The Gazette 1979

SEPTEMBER 1979

GAZETTE

their client or their patient. Sometimes the real needs of the child may be lost in the midst of all this. These children frequently love both parents and become very confused when they hear conflicting stories from the warring parents about one another and do not know who or what to believe. If this tug of war situation continues over a longer period they have great difficulty in identifying clearly with one parent or another and deciding which parent they would like to grow up to be like. As so often in these sort of situations, I have found myself trying to carry out a holding operation to prevent the children involved becoming very disturbed or even psychotic. I feel strongly, as recommended by the excellent book 'Beyond the Best Interests of the Child', written by Goldstein, Annafroyd, and Solnit, that these sort of cases should be resolved quickly and finally in favour of one parent or another, than be allowed to drag on over a long period of time. The same book recommends that the parent given custody should have the right to make all decisions pertaining to the child concerned, including allowing visiting by the other parent or not. This is, I am well aware, against routine practice and may in some ways seem unfair to the other partner. It depends very much whether you view the needs of the adult or the child as being more important. If you consider that the child's needs are more important, he is much more likely to settle down, readjust and develop normally if he is not subject to a tug-o-war situation between the two parents. This may mean of course he will be brought up entirely by one parent, but this parent will have the confidence that he or she will not be harrassed and will have been given a vote of confidence to carry on unhindered the job of parenting. Reports to Solicitors I would like to mention a word about reports to solicitors about these sort of cases. Doctors, child psychiatrists, and other workers in the field of child care are often asked to submit reports to solicitors stating their views about suitable custody arrangements, and visiting rights for the child. Copies of these reports are often requested by the solicitors acting for the other party. This sort of situation has placed myself, and I know many of my colleagues, in a dilemma on several occasions. If one gives a totally complete report it is very likely to jeopardise any further working relationship with one or both parents. I understand in fact these reports are often shown to the parents concerned. It would seem to me a much more satisfactory arrangement, as happened to me recently, of sending the report direct to the Judce concerned knowing that it would be kept in confidence and would be for his eyes only. This then leaves the doctor or the social worker concerned free to work on with the family concerned without fear of damaging their mutual relationship. I would like to say a word about the time element involved in these sorts of Court cases. To an adult a week is a week, a month is a month, a year is a year. To a child living in an unhappy, stressful situation, each day is barely tolerable. A week is a very long time and a month can feel like eternity. This then has obvious implications for quick resolution of Court cases mentioned above. Another situation which commonly arises in the field of child care is the decision confronting a doctor, social worker, solicitor or marriage counsellor etc. whether or

child care order in a courtroom situation. To my mind the laws of this country are very weak in giving support to social workers or other workers in the child care field who are trying to protect the physical and mental health of abused and neglected children. I know in many instances we are reduced to bluffing to try and protect a child knowing in fact that there is little in law to back us up. Naturally social workers and others concerned feel very insecure in these circumstances, and may tend to defer decisions unnecessarily long because of the daunting experience of having to forcibly remove a child from its home against its parents' wishes. I know, from my own point of view, I am reluctant to fulfill the role of the much threatened doctor who puts children away. It is also not particularly helpful to die image of a community based child guidance clinic which is trying to overcome many of the deeply rooted fears and resistence to psychiatry and particularly child psychiatry. It may be that what is needed most of all is some interim step between the place of safety order, which only lasts for a short period and a child care order which tends to be very final and drastic. Although I am not an expert on the alternative possibilities, I would feel some sort of supervisory order, which tends to operate in England, may be very helpful. As well as this I do not see why children cannot be removed from their homes from assessment and decision-making as now applies to cases of delinquents who come before the Courts, and in fact are sent to the Assessment Centre in Finglas, Co. Dublin. Probably the most difficult situation of all is where you strongly suspect one parent is seriously disturbed, (e.g., hidden psychiatric illness; psycopathic personality; Incestuous parent). The more normal parent has often given up and is often afraid to take action or maybe is caught up in the distrubed parent's delusioned system. The disturbed parend is never seen and the malignancy in the family is usually skilfully concealed from the outside world. This is in contrast to the battering alcoholic parent about whom the whole world knows. These cases can present in very ordinary ways such as bedwetting in a child or failure to learn, or more rarely through a sudden dramatic gesture such as an overdose in a family member. Often clues are gradually picked up from a chance remark of a child or an attending parents' slip of the tongue or possibly calculated leaks to the doctor or social worker. When sufficient evidence is accumulated to suspect the non- attending parent, efforts are then made to see him/her. You then come up against a blank wall. If you push too hard the family is withdrawn from therapy. Somehow or other access is needed to determine if more drastic steps should be taken such as seeking a child care order. Warring parents Another common problem seen frequently in child guidance clinics is the child torn between two separated, divorced and warring parents, both often seeking exclusive rights to the child to the detriment of the other marital partner. The child's needs often receive low priority and a need to hurt one another seems much more paramount, and the child is often used as a weapon in this war. Court cases can drag on, visiting rights can be haggled over, and court decisions concerning custody and access are appealed. Both solicitors and doctors line up on either side of the fence determined to win the case for

190