fc_judgments: 52
Data source: lawnet.sg/lawnet/web/lawnet/free-resources
This data as json
| _id | _item_id | tags | date | court | case-number | title | citation | url | counsel | timestamp | coram | html | _commit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 52 | a23ecad9490d72b65ccfb62c10d7a6b2e43860bc | [
"Section 28 Family Justice Act 2014 \u2013 examination of children \u2013 expert evidence \u2013 access \u2013 video and audio recordings of children"
] |
2024-07-26 | Family Court | Divorce No 1294 of 2023 | XAB v XAC | [2024] SGFC 53 | https://www.lawnet.sg:443/lawnet/web/lawnet/free-resources?p_p_id=freeresources_WAR_lawnet3baseportlet&p_p_lifecycle=1&p_p_state=normal&p_p_mode=view&_freeresources_WAR_lawnet3baseportlet_action=openContentPage&_freeresources_WAR_lawnet3baseportlet_docId=%2FJudgment%2F31844-SSP.xml | [
"SC Teh Guek Ngor Engelin with Rebecca Vathanasin (Engelin Teh Practice LLC) for the Plaintiff",
"Yap Yongzhi, Gideon with Tan Shern Wen, Joshua (Martin & Partners LLP) for the Defendant."
] |
2024-08-05T16:00:00Z[GMT] | Tan Shin Yi | <root><head><title>XAB v XAC</title></head><content><div class="contentsOfFile"> <h2 align="center" class="title"><span class="caseTitle"> XAB <em>v</em> XAC </span><br><span class="Citation offhyperlink"><a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/31844-SSP.xml')">[2024] SGFC 53</a></span></h2><table id="info-table"><tbody><tr class="info-row"><td class="txt-label" style="padding: 4px 0px; white-space: nowrap" valign="top">Case Number</td><td class="info-delim1" style="padding: 4px">:</td><td class="txt-body">Divorce No 1294 of 2023</td></tr><tr class="info-row"><td class="txt-label" style="padding: 4px 0px; white-space: nowrap" valign="top">Decision Date</td><td class="info-delim1" style="padding: 4px">:</td><td class="txt-body">26 July 2024</td></tr><tr class="info-row"><td class="txt-label" style="padding: 4px 0px; white-space: nowrap" valign="top">Tribunal/Court</td><td class="info-delim1" style="padding: 4px">:</td><td class="txt-body">Family Court</td></tr><tr class="info-row"><td class="txt-label" style="padding: 4px 0px; white-space: nowrap" valign="top">Coram</td><td class="info-delim1" style="padding: 4px">:</td><td class="txt-body"> Tan Shin Yi </td></tr><tr class="info-row"><td class="txt-label" style="padding: 4px 0px; white-space: nowrap" valign="top">Counsel Name(s)</td><td class="info-delim1" style="padding: 4px">:</td><td class="txt-body"> SC Teh Guek Ngor Engelin with Rebecca Vathanasin (Engelin Teh Practice LLC) for the Plaintiff; Yap Yongzhi, Gideon with Tan Shern Wen, Joshua (Martin & Partners LLP) for the Defendant. </td></tr><tr class="info-row"><td class="txt-label" style="padding: 4px 0px; white-space: nowrap" valign="top">Parties</td><td class="info-delim1" style="padding: 4px">:</td><td class="txt-body"> XAB — XAC </td></tr></tbody></table> <p class="txt-body"><span style="font-style:italic">Section 28 Family Justice Act 2014</span> – <span style="font-style:italic">examination of children</span> – <span style="font-style:italic">expert evidence</span> – <span style="font-style:italic">access</span> – <span style="font-style:italic">video and audio recordings of children</span></p> <p></p><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td width="80%"><p class="Judg-Hearing-Date">26 July 2024</p></td><td><p class="Judg-Date-Reserved"></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p></p> <p class="Judg-Author"> District Judge Tan Shin Yi:</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-1">Introduction</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_1"></a>1 Section 28 of the Family Justice Act 2014 (“the FJA 2014”) is not an often-cited provision in family proceedings, probably because it involves the medical examination and assessment of children. This application directly concerns the question of whether a young child of 4 years should be examined by a psychologist or qualified therapist, and also raised issues regarding the impact of high-conflict divorces on young children.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_2"></a>2 I declined to grant the application in this case, as I did not find it necessary or in the best interests of the child to subject him to a psychological assessment. It is essential to first understand the background to this application, before I explain my reasons below.</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-3">Background facts</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_3"></a>3 The parties were married in January 2016 and they have a young child, A, who is currently 4 years old. The Plaintiff mother (“the Mother”) filed for divorce in March 2023, citing the unreasonable behaviour of the Defendant father (“the Father”). Interim Judgment was granted on 20 June 2023. On 31 July 2023, the Father filed a Summons application for interim access to A (SUM 2404/2023). On 16 August 2023, the Mother filed a Summons application to restrain the Father from removing A from school before the end of the school day (SUM 2579/2023).</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-3">The Consent Orders</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_4"></a>4 On 12 September 2023, the parties attended mediation in court and the following consent orders were recorded:</p> <p class="Judg-2"><a id="p1_4-p2_i"></a>(i) Pending the resolution of SUM 2404/2023 for interim access, the Father shall have interim access to A:</p> <p class="Judg-3"><a id="p1_4-p2_i-p3_a"></a>(a) From 5-6pm on Mondays, Tuesdays and Thursdays; during which time the Father shall take A to the nearby playground located at B Park. Such access shall commence on 18 September 2023.</p> <p class="Judg-3"><a id="p1_4-p2_i-p3_b"></a>(b) From 9am to 1.30pm on Saturdays. The Father shall take A to a public place, including XX Club, and there shall be no restrictions as to who will accompany the Father during his time with A. Such access shall commence on 16 September 2023.</p> <p class="Judg-3"><a id="p1_4-p2_i-p3_c"></a>(c) The Mother’s domestic helper shall accompany A during all access sessions.</p> <p class="Judg-2"><a id="p1_4-p2_ii"></a>(ii) The Father shall pick A up from the matrimonial home located at XY (“the Matrimonial Home”) at the start of each access session and return A to the Matrimonial Home at the end of each access session. The Father shall be at liberty to have another person accompany him during the pick ups / drop offs.</p> <p class="Judg-2"><a id="p1_4-p2_iii"></a>(iii) For the avoidance of doubt, the Father shall be permitted to open the front gate of the Matrimonial Home for the purposes of backing his car into the front porch of the Matrimonial Home during such pick ups / drop offs but shall remain in his motor vehicle while waiting for A. In the event that the Father walks to the Matrimonial Home for the access, he may open the front gate of the Matrimonial Home for the purposes of picking A up or returning A but shall not enter the Matrimonial Home; and shall leave as soon as he picks A up or returns A to the Mother or the domestic helper.</p> <p class="Judg-2"><a id="p1_4-p2_iv"></a>(iv) All orders are subject to changes if there are further Court orders / agreement between the parties. </p> <p class="Judg-2"><a id="p1_4-p2_v"></a>(v) The interim arrangements contained in this order are not an admission of the parties’ positions; and are without prejudice to the parties’ positions and the parties can still rely on their respective summonses during the hearing of the said summonses.</p> <p class="Judg-2"><a id="p1_4-p2_vi"></a>(vi) The Father shall not be permitted to enter the matrimonial home located at XY save to pick up some of his personal belongings. In such event, the Father shall only pick up his personal belongings with prior appointment arranged and written agreement with the Mother.</p> <p class="Judg-2"><a id="p1_4-p2_vii"></a>(vii) Save for an emergency or if A is ill, neither the Mother nor the Father shall remove A out of school before the end of the school day at 4.30 pm.</p> <p class="Judg-2"><a id="p1_4-p2_viii"></a>(viii) Neither the Mother nor the Father shall visit A in school during the course of the school day.</p> <p class="Judg-2"><a id="p1_4-p2_ix"></a>(ix) The Mother shall send and pick up A to and from school every day.</p> <p class="Judg-2"><a id=""></a>For ease of reference, these orders dated 12 September 2023 are collectively referred to as “the Consent Orders”.</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-1">The Present Application</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-3">The Mother’s position</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_5"></a>5 The Mother filed the present application, SUM 2985/2023, on 25 September 2023. The application is for (i) a psychologist from KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital (KKH) or specific therapist to examine the child, A, for “purposes of preparing expert evidence in the form of report”; and (ii) in the interim, pending the psychologist’s report, parties to have joint custody of A, the Mother to have care and control and the Father to have interim access as per the terms of the Consent Orders.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_6"></a>6 The Mother claimed that the application was necessary because A started behaving differently after the commencement of divorce proceedings in March 2023, and that the Father and his family members began to treat A “differently”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_1" id="Ftn_1_1"><sup>[note: 1]</sup></a></span>. The Mother claimed that (i) the Father started to take A up to his bedroom to the exclusion of her domestic helper, instead of allowing A to roam freely in his parents’ home; and (ii) the Father and his family members started “speaking negatively”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_2" id="Ftn_2_1"><sup>[note: 2]</sup></a></span> about the Mother to A, telling A that he would be living with them and they would care for him.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_7"></a>7 The Mother also claimed that the Father started<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_3" id="Ftn_3_1"><sup>[note: 3]</sup></a></span> buying more toys to “bribe and manipulate” A, and picking A up from school and “prevented” the Mother’s domestic helper from exiting the vehicle to pick A up from the school lobby or only picked the helper up after he had already picked A up from school.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_8"></a>8 More significantly, the Mother claimed that the Father and his family members had engaged in what she termed as “negative stoking”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_4" id="Ftn_4_1"><sup>[note: 4]</sup></a></span>, which allegedly caused confusion and distress in A. She stated that<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_5" id="Ftn_5_1"><sup>[note: 5]</sup></a></span> A would often return to the Matrimonial Home after access “looking very disoriented and confused” and would have frequent temper tantrums and meltdowns; and would wake up multiple times in the night crying for the Mother, which he did not do before. The Mother also claimed that after A returned from access, he began<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_6" id="Ftn_6_1"><sup>[note: 6]</sup></a></span> bed wetting and soiling himself or on the floor when he had previously been able to use the toilet. The Mother brought A to see a play therapist, who apparently informed her that<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_7" id="Ftn_7_1"><sup>[note: 7]</sup></a></span> there was a lot of “dysregulation” in A and that A is “very high need” and needs a “high level of control due to his insecurities”. Subsequently, the Mother brought A to a second therapist in September 2023, as the first therapist apparently “did not want to be involved”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_8" id="Ftn_8_1"><sup>[note: 8]</sup></a></span> in the Summons application.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_9"></a>9 The Mother’s case was that<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_9" id="Ftn_9_1"><sup>[note: 9]</sup></a></span> she filed this application as A had been “severely and adversely affected by the changes caused by the behaviour of the Father and his family members following the commencement of [d]ivorce [p]roceedings, particularly the negative stoking”, and she wanted the appointed psychologist to<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_10" id="Ftn_10_1"><sup>[note: 10]</sup></a></span> (a) work with A “through his feelings and help him to manage” his dysregulation; (b) assess A and “determine if he has been destabilised and/or negatively affected” by exposure to the Father and his family; and (c) make recommendations for the Father’s access to A.</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-3">The Father’s position</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_10"></a>10 The Father submitted that the application was another bid by the Mother to “entrench her position”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_11" id="Ftn_11_1"><sup>[note: 11]</sup></a></span> over A’s care and control, and to reduce his access to A as the Mother was really unhappy with the Father for not parenting A “in the way that she wants”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_12" id="Ftn_12_1"><sup>[note: 12]</sup></a></span>. The Father objected to the psychological assessment of A because he took the view that the assessment “may cause short-term and long-term harm”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_13" id="Ftn_13_1"><sup>[note: 13]</sup></a></span>. The Father also submitted that a psychologist’s report would not be helpful because A is extremely young, and it would be difficult to ascertain any factual causes for A’s mental or emotional state.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_11"></a>11 The Father denied that he or his parents had engaged in any “negative stoking” of A, or that A’s movements were restricted in his parents’ home during access<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_14" id="Ftn_14_1"><sup>[note: 14]</sup></a></span>. In response to the Mother’s allegations that A started to behave differently due to the different treatment by the Father and his family members after divorce proceedings began, the Father pointed out that<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_15" id="Ftn_15_1"><sup>[note: 15]</sup></a></span> the Mother’s accounts of events from March 2023 onwards showed that any change in A’s behaviour may not have been due to the Father’s or his family member’s actions. The Mother claimed that A began to act up in March 2023, and in April 2023, she changed her work arrangements to pick A up earlier to spend more time with him. The Mother again adjusted her work schedule subsequently so she could spend more time with A, and A then started full-day school in mid-July 2023. She also stated that the Father’s time with A did not change much from February to June 2023.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_12"></a>12 The Father also denied that he had spoken negatively of the Mother to A, and had only said to A that “<em>papa can feed you”, “papa can shower you”</em> or “<em>you can stay at por por’s house”</em> or words to that effect. The Father highlighted that before the divorce proceedings, the Mother had been fine with A staying at his parents’ home, and with his parents and sister helping with A’s care<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_16" id="Ftn_16_1"><sup>[note: 16]</sup></a></span>.</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-1">The Law regarding examination of children</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_13"></a>13 Section 28 of the FJA 2014 provides that:</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>“(1</em>) <em>In any proceedings before a Family Court involving the custody or welfare of a child or involving a person, the Court may, on the application of any party to those proceedings or on its own motion, appoint a registered medical practitioner, psychologist, counsellor, social worker or mental health professional to examine and assess the child or person (as the case may be) for the purposes of preparing expert evidence for use in in those proceedings.”</em> </p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_14"></a>14 The accompanying subsidiary legislation is in rules 35 and 36 of the Family Justice Rules 2014 (“the FJR 2014”):</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">“<b><em>35.-</em></b>(<em>1</em>) <em>Where a child is a party to or a subject of any action of proceedings, or where any action or proceedings involve the welfare or custody of a child, a party must not, without the leave of the Court, cause the child to be examined or assessed by any registered medical practitioner, psychologist, counsellor, social worker or mental health professional for the purpose of preparing expert evidence for use in in those proceedings.</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">…</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">(<em>4</em>) <em>Where a registered medical practitioner, psychologist, counsellor, social worker or mental health professional who is not appointed by the Court pursuant to an application under paragraph (1) examines or assesses the child, no evidence arising out of the examination or assessment may be adduced without the leave of the Court.</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <b><em>36.</em></b> <em>When considering any question relating to the welfare or interest of, or relating to the custody, care and control of and access to any child, the Court may, on its own motion and with a view to obtaining a report on the welfare of the child, direct that the child be examined or assessed by a person, whether or not a public officer, who is trained or has experience in matters relating to child welfare.</em>”</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-3">Purpose of appointing a child expert</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-2">Welfare of the child</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_15"></a>15 Before ordering a child to undergo an assessment pursuant to section 28 of the FJA 2014, the assessment must be for the “<em>purposes of preparing expert evidence for use in”</em> the proceedings involving the custody or welfare of the child. Similarly, rules 35 and 36 of the FJR 2014 provide that the expert evidence must be required in determining questions relating to the welfare or interest of, or relating to the custody, care and control of and access to the child.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_16"></a>16 Section 125 of the Women’s Charter 1961 (“the Women’s Charter”) makes it clear that the <b>paramount</b> consideration in all custody, care and control proceedings is the welfare of the child. The expert evidence is just one factor to be taken into account and the judge is at liberty to depart from expert recommendations if, after considering <em>all</em> relevant factors, they are not deemed to be in the welfare of the child. Indeed, section 130 of the Women’s Charter provides that the judge is not bound to follow the advice of a person trained or experienced in child welfare, when determining questions relating to the custody, care and control of a child:</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>“130</em>. <em>When considering any question relating to the custody, or the care and control, of any child, the court is to, whenever it is practicable, have regard to the advice of a person, whether or not a public officer, who is trained or experienced in child welfare but is not bound to follow such advice.”</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Heading-2">Necessity</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_17"></a>17 The assessment of a child is not simply a fact-finding exercise but may be better described as a forensic one, in order to gain <em>expert</em> insight/evidence on issues which are relevant to the proceedings in which leave for such assessment is sought. It should therefore be clear why the expert evidence is required, and what questions it would answer, relating to the welfare or interest of, or relating to the custody, care and control of and access to the child.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_18"></a>18 In child-related proceedings in the UK, the court’s permission is similarly required before a child may be medically or psychiatrically examined or otherwise assessed for the purposes of providing expert evidence<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_17" id="Ftn_17_1"><sup>[note: 17]</sup></a></span>. The UK Children and Families Act 2014 provides that such expert evidence must be<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_18" id="Ftn_18_1"><sup>[note: 18]</sup></a></span> “<em>necessary to assist the court to resolve the proceedings justly</em>”; and includes several factors which the court should consider in deciding whether to give permission for the examination or expert evidence. Such factors include (a) the impact of the examination or assessment on the welfare of the child; (b) the issues to which the expert evidence would relate; (c) the questions which the court would require the expert to answer; (d) what other expert evidence is available; (e) whether evidence could be given by another person on the matters on which the expert would give evidence; (f) the impact on the timeline, duration and conduct of the proceedings; and (g) the cost of the expert evidence.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_19"></a>19 While the relevant legislation in the UK is worded differently from section 28 of the FJA 2014, the factors in the Children and Families Act 2014 provide a helpful reference when considering whether assessment of children should be ordered and whether expert evidence is required. In <em>L v. J</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/4764-M.xml')">[1999] SGHC 258</a>, which concerned the variation of access and allegations of abuse, the applicant produced two psychiatric reports to support her assertion that the respondent’s conduct had adversely affected the mental wellbeing of the children. The court found the children’s psychiatric reports “unnecessary” and stated that it was in the children’s interests to keep them out of the dispute between the parents as much as possible. The High Court stated that<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_19" id="Ftn_19_1"><sup>[note: 19]</sup></a></span> parties in every case should first consider whether a psychiatric assessment can truly be in the interests of the child, taking into consideration that such an assessment may take a toll on a young child’s mind and “<em>exacerbate feelings of guilt, anxiety and fear arising from the break-up of the family”.</em></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_20"></a>20 In <em>BF v. BG</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/29855-M.xml')">[2004] SGDC 115</a>, the court stated that<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_20" id="Ftn_20_1"><sup>[note: 20]</sup></a></span> the “<em>best course of action in any custody and access dispute is for it to be resolved… without the children being taken to see any counsellor or psychiatrist at all. </em><b><em>Seeing a counsellor or psychiatrist for an assessment in order for the custody and access disputes to be resolved (as opposed to seeing a counsellor or psychiatrist for therapeutic purposes) may damage the child by enhancing his awareness of the dispute between his parents, making him acutely conscious that he is the center of this dispute, and giving him the idea that his responses may have some influence in this dispute, and that he must therefore bear some responsibility in respect of its outcome</em></b><em>.”</em> [emphasis is my own]</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_21"></a>21 Thus, it should be asked whether such <em>expert</em> evidence is really necessary, or whether the information sought may be obtained through other means which are less intrusive to the child, for example, by instead conducting a judge-child interview, or by ordering a specific issues report which is conducted by a court family specialist from FJC’s Counselling and Psychological Services (“CAPS”)<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_21" id="Ftn_21_1"><sup>[note: 21]</sup></a></span>.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_22"></a>22 Any psychiatric or psychological assessment, while not involving a physical examination of the body, should nevertheless be treated as a medical intervention. Just as a parent would not hastily insist that a child undergo surgery with general anesthesia to repair a sprained ankle, similarly parents should not be so eager to offer up their children’s minds and thoughts to be dissected and picked over by a psychiatrist or psychologist. Divorcing parents should recognise that custody disputes do <b>not</b> warrant immediate psychological or psychiatric intervention for children without good reason.</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-2">Utility of assessment</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_23"></a>23 It is important to ascertain the questions to be answered by the expert evidence. If the information sought by the court can only be answered by an expert and is not merely factual, then an expert assessment may be required. In <em>BF v. BG</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/29855-M.xml')">[2004] SGDC 115</a>, the court found that the expert<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_22" id="Ftn_22_1"><sup>[note: 22]</sup></a></span>“<em>must give an explanation which supplies the understanding of the subject which the court lacks</em>”. In <em>In re C (Fam D)</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/English/77525-E.xml')">[2024] 1 WLR 1</a>, it was stated that<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_23" id="Ftn_23_1"><sup>[note: 23]</sup></a></span> an allegation of whether a parent had alienated a child against the other parent was “<em>a question of fact for the court to resolve and not a diagnosis that can or should be offered by a psychologist</em>”.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_24"></a>24 In <em>UVM v. UVN</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/23230-SSP.xml')">[2019] SGFC 56</a>, the court found that the purpose of rule 35 of the FJR 2014 was to “<em>ensure that a child is not subject to unnecessary psychological assessment which could of itself lead to issues of its own”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_24" id="Ftn_24_1"><sup>[note: 24]</sup></a></span></em>. It was noted there that the psychological assessment was conducted when the child was aged 2 years 8 months, and it was doubtful whether the answers from, or any tests conducted on, such a young child would be reliable.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_25"></a>25 At the ages of 3 to 4, children’s speech and thinking are still in the early stages of development, and their use of speech and vocabulary is extremely limited. Their cognitive skills are not fully developed, and they may not be able to express themselves clearly. A is only 4 years old now, and it would be difficult to elicit information from him which is useful for the current proceedings, even with the assistance of a trained expert. The Mother herself admitted that she did not apply for a custody evaluation report (CER) or access evaluation report (AER) because she thought that being only 4 years old, A “<em>may not be able to express himself to a CER or AER officer</em>” <span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_25" id="Ftn_25_1"><sup>[note: 25]</sup></a></span>. The Mother has not shown how a trained psychologist or therapist would be in a better position to elicit more information from A than an AER or CER officer (who is usually a trained counsellor or social worker).</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-2">Not therapeutic or aimed at fault-finding or attributing blame</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_26"></a>26 It is also useful to look at the reasons for which a psychological assessment of a child should <b><u>not</u></b> be ordered. It is clear from <em>JBM v. JBN</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/16706-SSP-M.xml')">[2014] SGDC 429</a><span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_26" id="Ftn_26_1"><sup>[note: 26]</sup></a></span> that the court-ordered psychological assessment of children is <b>not</b> meant to be therapeutic or preventive in nature. For completeness, <em>JBM v. JBN</em> pre-dated section 28 of the FJA 2014 and concerned the equivalent rule 41 of the now-repealed Women’s Charter (Matrimonial Proceedings) Rules (Cap 353, R 4) (“the MPR”). Rule 41 of the MPR is the predecessor rule to rules 35-36 of the FJR 2014; and is drafted in a similar manner:</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>“(1</em>) <em>After proceedings have been commenced under Part X of the Women’s Charter (Cap 353), a party shall not, without the leave of court, cause a child to be examined or assessed by any psychologist, psychiatrist, counsellor or other social work professional or mental health professional for the purpose of the preparation of expert evidence for use in the proceedings for ancillary relief involving the custody and welfare of the child.”</em> </p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_27"></a>27 The Mother’s application sought to have the appointed child psychologist help to “<em>address and manage any negative feelings”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_27" id="Ftn_27_1"><sup>[note: 27]</sup></a></span></em> A may have, and to “<em>ascertain the reasons for his distress”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_28" id="Ftn_28_1"><sup>[note: 28]</sup></a></span></em>. In the specific prayers of the Mother’s amended Summons, it is stated that the psychological examination of A is for<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_29" id="Ftn_29_1"><sup>[note: 29]</sup></a></span>:</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">“<em>purposes of preparing expert evidence in the form of report”, to set out the “assessment of A’s mental and emotional state”, and whether he has been “destabilised/negatively affected because of exposure to the Defendant and/or his family</em>”; and</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">“<em>recommendations for the Defendant’s access to A in light of his/her findings above</em>”.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_28"></a>28 The Mother goes on in the affidavits to state that:</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">“<em>a child psychologist needs to be appointed to assess [A] and to recommend the care arrangements moving forward since:</em></p> <p class="Judg-QuoteList-2"> <em>a</em>) <em>The Defendant does not seem to take cognizance of any of the troubling evidence before him of [A]’s distress; and</em> </p> <p class="Judg-QuoteList-2"> <em>b</em>) <em>The Defendant does not seem to take into consideration my observations of [A] despite being his primary caregiver.” <span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_30" id="Ftn_30_1"><sup>[note: 30]</sup></a></span>:</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>“I am genuinely concerned about </em> <em><u>the Defendant’s behaviour and the effect it has had on [A]</u></em> <em>. I want to highlight the following which I believe confuses and dysregularises [A]…”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_31" id="Ftn_31_1"><sup>[note: 31]</sup></a></span></em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em> <sup></sup>“a child psychologist will be able to assess [A] and </em> <em><u>give credence and legitimacy to what I’m observing with [A]’s behaviour.”</u></em> <em> <span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_32" id="Ftn_32_1"><sup>[note: 32]</sup></a></span> </em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>“It cannot be the case that nothing is done to help [A] with his dysregulation, especially when the Defendant refuses to take any responsibility or make any effort to speak with me to:</em> </p> <p class="Judg-QuoteList-2"> <em>a</em>) <em>See if there’s any truth in what I have been saying</em> </p> <p class="Judg-QuoteList-2"> <em>b</em>) <em>Obtain the necessary guidance to help [A] and manage his dysregulation</em>”<em><span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_33" id="Ftn_33_1"><sup>[note: 33]</sup></a></span></em></p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>“I find this most worrying and am concerned about [A] if the Defendant and his family continue with their negative stoking and triangulation when they have more time with him.”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_34" id="Ftn_34_1"><sup>[note: 34]</sup></a></span></em> </p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_29"></a>29 The reasons for the Mother’s application are misguided. It is clear, as explained above, that ordering a child to be assessed for the purposes of preparing expert evidence <b>cannot</b> be therapeutic in nature. If the court determines that a child in divorce proceedings requires therapeutic intervention for his/her trauma or distress, orders may be made for the child to undergo counselling or therapy, or, in serious cases, to see a psychiatrist/psychologist to undergo treatment. That is however very different from ordering a child to undergo assessment for the <em>purposes</em> of obtaining expert evidence to assist the court in answering questions that only an expert can. The former is ordered for the primary purpose of treating the child, and not for the determination of an outcome in custody proceedings.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_30"></a>30 An application for a court-ordered assessment of a child must not be used as a means of blame-attributing or fault-finding on the part of one parent. The assessment must be an objective forensic exercise necessitated for the welfare of the child. The way the Mother’s prayers in the application are phrased, what she seeks to be determined is whether A has been negatively affected “<em>because of exposure to the Defendant and/or his family</em>” and for the expert to make recommendations for the Father’s access to A “<em>in light of his/her findings above</em>”. The proposed questions to be posed to the expert are also based on the premise or assumption that A’s current emotional state is due to the Father and/or his parents<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_35" id="Ftn_35_1"><sup>[note: 35]</sup></a></span>, and are self-serving. Even if the questions posed to the expert are reframed from those sought in the Mother’s application, I am of the view that there is no need for expert evidence of this nature.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_31"></a>31 What is important here is that we deal with the issue of how we can help A through this difficult adjustment period in his life, and not subject him to a psychological <em>assessment</em> for the purposes of determining how much access the Father should have. I do not think that the exact causes of A’s alleged dysregulation can be determined by an assessment, given A’s tender age and limited ability to express himself.</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-1">My findings</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_32"></a>32 After considering all the relevant factors, I am not convinced that it is necessary or in the best interests or welfare of A to order a psychological or therapeutic assessment to be undertaken. I also do not see the utility of the expert evidence sought to be ordered in this case. While I do not doubt that A has been experiencing changes such as waking up and crying in the middle of the night, temper tantrums and a certain amount of regression with respect to his toileting habits, it is important to understand the effects of divorce and parental conflict on a child of his age.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_33"></a>33 A was only 3 years old when the divorce proceedings commenced. Children of this age are too young to fully understand and comprehend changes around them. They are extremely sensitive to changes in their routine and daily life and are unable to express themselves clearly. Young children are also very attuned to the moods and feelings of their caregivers and the people around them, and may react accordingly. If a parent whom the child is close to is anxious or upset, the child may mirror the emotions of the parent by crying or throwing tantrums.</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-3">Effects of divorce on young children</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_34"></a>34 It is not unusual that A feels the stresses and impact of the divorce and custody proceedings; and is thus acting out or exhibiting regressive behaviour. Constant exposure to conflict and stressors can severely impact a child. Even the observation of conflict between parents is a direct stressor for children, and divorce is a “<em>summary variable that represents a variety of circumstances that many children experience as stressful</em>”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_36" id="Ftn_36_1"><sup>[note: 36]</sup></a></span>.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_35"></a>35 On the Family Assist website hosted by the Ministry of Social and Family Development, it is stated that a child aged 3-4 years, who is exposed to the conflict of divorce, may become “clingier and throws more tantrums by crying, screaming, or kicking”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_37" id="Ftn_37_1"><sup>[note: 37]</sup></a></span>. In <em>BF v. BG</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/29855-M.xml')">[2004] SGDC 115</a>, the learned District Judge opined that “<em>Children in a divorce situation may feel more sensitive to the presence or absence of a parent than children in a non-divorce situation. They may need more reassurance that the non-custodial parent is a constant presence in their lives, in order to feel secure.”</em></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_36"></a>36 Parents should also be aware of the “normal” changes a young child goes through as they are growing up, through different stages of their lives. It is not uncommon for a young child to regress in development sometimes due to growing pains, stressful stages of their lives or picking up on parents’ anxiety and trauma. Young children who have been toilet-trained may occasionally wet the bed, or wake up multiple times a night where previously they used to sleep through. How can one distinguish whether this is a phase of development, or whether the child has been truly traumatised and requires professional intervention?</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_37"></a>37 One would only have to perform a web search for “child regression” to find that thousands of books, perhaps more, have been written on this topic. This is probably because regression is a normal part of child development and is usually in reaction to a stressor. A change in caregivers, in school timings, in routine, can all be potential stressors for young children who are unable to verbalise accurately what they feel at the tender age of 4. As children develop and adapt to new surroundings, some form of regression may be expected. Highly sensitive children may be even more prone to regression as they have been shown to be more reactive to changes in their environment<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_38" id="Ftn_38_1"><sup>[note: 38]</sup></a></span>.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_38"></a>38 Since the divorce proceedings were commenced in March 2023, the parties appeared to have engaged in one-upmanship behaviour where each was trying to show that they were the better parent, or spent more time with A. The Mother also admitted that around April 2023, she changed her work arrangements in order to pick A up from school earlier. While the Mother claimed that the Father had also disrupted A’s routine and schedule by picking A up early from school<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_39" id="Ftn_39_1"><sup>[note: 39]</sup></a></span>, she admitted that this was only done over a 2-week period. The Mother claimed that<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_40" id="Ftn_40_1"><sup>[note: 40]</sup></a></span> A’s dysregulation was at its “peak” between 22 July and 11 August 2023. However, the Mother herself also took A out of school early, and this was evidenced in the correspondence dated 13 July 2023 from the Father’s then-solicitors to the Mother’s then-solicitors<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_41" id="Ftn_41_1"><sup>[note: 41]</sup></a></span>. During this period, the Father also claimed that the Mother had reduced his access to A, as she was picking A up from school or his parents’ home early. The parties’ conflict culminated in an incident on 24 August 2023, in the presence of A, where there was a physical altercation and the Mother filed an application for a Personal Protection Order for herself, and a Domestic Exclusion Order<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_42" id="Ftn_42_1"><sup>[note: 42]</sup></a></span> against the Father.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_39"></a>39 It is also undisputed that A started attending full-day school from July 2023 onwards, which is yet another change to his daily routine. In short, A had experienced, in the short span of just a few months, many major changes in his daily life. After the proceedings commenced, A saw less of the Father, the parties took turns to take him out of school early, and he then started full-day school. His routine and schedule also changed in that previously, after school, he would spend time at his paternal grandparents’ home and the Father would return early to play with him before the Mother brought him back to the matrimonial home. However, the Mother then started to bring him back to the matrimonial home earlier, so that he spent less time with the Father and his paternal grandparents. A was also present during the parties’ altercation on 24 August 2023. All these changes could very well cause A to feel extremely insecure and unmoored.</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-3">The “negative stoking”</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_40"></a>40 The Mother’s evidence that the Father and his family members had been saying “negative” things about her to A consisted mainly of: (a) her observations of A saying certain things like<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_43" id="Ftn_43_1"><sup>[note: 43]</sup></a></span> “<em>does not want to go home</em>, <em>you can stay at por por’s house, papa can take care of you, papa can feed you, papa can shower you, you don’t need stupid mama, you can sleep on papa’s bed, you can sleep with aunty xxx</em>, <em>mama wants to take papa away, please don’t take my papa away, mama please return my papa</em>”; and (b) her domestic helper C’s affidavit evidence. The Mother concluded that since A was only 3 years old at the time, he would not know how to say such things and would only say them if they had been “told to him in this manner”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_44" id="Ftn_44_1"><sup>[note: 44]</sup></a></span>. </p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_41"></a>41 The Mother also relied on several transcripts of audio and video recordings, presumably to show the effects of the “negative stoking” on A.</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>“[00:47] Kid: Such a very hard day.</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[00:50] Woman: Such a very hard day, huh? Oh my goodness, what happened my dear? Why did you say had such a very hard day?</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[00:57] [Kid is crying]</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[01:04] Woman: Why did you have such a very hard day? Huh? What happened, my dear? Why did you have such a very hard day? Huh?</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[01:16] Woman: Because what?</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[01:18] Kid: (indistinguishable) a very hard day at the playground.”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_45" id="Ftn_45_1"><sup>[note: 45]</sup></a></span></em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>“[14:32] Kid: I wanna stay there now.</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[14:33] Woman: You wanna stay there now. But darling, we’re here at XXX now, dear. don’t want to go to xxx, xxx not nice..</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>…</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[14:58] Kid: I don’t want to go to xxx, xxx not nice.</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[15:01] Woman: You don’t want to go to xxx because xxx not nice.</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>…</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[17:18] Kid: I want…I don’t want to stay in this house. I wanna break, I want to spoil this house. I want the bad people stay in this house.</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[17:28] (Woman: Okay. So.)</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[17:29] Woman: You want the bad people to stay in this house. Who’s the bad people?</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[17:33] Kid: I don’t even like this.</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[17:38] Woman: Hm? You like the bad people stay in this house.</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[17:42] Kid: (indistinguishable) bad people stay in this house.</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[17:44] Woman: Okay.</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[17:44] Kid: I want my, where’s the bad people toy?</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[17:50] Woman: What’s the bad people toy, dear?</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[17:53] Kid: The bad people toy from the police station.</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[17:56] Woman: Haiya, you go and pull it, you go and throw it down the toilet, and you flushed it away. Then now you want. You flushed it down the toilet already la, silly boy.”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_46" id="Ftn_46_1"><sup>[note: 46]</sup></a></span></em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>“[06:55]</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>Child: I don't want. No. Aunty please don't go out. [inaudible] Go away, Papa.”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_47" id="Ftn_47_1"><sup>[note: 47]</sup></a></span></em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>“[01:28]</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[Male enters the house]</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[01:42]</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>Male: xxx.</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[Child run toward man and seemingly tries to hit him. Man hugs child.]</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>…</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[02:26]</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>Child: I don't want you. I don't like you, Papa. I don't like you.</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>…</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>[02:46]</em> </p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>Child: Go jail. Go. Papa.”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_48" id="Ftn_48_1"><sup>[note: 48]</sup></a></span></em> </p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_42"></a>42 I do not find that the Mother’s evidence of “negative stoking” of A by the Father and his family members is substantiated. Even where A apparently tries to hit the Father or refuses him, and I note that these video recordings were taken in October 2023, these incidents occurred at the height of the parties’ acrimony when there were access disputes and multiple applications filed by parties. Given the upheaval in A’s life at this time, it is not unexpected that he would exhibit adjustment issues and act out. The Father has also pointed out that there was also evidence of the Mother saying negative things about him to A<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_49" id="Ftn_49_1"><sup>[note: 49]</sup></a></span>, such as:</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1">“<em>You are scared to talk to your Papa is it? Why are you scared to talk to your Papa?</em>”<em>.</em></p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_43"></a>43 It is clear from the very voluminous affidavits and multiple transcripts of recordings submitted by the Mother, that she harbours strong negative feelings against the Father. A young child’s emotional state can be significantly influenced by that of his primary caregiver. It is likely that A could have picked up on the Mother’s strong emotions against the Father, thus causing him to be clingier to the Mother. It is also possible that A is emotionally affected by the Father’s frustration at the restrictions placed on his access, and acts out due to confusion. I point this out because I do not think that it is possible for anyone to definitively point to the alleged “negative stoking” of A as the determinative factor for A’s dysregulation or regression; there could be many other factors contributing to A’s emotional state. What is clear to me is that, on a balance of probabilities, the very acrimonious relationship between the parties, their conflict and constant litigation is causing stress and confusion to A, and both parties have a part to play in this.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_44"></a>44 In the circumstances, while I dismiss the prayer for A to be examined by a psychologist or therapist for the purposes of preparing expert evidence in the proceedings, I recognise that there is a need for A to receive some intervention to help him to cope with the parties’ conflict and divorce. I therefore order the parties to <b>jointly</b> engage a play therapist for A, for the purposes of helping A to deal with the proceedings and the parties’ acrimonious relationship. A report is not required as the play therapy is not required for the purposes of expert evidence.</p> <p class="Judg-Heading-3">Using video and audio recordings of children for proceedings</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_45"></a>45 In the present case, I had on 16 January 2024 ordered that neither parent or their agent is to take audio or video recordings of A with the other parent, and save for exceptional circumstances, neither party is to submit any further audio or video recordings of A in affidavit. I had explained to both counsel that especially for young children such as A, repeatedly taking video or audio recordings of the child with one parent for the purposes of proceedings is extremely detrimental to the child’s welfare. I was concerned as the Mother had, in a supplementary affidavit filed earlier, adduced almost a hundred pages of transcriptions from video and audio recordings<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_50" id="Ftn_50_1"><sup>[note: 50]</sup></a></span>. In the Mother’s Affidavit of Assets and Means, she also adduced further evidence<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_51" id="Ftn_51_1"><sup>[note: 51]</sup></a></span> of more transcriptions.</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_46"></a>46 In <em>VZZ v. WAA</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/27115-SSP.xml')">[2022] SGFC 11</a>, I had stated that in adducing evidence of multiple video and audio recordings, parties should really consider whether such evidence is really of assistance to the court, and more importantly, the impact of such recordings on the welfare of the children<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_52" id="Ftn_52_1"><sup>[note: 52]</sup></a></span>. The High Court had also stated in <em>CLB v. CLC</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/27071-SSP.xml')">[2022] SGHCF 3</a> that photographs, video and/or audio recordings <span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_53" id="Ftn_53_1"><sup>[note: 53]</sup></a></span>“<em>are not always of assistance to the court – they may capture a moment (or several moments) in time</em>” but they do not capture events or interactions leading up to, or after, that particular moment. While such evidence may be relevant, it may carry weight that is “disproportionately prejudicial” to its relevance. Repeatedly photographing or filming children is also extremely intrusive and may constantly remind a child that he/she is being “used” in court proceedings. There is also the concern<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_54" id="Ftn_54_1"><sup>[note: 54]</sup></a></span> of the possible impact of such recordings on the child in the long run: how would the child feel knowing that his/her past actions, behaviour and words were captured as evidence and used by one parent against the other? </p> <p class="Judg-Heading-1">Conclusion</p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_47"></a>47 Finally, I would remind both parents that while one parent may have interim care and control and the other parent has access, it is <span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_55" id="Ftn_55_1"><sup>[note: 55]</sup></a></span>“<em>erroneous and unhelpful to co-parenting for the parent with sole care and control to hold the view that he or she is the better or more important parent”</em>. It cannot be over-emphasised that effective joint or co-parenting is important in helping children to adjust to divorce and separation. As stated in <em>TAU v. TAT [</em>2018] 5 SLR 1089:</p> <p class="Judg-Quote-1"> <em>“While the parties take issue with each other’s parenting style, they must know that it is their divorce that has ultimately taken the greatest toll on the children. The parties’ acrimonious litigation and relationship have produced terrible effects on their children, psychologically, mentally, emotionally and even physically. The children are sandwiched between the parties. The adverse effects of the divorce on the children far outweigh the disadvantages of each parent’s parenting style.”<span class="FootnoteRef"><a href="#Ftn_56" id="Ftn_56_1"><sup>[note: 56]</sup></a></span></em> </p> <p class="Judg-1"><a id="p1_48"></a>48 A is a vulnerable young child who is bearing the brunt of the divorce proceedings and litigation, and it is the joint responsibility of both the Father and the Mother to help him through this difficult time in his life. A child needs <em>both</em> parents to be involved in his life in order to thrive, and while it may be difficult for one parent to accept the other parent’s different parenting style, I urge both parties to set aside their grievances against each other and work together towards ensuring that A is happy and healthy.</p> <hr align="left" size="1" width="33%"><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_1_1" id="Ftn_1">[note: 1]</a></sup>Paragraph 12 of the Mother’s affidavit in support of SUM 2985/2023 filed on 25 Sept 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_2_1" id="Ftn_2">[note: 2]</a></sup>Paragraph 12 of the Mother’s affidavit filed on 25 Sept 2023 and paragraph 23 of the Mother’s Written Submissions filed on 24 May 2024.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_3_1" id="Ftn_3">[note: 3]</a></sup>Paragraph 23(d)-(e) of the Mother’s Written Submissions.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_4_1" id="Ftn_4">[note: 4]</a></sup>Paragraph 24 of the Mother’s Written Submissions.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_5_1" id="Ftn_5">[note: 5]</a></sup>Paragraph 14 of the Mother’s affidavit filed on 25 Sept 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_6_1" id="Ftn_6">[note: 6]</a></sup>Paragraph 17 of the Mother’s affidavit filed on 25 Sept 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_7_1" id="Ftn_7">[note: 7]</a></sup>Paragraph 23 of the Mother’s affidavit filed on 25 Sept 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_8_1" id="Ftn_8">[note: 8]</a></sup>Paragraph 34 of the Mother’s Written Submissions.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_9_1" id="Ftn_9">[note: 9]</a></sup>Paragraph 36 of the Mother’s Written Submissions.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_10_1" id="Ftn_10">[note: 10]</a></sup>Paragraphs 36-37 of the Mother’s Written Submissions.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_11_1" id="Ftn_11">[note: 11]</a></sup>Paragraph 7 of the Father’s affidavit filed on 6 Nov 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_12_1" id="Ftn_12">[note: 12]</a></sup>Paragraph 112 of the Father’s Written Submissions filed on 21 May 2024.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_13_1" id="Ftn_13">[note: 13]</a></sup>Paragraph 10 of the Father’s affidavit filed on 6 Nov 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_14_1" id="Ftn_14">[note: 14]</a></sup>Paragraphs 46-47 of the Father’s affidavit filed on 6 Nov 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_15_1" id="Ftn_15">[note: 15]</a></sup>Paragraphs 35-39 of the Father’s affidavit filed on 6 Nov 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_16_1" id="Ftn_16">[note: 16]</a></sup>Paragraphs 78-82 of the Father’s affidavit filed on 6 Nov 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_17_1" id="Ftn_17">[note: 17]</a></sup>See section 13(3) of the Children and Families Act 2014.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_18_1" id="Ftn_18">[note: 18]</a></sup>See section 13(6)-(7) of the Children and Families Act 2014.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_19_1" id="Ftn_19">[note: 19]</a></sup>[6] of <em>L v. J</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/4764-M.xml')">[1999] SGHC 258</a>.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_20_1" id="Ftn_20">[note: 20]</a></sup>[54] of <em>BF v. BG</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/29855-M.xml')">[2004] SGDC 115</a>.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_21_1" id="Ftn_21">[note: 21]</a></sup>Court family specialists are usually trained counsellors, psychologists or social workers. CAPS is the social science arm of the FJC: see Counselling and Psychological Services (menlosecurity.com).</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_22_1" id="Ftn_22">[note: 22]</a></sup>[46] of <em>BF v. BG</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/29855-M.xml')">[2004] SGDC 115</a>.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_23_1" id="Ftn_23">[note: 23]</a></sup>[103] of <em>In re C (Fam D)</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/English/77525-E.xml')">[2024] 1 WLR 1</a>.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_24_1" id="Ftn_24">[note: 24]</a></sup>[19] of <em>UVM v. UVN</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/23230-SSP.xml')">[2019] SGFC 56</a>.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_25_1" id="Ftn_25">[note: 25]</a></sup>Paragraph 38 of the Mother’s Written Submissions.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_26_1" id="Ftn_26">[note: 26]</a></sup>See [20] of <em>JBM v. JBN</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/16706-SSP-M.xml')">[2014] SGDC 429</a>.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_27_1" id="Ftn_27">[note: 27]</a></sup>Paragraph 16 of the Mother’s affidavit filed on 4 April 2024.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_28_1" id="Ftn_28">[note: 28]</a></sup>Paragraph 32 of the Mother’s affidavit filed on 25 Sept 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_29_1" id="Ftn_29">[note: 29]</a></sup>Prayer 1 of the Mother’s amended Summons filed on 3 April 2024.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_30_1" id="Ftn_30">[note: 30]</a></sup>Paragraph 11 of the Mother’s affidavit filed on 4 April 2024.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_31_1" id="Ftn_31">[note: 31]</a></sup>Paragraph 33 of the Mother’s affidavit filed on 25 Sept 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_32_1" id="Ftn_32">[note: 32]</a></sup> Paragraph 16 of the Mother’s affidavit filed on 4 April 2024. </p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_33_1" id="Ftn_33">[note: 33]</a></sup>Paragraph 21 of the Mother’s affidavit filed on 4 April 2024.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_34_1" id="Ftn_34">[note: 34]</a></sup>Paragraph 165 of the Mother’s affidavit filed on 4 April 2024.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_35_1" id="Ftn_35">[note: 35]</a></sup>Pages 124-128 of the Mother’s affidavit filed on 4 April 2024, draft “Letter of Instruction to Expert Witness”.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_36_1" id="Ftn_36">[note: 36]</a></sup>Amato, Paul R. and Cheadle, Jacob, “Parental Divorce, Marital Conflict and Children’s Behavior Problems: A Comparison of Adopted and Biological Children” (2008) Sociology Department of atDigitalCommons@University of Nebraska – Lincoln, Faculty Publications. 91.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_37_1" id="Ftn_37">[note: 37]</a></sup>3-4 years old (Pre-Nursery and Nursery) | Family Assist (msf.gov.sg)</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_38_1" id="Ftn_38">[note: 38]</a></sup>“<em>The Highly Sensitive Child: Helping our children thrive when the world overwhelms them”</em>, Elaine N. Aron (Three Rivers Press) 2002 ed.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_39_1" id="Ftn_39">[note: 39]</a></sup>Paragraph 33(d) of the Mother’s affidavit filed on 25 Sept 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_40_1" id="Ftn_40">[note: 40]</a></sup>Paragraph 27 of the Mother’s Written Submissions.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_41_1" id="Ftn_41">[note: 41]</a></sup>Paragraph 129 of the Father’s affidavit filed on 6 Nov 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_42_1" id="Ftn_42">[note: 42]</a></sup>SS xxx/2023 is currently pending decision.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_43_1" id="Ftn_43">[note: 43]</a></sup>Paragraph 33(c) of the Mother’s affidavit filed on 25 Sept 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_44_1" id="Ftn_44">[note: 44]</a></sup><em>As above.</em></p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_45_1" id="Ftn_45">[note: 45]</a></sup>Page 343 of the Mother’s Affidavit of Assets and Means filed on 28 Nov 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_46_1" id="Ftn_46">[note: 46]</a></sup>Pages 349-351 of the Mother’s Affidavit of Assets and Means.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_47_1" id="Ftn_47">[note: 47]</a></sup>Page 12 of the Mother’s supplementary affidavit filed on 2 Oct 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_48_1" id="Ftn_48">[note: 48]</a></sup>Pages 18-20 of the Mother’s supplementary affidavit filed on 2 Oct 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_49_1" id="Ftn_49">[note: 49]</a></sup>Paragraph 90 of the Father’s affidavit filed on 6 Nov 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_50_1" id="Ftn_50">[note: 50]</a></sup>The Mother’s supplementary affidavit filed on 2 Oct 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_51_1" id="Ftn_51">[note: 51]</a></sup>Pages 343-352 of the Mother’s Affidavit of Assets and Means filed on 28 Nov 2023.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_52_1" id="Ftn_52">[note: 52]</a></sup>[18] of <em>VZZ v. WAA</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/27115-SSP.xml')">[2022] SGFC 11</a>.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_53_1" id="Ftn_53">[note: 53]</a></sup>[41] of <em>CLB v. CLC</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/Judgment/27071-SSP.xml')">[2022] SGHCF 3</a>.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_54_1" id="Ftn_54">[note: 54]</a></sup><em>As above.</em></p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_55_1" id="Ftn_55">[note: 55]</a></sup>[20] of <em>VJM v. VJL</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/SLR/27088-SSP.xml')">[2021] 5 SLR 1233</a>.</p><p class="Footnote"><sup><a href="#Ftn_56_1" id="Ftn_56">[note: 56]</a></sup>[34] of <em>TAU v. TAT</em> <a class="pagecontent" href="javascript:viewPageContent('/SLR/22624-SSP.xml')">[2018] 5 SLR 1089</a>.</p></div></content></root> | 1782 |
Links from other tables
- 3 rows from _item in fc_judgments_version