Mary Ann P. v. William R.P., Jr., 22959
| Decision Date | 19 July 1996 |
| Docket Number | No. 22959,22959 |
| Citation | 475 S.E.2d 1,197 W.Va. 1 |
| Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
| Parties | MARY ANN P., Plaintiff Below, Appellant, v. WILLIAM R.P., Jr., Defendant Below, Appellee. |
Syllabus by the Court
1. Syl. pt. 1, Burnside v. Burnside, 194 W.Va. 263, 460 S.E.2d 264 (1995).
2. "Children are often physically assaulted or witness violence against one of their parents and may suffer deep and lasting emotional harm from victimization and from exposure to family violence; consequently, a family law master should take domestic violence into account[.]" Syl. pt. 1, in part, Henry v. Johnson, 192 W.Va. 82, 450 S.E.2d 779 (1994).
3. Syl. pt. 3, Mary D. v. Watt, 190 W.Va. 341, 438 S.E.2d 521 (1992).
Mary M. Downey, Charleston, for Appellant.
Wayne King, Clay, for Appellee.
Mary Ann P., 1 the plaintiff below and appellant herein, appeals an order of the Circuit Court of Kanawha County which granted William R.P., Jr., the defendant below and appellee herein, supervised visitation with the couple's two sons. The plaintiff argues the circuit court erred when it failed to find credible evidence of sexual abuse and failed to appropriately consider the evidence that the defendant physically and mentally abused her. After reviewing the record, we find that even if no sexual abuse occurred in this case, the circuit court erred when it failed to take into consideration the defendant's abusive behavior toward the plaintiff and the emotional impact that abuse had on their children. The weight of the evidence supports our conclusion to remand this case to the circuit court with directions to suspend supervised visitation until the defendant undergoes psychological treatment for his behavior. The circuit court also should consider whether the children and the defendant should undergo therapy together to work through their problems before resumption of visitation occurs.
The parties were married in March of 1985 and two sons were born of the marriage. William Raphael P. III (Billy) was born in May of 1985 and Mark Patrick P. was born in July of 1986. The record reflects that from The plaintiff received custody of the children as she was determined to be the primary caretaker. The numerous proceedings held before the family law master focused primarily on the defendant's visitation rights which are at issue in this appeal.
[197 W.Va. 3] the beginning the couple had a troubled marriage. The defendant was physically and mentally abusive to the plaintiff throughout their marriage. In an attempt to improve their relationship, the parties underwent marriage counseling with Chuck Rhodes, a family counselor and therapist. The parties were unable to work through their problems and they separated. The plaintiff filed for divorce in 1988.
At the March 3, 1992, hearing before the family law master, the plaintiff detailed the physical and mental abuse that occurred during the marriage. She testified the defendant did not want her to have either of the boys and he urged her to have abortions both times she became pregnant. He showed little interest in the children when they were infants and openly expressed his disappointment that he had boys instead of girls. The defendant was not at home very much during the early part of the marriage because of his business trips. The plaintiff testified that when she was pregnant with Mark she learned the defendant was having an affair.
The plaintiff also testified the defendant had a violent temper and would yell and curse at her in front of the children. The defendant cursed at her so frequently that even when the boys were just learning to talk they said explicit curse words. During arguments, the defendant punched and kicked the plaintiff. He threatened her with a knife. He choked her around the neck so hard she had to wear a scarf to hide the bruises. He drug her across the floor by her hair in front of the children. The plaintiff testified that when the children would witness this abuse they would scream and cry and try to hide. The defendant would hit and kick the children's toys and broke toys in front of the children in fits of rage. The plaintiff testified that "[t]he trauma and crying that these children have seen in their life is unreal."
During one argument, the defendant locked the plaintiff out of the house and kept the children inside. She testified she was afraid for the children's safety and put her fist through a window to enter the house. She severed three nerves in her arm and underwent surgery to correct the damage.
Billy and Mark have severe allergy problems and needed frequent medical treatments for ear infections, allergies, and colds when they were infants. The plaintiff testified the defendant was not sympathetic to the children's medical needs and, on certain occasions, blocked her attempts to get medical attention for the boys because he believed the plaintiff was overreacting to the children's symptoms. The defendant continued to smoke in front of the boys even though it caused them respiratory problems.
Despite the foregoing, the plaintiff maintains she encouraged the children's visitation with their father following the separation. However, she stated he exercised his visitation rights sporadically. In July of 1991, following an overnight visitation with his father, Billy informed his mother that the defendant touched him in an inappropriate manner. Billy told his mother that his father touched his penis, his father wanted Billy to touch his father's penis, and his father kissed his penis. The plaintiff believed her son and arranged for him to be counseled by Mr. Rhodes. Mr. Rhodes suggested the plaintiff take Billy to Pam Rockwell, a counselor with the sexual assault program at Family Services of Kanawha Valley.
After interviewing Billy, it was Ms. Rockwell's conclusion that Billy had been sexually abused by his father. Billy was uncomfortable talking about the incident. However, he did whisper in his mother's ear and asked her to tell Ms. Rockwell that when going to the bathroom his dad touched his penis and kissed his penis. Based upon this information, Ms. Rockwell recommended no contact whatsoever with the defendant.
Dr. John MacCallum, a psychiatrist, was first contacted by the defendant because the defendant was seeking evidence that he had done nothing inappropriate with his children. Dr. MacCallum explained he would not advocate the defendant's position, but he would Dr. MacCallum was later asked by the family law master to interview the children and the plaintiff. Following those interviews, Dr. MacCallum affirmed his conclusion that no sexual abuse occurred. Billy told him that his father touched his penis once when they were going to the bathroom. Dr. MacCallum was highly critical of the interview techniques utilized by Ms. Rockwell as shown on a videotape she prepared of her interview. He claimed her questions were unduly suggestive. Based on these findings, Dr. MacCallum recommended the defendant should have no restrictions placed on his visitation rights.
[197 W.Va. 4] interview him and render an opinion in the case. After interviewing the defendant, it was Dr. MacCallum's opinion that no sexual abuse or inappropriate sexual contact occurred. He stated the contact Billy spoke of was innocent toilet training touching that was misinterpreted by Billy.
During Dr. MacCallum's interview with the plaintiff, she spoke of several incidences of physical abuse she endured during the marriage. Furthermore, the plaintiff documented some rather deviant sexual behavior and/or interests of the defendant. Dr. MacCallum stated he had no reason to question the veracity of the plaintiff's statements. He also testified the boys clearly dislike their father. However, during Dr. MacCallum's deposition, he stated that for purposes of his evaluation he separated the issue of sexual abuse from questions of the general safety and well-being of the children under the circumstances of visitation.
The plaintiff testified Billy and Mark no longer want to have any contact with their father. It upsets them greatly when they have to visit with him. When the defendant comes to the house to visit, the boys frequently run and hide and have to be coaxed to come out to speak with their father. The plaintiff testified the visitations have had a profound effect on Billy. He has nightmares and acts out aggressively toward other children. Billy builds traps and barricades and frequently checks to see the doors and windows are locked because he is afraid the defendant will enter the house.
Several witnesses who accompanied the defendant on supervised visits testified regarding the boys' and the defendant's behavior. While the evidence is somewhat conflicting, it appears the boys do not want...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. George B. W. v. Kaufman
...court abused its discretion 190 W.Va. at 342-43, 438 S.E.2d at 522-23 (emphasis supplied). We recognized in Mary Ann P. v. William R.P., Jr., 197 W.Va. 1, 475 S.E.2d 1 (1996), that under some circumstances visitation could be totally suspended, at least until the family underwent therapy. I......
-
State, ex rel. Dept. of Health v. Ruckman
...to acts of abuse and neglect. See e.g., Alireza D. v. Kim Elaine W., 198 W.Va. 178, 479 S.E.2d 688 (1996); Mary Ann P. v. William R. P., Jr., 197 W.Va. 1, 475 S.E.2d 1 (1996); Belinda Kay C. v. John David C., 193 W.Va. 196, 455 S.E.2d 565 (1995). Supervision and/or further restrictions to v......
-
Alireza D. v. Kim Elaine W.
...would be beneficial in helping the children cope with the appellee's conduct. As this Court recently stated in Mary Ann P. v. William R. P., 197 W.Va. 1, 8, 475 S.E.2d 1, 8 (1996): When family problems involving children are of sufficient depth and duration that professional counseling is n......
-
Porter v. Bego, 23473
...subject to a de novo review." Syllabus Point 1, Burnside v. Burnside, 194 W.Va. 263, 460 S.E.2d 264 (1995)." Mary Ann P. v. William R.P., Jr., 197 W.Va. 1, 475 S.E.2d 1 (1996). 2. When there has been a judicial determination of paternity, the paternal parent is required to support his child......