Can I change a district judge?

[lonedad]

I have recently applied for residency of my daughter. My ex partner and daughters mother has counter claimed. The reason why I have our daughter is because her mother is mentally ill. With all the evidence we have, the judge said that she wanted reports from social services, doctors and health visitors. She also wanted a reply from my ex to my claims. The judge then said to me to prepare myself to lose my daughter. She said that the courts favour mothers and that unless my ex's mental health is proved to be sevre and ongoing, I will lose her. I think this is wrong. I also beleive that the judge favoured my ex. Can I apply to have the district judge changed as I beleive this one is biased?

[themas]

I don't know the answer to your question (you should take this up with the Court authorities locally or with the Ministry of Justice, or ask your solicitor if you have one) but the Courts in these cases have a statutory duty to do what they consider to be in the best interests of the child. The judge clearly has to have as full a picture as possible (from both parties) before reaching a decision & it seems from what you say that the reports etc. she has asked for are to enable her to do this. However, it does not seem to me to be right for her to have told you what you say she did - particularly as it seems that at this stage sge does not have full information about the situation.

These cases are always very complex. If you do not have legal representation you would be well advised to get it now.

[fredpuli47]

It's not unusual for judges to say something along those lines. They are trying to be helpful. . It sounds as though you are not legally represented. I say that because statements like that are normally made by the lawyer to his or her client, as part of their professional duty to the client . Like doctors , lawyers have to be frank when they advise clients.If the judge sees you have a lawyer present then such judicial comment is unnecessary.

Of course, it's possible that you have the words in a far worse light than they deserve.I do empathise with you but have to say that it is extremely common for the person hearing whatever the judge says to be so emotionally involved that they interpret anything and everything as the plainest indication of bias or hostility. A lawyer would get rich(er) very easily if he had �1 for every time the client said " The judge is against me" !

I can't think that in these circumstances, the judge would debar herself from sitting again on your case. What's more, nobody else will debar the judge and order a change. (If it were that easy then, for the reason I've just given, people would be changing their judge almost every time there was a hearing )

[lonedad]

I have a solicitor and he is as shocked as I am that this Judge said what she did. The judge also never allowed me a say and allowed my ex partner 30 minutes of lying through her teeth.

[fredpuli47]

In that case the judge was unwise to be saying anything about the tendency one way or the other: it's as though you didn't have the solicitor there to tell you.Ask your solicitor to be frank with you.It may be the case that the tendency in courts is for the court to place the child of your child's age with its mother. You don't say how old your child is. If the child is very young then, of course, courts normally place the child with the mother.That's always been the case: it's a natural presumption even when the mother is some way less than perfect.BUT the interests of the child are always paramount and therefore much depends on what the reports say.It is early days yet.

[lonedad]

I dont see why a child is automatically put with the mother. It seems an outdated and predjudised rule in this day and age. My daughter is 4 months old, I have raised her since she was 2 and a half weeks while her mother ran around with knives and came and went when she pleased

[fredpuli47]

Not automatically, just presumptively. Other things being equal, it is natural for a very young child to be with its mother at home with her, so that's where the court would normally place the child.That's generally in the best interests of the child.

But 'circumstances alter cases'. As I say, the court is bound , by law, to decide what is best in the interests of the child. The interest of the child is paramount: it's not a matter of automatically doing anything. Your case may be one where the court will think that being with her mother is not in the best interests of your daughter.

[Pippa68]

Good luck, lonedad.

Mr Pippas ex wife was a drunk, and the courts were told she was constantly drunk in charge of a minor (as backed by social services). She left her daughter with an alcoholic boyfriend while she went out to get more booze and was arrested for drink driving.

She passed out drunk and left the front door open ~ her 2 year old went out in the road.

The court awarded her residency, and we have fought for every day of contact we have had ever since.