WA Applicant father considering FVRO application to stop emails

[Rosscoe]

@GlassHalfFull just life experience and the practicalities involved. Yes, a VRO may prohibit some communication, certainly not all ( it will still be necessary to communicate for co-parenting matters). In a high conflict situation IMO the OP (the high conflict one) will find a way to carry on acting in such a way - so the relief on mental health may not be addressed. Even with a VRO, it can have the opposite effect and just serve to further deflate you to the situation where you have a VRO but as you still need to find a way to co parent the conflict / abuse remains in some form. Hence the suggestion to put in place boundaries of your own to deal with communication going forward. This I found was a particularly powerful thing in my situation. Once I worked out what to take on board, what to reply to and what to simply banish to the far depths of the universe the whole dynamic changed.

Also, I think it important to view the situation from the OP point of view and how a VRO can be used against you (it happens). Mental Health issues have already been raised by the OP, and the court is obligated to look into this in terms of parental capacity (no doubt OP will be using this as grounds in the court proceedings). It can then be alleged that it is due to mental health concerns that the parent is not able to communicate etc etc and that it actually hinders the relationship and causes a break down in parental cooperation etc. I honestly believe it a better strategy to kindly point out the bad behavior during the proceedings and talk about the steps you take to reduce the conflict - this I think holds weight with a judge and shows that you have your sh*t together.

 

[GlassHalfFull]

That's true, although I was a few years ago on the receiving end of a DVO (which included my children as protected persons) and while in my case it was likely a strategic move to gain advantage in terms of control of the children (I was prior the primary carer of my elder child) rather than because there was any legitimate violence in the relationship, I know from experience that it did 'shut me up'. I didn't know how to respond to it and until I got legal advice about family court proceedings, I didn't see my children or even contact my ex for 2 months. So it does work, but of course it forces matters into court and as you say, does escalate matters. But from the OP's story, they're already in court with consent orders and it sounds like the ex is mostly adhering to them, so it's unlikely to cause further problems. And if the ex does push the boundaries of what is allowed under the DVO, there are avenues to hold them accountable. Not pleasant avenues obviously, especially not ones that have the best interests of the children in mind, but at least in theory it should act as a deterrent??

 

[Rosscoe]

Yeah, it could well be a deterrent but like you say the ex will still push boundaries and where exactly are those boundaries in that case when an order is granted? When is it deemed petty / unreasonable to say that there is a contravention of the order? Then you have to go through the stress of making the complaint, proving the contravention etc, and I agree with you, this is likely to not be in the best interests of the children. I think if the issue is mainly regarding how the current communications are affecting the father's mental health then I would say there is a good chance that a VRO will escalate the situation and could have an adverse effect. IMO it is far better to implement something along the lines @Match is already doing.

 

[sammy01]

Put a spoonful of concrete in your coffee.
The law can't fix everything. Old mate needs to learn coping skills. He needs a mental health forum, not a law forum.

Respecfully, stop caring about the ex and her stupid emails. I still get the occasional novel. I like reading them. They remind me of how fcuking lucky i am i don't live with her anymore....

 

[GlassHalfFull]

But Sammy, although I mostly agree with you about coping skills, that's a bit like telling a victim of physical domestic violence that really what they need is a martial arts coach to help them defend against assault, not a DVO. The laws on DV exist because people shouldn't have to put up with abuse, even though in reality, all kinds of other equally upsetting injustices go unpunished every day because that's the price we pay for living in an imperfect society.

I guess the real issue is that DVOs should be primarily to protect victims from SERIOUS abuse, but in the real world, they're used for every kind of minor domestic dispute under the sun. Shouting = verbal abuse. Arguing about money = financial abuse. The children overhearing an argument = child abuse. If DVOs were restricted only to serious abuse and not just things that upset sensitive people's feelings, we'd probably have a much better DV prevention system.