A father going through separation proceedings claims he is being deprived of his right to spend time with his 10-year-old son because the access hours granted by the court clash with his working schedule.

The man, a nurse who works on a day-in, day-out shift roster, was last May granted access to his son by the Family Court on Wednesdays and Saturdays. However, he says his work schedule forces him to miss one of the two appointments with his son every week.

Since the ruling, he has filed two applications asking the court to change the days set and to increase the hours. His requests have, however, been turned down, even though the couple have shared custody of their son and 17-year-old daughter.

The father, who asked for anonymity to protect the identity of his children, feels the court system unfairly favours women when allocating custody access. “I made some calculations of my own. With the access given by the court I need to take 418 hours of leave a year when I am entitled to 208 hours by my employer.

“Besides, I’m only enjoying my son for seven per cent of the time while she (the wife) has him for 93 per cent, although I am maintaining both children and her, we have joint custody and it was she who requested a separation,” he said.

The couple had been married for about 18 years when the wife filed for separation and, following mediation, the separation proceedings started in October. The couple continued living in the matrimonial home with the two children and agreed that each parent would have the boy on alternate days.

In February, the Family Court issued a ruling granting them joint custody but did not list access hours, given the fact that the couple still lived together. But, as outlined in court documents seen by The Times, in April the mother left the house and took the son with her. The 17-year-old daughter remained with the father and the mother never filed to have access to her.

The father filed an application to see his son. The court appointed a children’s advocate but the report remained sealed to both parties. Meanwhile, the father did not see his son for about two months.

On May 5, the Family Court issued a temporary ruling saying the father could see the boy for three hours on Wednesdays and eight hours on Saturdays. Then, on May 20, the court decreed the couple should have joint custody of the son and confirmed the limited access hours for the father as listed in the May 5 ruling.

The court also ruled that the daughter could see her brother whenever she wanted. However, the father said, the mother was not allowing the girl free access to her brother. “When the boy was still at school she would go and visit him during his break but in summer she’s barely seeing him,” he said.

In the applications he filed to have the access hours changed and extended, the father also submitted his work rosters and leave applic-ations that had been refused. He also asked to be able to keep the boy overnight and although his wife originally did not object, the court turned down the applications.

“As a result of all this, the boy is being deprived of seeing his sister and father...

“My parents are old and they are not being allowed to enjoy the company of their grandson. I love my son and want to be in his life. That is all I’m asking,” the father said.

This is not the first time a father complains that the system favours mothers when it comes to allocating custody access. The story of the father of two small children who was facing a similar problem featured in The Times last July.