When Lorraine’s grand daughter, Kate disclosed sexual abuse, the perpetrator (Biological Father) took the mater to the Family court to gain access to Kate, then four years old.

An independent Children’s lawyer was appointed.

“This sounded like a good thing a the time because I assumed they were going to independently acting for Kate’s best interests.

How wrong was I? so wrong, Kate was not independently represented at all, The ICL did not even meet or talk with Kate. She did not submit any evidence from school teachers, doctors or psychologists, to the court experts or the Judge.

The ICL aligned herself with the father. She insisted that contact continue with the father despite the evidence, disclosures, regressive behaviours and comments made before, during and after contact. She payed no regard to the wellbeing of Kate.

I kept a diary of Kate’s regressive behaviours and comments she exhibited around contact with the father. However when the ICL became aware of my diary she wrote to me and asked me to destroy it. This was prior to the trial.

I was horrified that a child’s lawyer would not only omit evidence from third party professionals, but ask me to destroy evidence before the trial. In any other jurisdiction this would be seen as evidence tampering and influencing a witness.

Instead all of the ICL’s omissions were disregarded and viewed as an oversight by the court”.

The ICL submitted the father was no risk to Kate and contact should continue similar to shared parenting. 5 years on… Kate still cries before and during contact, she begs not to go. She suffers low self esteem after visits.