*The matter came before the Family Law Court.
A GRIEVING father has rejected a judge’s proposal that the ashes of his late young little child be split between himself and his estranged partner, the child’s mother.
At the Family Law Court, Judge Alec Gabbett said that the issue over the couple’s late child’s ashes was causing difficulty for both of them.
The ex-couple no longer live together and the mother has the ashes of the child at her home.
The pre-school going child died following a battle with a terminal illness.
The child’s mother, represented by solicitor, Shiofra Hassett, told the court that her ex-partner “keeps saying he will move the ashes and take them away from me – all the time”.
Judge Gabbett asked, “Is it possible for the two of ye to split the ashes?”
In response, the father said that he disagreed with that proposal.
Judge Gabbett said, “Okay, that is fine, let’s park that”. He then asked, “Is it possible that ye could inter the ashes somewhere and by agreement put them into a grave or somewhere ye could both visit? Is that in the plan?”
Judge Gabbett said, “Ye need to finalise where your child is going to rest. This is a significant stressor – this needs to be resolved”.
During the highly charged hearing into a Safety Order application by the mother against her ex-partner, both parents wept at different times.
The man retained a key to his ex-partner’s home which was causing the woman stress.
Judge Gabbett asked, “Is it possible that you give the key of the house back if you get some items belonging to your child, though not the ashes as ye would try to reach agreement by mediation of where the child would rest ultimately”.
He said, “Otherwise I have to bar you from the house. I want you to stay away from the house because being in the house is no longer appropriate”.
Judge Gabbett said, “Ideally this lady would give you some memorabilia for your child – that is the best I can do”.
The woman secured a domestic violence Protection Order against her ex-partner on an ex-parte basis in court last November where she alleged that he had been violent, aggressive and controlling towards her.
Now, the case was in court again where the woman was applying for a Safety Order and the man said that he would consent to a two year Safety Order that saved his ex-partner having to go into evidence.
The man did say that his ex-partner had told a lot of lies to the court.
Judge Gabbett told the man that he already has two alleged breaches of the Protection Order.
Judge Gabbett told the man that the Safety Order stops him from using violence or threatening violence or putting in fear the applicant. Judge Gabbett said that it also stops him from watching and besetting his ex-partner’s home.
Judge Gabbett told the man that if he breaches the Safety Order, it is a criminal offence where he faces a fine up to €4,000 and or up to 12 months in prison
In response, the man asked if there was any chance he got some of his child’s stuff back.
Judge Gabbett said, “I have asked for that to happen. At a human level that should happen”.
Ms Hassett said that the man’s solicitor, Stiofan Fitzpatrick should write to her as to what the man wants “and we can organise”.
