Heartbreak of the Covid

It’s one of lockdown’s most troubling legacies — estranged couples using the pandemic as an excuse to keep exes from seeing their children. SALLY WILLIAMS exposes the . . .

ALITTLE over a year ago, Sandra, 50, left her marriage to rent a flat near the family home. Her husband, she maintains, was a ‘coercive controller’ and she and their two children — girls aged 11 and 14 — were better off on their own.

Through lawyers, the former couple agreed custody would be 50/50. Sandra is a management consultant and well used to negotiation and problem-solving. She was happy with the arrangement. But then came Covid. ‘At the beginning of the pandemic, my ex made an announcement through his lawyer, saying that he would have the children during lockdown,’ she says.

Claiming he’d seen Sandra out walking with a friend and failing to social distance, her former husband accused her of breaking Covid rules and, therefore, endangering the children. ‘It was totally fake,’ says Sandra now. ‘He used it as an excuse to have further power, further control over me.’

‘My lawyer just batted it back and said: “No, this is not happening. She is not breaking the rules.” ’

But a year on, Sandra has not seen her younger daughter for seven months. ‘He claims she doesn’t want to be with me. He’s poisoned her mind against me.’

As the pandemic continues to play out this spring, lawyers across the land are dealing with the tragic fallout among divided and warring families.

Parents, they claim, are weaponising Covid in acrimonious battles for custody. And when one uses the virus as an excuse to deny the other access, it’s inevitably the children who suffer.

‘Covid is a gift to unscrupulous parents,’ says Emma Gill, director of family and divorce law at Vardags. She adds that pretty much every case involving children she’s had since March 2020 has involved calculated use of the pandemic.

‘The easy way to derail child arrangements — either ones already in place, or being discussed — is to simply say, we have to self-isolate. It’s a very convenient excuse, and one that’s very difficult to refute. Absolutely, it’s being weaponised by those parents who want to disrupt a programme that has been agreed.’

SHE adds: ‘The impact of the national pandemic on children’s well-being is going to be catastrophic anyway. And then to create an added barrier by denying the support network of other parents, grandparents on that side, half-siblings or step-siblings is hugely cruel. The fact that any parent would do it is pretty appalling.’

The guidance for parents who live apart states that children under the age of 18 can be moved between their parents’ homes after a sensible discussion and an assessment that the children are not being put at risk.

But if parents make snap decisions and break court orders ‘there is no immediate remedy’, points out Adele Pledger, a partner at law firm Withers.

You have to rely on the courts to put it right, and even before Covid there were complaints about how long such court proceedings took. Now it’s even longer.

‘Typically, you have to file your application in the court local to where your child lives, and it’s completely pot luck as to how well adapted that court is to virtual hearings and how quickly you can get a hearing.

‘Covid has at least doubled the length of time for these Lawyer: Adele Pledger Picture: MARK HARRISON private cases to go through court,’ says Emma Gill. Before Covid, getting an initial court hearing would take at least two to three months; now it’s five or six. And where more acrimonious cases used to take up to a year, now you could be looking at two years before any kind of resolution. ‘Covid is emboldening parents to be even more difficult than previously because where’s the comeback?’ Emma says. ‘They’re not going to be reprimanded by the court because you can’t get a court hearing, and you can’t go to the police or children’s services because it’s not within their remit.’ Aman, 40, who works for the NHS, has two girls, aged seven and nine, with his ex-wife. They divorced a number of years ago. After many months of conflict, and a court case, it was agreed that Aman would have the girls every other weekend, and one night during the week. But visits stopped in the first lockdown.

‘My ex-wife said she wanted to protect her elderly mum, who lives in the same house, and didn’t want me seeing the kids because I work in a hospital and had the potential of catching Covid.

‘I sympathised initially. I thought, OK, fair enough. But in October when the schools were back, my older daughter actually got Covid, and then I got it, too. I said: “Look, why doesn’t she stay with me — for your mum’s sake.” My ex said no. So when my daughter actually had Covid, my ex didn’t want to protect her mum.’

VISITS resumed briefly at the end of last year, but the current lockdown has meant another period without access. He last saw the girls at the beginning of January.

‘I recently asked if my ex’s mum had been vaccinated and she didn’t respond. Then, when I spoke to my older daughter, she said the vaccine can make you sick if you have it. I thought: “Where have you got this from?” ‘I explained that I work for the NHS, I had my vaccine in January and it’s fine; it will protect you and your grandma. But it’s almost like they are anti-vaxxers.’

Aman exists now in a kind of banishment, only able to see his girls for ten to 15 minutes a week on FaceTime.

‘They are becoming less interested and sometimes my calls aren’t answered at all. ‘I say: “Do you miss Daddy?” “Yes,” they say, “but we can’t come until after Covid.”

God knows when it will ever end. It’s just heart-breaking.’

Charles Tennant, solicitor and partner in the family department of Sussex-based law firm Coole Bevis, is not surprised by stories such as these. ‘For people who are determined to be difficult, Covid has become a useful way to cause problems,’ he says.

This is because Covid is a bit different to the usual stalling tactics — accusing your former partner of inappropriate behaviour, or mental instability, say; or reporting them to the police; or simply ignoring an order.

‘Covid adds a veneer of respectability,’ explains Charles. ‘The implication is that there’s an over-arching public-health

argument that outweighs their specific circumstances. That there is a greater authority than an order — which, by the way, there isn’t. Once you’ve been ordered to do something, you must comply with it.’

That point was made plain in April, when Sir Andrew McFar-lane, who is in charge of family courts in England and Wales, said those ignoring court orders could end up facing legal action.

‘If the parents are acting in a cynical and opportunistic manner, then that’s wrong and the courts will regard it as wrong,’ he warned.

But according to lawyers on the frontline of these battles, threats like this haven’t made any differ-ence. ‘I had a case before Christ-mas where a parent was waiting to see their children and, liter-ally, on the day before the first meeting in six months, all of a sudden the whole family had to self-isolate for two weeks because of Covid,’ says Emma Gill.

In another case, a parent took the children and moved to their holiday home — with no consul-tation or agreement.

‘Instead of the children being two minutes around the corner from the other parent, they were 200 miles away,’ she added.

In around 85-90 per cent of cases, the parent fighting for access is the father, according to Michael Lewkowicz, director of communications for the campaigning group Families need Fathers.

‘We have fathers who applied for contact at the beginning of Covid, and nearly a year down the line they still haven’t seen their children.

‘For a young child not to see a parent at all for months on end, it’s just not good for that child. The parent has to rebuild the relationship almost from scratch.’

But the pursuit of freedom from a failed marriage can leave mothers exposed, too — just like Sandra.

‘For someone who is control-ling and abusive, Covid has given them that extra clout to do and say what they want,’ says Ruth Driscoll, who coaches women on dealing with control-ling partners and runs The Life Liberator website.

‘It’s been much more difficult to get in touch with profession-als who can support and help, certainly in the first lockdown, and also much more difficult to enforce anything. So for those who’ve used Covid to weaponise the children against their partner, it’s given them a bit of a field day, really.’

BuT some parents claim the virus has given them good cause to deny their former partners time with the children. When Fran began a casual relationship with Jim back in 2018, she ended up pregnant by accident. It wasn’t a relationship that could last, but Jim still wanted to be part of their daughter’s life, and Fran agreed.

It turned out Jim had an explo-sive temper, however, and also dabbled in drugs — so Fran reached a compromise: he could visit Maddie, every other week-end, but only at her house and never alone.

When the pandemic hit, Jim’s behaviour became even more erratic. ‘He said Covid was a Government hoax to introduce martial law.

‘And then as more cases came forward, he changed tack, and said the Government had created it, partly as a population cull and partly to make money, because the pharmaceu-tical industry and the Govern-ment were in cahoots with PPE companies.

‘His theories were so bizarre and extreme.’

Just as alarming, Fran contin-ues: ‘He wasn’t following any Covid regulations. In fact, he was actively promoting not wearing masks, and saying things like uV light would kill any form of virus.

‘And he still wanted to come and see our child!’

Fran stopped his visits. She would only agree to meet at a child contact centre (safe spaces where children can meet parents they don’t live with), because they have to abide by Govern-ment regulations on handwash-ing, social distancing and wear-ing masks. But Fran says: ‘He wasn’t willing to accept that.’

They argued horribly, and the case is now with the family courts — though Fran has no idea how long it will take.

‘He’s saying that I’m denying him his rights as a father to have access to his daughter and that I’m using Covid as a way of saying he can’t come to our home. But I just want to keep my child safe.’

Cases like this show the situa-tion is not always clear-cut. But one thing’s for sure — Covid has driven another cruel wedge between already-divided par-ents, and who knows when its toxic after-effects will end.

SOME names and details have been changed.