[Dr Travis Gee]

(26-Sep-2016, 09:20 AM)Brandon Wrote: The Judge did ask me whether I objected to this report writer, to which I said ‘No’, but now I regret agreeing to it.

Given the ICL’s behaviour, I am very worried that the Report Writer was chosen because of her reputation, but I have not been able to find out much information on her one way or the other so far.

Can I get the selection of report writer reviewed, given my concerns? Can I nominate another report writer, who I believe would be more objective?

I am now very anxious that I have been set up by an ICL who has clearly demonstrated who she sympathises with in our child custody dispute.

At your next hearing you can ask for whatever you wish, however, whether you are successful will depend on your legal arguments. I'm not a lawyer, however, my gut feeling is that you would have to point out first the apprehended bias of the ICL, and second, the failure of said ICL to offer choices in the matter for you to research. This rather feels like 'denial of natural justice,' especially since you are self-represented and weren't familiar with the process. 

Part of the problem is that the ICL has the power to hand the report writer only your ex's paperwork, and none of yours. I've seen it done. You can raise points from your affidavit in the interview, and the report writer won't know what you're talking about. Report writers are *supposed to* make "all relevant inquiries" but there's wiggle room, if they feel they don't need to look further after finding your ex "credible," they may not.

That's why if you don't get another kick at the can in choosing, you can still ask the judge to allow an independent second opinion paper funded by yourself to be permitted in anticipation of a biased report from the ICL's 'pet reporter,' which *should* have the effect of making such a second opinion unnecessary, since the reporter knows they will be subjected to outside scrutiny if they are anything less than impartial. You can make that case to the judge as well, in the spirit of avoiding unnecessary proceedings.

Necessarily, some formal legal input would be advisable, even if you only pay for a half-hour consultation to go over these points without 'retaining' the solicitor formally. That also allows you to say quite truthfully that you sought legal advice.

All the best,

Dr. Travis Gee
Psychologist.