A psychologist has testified that a Manitoba man at the centre of a child custody battle has kicked a drug habit and could be a motivated father.

The custody hearing centres on a boy and girl who were seized by child welfare workers after one went to school with racist drawings on her skin.

The children were taken from their home in March 2008 when the girl, now eight years old, went to school with a swastika drawn on her arm. Her teacher scrubbed it off in the afternoon, but the girl showed up again the next day with another one, along with other white supremacist symbols drawn on her body.

Family services caseworkers were alerted and went to the family's apartment, where they found neo-Nazi symbols and flags, and took custody of the couple's two-year-old son. CFS officials picked up the daughter at her school.

The man is the stepfather to the girl and biological father to the boy.

Manitoba Child and Family Services (CFS) is seeking permanent custody of the children, alleging the parents taught them to hate minorities, neglected them and abused drugs and alcohol.

Skinhead, not white supremacist, man testifies

On Monday, the man testified that he's not a white supremacist but did describe himself as a skinhead. He also told the court that he is against people of different races having children together.

The man also admitted he used derogatory words to describe black people, taught the girl to believe in white pride, and told the girl that non-whites should go back to their own countries.

The psychologist is appearing in defence of the father in this case as he's treated him in the past, court was told. He became involved after the man was charged in connection with domestic violence.

During five sessions spanning about a year, the man credited his white pride for helping kick his heroin habit, and he has started to address his problem drinking, the psychologist testified.

Factors in father's favour: psychologist

The doctor said, in his opinion, there are a number of potential positive factors working in the dad's favour should he get his kids back. Those include his willingness to allow family and social workers to continue working with the family and his record of steady employment since the children were seized more than a year ago.

But the lawyer for CFS accused the psychologist of coming to flawed conclusions because he relied only on what the father told him. Under cross-examination, the psychologist testified that he never talked to the father's friends or employers to see whether his lifestyle was indeed improving.

None of the people testifying at the hearing can be identified in order to protect the identities of the children.

With files from The Canadian Press