Hate Monopoly? Well then, you obviously must be a child molester

Yet the reasons given in reports as to why a father's access should be restricted or denied often seem arbitrary, to put it mildly. One applicant had cancer which, said the report, 'could be upsetting' for his child. A man might be said to 'lack sensitivity' or be 'over-enthusiastic' or even 'father-centred' - for which tendency one man was denied all contact with his child. In one case, it was noted disapprovingly that a father had told his son he preferred Scrabble to Monopoly and thought hyacinths smelled sweeter than roses. This was seen as 'taking the lead in contact' - a form of emotional abuse, according to the reporting officer. One father wore a black shirt which 'could be intimidating'. Another stood accused of 'losing his temper with customs officials in a French airport in the 1990s' and was therefore said to have an 'unfortunate disposition'. One report could find no reason why a child should not see more of his father but went on to conclude: 'Nonetheless, the mother must be concerned about something.' The father's contact was limited to two hours every six weeks.

- Excerpted from "It's never father's day" in The Observer (emphasis mine)

... or for a little more:

I know of reports that recommended cessation of contact because the fathers in question "didn't act right" during a game of snakes and ladders, because their children fell asleep in the car on the way home from a contact visit, because they made lumpy mashed potatoes for tea, or because they were likely to upset their children on account of suffering from cancer.

- Excerpted from "A secret world of suffering children" in The Independent