Child arrangement court order

Hithther I am sorry you have been so hurt it must be hard. I am not in this situation but it is clear that you must have gone through a very hard time.

Such a shame when the parents won't accept compromise. ""When the parents say no" but you give no reason why they should. What about when the GP says no?

Of course if it goes to mediation the parent won't be happy, I can understand that but it may be that the mediator can make them see they are being unreasonable/petty and using their spite to stop the children seeing a much loved GP.

*Even if the reasons given to deny contact are valid, the gp are unable to see them as valid or disregarded as lies, minimize them and say they are exaggerations.
This case is relevant in the case of unsafe and dangerous behaviour" could equally apply the other way round!

There are two ways to look at all these things and I am suggesting the other way.

Even if the reasons given to deny contact are valid, the gp are unable to see them as valid or disregarded as lies, minimize them and say they are exaggerations.
This case is relevant in the case of unsafe and dangerous behaviour

why it does work,

Apologies - why it does not work

Nonnie,
Why mediation doesn't work?

Whether the parents or the gp are the unreasonable ones - it doesn't matter in this case.

Before somebody decides to sue another, both parties have tried to talk, say no to the request and maybe explain reasons why it does work, maybe even compromise (you want 2x a week, I give you 1x visit a week, for example) but it is not accepted

When parents say no and grandparents refuse to accept the no and keep pushing for what they want, communication is already broken down to the point that the parents will dig their heels the more the gp push. It is psychology 101.

So when mediation is held, it is seen as grandparents trying to force the parent's hand using the law and again not respecting their no. As adults, it does not sit well on the parents.

So no, mediation may not work at all, even if the mediator thinks gp were an important part of the gc's live.
Mediator is only an intermediary dealing with a hostile situation, no a magician that solves a conflict that has been going on for a long time

Having read the whole thread it is clear that some have direct experience and feel strongly about it. I don't have such experience and cannot imagine how adults could behave in this way. Surely if everyone has the interest of the children at heart it would never come to this? If 50% are horrible GPs does that mean the other 50% are horrible parents?

I understood that before going to court both 'sides' were required to go for mediation. Wouldn't that stop most going to court? If they did would the mediator have to give their opinion of the situation to the court? I would have thought the mediator would soon work out which party was reasonable and which was not.

I still maintain most people are not as bad as the examples cited, maybe its just because I don't know people like that.

Given that there are horrible people in every generstion, it is fair to say AT LEAST 50% of parents/grandparents who have been cut off, have been cut off for good reason. These are the most likely to go to court because toxic people care about winning. They care about looking good to others. These are the people who cause untold damage to their children then shout THERE IS NO EXCUSE TO CUT OFF A PARENT. They will support any parent who has been cut off without any concern or care that they could be talking to an abusive person. They will encourage absolute bad behaviour and and send good, hurting desperate parents down the wrong path. They are here, they are everywhere you go, hiding in plain sight, pretending they are the real victim to get attention. They love attention. People who have lost their children through absolutely no fault of their own need to call them out on that nonsense because if you don't, you are picking the wrong side. Because it shouldn't be estranged versus estrangers, it should be genuine victims against perpetrators.

notanan, I don’t disagree, but for the sake of a “two sided” argument, I wanted to put it in the best possible light. I didn’t want my thought shut down with “but what if the parents are horrible”

"*assuming that the parents are not dangerous people to their children"

But even if they were court ordered contact doesnt remedy that in any way. It just ADDS a layer of trauma

I have another question on the same line, damage to the GCs.

How damaging is it for society to teach a GC that they are going to grow up in a society that the courts will eventually force them to make decisions about their own family against their will when they grow up?

I'd say as a GC - 'Hang the courts!' No one wants to be controlled.

"Please, be good GCs and understand, we the courts will be making life's tough choices for you, because your not qualified to do so yourself." vomit.....

It doesn’t matter if “the grandparents have done nothing wrong” if you accept that court ordered visitation is damaging for a child.

The grandparents could be absolutely in the right, and the parents are in the wrong. The point is, forced visitation is not healthy. It’s not a normal a family visit, and in some cases can be incredibly damaging to a child.

If you are willing to put a child through that, then yes, you are being selfish.

*assuming that the parents are not dangerous people to their children

I am willing to answer those 3 questions but I am sure it will start another debate

I've said it before but for those who haven't read it, will these ACs change their minds when they realise they may be cut out of a will?

No, I want nothing from my "controlling, always right" parents. All that I want is to be left to make my own best decisions for my children.

Will they change their minds when their children grow up and cut them out because that's what they have been taught is OK?

Your assumption on this is totally incorrect, that grown children grow up and just duplicate the behavior of their parents. In fact, my 2 grown children and their own families, have also cut out their GPs (my parents) due to the events and dialog they have witnesses from them (the GPs).

So, my parents have not only shut us (me, wife, daughter) out, but also shut themselves out of the next generation, as we have a grandchild on the way, and my own 30 yr old daughter wants her child to never be around such a horrible GP as she has seen..

So, be a little more open minded, that my kids may perhaps be pretty smart folks.

What damage does a parent do to a child by denying them access to a whole side of the family?

No damage in our case, only benefit! We have broken a generational cycle of controlling over-parenting, and they are just mad and blame us..

Victim much??

Smile my sympathies, it must have been a very hard decision to make. It is good to hear someone who is tolerant of more than one point of view. You seem to recognise that there are always 2 sides to a story and anyone considering the child should know that. Let's face it the courts are normally on the side of the parent so if they decide a child has a right to see its GPs there must be a good reason.

I think I have a right to an opinion as I have not taken a parent to court and I simply do not believe that all GPs are selfish and have only their own interests at heart. If a parent denies their child access to a loved GP for no good reason then they are at fault.

I've said it before but for those who haven't read it, will these ACs change their minds when they realise they may be cut out of a will? Will they change their minds when their children grow up and cut them out because that's what they have been taught is OK? What damage does a parent do to a child by denying them access to a whole side of the family?

Perhaps we should all look at the bigger picture and not at our individual cases.

Yes it is Hithere.

That is the reality Starlady and is why, as you say it isn't a level playing field. Parents don't have to allow GP's to see their GC and if they refuse to compromise in any way, it's 'game' over.

"Bitterness and blinkers wont ever consider compromise or empathy" all or nothing and for so many of us Nonnie, it's nothing.

What I am not in agreement with notanan are the posts I've seen on this thread, and others that GP's who do choose to go to court are selfish and have no care for their GC. I'm not in agreement with posters who never acknowledge that not all EGP's have done something to warrant the loss of their GC.

As an EGP who chose not to go to court, I would not judge and/or condemn a GP who chose to go down that road. I find that approach particularly distasteful from GP's who are not estranged and have no comprehension of the pain that we go through, and even more so from a poster who doesn't know the love GP's have for their GC, because they are no GP's themselves.

The sad truth is that this is a very polarized subject.

Nonnie, no I don’t feel better. I’m not trying to upset you. Notanan isn’t either. No one is trying to dictate anything. She is correct in what she says regarding a child being the subject of a court order with a non parent.

Now, that might be difficult to hear, but it is true nonetheless.

She has put forward many valid arguments as to why making a child the subject of a court order is not in the child’s best interests, unless of course the grandparent has at one point been the primary carer to the child.

She is certainly not spouting an intolerant monologue. She has no choice but to keep repeating herself as no one appears to be taking on board the effects that such a court order has on a child. And she absolutely has empthay...for the child.

GG feel better now?

I simply cannot understand why anyone needs to dictate to others on here, what do they get out of it? Being angry or sarcastic towards another poster says more about the person doing it than the one to whom it is directed.

Nonnie, reiterating facts is not an intolerant monologue.

Its not supposed to be a level playing field.

Children need to have primary carers who are deferred to in order to feel secure, not too many cooks all having a piece of the child pie.

Attatchment theory 101

"It feels like you... don't think a parent is ever at fault or that people can work together for the interests of the child."

"Bitterness and blinkers won't ever consider compromise ..."

I know these comments weren't addressed to me, but they made me think... often, IMO, parents resist mediation or refuse to compromise w/ GPs b/c, in the end, they don't have to. Unless the court decides otherwise, they have full authority over who their children spend their time with and how much. For example, if the parents, sadly, don't want the GPs to see the GC at all and the GPs want to see them once a week, yes, they could compromise at every other week. But, to my understanding, the parents can simply say, "No." The GPs might have to compromise to get at least some of what they want, the parents don't. It's just not a level playing field, another reason the legal process is so often unsatisfactory for GPs, IMO.

Good post Smile but not sure you will get any understanding, just the same intolerant monologue in which I will no longer participate. Bitterness and blinkers won't ever consider compromise or empathy.

Solicitors do spell out the destructive impact of court orders wheb GPs seek advice on this, and almost always advise against it unless the GP has has PR or fostered.

So the GPs who do it anyway have had the effects on the child bluntly spelt out to them.... but still want their go

GP's who are so desperate to see their GC that they're prepared to go to court in order to achieve this

Those GPs care more about their "desperation" to see the child, than they do about the child themselves and the impact the court process has on the child.

Truely loving GPs dont put their GC through that, no matter how desperate they themselves are to see the child.

Given that you fall into the latter group Smileless, I am surprised that you are not in agreement

Wouldn't it be nice to see more posts that recognise that some P's are using their children rather like pawns, that they're keeping their children away from their GP's just because they can.

It is recognised. It just doesnt alter the impact on the child of being subject to a court order, and of having their immediate family taken to court!

Childrens court does not exist to determine who wins an arguement between adults!

Smileless the point is that regardless of which adult was origionally out of order, court contact arrangements have a serious negative impact on the child.

Suing just piles trauma on top of trauma, 2 traumas dont cancel each other out.

GPs like you smileless are putting your GPs first by not having them pulled in all directions via court orders.

Multigenerational relationships (including the parents) is the gold standard.
Failing that, adults agreeing on contact between GPs and GCs is the next best thing
But court orders are at the bottom of the heap, they do more damage than GPs stepping back and being out of the picture.

Court orders are nothing like agreed visits. Nothing at all.