by Pat Barrow
Why isn’t that pattern apparent in this family? Does Jeremy’s behaviour suggest that something more sinister is going on? Does his persistent undermining of arrangements, his apparent need for control hint at narcissistic tendencies? If so, I have a difficult task on hand. I cannot change a parent’s inbuilt character; I have to work out if his behaviour is a consequence of the separation or is the true Jeremy actually depicted by that behaviour? Only when I have worked out what is really happening can I begin to look at ways to make an impact and bring about change.
However, from experience, I know that if there is a character flaw and Jeremy’s behaviour is not driven by heightened emotions surrounding his separation from Ceri but his inbuilt personality – that in fact he has narcissistic tendencies – that means that reducing his power of manipulation is likely to prove to be impossible. I know full well that there are cases where to continue fighting for some sort of shared parenting can cause such extreme emotional pain for the child that it perpetuates the emotional abuse. In those few cases, the only solution may be to wait until the child’s eyes are opened and as an adult, they make judgements about their parents and then chose the parent who gives the unconditional love rather than the parent where love comes at an impossibly high price.
So if that is the case in this family, what is the best that I can hope to achieve? Well, without doubt, what I will aim to do is to encourage an arrangement which at least leaves the doors wide open. This is not defeatist but is about facing reality. I know full well that changing residence and forcing the children to in effect choose Ceri would mean that they lose Jeremy, something which I suspect neither child has the emotional capacity to manage at this stage of their lives. But equally the pain and hurt, if they in effect lose Ceri, will be equally unmanageable for them. The compromise may be that they spend considerably less time with Ceri but that time is of prime quality – quality rather than quantity may be the only child centred option.
Chapter 29
Carol 3 – analysis before court hearing
I’d had meetings with both parents and several with Hetty and Jonty. I could see that Ceri’s decision to move away was at least in part motivated by her wish to make it easier for the children. It tore her in two to see how tortured they were, as they continuously tried to get it right for both her and Jeremy. She reacted angrily when I suggested that her pull to return to the area where she spent her childhood was nevertheless partly fuelled by her desperation to start a new life, to rid herself of the man who had disempowered her for so long. I could understand her argument that it was entirely for the children and that Jeremy’s ongoing influence on every aspect of her life was clearly preventing her from moving on, but there was no doubt that encouraged her tunnel vision and inability to see the situation through the children’s eyes or experience their pain and confusion that losing her would generate. She no doubt wanted to believe that like her, they would find life so much easier if there was a distance between the parents and clearly defined holiday arrangements. Could she honestly say that she couldn’t imagine just how painful it would be, in particular for Hetty? How the children would, in their bewilderment, take little convincing from Jeremy that she had deserted them. She was providing him with the perfect ammunition and from my dealings with him, he would leap at the golden opportunity to further alienate the children.
To be honest, Jeremy wasn’t particularly easy to engage with on a meaningful level. Frustratingly, he seemed incapable of empathy and either couldn’t or wouldn’t perceive that the children could possibly have a view that differed from his own. He assumed their automatic compliance and used that to exploit the children disregarding their need and right to have an unfettered relationship with Ceri.
At ten and thirteen, Jonty and Hetty’s differing stages of development meant they managed their struggles to maintain divided loyalties differently. Struggles that were triggered by constantly having to choose either mum or dad. Jonty’s emerging alliance with Jeremy was his coping mechanism. Initially, this had been pretty mild and somewhat hidden, just an occasional reluctance to go and see Ceri and then he had started complaining about her. His stories were often fanciful, but nevertheless, they were lapped up by Jeremy. However, in spite of that, he had continued to also say how much he cared about his mum and that was borne out by their relaxed and easy relationship for much of the time when he was with her. More recently, it had become increasingly obvious that juggling his emotions was becoming too difficult and in desperation, he had attempted to distance himself from mum as his way of managing his impossible dilemma. His alliance with his dad had become stronger and was clearly encouraged by Jeremy. From experience, I knew that allegiance was likely to become more pronounced and extreme. It wouldn’t be long before Jonty was refusing to visit or to have any involvement with Ceri. It was a foregone conclusion that he would follow this pattern unless Jeremy discouraged it. Of course Jeremy wasn’t going to do that, on the contrary I was pretty sure that he’d rub his hands in glee if at least one child turned their back on the woman he detested. Hetty, that bit more mature, was struggling but at least at this stage was still able to maintain a good relationship with both parents. Her strategy was to keep them separate and was a precarious position for her to maintain.
Consciously and subconsciously, both children would be balancing their own experience of their time with mum with overt and covert contradictory messages from dad such as the unsubstantiated hints that Ceri had a boyfriend waiting in the wings and that was her real reason for leaving. The hints that she was dumping them, the suggestion that she couldn’t wait to start a new life and that she didn’t really care but just wanted to get her own back on him. In their desperate attempt to maintain stability in their lives, the only ostensible solution to manage their distress would be for them to decide that one is the ‘good’ parent and the other is ‘bad’. The reality of good and bad in both would just not be a feasible option.
My concern is that Jonty is on the tip of rejecting Ceri and experience shows that once entrenched in that mind-set it is particularly difficult to remedy. Children become stuck and continue to make a desperate attempt to prove their allegiance to one parent, the parent that they feel they depend upon and who often unhealthily depends on them. They have no choice but to become hostile and rejecting of the other parent. Sadly, one day Jonty may have to come to terms with his childhood belief that forced him to exclude a decent, loving mum and without doubt, that will cause irreversible damage in his relationship with his dad.
Whether Hetty will have the resilience to continue to juggle a relationship with both mum and dad remains to be seen. Sadly, the odds are stacked against her too. Both children have such an enmeshed relationship with their dad, one which he needs, which he feeds upon. He encourages and expects to be adored, raised to lofty heights by his children just as he had demanded from his wife. It would seem that Hetty would find it increasingly difficult to reconcile the positive experience she has with Mum with implicit contradictory information from the dad she loves, adores and so desperately needs and fears losing.
It is encouraging that currently Ceri at least recognises the children’s need for a positive and meaningful relationship with her and Jeremy and seems to be making an effort to avoid negative remarks or criticisms about Dad. This is in stark contrast to Dad’s frequently stated belief that Mum is important when in reality his sarcastic remarks: “You are so gullible, Hetty – taken in by her – too nice. She doesn’t care about you and she’s dumped you for a new life etc., etc.” Seeds of doubt designed to undermine the children’s confidence in Mum so that they are no longer sure of her love for them. That ploy of Jeremy’s encourages my view that as far as he is concerned, her value in the children’s lives is negligible.
It is predictable that as time progresses in the face of his opposition, Ceri will struggle to continue to consider that the children need both parents. This change of heart is likely to be fuelled by the contradictory changes she will w
itness in the children’s behaviour. More than likely when Hetty is with her and away from Dad, she will experience a relaxed, comfortable and affectionate Hetty and it will make no sense to her that Jeremy insists that Hetty is really indifferent about spending time with her. Whilst with him, Hetty will have little choice but to join her brother in toeing the party line and reinforcing Dad’s views that of course the so-called experts got it wrong. Jonty and Hetty will have to at least appear to share his view that Mum plays no valuable part in their lives. It is likely that when Hetty is with her dad or in proximity to him, her behaviour towards her mum will as a consequence become cool and distant. What a terrible, terrible muddle this poor child will experience, perhaps because of her more advanced stage of development, it will be even more painful than her brother’s. She will have the cognitive ability to have a more objective view of what has happened with the means to be judgmental and critical of both her parents, but that will be in secret. The reality is that in order to maintain her relationship with her dad, she will have to openly blame her mum, an untruth which Hetty will find increasingly difficult to live with.
I have concerns that both children’s self-esteem will be damaged by the parental conflict. The signs of them both feeling a sense of worthlessness are already visible, believing that they are the cause of their parents’ problems. In the future, the spinoff will be that it is likely their own ability to maintain relationships will be adversely affected. Having to keep secrets from one parent or the other will encourage them that being deceitful or sneaky is an acceptable way, and perhaps the only way, to manage difficult situations.
As both children become older, they will sadly lack the benefit of witnessing their parents managing disagreements in a healthy constructive way and without such a positive role model, they will be ill equipped to deal with conflict themselves. Research suggests that may well trigger aggressive or bullying behaviour in either child and without doubt, it will damage their belief in themselves and in what they can achieve. They will be burdened by unresolved anger; anger which will make no sense but which may well spill over and affect every aspect of their lives and as a result misuse of food, alcohol or illegal drugs, or other forms of self-harm may be a welcome solace from unbearable pain and give them a false sense of being in control.
Whilst a robust court order clearly defining arrangements for both children may well assist, and at least initially encourage contact, it seems almost inevitable that gradually the children’s contact with Ceri will dwindle. Ceri lacks the financial resources and I fear the resilience to keep fighting through the courts and the likely scenario is that the day of reckoning will be postponed until they are mature enough to stand up to Jeremy and to recognise him for what he really is. Sadly, whilst a two-day court battle may well solve the immediate future, at the same time it will antagonise the situation and deepen the antipathy between the parents. The likelihood of parental co-operation will evaporate.
Mum’s solicitor, Katrina Barker, and the children’s solicitor, Michaela Brookes, are both experienced advocates determined to seek the best outcome possible for the children; neither will mince their words, they will encourage parental dialogue be it in person or through them. But sadly, Jeremy’s solicitor, Simone Fletcher, is known to be adversarial and she is more likely to ramp up the hostilities and increase the tension between the parents rather than encourage resolution. We have an excellent judge in Henrietta Haines. She is known for her wisdom, her ability to grasp the situation and to deal with it in a fair and child centred way.
I have listened carefully to the children and they have made it very clear to me that they want a relationship with both parents, although Jonty struggles with the notion of one with Ceri in the face of his father’s lack of support and constant criticism of her. In spite of spoken protests, neither child really wants to be put in the position of actually having to make choices or decisions about contact and they would much prefer arrangements to be clearly decided, ideally by both parents, but Hetty at least understands that any level of agreement is unlikely.
Ceri’s proposal of 50% of all holidays is sadly unrealistic; even she can see that her enthusiasm for that arrangement has given Jeremy more ammunition to fuel his insistence that she makes empty promises which have no substance. The children are both at private school and Ceri’s holidays cannot possibly cover seven or eight weeks each year. However, in spite of Jeremy’s protests, keeping a pattern of regular contact is important, and they should spend quality time during each holiday with their mother. Jeremy’s own proposal of only two visits a year, more than anything, is a stark demonstration of his lack of commitment to the children maintaining a relationship with Ceri.
I have discussed with Ceri the possibility of her making occasional trips down to Welshpool or Shrewsbury and staying with friends and seeing the children from there. Subject to successfully juggling her finances, she favours the idea but until she knows whether Jeremy will pursue his right to force a contribution from her through the CSA. Her available cash remains unknown. Ceri knows full well that Jeremy is entitled to claim once children are no longer living with both of them and anticipates he will pursue any means to make life more difficult for her. She insists she has every intention of supporting the children in every way that she can but her limited financial resources means that she will struggle to fund extras once she has a mortgage and associated household expenses plus a contribution towards the children to find each month.
In common with other children of eleven and thirteen, Hetty and Jonty seek a sense of fairness between their parents and a meeting place half way between Welshpool and Whitley Bay was greeted favourably by them both, though of course it was discounted by Jeremy, unless trips are limited to his suggestion of twice a year. I put forward the suggestion that handovers at the Hartshead Moor Services on the M62 would be equidistant for both parents.
Ceri had agreed with my suggestion but Jeremy had made the counter proposal of handovers at Birch Services – an arrangement which reduces his travelling time and I guess he would strongly object to handovers at Hartshead Moor if the hearing didn’t go his way.
I inevitably go to court in the hope that there will be some agreement without a contested hearing, but in this case, Jeremy’s resistance and reluctance to consider anything other than his own point of view makes that an unlikely outcome. A robust court order may be best for Hetty and Jonty.
Chapter 30
Court Hearing Wrexham County Court 18 July, Case No WP39651
Cross examination of Carol Maitland (ISW) by Simone Fletcher, Solicitor for Jeremy Taylor
SF “Now come on Ms Maitland, surely you can see that we’ve got a desperate father here who just cannot keep up with his impetuous ex-wife who really can only put herself first and just fails to see how important the children’s needs are?”
CM “No, I don’t agree. I think Ceri’s move to Whitley Bay was a desperate attempt to try and make things less difficult for the children.”
SF “Less difficult! She walked out on them, how could that make it easier for the children?”
CM “She knew how difficult it was for them just as it was for her. How their father would undermine and chop and change arrangements and continuously put them in the position of having to choose between him or her. She realised just how hard it was for them and so by putting a distance between them, it may take away that pressure or at least minimise it.”
SF “Well, superficially that may well be correct, but surely you can see how devastated the children were when their mother just decided to up and go? I see at paragraph 36 you say that she ‘thought carefully through her actions’. Remind the court Ms Maitland, of how the children and indeed their father heard about mother’s move. You hesitate, well let me remind you, isn’t it correct that she told the children during a weekly visit without having the decency to talk to their father first. She let them do her dirty work. They were the ones who had to work out how to tell him. Of course, he was devasta
ted knowing how it would just turn their world upside down. Surely, you can see that he has spent all his time since the separation trying to normalise things for the children and trying to help them come to terms with their mother’s unpredictable and inappropriate behaviour.”
CM “Forgive me, but is that a question or is it a statement? I need to remind the court of the facts. There has been no evidence that Ceri’s behaviour has been inappropriate in any way at any time. We’ve got a mother and father here who have very different versions of their relationship but it is clearly documented from my visits that I’ve witnessed two children with an increasingly good relationship with their mother which over time –”
SF “Yes indeed, I know what you’ve written but I didn’t ask you that.”
Judge HH “But Miss Fletcher, I’d like Ms Maitland to finish what she was about to say. Carry on, Ms Maitland please.”
CM “After a gap without contact, the children very quickly reinstated their relationship with their mother. As time has gone on, there is clear evidence that it has become increasingly difficult for them to juggle their relationships with Mum and Dad. They have been put under immense pressure and evidence suggests that pressure has been instigated by their father, rather than their mother. She is the one who has backed down and in her own way tried to make it easier for the children. Yes of course, they’ve had to deal with their separation from her and that’s been incredibly difficult and painful for them. No doubt, she has underestimated the impact upon the children and how easy it is for children to misunderstand and misinterpret, but she was not motivated by any intention to escape from them. Sadly, that’s the message that they’ve been given by their father. Those mixed messages have increased the children’s confusion, mistrust and immense sadness.”
