Child arrangement court order

Statistics: take your pick: family anihilation/spouce murder risks go up when an abused partner tries to leave. The defence almost always cites the effects the split was having on the abuser's mental health/finances/physical health

Children have the fundamental human right to peaceful enjoyment of their home life.

Court orders times 4 dragging them round to houses cause "grandparents rights" would directly contradict their human rights to peaceful enjoyment of their home

No such thing as too sensitive, sensitive is a beautiful thing so we need to love them for their sensitive selves and take a little extra care to communicate well

What adult would not be stressed by being legally forced to sleep away from home four times a month in 4 different houses? Or to spend every weekend in contact centres? Thus having no day off at home for YEARS!
But some seek to make it law to force children to do so

I haven't commented on whether estrangement is abuse or not. I personally dont think it is but I accept others may not agree.

Sorry ...should have said that my comment above, and copied below, was in reply to Notanan

My point was that people have emotional/physical responses to lots of different traumatic experiences, divorce included as you say....not necessarily because they have been controlling or abusive but because the experience is traumatic for them. Where can I find the statistics on controlling/abusive people having a huge physical, mental, emotional response when someone walks away, as opposed to people generally having a physical , mental emotional response to a traumatic event ?

Notanan Statistics: take your pick: family anihilation/spoucs murder risks go up when an abused partner tries to leave. The defence almost always cites the effects the split was having on the abuser's mental health/finances/physical health

Ok ...but that in no way links to any estranged person who has an emotional/mental/physical response to estrangement, being abusive/controlling! The point is ...estrangement may happen because a party is controlling/abusive and that person may have a response when the other person walks away. But the fact that either party has an emotional/physical/mental response does not necessarily correlate with either of them having been "controlling/abusive!" Mental/physical/emotional response to a traumatic event is human and pretty normal!!

So I still don't really get the point that you were trying to make¬!

Notanan, looking this conversation over, I see that your post about huge reactions comes right between your two posts about divorce. However, the "huge reaction" post does not mention divorce. So I can easily see where Smileless related it, instead, to her post about Mr. S' anxiety attack.

About GPs who are CO as the result of divorce - I agree that they should not be denied visitation w/ their GC just b/c the parents are no longer together. Nor should the children be denied contact w/ their GPs for that reason. But the GPs who complain of lack of contact usually are from the non-custodial parent's side. So that gets back to the question of who is responsible for ensuring the GP/GC contact, if anyone, their own AC or the custodial parent?

Also, from what Ive seen, there are some variations to this situation. In some cases, if one of the parents begins a new relationship or gets married, the GPs on the other parent's side of the family try to drive a wedge between the child and the new spouse/SO. Or they don't like the new spouse's/SO's childcare practices and make an issue out of it. Or for some other reasons, there are tensions between the new spouse/SO and the GPs. In those cases, some time apart might be make some sense.

The same is true when one parent has, sadly, died, and the remaining parent tries to push his relatives away. IMO, it can be cruel to intensify the loss by separating the GPs, say, from the GC and vice versa. Then again, some GPs try so hard to keep the memory of the deceased parent alive in the child's mind that they interfere w/ the living parent's efforts to move on and begin a new life. IMO, there is no one size fits all answer to these situations.

notanan …...Do you think you can give context and reliable information to explain your post on

03.09 - 22.52....It is common for abusive controlling people to have a huge response when the person they abuse walks away (para phrased)

It has been asked several times by Madgran and others, as it's important for all of us to understand what you seem to know.
Not clarifying or answering the question just puts your position in doubt.

Do you see that no where in life can someone just say something and expect it to go unqualified?

No matter how much you personally and emotionally want a situation to be the way you describe it, it's only a story in your head without facts and stats.

Hearsay and gossip doesn't cut it I'm afraid.

Of course you're free to talk about anything you like.
Including what you've heard from friends and neighbours, but to convert that into pseudoscience, is disingenuous!

Silly comments referencing Smileless post giving info on the Broken Bonds GP action day at Westminster, made you look really unkind and uneducated.
Quote looks like they've been googling US legal jargon by mistake... Ooops!
She told you it was at Westminster, that's the UK.

Coupled with all the overblown, grandiose exaggerated examples of how GP will destroy their own GC and AC lives are total fantasy. ie:
^court orders x 4 dragging gc to 4 different houses.
Forcing them to spend the night etc etc., and so it goes.

Nothing of the sort has been tabled.
Just contact between GP and GC. Simply contact.
Not weekends, or overnights, just contact.

Can you not envisage a less nightmare-ish and more normal situation?

20mins after school. A phone call. A birthday or Christmas card and prezzy. These are examples of the more likely types of contact.

Why you find it difficult to accept that some GP's have been subjected to unfair treatment is beyond me?

At least the legal system is waking up to the necessity to first look at, then formulate legislation to allow access where it is at all possible.

Don't be afraid of this, as from what I've read the P's and the GC will always be the guiding influence that decides the outcome.
It is likely to weed out those who do not take the childs needs into account, whether they be parents or gparents.
Surely that's a good thing.

*Nothing of the sort has been tabled.
Just contact between GP and GC. Simply contact.*
Not weekends, or overnights, just contact

Not "just contact", court ordered contact. And that is what court ordered contact mean.

Why you find it difficult to accept that some GP's have been subjected to unfair treatment is beyond me?
Repeatedly have! It still doesnt make court orders less awful on children.

*Coupled with all the overblown, grandiose exaggerated examples of how GP will destroy their own GC and AC lives are total fantasy. ie:
^court orders x 4 dragging gc to 4 different houses.*
GP who want their rights to forced contacts enshrined in law must surely realise that it wouldnt just apply to them! They may not be the childs only living GP!

Silly comments referencing Smileless post giving info on the Broken Bonds GP action day at Westminster, made you look really unkind and uneducated.
Quote looks like they've been googling US legal jargon by mistake... Ooops!
She told you it was at Westminster, that's the UK.
Im sorry but thats your comprehension lacking not mine. I know where it is, but what they are asking for doesnt work within UK law.

notanan …...Do you think you can give context and reliable information to explain your post on see any domestic volence charity, safeguarding organisation or case histories. Its not a radical statement.

Notanan, looking this conversation over, I see that your post about huge reactions comes right between your two posts about divorce. However, the "huge reaction" post does not mention divorce. So I can easily see where Smileless related it, instead, to her post about Mr. S' anxiety attack.

The language was also clearly about adult relationships: not adults abusing children! Which is what smileless superimposed!

A post about historic child abuse would have read very differently!

Namsnanny please share how you think courts would enforce a law that guarentees GPs contact?

No court will order "just contact!, y'know, whatever, whenever suits..."

Here's a hint: court ordered contact and contact centres already exist so we're not talking hypotheticals here! We are just talking about whether or not to widen the number of court ordered a child can be subject to at a time!

Don't be afraid of this, as from what I've read the P's and the GC will always be the guiding influence that decides the outcome.
That is not how it works!
We already have court orders! We know how they work, and they are rigid, life restricting and distressing

So I still don't really get the point that you were trying to make¬!

That ending a relationship is not abuse! No matter what the other party's response to it may be. Switch "estrangement" for "divorce" and it is easier to appreciate why people must always be able to walk away!

It does not always follow that the party who most publically complains about what the "divorve" "did" to them who is the victim of the relationship, nor is the one who finally calls it a day the default villan!

So to say "estrangement is a form of abuse" is as wrong as saying "divorce is a form of abuse" and its not, it is terminating the relationship!
There may be abuse in the relationship that is being terminated.
There may not, some people just shouldnt be together! (Includes family)
But the divorce/estrangement itself is not an act of abuse

notanan Well I agree that a person ending a relationship is not abuse per se. Just not sure of the relevance of the point about about emotional/physical/mental response in relation to making that point! The two things don't correlate

This thread has been completely taken over by self aggrandising and complete hyperbole. Not one proven statistic has been produced to back up the many - some completely outrageous - claims made.

In any given scenario, we can all offer opinions and repeat "stories" we have heard regarding the subject being discussed. However without proof, that's all they are....opinions and oft repeated stories.

I personally would never resort to litigation. However, I'm mindful of the fact that most grandparents are only in this situation because of the original court involvement by the parents of these children when they decide to end family life as the child knows it. Often this is vicious, and costly and will already have affected the child. Did it stop them?

There are always those in life who will go to any lengths to get their own way. That said, and again there are no statistics, but I would bet my house that most grandparents taking the court route, are doing so purely from love for their beloved grandchildren.

I didn't "super impose" anything, there was no need for me to do so.

Of course we are talking about adult relationships. I'm aware that there have been cases in America where children have divorced their parents, I don't know if this has happened here in the UK, but safe to say that it is adult children who are estranging themselves from an adult relationship.

In some cases the abuse of a child in childhood ceases when they become adults, in others the abuse continues into adulthood. Regardless of their age, a child is always their parents child. If a parent is abusing their adult child they are committing child abuse even if that child is an adult.

notanan "It is common for abusive controlling people to have a huge physical and mental/emotional response when the person they abuse finally walks away" Is it? Despite having been asked on several occasions you have been unable to qualify that statement.

"A common phrase is "you did this to me" about what ever mental/physical/lifestyle breakdown happens to the abuser when the public/street veil falls and they are abandoned". An interesting point. During an extremely unpleasant exchange with our ES's wife she lost her temper with me and said "you've done this to me, you've made me like this".

That statement is equally applicable to an abusive parent and an AC, or in my case a d.i.l. claiming abuse where none has taken place.

Sadly as you have posted IrishRose "This thread has been taken over by self aggrandising and complete hyperbole. Not one statistic has been produced to back up the many - some completely outrageous - claims made".

notanan2 Wed 04-Sep-19 19:24:59 interesting comments and the first time I've seen a parent admit that. Yes, the children have the rights and Smile's post referred to "The Plight of Children Estranged from Their Grandparents."

Summerlove Wed 04-Sep-19 19:28:38 I disagree, parents do not have the right to 'parent as they wish' they have the 'responsibility' to do what is best for the children

Star you said "The same is true when one parent has, sadly, died, and the remaining parent tries to push his relatives away. IMO, it can be cruel to intensify the loss by separating the GPs, say, from the GC and vice versa. Then again, some GPs try so hard to keep the memory of the deceased parent alive in the child's mind that they interfere w/ the living parent's efforts to move on and begin a new life. IMO, there is no one size fits all answer to these situations." I agree but I wouldn't like to think a parent would want to stop the child remembering a dead parent, that really would be abuse.

Namsnanny Thu 05-Sep-19 02:42:44 I wish I could have put that half so well. Thank you. May I just add that the point of the courts is to work out what is best for the child. No child needs to suffer as a result, if the GPs are bad for the child they won't have access. Both Ps and GPs should go to mediation long before it even gets to court so to suggest that is.

notanan2 Thu 05-Sep-19 07:04:49 I think you are splitting hairs, estrangement can be abuse and it can be about protecting someone. It is not as simple as you seem to think

Irish Rose you said "There are always those in life who will go to any lengths to get their own way. That said, and again there are no statistics, but I would bet my house that most grandparents taking the court route, are doing so purely from love for their beloved grandchildren." I agree and that could be either the P or the GP which is why when all else fails the courts decide. Imo they are experienced and will do what is best for the child. Only in extreme circumstances, when a parent is trying to thwart the rights of the child, would a court give an order that GPs should see the child on specified dates. I imagine the situation quoted on here must have been such cases.

I would like to give an example of the way some people manipulate a situation. This is not to do with estrangement as that has already been done over and over again, this is about the way people can behave which I think is comarable.

We were on a commuter train and had to stand, which we thought we could manage. DH has a spine problem which makes standing difficult but we thought he could manage until there was a delay and the train stood still for quite a long time. We were right next to the seat for the elderly,, disabled etc which was occupied by people in their thirties. I asked DH if he could manage and he replied that he would try but looked very pained. The people in the seat in front offered their seats which we accepted. One of the people behind us had a hissy fit and said we were humiliating her, she had never been treated like that she had been using this train for 5 years and didn't know that seat was for people who needed it etc so loudly that all the carriage heard her. She said she was having a panic attack! She got quite a lot of sympathy for her awful upset, tears, hysterics, the whole works, real drama queen. We got off the train at the same station and as soon as she was off the platform the hysteria stopped! It was all an act and I think that is what some people do when they know they are in the wrong. 'The best form of defence is attack'

If only the lady in your example could see that she'd humiliated herself nonnie and the people she fooled didn't see her behaviour for what it was.

There are a lot of utterly bonkers people around who just don't seem to know it