Two social workers made an unannounced visit to the house shortly after this husband’s diary was given to the youth court (19 April 2012). Their sole aim was a report on me for a youth court. Their laws dictate this report as highly confidential and no-one other than the elected authorities were allowed to have it. The party’s advocates were only allowed to go and read this report at the court chambers, but no proper copies were allowed to be distributed.
I was not allowed to read this report slandering me — due to “high confidentiality” in some aim to “protect children”.
But people had copies – just not me. This father’s advocate in the respected country was law exempt and she had it. She sent a copy to this father’s native country advocate. She in turn made it public in our native countries court. This is how I, months later, obtained it.
In this social service report, the one social service worker gives her steps taken in writing this report:
2 May 2012 unannounced visit [afternoon]
3 May 2012 she phoned 6 people.
4 May 2012 she phoned 1 person.
4 May 2012 09:38 she submitted her report.
A recollection of my event dates are:
30 March and 2 April 2012 – I approached the police.
19 April 2012 – The date the molestation case was stopped at prosecutor’s level.
19 April 2012 – This father handed in his documents to this youth court.
23 April 2012 – The divorce summons was put in the mailbox. This is the only document I received.
30 April 2012 – The date this emergency hearing on custody was scheduled for. It was postponed on about 26 April 2012, by my newly obtained advocate, to 7 May 2012.
Notice by the dates that this social service worker was not involved in investigating child molestation.
A woman, calling herself by the name of this social worker, contacted my mother end April 2012 on her cell phone and spoke to her for half an hour. Not pertaining to the incident my mother witnessed with this father’s hand in a child’s privates in her apartment, but for obtaining information on me. This call is not on this social worker’s list of people she phoned and falls outside her 2 day agenda.
Two female social service workers was at the house for this unannounced visit. They were in their late 30’s early 40’s. They are unmarried and have no children and have never raised any children. I am estimating the language we conversed in was their fourth language. But, no official translator was present.
On the father’s behalf and to create impressions of his innocence, the following statement is made by his advocates:
“The social service worker of the respected country conducted a full investigation into the allegations of molestation. Her investigation included interviewing all three Children. The children also participated in play therapy.”
See if you can identify these actions in this social service workers comments in her report listed below. Her quotes are in bold italics
This social worker starts her report with a description of the accommodation, saying:
“The house was chaotic.” Her example: “The three small children’s toys are everywhere in the living room.”
The red carpet in the open living area has been the children’s designated play space since mid 2009. As a mother of three minor children, I considered it a good day if toys stayed just in the living room. This social service worker did not say where law dictates the toys, I have bought for my children, to be in our private living space.
“The parents have separate bedrooms the mother sleeps in the basement.” The “basement” is called the ground floor.
The sleeping situation had been separate bedrooms for over a year. When at that time, this father moved the smallest child’s bed/cot to the spare bedroom on the ground floor against my wishes, saying he does not care where I sleep. The other children also had their bedroom on this floor.
“A double bed, mattress and a spare bed for the smallest boy are in the mother’s room.”
The smallest boy’s cot (140/90cm), not a spare bed, had been in this spare bedroom since this father moved it there about end 2010.
The mattress I had moved as a temporary measure for the eldest boys to use the various ends off, after they continued wanting to sleep in my room.
“In fact to protect her children from the father the mother locks herself into this room with the children at night.”
These doors have no locks. The children slept with me in the room voluntarily. The door was not even closed.
“There is a banana skin in the two year old’s bed”
My children likes bananas. Strangely I did not allow bananas in their bed, because I had found the banana stains hard to remove.
“The two year old’s bed is scribbled on.”
As an artist and mother I’ve found it common that my children wanted to draw on things. All three my children did this. I myself was doing a mural for their bedroom wall, having starting around end 2010. I allowed the eldest two children on occasion to paint with. The smallest decorated his own bed.
“During the visit by the social service , there was a strong smell of burning in the accommodation, the father showed us that the mother had forgotten the eggs on the cooker; she had left and the eggs had exploded;”
This mother remembers boiling eggs on the stove timer for lunch and eating egg at around 12:45. Cleaning up after lunch this mother poured water off of the the eggs and placed the pot to cool next to the sink. The social service worker uses the words “during the visit” they encountered a strong smell of burning. Oddly she does not say “at arrival”.
No eggs “exploded”. They were burnt on one side, but still whole and intact in the pot. Hence no word of eggs over the ceiling or kitchen. I was not at home with the arrival of the father to the house or these two women. I am estimating I arrived around an hour after this father left us on the street corner.
In courts, this husband makes two statements on these two social service worker’s arrival at the house and the “eggs”. I quote him:
1. Upon my return home, when the wife and the two younger boys were still outside our front door, I was confronted with a home filled with smoke. The eggs had exploded and a fire was developing.
2. Upon the arrival of the social workers, I was alone at home having left the wife and children at our street corner, we all having taken the eldest child back to school after lunch. They spoke to me first.
A combination of his two statements is confusing. He arrives home. We are outside the front door, apparently while eggs are exploding and a fire is developing. The social service workers arrive after him, but now he had left us at the street corner.
After lunch we took the eldest child back to school. On the way back this father went home alone after several attempts by him to hurry them home. The children refused to follow him. I stayed with the children while they played in water puddles at the street corner. We also arrived a while later and did not use the front door as an entrance, but the garage door. She continues:
“According to the father, this was not the first time that the mother had not paid any attention while cooking, she had previously turned the apartment cooker on and had left.”
This apartment referred to here is separate to the house and on the second floor. Nobody cooked there as far as I know. But this father did use the apartment for a study.
This husband did wake me up late one night and told me to follow him. He went to the apartment and showed me the stove. All four stove plates were turned on. He asked me in his raging voice who had done it and then started taking pictures of this stove. The first thought that entered my mind was why did he not turn it off. I turned off the stove and went back to bed. The smallest child was on the ground floor stairs (two flights down) that afternoon. The following morning I told this husband that it might have been him.
But this husband, the previous night already, locked all the doors leading to this apartment and took the spare keys for these locks as well. He could only have switched the stove’s main power off. His over reaction gave me the impression that he wanted to be sure he had total privacy and sole access to the apartment and used this “stove incident” as an alibi for his actions. He also have hands to turn knobs, don’t he?
The claims of this husband on “the stove” topic varies.
1. In his diary to the respected country’s court he states: “Found the stove with all the plates turned up to maximum and the oven also. The kitchen cupboard above the stove being damaged by the heat. (Pictures are available) Why did she (the wife) not go upstairs (to the apartment) to make sure everything was ok?”
2. In the social service worker’s report is said the father told her: “this was not the first time that the mother had not paid any attention while cooking, she had preciously turned the apartment cooker on and had left.”
3. In his court statement to our native country’s court this father says: “I also have pictures of the stove plates that the wife (or children) forgot to switch off.”
In statement 1 he says he has pictures of damaged kitchen cupboards. (But there is no damage on the cupboards.) In statement 3 he forgot about cupboards and has pictures of turned on stove plates.
In his statements 1 & 3 nothing is cooking in this apartment, but in statement 2 it is claimed I did not pay attention while cooking in this apartment.
Statement 1 the oven is turned to maximum, but in statement 2 & 3 there is no mention of an oven.
“There was an open hamster cage in the bathroom. The mother could not answer my question as to where the 4 hamsters were. The social service finally found a hamster in a bowl, the second child found another somewhere in the bathroom, and squashed it between his hands.” This second child did not squash a hamster, as she is saying. He held it nicely. A hamster that is in distress will bite and this hamster was fine. I had seen my children interact with hamsters. She had not. “The other 2 hamsters have disappeared. The father explained that he had already found 5 hamsters dead in the house.” The hamsters had free rein in two bedrooms and a bathroom, being blocked from the rest of the house by stairs. I preferred animals free and had always found caging animals cruel. There had been three dead hamsters killed by the hamster in the bowl, which was a white, ratlike, bitch hamster. I was told by the pet shop that this is normal behaviour, especially if the hamsters are confined and not the same size. This father showed his children the one dead hamster he had found and told them that they killed it. When I told the children they did not, this father ignored me and again told them that they did, and that they did not take care of it. This father did not once give food and water to any of these animals. The children and I did. Today, in his care, these children don’t have any pets anymore.
“The mother did not understand why I thought it was not appropriate to let the hamsters run around the house, without being able to find them afterwards.” She is wrong in her assumption. What I did not understand was why this social service worker wanted me to look for pet hamsters and of what significance and priority her seeing 4 hamsters had with anything? They are also easily found if looked for because of their confinement to three rooms. For example, they left the house with us two days later, meaning her impression of “without being able to find them afterwards” is false. She had been oblivious that the second child played with these hamsters in the ground floor (her basement) bathroom during most of their visit. She ignored the noises and kept on telling me to leave the children alone. Later, because she is unaware with no experience of what a minor child is capable of doing when left alone, she is upset.
“When asked why the mother had brought the hamster to the police station, the mother said that the children had asked her to bring it.” This social worker, under her steps taken in her report, spoke to the police only the day after her physical visit to the house. But, she interrogated me during her visit on a hamster that was at the police station.
On the day of going to the police station, my children had asked me if they could take the hamster with them. I had read somewhere that animals can be emotionally beneficial for children and this is the reason I purchased these small animals. I agreed that they could take the hamster, saying that they should take care of it while we are there, which they did beautifully.
“After my explanation about the fact that in the upbringing the parent should not give in to every capricious demand by their children,” This, at the time of her visit was voiced and repeated to me several times by her in the exact following words, “You should not to listen to your children. You should not give them what they ask for.”
“I asked the mother if she would have also brought the goldfish if the children had asked her to do so. The mother thought for a long time about my question, answering me that transporting the goldfish would have proven to be more difficult and that at the time she would have had to find a leak proof bag to transport the goldfish. (Although I am citing this apparently innocuous [not injurious to physical or mental health] example it is to show the extent to which the mother was incapable of reasoning in an abstract manner and following current thoughts).”
I followed her thoughts/reasoning perfectly and gave her a coherent, logical answer to her innocuous question that had no practical purpose. It is termed sarcasm. It capably followed her thoughts and tone used in asking her question.
Keep in mind the statement of this father’s attorney, which is:
“The social service worker of the respected country conducted a full investigation into the allegations of molestation. Her investigation included interviewing all three Children. The children also participated in play therapy.”
Have you managed to find anything in relation to this statement yet?
“At the time I visited the house I again noticed the chaotic state of the bedroom,” (A repetitive statement on the extra single mattress, a banana peel and a scribbled on cot.) “and the fact that the hamsters are treated like objects of toys (they are lost, they are thrown around the room, they are found some weeks later under the cupboard). I drew the mother’s attention to the importance of having boundaries in raising her children. Advice which was only met with incomprehension from the mother.”
I did indeed frown in incomprehension. The reason, in the social service worker’s own words: “There was an open hamster cage in the bathroom. The mother could not answer my question as to where the 4 hamsters were.” I frowned on this social service worker’s behaviour, who, in an attacking manner, was making false accusations of hamsters being thrown and missing for weeks. She is using the words “the fact” in her statement, but did not herself witness any hamsters treated like toys or seen them missing for weeks. None of my children had ever thrown a hamster. Hamsters were also never missing for weeks. My children played carefully with the hamsters.
Her perceived imminent danger to these children is: thrown, walking, travelling or missing pet hamsters, seen or unseen. It is the highest priority to her.
This statement of, “the mother does not see the importance in setting boundaries for her children”, is repeated several times throughout this social service report in various settings and, according to her report, by various people. For example:
“According to the father, he claims his wife is incapable of setting boundaries for the children. With regard to the fact that the mother spends much more time with the children than the father, the children are accustomed to doing whatever they like; the children impose their desires on the mother who for her part, responds to each demand from her children, without any thought whatsoever.” There are no examples attached, just these accusations. Then she says:
“The children are between 2 parents with dramatically opposed approaches to upbringing.”
This social worker claims a teacher, during their conversation, said: “During the assessment interview , the mother had brought the three children. The children ran all around the classroom, climbing on the furniture, without the mother imposing any boundaries. The mother does not want to set boundaries for her children.”
“Furniture” creates the impression of tables and chairs, but there are climbing frames for children in one section of this classroom. This is the furniture my three children played on. I don’t have a problem with children playing on a climbing frame. This teacher told me she does not want the children to play on the children’s climbing furniture. I asked her for paper and crayons and asked the children to come and draw, which they did do. This teacher did not ask me to send my two children out of the school, nor did she stop the meeting. She smilingly continued showing me my 4 year old’s school curriculum, overwhelmingly consisting of witches and dragons blowing flames – teaching material I questioned her on.
And of course this social worker creates the impression this father does set boundaries:
“Although the father a former soldier, would like rules strictly observed in the house, the mother does not apply any rules at home.
Although the father is trying to establish a framework and set boundaries for his children…” On the contrary, this father did not establish any framework for his children. He was away more than half the time and for the rest mostly engulfed in his own life. When he was involved with the children, it was on separated levels, for example, overly strict, abusive or physically/mentally absent or for “grope a boy” wrestling entertainment. This father cannot be said, until today, to have involved himself in normal everyday routines or the normal existence/ground work of a normal family. The social worker continues: “The mother does not see the interest in setting boundaries and fulfils every capricious demand from her children. (This is why she brought the hamster to the police station, as the children has asked to be able to bring the hamster, she let the animal run around the police station at her children’s request)” Her statement is again a repetitive boundary statement. The animal did not run around the police station. The children were looking after it all the time, otherwise we would never have found it when we went home.
“The father appears to be much more strict with his children and wants rules to be respected (don’t eat chocolate before lunch, do not eat on the sofa, do not watch television while eating, etc.)”
This social service worker, saying this father wants rules to be respected, refers here to a man that lies and deceives openly in two countries’ courts, meaning disrespect for a court and everyone in it, disrespect for the truth, morals and disrespect for his children and me. A man who enjoys opening fraudulent bank accounts to deceive. She is talking of a man that operates purely on the need to have total control and will use any means to get it. But he sits at a table/on a sofa/bed eating, even chocolate, and also accomplish this while watching his computer/television.
“The mother the only one to look after the children when the father is travelling, does not set boundaries for her children, she considers that her role is to fulfil her children’s whims.” No example and again a repetitive boundary statement. Repetition is used in indoctrination. My children had their discipline, boundaries and daily routine, where they were allowed to go and where not. In the interest of “evidence”, has this woman observed me looking after my children?
“Her children, all three of whom are in exploratory phases need to be protected in their curiosity and need to have limits in order to contain their feeling of supremacy.”
From my experience limits for toddlers are not for their feelings of “supremacy”. It is for their survival and to teach moral behaviour. My opinion is, that the result of excessive, unhealthy control over a child, will create an adult who crave control or power even at the expense of others.
This social worker also spoke to the children’s teachers and the second child’s teacher replied: “The second child’s hygiene leaves a lot to be desired; he smells very bad.” This social service worker omits to say smelling of what. The eldest child’s teacher from a different school reports:
“Up to now there were no problems with this child’s hygiene.”
All the children bathed together every night and obviously they did not smell. Like or disliking a smell is also subjective opinion.
This same teacher that stated the child smelled, according to this social service worker states: “Moreover, the teacher had recently found that the mother, for her part, was also neglecting herself. The teacher had found that the mother was unwell and had lost a lot of weight in a short period of time.”
This social service worker herself did not comment at all on my appearance during her unannounced visit. I estimate our weight approximately the same. What does the law dictate on my normal weigh without me being discriminated against?
This social worker and father manage to create the impression that my children ran around as if they are hooligans, that I never gave them a schedule and routine, that they ate only sweats. But I regulated the children’s routine: This included meals at the table at a regular time and on occasion I would allow them a pizza while watching their favourite movie as a treat. My children ate all fruits, average 5 kinds a day. They got several fruits for their school lunches. (Now the children get bread.) They ate all vegetables, even broccoli. All three children had their bathing times and bed times, etc.
This husband unconsciously lists several routine activities in his diary and statements. From these, it is noticeable that I was occupied with enacting and enforcing these boundaries and routine activities. It is evident that this father, by his own words, is solely occupied in entertainment activities with the children.
The following are statements of this father:
– After supper (mother; routine) the boys want to wrestle with me(father; entertain). We have lots of fun and after which they go down to bath(mother; routine).
– After they had finished bathing(mother; routine) I went down to say good night to them.
This same father says in our native country’s court and I quote:
“She has a laissez faire attitude in regards the children’s established routines and their discipline. She simply does not see the need for our boys to be raised with routines and set boundaries. Rather, she indulges every whim the children may have.”
The following are quotes of this father/husband where he contradicts himself:
–I(father) walked back into the house to where the youngest son was in the kitchen and started playing with him(father; entertainment). The wife also came back into the house and started getting busy in the kitchen preparing supper.(mother; routine)
– The wife’s reply to me was that if she will remember, as the boys have to go to bed early! (mother; routine)
– Having bathed (mother; routine), the smallest child came up to me(father) in the kitchen and indicated that he wanted to play our wrestling game(father; entertain). This he did by lying on his back on the kitchen floor at my feet. The child and I(father; entertain) did play.
– The wife immediately told me that she could not talk now as she is busy preparing supper and the children are in the bath!(mother; routine) And that I(father) should call later.
– Having bathed (mother; routine), the smallest child came up to me(father) in the kitchen and indicated that he wanted to play our wrestling game(father; entertain). This he did by lying on his back on the kitchen floor at my feet. The child and I(father; entertain) did play.
– After supper(mother; routine) the evening the eldest child asked me that we should call my brother (father; entertain). This made the wife completely mad and she walked into the father’s bedroom telling the boys they immediately have to go and brush their teeth and go to bed (mother; bed time routine).
This pilot husband/father spent most of his time in his bedroom – “working”. I obviously attended to our three minor children and household. His following statements in his “diary” indicate his own “bedroom” behaviour:
– The boys left with her and I went to my room to do some work on my laptop Accounts payments, recurrent training arrangements etc
– Went back to my room to continue my work. While working in my bedroom I could hear kitchen utensils and equipment being thrown around.
– I came to my bedroom to make my travel arrangements for work on April 3 and 4.
– At +-16h00 the eldest child came to my room after his afternoon sleep
– I was working in my bedroom.
– I am sitting in my bedroom on my bed studying and preparing for my upcoming recurrent training which starts in 2 weeks time.
– I was busy in my bedroom writing in my diary summarising the events of the day.
Another topic of discussion was the minor children’s (age 5, 3 and 2 year) schools. The eldest child’s teacher states:
“On 3.5.2012 the father arrived at the school to excuse his son’s absence. According to the father’s statement the mother had been telling the child stories until very late in the night, which is why the child is incapable to get up that morning.”
This very same father that arrived at school with this story, was the parent that started distracting the children when it was their bedtime. He disrupted and ignored their schedule. For example I quote this father:
– After supper the evening the eldest child asked me that we should call my brother. This made the wife completely mad and she walked into the bedroom telling the boys they immediately have to go and brush their teeth and go to bed.
“At 2:00PM the same day, the father came looking for the teacher as the child was playing with his mother outside the school and the father could not persuade the child to go to school. The mother for her part did not wish to force the child to go to school. The mother does not set any boundaries for the child.”
On Thursday 3.5.2012 (the date the social service worker says the teacher indicates) at 2:00PM and for the rest of the afternoon there is no school in this respected country. According to her, her unannounced visit takes place afternoon 2.5.2012. Her report is in on 4.5.2012 by 10:00AM. She, scheming in creating false impressions and giving false dates, did not leave herself a lot of room for these types of errors.
This father, after receiving custody, kept this very child, and another child out of compulsory school for a month and a half. No questions asked by anyone! She continues:
“If the child does not want to go to school the mother does not set any boundaries for the child. The mother is the only one to look after the children when the father is travelling…” Again a repetitive statement on boundaries. Oddly enough my child did go to school regularly except in cases of illness in which case they had doctor’s certificates. This was only once with the pneumonia scare.
After I had gone to the police this father starts involving himself in the children’s activities in disruptive ways. Hence, after the Easter holidays (the Easter holidays started when I went to the police) this father also became involved in taking the eldest child to school, having never been there before. This is why the eldest child’s teacher says:
“The father had never visited the teacher until the end of the Easter holidays, since which time he has been in regular contact.”
This father in our native country’s court deceivingly states he always took his eldest child to school during his “regular morning exercise”. This father did not have a regular morning exercise. He acquired one in April 2012. The teacher who stands at the gate and greets parents says she had never seen this father before the Easter holidays, but regularly after and then…
“The minor has not wanted to go to school since the Easter holidays.”
The impression this literally running-to-school father creates after the Easter holidays is quoted by the social service worker as:
“The father is more strict and wants the child to go to school.”
The second child’s teacher reports:
“After the Easter holidays the second child had tantrums and did not want to separate from his mother. The teacher explained to the mother that she should not attach too much significance to these fits. The mother took her son home.”
This school the second child attended is not compulsory by law. This child was three years old and went through a traumatic time in his short life. I would not like to be ignored in a stressful situation as this teacher was advising me to do to him – devoid of any care or compassion. This same teacher had one year before locked her class door to keep my eldest screaming child in. I have regretted allowing her, her behaviour ever since. I wonder why my children had these fits when they were going to be left in her care?
Several times I tried to stay longer for the child to calm down, but it did not work. He did not want to stay there or leave me — either one of the two. A few times when his father took him he stayed there without a problem apparently.
“The teacher explained that at one point the second child had pneumonia and the mother did not wish to give medication to her son and tried to intervene by giving him homeopathic medication.”
Tried to, is inaccurate, misleading word use and imply that the child had to be admitted to a hospital, which is what would happen if pneumonia is not treated successfully. I successfully intervened. I had a prescription for antibiotics as well as a prescription for homeopathic medication. The homeopathic medication was effective and healed the child with pneumonia, as well as the rest of us with flu symptoms.
The most common strain of pneumonia is not a bacterial infection, but a viral infection and thus does not respond to antibiotic medication.
Quoting wikipedia on antibiotic resistance: Anti Biotic resistance is a serious and growing phenomenon in contemporary medicine and has emerged as one of the eminent public health concerns of the twenty-first century. The major problem of the emergence of resistant bacteria is due to misuse and overuse of antibiotics.
When the doctor diagnosed the second child with infectious pneumonia I kept all three children home. Knowing that this is a dangerous infectious decease and they attended three different institutions in various parts of this respected country. When this child was healthy enough, after two weeks, this teacher said the child cannot come back to school yet. She then told me another teacher at this school had been seriously ill with pneumonia for four weeks already. I was not notified that there was pneumonia in this school and to be cautious.
“The child is teased because he does not have undergarments.” When this eldest child started this school, about 8 months before, the teacher did tell me the children are teasing this child because he did not wear undergarments. I bought several types of undergarments and asked the child to choose the most comfortable for him. He declined it. I said, “but the teacher is saying you are teased, because you don’t wear underwear.” This child shook his head no, and walked away. At the time his refusal puzzled me, but his father did not wear underwear and I thought maybe the child is following his example. I told the child where I was putting the underwear in his cupboard for him.
This child continued telling me he is teased. When I had asked about this the teachers would say no, he is ok. They don’t see anyone teasing the child. The evening the children told me about their father’s “food”, the eldest child told me at bedtime he had told children at school and they are teasing and beating him about this.
I again asked, this time two teachers on separate occasions. One teacher again said no one is teasing this child and the other named a child she saw teasing him that day. I asked my eldest child if this was a child he had told about the “food” (from his father’s penis). He said yes. He also gave me the child’s name.
Keep in mind the statement of this father’s attorney:
“The social service worker of the respected country conducted a full investigation into the allegations of molestation. Her investigation included interviewing all three Children. The children also participated in play therapy.”
Have you managed to find anything in relation to this statement yet?
“The father told several anecdotes about times when there was a risk of the children burning themselves due to the mother’s negligence;”
The eldest children had cooked scrambled eggs under my supervision. I taught them how to take care not to get burned. They also never suffered burns in my care. I see there are children cooking competitions in some counties. Cooking is a great hobby. It is also skills they can use later in life. The children also cook in school.
“I had to intervene as the front door was open, there was no guard rail on the entrance stairs and there was a major risk of falling some metres. The smallest minor ran in the direction of the front door.”
Yes his eldest brother came back from school and walked up those stairs without railings. He ran in the direction of the door when he saw his brother. I opened this door for his brother. This social service worker did or said nothing to the child. I had been living in dangerous building conditions for years — meaning constant worrying and having to take precautions that a baby, toddler or small child does not fall down holes, or off a building etc. Even after completion of the building, this father did not want to agree on safety railings. The front door could still be locked. My main concern was with a 3 meter sliding door in the living area, of the same height as the front door. It opened onto nothing and there was no protection on it at all. This social worker sat next to this sliding door for nearly three hours. There is no mention of this living area door in her report. There is also no mention for the reason of no safety railings.
I approached many companies for quotes on the guard rail work needed around the house. But this husband had found the offers too expensive. He wanted a terrace which would cost a substantial amount, but he did not want to pay the price quoted for it. I had asked him for interim protection while he decided and he denied my requests.
If I was in negotiations with a company for this, he used it as a punishment for me, saying nothing will happen with these negotiations, because of what he deemed I had done or said wrong. He knew I felt uncomfortable about the guard railings, especially the sliding door’s. This father only put on railing 3 years after this very report. At no point did authority intervene , judge or force him to put on safety. Not even after this social service report .
“When we left the eldest son aged 5 left the house onto the footpath, he was alone, there was no adult in view.”
There were two adult social service workers in view. Did they care and direct this small child back to the house?
No, they walked across the street laughing, got into a convertible and drove off. I was standing outside, next to the house. This father was standing at the front door and also ignored the child.
After this father has told me my mother apparently called him a pedophile, this father’s clearly attacking and harassing behaviour resulted in me asking the pastor to find a place for help. I told this pastor that this husband’s behaviour scares me, because he is not behaving at all like an innocent person towards me. But, that he is attacking me.
The pastor gave the contact details for help I had asked for, to this husband, saying we should go together. I waited for this husband, but found out later he went on his own without informing me.
This father in court described his recollection of the above events as such: Upon my return to home in early March 2012 I could no longer stand for the wife’s slanderous, false allegations, which I regarded as most serious. On or about 5 March 2012 I approached, a non-profit organisation for the prevention and support of child abuse, for assistance. I was referred to the Youth Police, as well as a child lawyer.
The social service report, says this organisation reports: “We were first contacted by the pastor of the church. Following this telephone call this father contacted us.” This father in our native country’s court states he approached this organisation that supports abused children, for assistance for himself being slandered. He threatened me with a slander suit for questioning him about his behaviour and his own gossip about himself! Why seek out child welfare?
According to the social service report this organisation states: “This father’s request was finding out how he could change the situation.” What “situation” he wanted changed is omitted in this report. But this father states he was referred by them to the youth police and a child lawyer. While he continued to handle the situation by threatening with lawsuits, harassing, invading privacy, recordings, emotional abuse and oppressive control, etc.
During my meeting, with this organisation for abused children, I listed the second child’s behaviour, saying that I have been told this child could be autistic.I was careful with what I was saying, since this father was threatening me. But the day after the children voiced this father’s behaviour, on 28 March 2012, I contacted this place/organisation again and told them what my children had told me. I spoke to the secretary since the people that dealt with the case was not available. They organised a meeting the next day with me and this father. At this meeting I gave them my children’s words. This was the first time this father heard that the children had confided in me. They organised for a physical examination that evening. This doctor who did the physical examination is the founder of this organisation.
The social service worker in her report states this doctor said: “He did not find any indication of sexual abuse to the smallest and eldest children. The second child’s behaviour was difficult and he could not examine him.” This “finding no indication of sexual abuse medical examination” would be for a child who had told me “his father makes “food” from his penis and puts it in his mouth.” Such an action is apparently evident during a cursory medical examination and the inability to see physical signs of oral sex is apparently evidence that nothing has happened. At this doctor’s office this second child told this father to get on the examination table. He walked away and in the middle of the room turned around and pointed at this father, saying several times in our native language that the doctor should look at him (father). He then came to me and started pulling me out of the room. I pulled him back, saying I would like the doctor to look at him.This doctor declined examining this second child, giving his reason as not wanting to force a child.
This husband however, in our native country’s court said: The second child, who was acting like a jibbing mule and clinging to me, refused to be examined.
This false, clingy, jibbing, mule statement made me ask the doctor to write a certificate, explaining what had happened and that he did not medically examine this child. The doctor wrote that the child ran from his father to his mother and was not examined.
“He directed the parents to a psychologist saying the mother hinted that the second child had autistic problems. But he does not think this is accurate.”
I did not hint at autism during the children’s physical examination for molestation.
The soonest an appointment could be made at this referred psychologist was for more than a month away. As with the physical examination this father also accompanied us to the psychologist appointment. I will not forget how elaborately and smilingly he placed the second child on his shoulders while walking down the corridor.
I listed the second child’s severe behaviour and started giving this to the psychologist. I clearly said that my children are saying they are being molested. She told me that she was only told to see if the child was autistic and that she did not know of any molestation. The children were playing in the corner with toys and she concluded by his interactions with his brothers, she said and, without speaking a word to this child, that this second child was not autistic. This meeting lasted around 20 minutes and that was it. Her profession as a child psychologist at a hospital did not include determining a child’s strange behaviour which is not due to autism.
“If the father is to be believed the wife had threatened to castrate him.”
There are also rumours that I have said I am going to kill this husband and burn down the house. It is very clear that this father/husband is alive, has a penis and living life in and out of an unburned house as it pleases himself and only him.
“This father is afraid of his wife’s impulsive reactions; she has been violent to him. The children have witnessed scenes of violence between the parents on numerous occasions.” Her example of the parental violence she chooses is: “during one the mother who had a knife in her hand to cut the pizza, had started to cut the pizza into a thousand pieces because she was annoyed. The children did not understand the behaviour of the mother who massacred (massacred: mass murdered) the pizza in front of her children.” This was a normally cut 8 pieces pizza, not my husband, nor a parent. This pizza was also mashed while eaten. She had never seen me cut an onion in front of my children.
Take note of how she purposely creates ominous impressions, stating, “the mother who had a knife in her hand..” I normally hold a knife in my hand when cutting food in my kitchen. My children watched me numerous times cutting/slicing food into very small pieces while cooking for meals. They sometimes sat with me in the kitchen and watched me holding a knife in my hand, as well as my cutting behaviour. I allowed them to help with pealing and, using a plastic knife for them, cutting the softer foods.
But this was indeed the same night the children had told me this father was making “food” from his penis for them. This was when I said to this husband that I would like to be cutting something else, while cutting the pizza into normal slices for my children to eat. This father, without me having told him what my children had said, knew obviously what I was referring to and did not reply.
My children also knew why I was angry. But I don’t think they understood my comment. The social service worker was not present during this meal, but she accepts what this father/husband says/gossips without asking questions or seeking evidence. She repeated this, as with the “boundary” statements, on several pages so the reader cannot miss it. For example:
“Impassivity of parents: the mother (broke the glass window in the door, lost control when cutting the pizza into small pieces)”
The glass in the door broke by accident when I slammed on the closed front door of the apartment, after this father lured the children into the apartment, having bought them a remote control helicopter and closed the door on me. This was after I had gone to the police. He had taken all the keys to this apartment. After the incident, I phoned the police, without speaking a word to this father, only thinking that I need help in protecting my children from his behaviour. The police took this father’s and my statements and left.
This “caring” father did this to upset me. But, he projects his behaviour to me and describe it as such: She was looking for confrontation and wanted me to lose my temper and do something, which she could hold against me!
Then this father projects again, after having lured and locked himself into the apartment with the children, saying:
“The father said that the mother locks herself in the bedroom with the children and tells stories to the children during which she stresses, time and time again that the father should not be trusted.”
This social service worker took this father’s words and repeated them independently in her report, using the words — in fact. I quote the Social service worker, under her heading, “Description of the accommodation”:
“In fact to protect her children from the father the mother locks herself into this room with the children at night.”
The reality is that there are no locks on these doors that these people are saying I used to lock my children in. I have the original door orders that state “without locks” under description of the doorhandles.
The social service worker was present in the house, but she was in the house one afternoon and left around 16h55, before the children’s bedtime. She did not witness this information she again gives as “a fact”.
I did place toys in a tower behind the children’s bedroom door, so I would wake up from the noise when these fall, if the door moves. The door was not even shut. This I did when the children were already asleep.
And even though I do think this father is not to be trusted at all, I did not give this type of information to my children. They are too small to understand this.
Not having seen this highly confidential social service report at the time I did not know these lies until some of it was repeated in another court order.
In our native country’s court I stated there are no locks on these doors. This husband then changed his “lock” statement to “barricade”.
Has anyone noticed this molestation investigation yet?
The social service worker of the respected country conducted a full investigation into the allegations of molestation. Her investigation included interviewing all three Children. The children also participated in play therapy.
Something else in this report made me realise just what an idiot I was, thinking that this man loved me.
“The parents met in 1996”
(Actually 1995)This husband dated and lived with someone else for about 5 years, during which we had very little contact. He started phoning me regularly in 2001. After a year of his phoning me we started dating. She continues:
“The father came to live in the respected country in 1997
The couple married in 2006, before marrying the father set 2 conditions:
The mother should never smoke again
The mother must work
After completing her economics degree the mother re-joined the father in 2006
The father stressed that he is very annoyed by the fact that the mother started to smoke again. In fact one of his conditions to agree to marry his wife was the fact that she would not smoke again.”
He had no problem dating someone who smokes. I visited him several times and smoked outside the front door. He also repeatedly said that he loves me. He had no conditions attached to love then. In fact, then we had a normal relationship. He did say he wanted me to stop smoking, saying he feels as if I am having an affair (with cigarettes) and he can then have an affair in turn. I did not understand his reasoning, but knew myself smoking is a bad habit and bad for your health and that I needed to try to quit this habit for my own sake. If you love someone then that is what you care for — it is not a condition for giving love.
But for him during our marriage every mediocre incident boiled down to obeying him or he criticised, ignored, threatened, insulted and oppressed. If he could not find a reason he had no problem distorting reality and/or making one up.
There are many things in this social service report that are not in line with reality, for example, this father saying: “he was not really present after the birth of his first son because he needed time to become accustomed to the role of father.”
He was really present for about 3 months after our first child’s birth. It is after the second child’s birth that he was not really present. I don’t know if it was to “become accustomed to the role of father”.
“The father said when the third child was born the mother insisted that she could give birth alone at home, despite the fact that the father did not agree with the idea.” In fact, I gave birth to my second and third children at home.
“At the time of the birth the midwife was not present so the father had to take on this role. According to the father, the mother is incapable of making compromises and she must always get her own way.”
I was told with the first birth I could not have a home birth. I compromised and had a hospital birth. With our second child I organised a midwife. This father had no problem with this. The day of the second child’s birth I told this father I am in labour and he repeatedly replied I am exaggerating. I phoned the midwife, ignoring this father/husband, an hour and a half before the birth. She replied that if I can speak to her I am not close to giving birth. She was late.
With the third child’s birth I arranged two midwifes on standby, to have a back-up. This husband/father at these times met with all the midwives, showed his charm and agreed with the idea. The second midwife wrote a testimony to confirm this.
“While the mother has the impression of not being supported by the authorities in protecting her children she is becoming more and more stressed.”
It is and was not only an impression of my apparently “delirious” mind that my children and I were and are not supported and protected.
This husband’s statement in our native country’s court is the following: “I state, however, that at the unannounced visit by the social service worker, she had instructed the wife to see a psychiatrist as a matter of emergency. The wife brushed off this advice.”
This was this social service worker’s words of telling me to go to the emergency at the hospital immediately, repeated three times during her visit. This “advice”, or more accurately, order she gave, is not written down anywhere in her social service report.
This comment created the impression with me of not being supported or believed and resulted in more stress. Or does this social service worker tell herself she decreased my stress levels?
This social service worker did not divulge her own behaviour during her unannounced visit. I found her behaviour aggressive, biased, domineering, indoctrinating and criticising. It was clear that she had no experience in raising children herself, had no idea what it entails and could not identify herself in any shape or form with mothers in this position.
The organisations and authorities, clearly by their actions, showed no interest, no compassion and provided no protection. They either joined in the lies and abuse or concentrated on nibbling toes, hamsters and rumours.
This social service worker’s “supportive” actions are well described by this husband in his court statements. He always mentions both his advocate and the social worker as his advisors in his actions and behaviour. For example,
“On the advice of this social service worker and my attorney. I limited the wife’s contact with the children and insisted that such contact be supervised.”
Who are these people that they could decide about my life of which they mostly know only lies?
The social service worker states: “Although a mother cannot be reproached for wishing to protect her children against possible dangers the management of the situation is becoming inappropriate and is having serious impact on the children.”
Yes! She did reproach me for trying to protect my children! She writes this report without adding her, “Take yourself to the emergency at the hospital immediately!” statement. Thanks to my court case in our native country her behaviour has been put on record by this father.
While I tried to take care of and protect my three small children in my shocked state, I veered off attacks from people the entire time. Not only this father, but evidently from others, this social service worker included, who are positioned in management positions to help. This increased the difficulty and frustration for me a hundred fold in this situation.
On top of everything, no psychologist in this respected country spoke my children’s language, also not this social service worker. As a result my children could not be aided in this country, but only in our native country. This was not a problem to the “justice system” of the respected country and they made their decisions without evidence. While the father simply locked up the children’s passports. Let’s not forget their looming international kidnapping charges for a mother taking her literally flesh and blood created children out of their country!
