A 17-year-old boy is contesting a court sentence that landed his mother in jail because she failed to abide by a custody contract obliging him to visit his father eight hours a week.

My mother never stopped me from seeing my father; I should be able to visit my father of my own free will

“My mother is innocent and she shouldn’t be in prison. I’m appealing to the courts to give children, especially in separation cases, a louder voice,” he told The Sunday Times one week after the appeals court decision.

Ten days ago the appeals court confirmed a magistrate’s decision to sentence the boy’s 57-year-old mother to three months imprisonment for refusing to grant her ex-husband access to their son.

But Duncan*, who has just started university and is not being named to protect his identity, insists his mother’s only crime is not insisting he visit his father when he preferred to stay home and study.

“My mother never stopped me from seeing my father; I should be able to visit my father of my own free will and in my own time, not be forced to spend four hours on Friday and another four on Sunday,” he said.

On the cusp of adulthood, Duncan is looking forward to turning 18 next month to unshackle the chains of a contract he never had a say in and earn the freedom to visit his father on his own terms.

A timid boy who has always felt torn between the two sides and was eager to keep the peace, Duncan felt he had to share his story in the hope that nobody else would have to face his predicament.

He speaks in a gentle voice, and even though he is clearly upset that his father chose to pursue charges that landed his mother in jail he never allows himself to be blinded by anger.

Rather than hatred, there is sadness at the way things ended up. “It is degrading to have my mother in prison. Though I know injustices happen, I associate prison with drugs and physical violence – I never thought we’d reach such extremes,” he said.

His parents, who are both teachers, had been married for about three years when he was conceived. However, when his mother was just two months pregnant, Duncan’s father left the family home.

Although the couple separated in 1994, separation proceedings were only finalised in 2007. The mother had custody of the boy, while the father was granted access on certain days.

As a young boy Duncan enjoyed spending time with his father. They would go cycling or on their boat, and he had a freer rein which he found appealing. He was also content to have a father figure in his life.

However, as he entered his teens his social life and studies started to take on more significance and the custody hours imposed by the court took away from the fun; at times he wanted to run away from everything.

“My relationship with my father became a bit strained. When I visit I’m there not out of my own volition but because I’m forced,” he said. Throughout Sixth Form, when the pressure of exams loomed, Duncan often skipped his weekly commitments, which further strained relations between his parents.

“My father says he wanted to catch up on the years he lost with me, but if he really wanted to do this he should never have left,” he said.

“My father would tell me that if I didn’t visit him, he would go to the police. It made me lose respect for him, even though he’s my father and I don’t enjoy saying such things about him,” he said, lowering his gaze as he added that he had never confronted him about why he would take matters so far.

Last year things got out of hand and after a series of consecutive failed visits, his father went to the police and the case ended up in court. His mother was sentenced to three months in prison, which was confirmed in the appeals court on September 27.

The appeals court recognised that the separation contract between the couple was not functioning properly and the mother had failed to send her son to her ex-husband on various occasions. The father claimed he had not seen his son for six months.

Her explanation to this, the court said, was that the father often “exaggeratedly prolonged” the time he spent with his son and there were times when the boy himself did not want to visit.

“The court considers this to be a weak reason and cannot exclude that she was doing this to spite her husband, making any excuse to avoid sending her son to his father. Certainly, the parents’ character did not alleviate the problem...”

The court concluded that the parents “showed great immaturity towards their son by letting their emotions and their personal interests trump the interests of their son. It remains to be seen what effect this irresponsible behaviour of the parents will have on their son in the future.”

The appeals court said it did not usually disturb the original sentence especially if it was within the parameters of the law.

Living at home with his aunt, Duncan still cannot understand how things went so horribly wrong. He is sad that his mother is behind bars, missing out on milestones in his life – starting university last week, and turning 18 next month.

“My father should have spared a thought for me before pressing charges. She’s my mother at the end of the day.”

* Names have been changed to protect the person’s identity.