sad, and more importantly lacked any direction. I understand that I suppose as it was CAFCASS’s job to provide direction. The problem I had now though was the amount of time stress and anxiety had been mentioned in the report, it was effectively a sink hole for me as there is no way CAFCASS were going to suggest contact for a child who was saying that he never had a “father son relationship with is Dad” and apparently someone who was making him so stressed he take to take time off school.
I was effectively done at this point as it was tight about now that Jacqui Knott from CAFCASS lost her nerve.
And here's a picture a Dad & his Son not enjoying a father & son relationship
Comments