Paul and Zabeth had several communications with their Child Protection Social Worker this week. Among the messages was a schedule for the three weekly visits which were ordered by the judge two weeks ago. He said, “That access shall be increased from two times a week for three hours each to three times a week for three hours.” That is appreciated. The judge also ordered access for special occasions. But you must hear how the order was worded. The judge has written these before, and the MCFD has dealt with them before. So he said, “Reasonable access on special occasions.” The modifying word “reasonable' makes all the difference. It is included as an order but the qualifying term immediately reduces the probability that access on many special occasions will be realized.
The final word this week was that the arrangement cannot be made this year for Paul to have his children with him for Father's Day. I am sure that she tried, the social worker that is. She expressed at the last court appearance that she was looking into the possibility. This week she did want the Baynes to know that this was not a denial of a visit but rather an inability to coordinate the plans.
What they wanted was the opportunity to go to a family restaurant for a father's day meal. Visits are customarily in a standard visitation facility. The children however live with a foster family who have their own father's day plans and can't be faulted for that. A driver/supervisor would also be needed to transport the children to the meeting place.
The reality is that a Judge's order is never black and white but rather still contingent upon variant factors. This time it appears, that a Father's Day visit was 'unreasonable.'