Eight years, entrusted to the alcoholic daddy
CHRONICLE / It was a spring evening, the eight-year-old took refuge with a friend who lives nearby, he was afraid of his father, completely drunk.
It wasn’t the first time he had seen him drunk.
A year and a half earlier, the man was released from prison after spending a year there for domestic violence against the mother and another victim, he was found guilty of serious charges, among other forcible confinement, threats and assault. fact. Since the father’s release, the DPJ has entrusted the child to his mother most of the time, never more than a week a month with his father.
It is the mother who takes care of him from birth.
But now the Directorate of Youth Protection has asked the court that the child be entrusted full time to his father with supervised visits for the mother, that means that she will be able to see her child only for a few hours, and always under the gaze of another person.
The reason? During confinement, the mother worried that the father would ignore the prohibitions and continue to hang out with people, that he would go to his girlfriend’s house as if nothing had happened. She wrote to the new worker in the file to share her fears and …
… The DYP came to take the child away.
The caregiver never came to meet the mother, she was never contacted. We showed up at her place, we left with her child. And this is where the DPJ asked that full custody be given to the father.
The mother is criticized for not speaking well of the father, for fueling the conflict, for being worried when her child tells her about what is happening at home, about violent events, about the fact that he has surprised his father. panties on the ground, with a girl other than her blonde.
The child also told his mother that his father asked him to blow the alcohol starter in his car.
Not the time he ran away.
And yet, for the DPJ, the mother is the bad guy in history, we maintain that the child invents all this to please him. Even if we have the testimony of this friend who welcomed the crying child. Although the father himself does not deny the facts, that there have been violent events in his home.
We sponge everything.
The mother, in fact, is the preventer from going around in circles, she is accused of not collaborating enough with the DPJ, of having trauma from the conjugal violence that she has suffered and of having fears about his ex. The mother is afraid that her child will still find himself in a toxic climate.
Well, the court has just ruled, the child will stay with his father, with supervised visits for the mother.
Even if the child wishes to stay with his mother.
But that doesn’t matter.
What matters is that the father is more accommodating with the DYP. That he has a drug problem and a criminal record like that doesn’t change that at all. In fact, the judgment says that the father’s drinking problem is obvious and worrying, but we are willing to take the risk.
The father denies his alcohol problem, he says he has an emotional management problem.
The mother is undergoing therapy to heal her trauma and to deal with her fears, therapy she pays for herself because the DYP has not offered her help. What we finally tell him is to come back, sir has had his time inside, we have to move on.
In the judgment, when we refer to his past of domestic violence, we speak of “incidents” that rub off on his relationship with the father.
It does not take into account the fact that the mother has looked after the child since the separation, that she has had almost sole custody of it all the time. Nobody disputes the fact that she is a good mother, everyone agrees that she is not a danger to her child.
Between the two, we choose the father.
This is not the first case I see like this, it too often happens that a woman who ends a relationship where she is a victim of domestic violence finds herself in the dock and, in the end, who ‘she loses custody of her children because she does not promote the relationship with the father.
Even if the father is violent, alcoholic.
And if a tragedy happens, we will wonder why we took such a risk, why we did not listen to the mother, as we did not listen to the grandmother of the girl from Granby, of whom we have said of her that she was “a woman with a broken alarm system, who sees dangers everywhere.”