[Dr Travis Gee]

(18-Aug-2015, 07:39 AM)_robert Wrote: Hi Dr Gee. I am now worried, having read this thread on Family Report writers, that the Family Report writer who was chosen by the ICL (quite enthusiastically I might add), will have the same ideology as the ICL. I have a female ICL who has interviewed my ex-wife and our children, but has not asked to interview me. I called her and said that I was available for an interview, and she said that this was not necessary. When I asked why not, she said that she has got all the details she needs from my ex-wife. Now, what is the point of going to Court if you simply rely on what one person says? How do you claim to represent the children, and refuse to interview one of the parents? I thought what she was doing was unethical, but apparently it happens all the time. I accept that I am stuck with the ICL, but can I now demand that I have a say in the selection of the psychologist?

 

Hi Robert,  

You are right to raise the concern about bias. The correct language would be "apprehended bias," which is the appearance of favoritism, rather blatant in this particular case, and very suggestive of *actual* bias.  I hope you have the refusal to interview you in writing (eg., email) from the ICL. If you don't then I suggest you ask again, this time in writing, and put a 'return receipt' on your message so you know if/when the ICL read it, and can thus prove she did even if she claims she didn't later on.  As to what you ask for in court, you can always ask for anything, it's up to the judge to decide if it will be allowed.  Check with your lawyer (if self-representing, the duty solicitor) about how to word the request if at all possible.  

You also have to think strategically, and that is where you are best informed by a solicitor or barrister who knows the judge in your matter. Is it best to raise bias early and force the ICL's hand (or maybe get her replaced), or let the evidence accumulate so that the whole mess wil be apparent at trial? These are difficult issues, and often hamstring self-represented litigants who are going in 'cold.'  Don't forget, the ICL almost certainly *knows* the judge, and may (through other cases of which you are unaware) be quite confident that she can get away with it.  

Regards,

Dr. Travis Gee add you reply here...