Child arrangement court order

Some good posts Nonnie but all too often there is very little, if any at all by some, consideration given to the GC and GP's who are denied seeing one another.

It fascinates me how the vast majority of the posts on this thread are so critical of non abusive GP's when it's the parents of their GC who are behaving so unreasonably.

We decided very early on that going to was something we'd never do, and as our ES's wife was making as much mileage out of her belief that we might, I wrote to our ES telling him this was not a course of action we would take. I said we did not believe it would be in our GC's best interests to gain contact against his (we only had one GC at the time) parents wishes.

We didn't want sleep overs or full days, just a few hours now and again. At the time we lived only 15 doors away from one another so it wouldn't have been a big deal.

We just wanted to be able to give them their birthday and Christmas presents in person, see them in school plays if at all possible and taking part on sports' days.

Our ES and his wife decided, for no justifiable reason, that we were longer to be a part of theirs or their children's lives and were to stay away.

So there are cases where the conduct of GP's only becomes an issue when it's convenient. There are cases where the geographical distance between the EGP's and their GC is not an issue. There are cases where GC and GP's are denied that special relationship that they could have had, out of spite.

Rather than the constant berating of GP's who are so desperate to see their GC that they're prepared to go to court in order to achieve this, how about some balance? 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.

Would you like to be forced to live in 3 houses?

How does this sound to you?:
Mon-fri: house 1
1st and 3rd weekends: house 2
2nd weekend: alternate odd months house 3, even months house 4
4th weekend Saturday contact centre person 5 Sunday contact centre person 6

Would you like to have to always get in after a long week !on friday and have to pack?

Neither of my kids sets of grandparents are still married! How many pieces can you chop a child into?

No! Extended family who want "their turn" via court order, and dont see the value in the child having a primary home and one set of primary carers do not care for the welfare of the kids by default!

I know adults who have Sun-thurs room lets here due to contacts that are too short to move the whole family home, and they find it stressful and exhausting and detrimental to their relationship with their family and they're adults who chose it!

And the child who has been at school all week having to spend their "down time" in contact centres or being delivered to contact visits

Its not about the resident parent "getting enough of a turn"

Its about a child already getting ferried back and forth between 2 houses being forced into a 3rd rigid compulsary contact arrangement!

I agree it's not just as simple as I put it, these things never are.
However i can't agree that the resident parent only has the same family time as the non resident parent.
Understood that there may be extra curricular activities etc for those children who are at school but resident parent still had bonding time during the week. I guess the value of school week time is a perception depending on what side of the fence you are sitting.

It still remains that resident parent has approx 12 nights on a stretch followed by only 2/3 nights for the non resident parent. And then back to another 12 night stretch.

And of course for those children of school age there are the long and short school holidays where there are no extra curricular activities or homework. Younger children being free of these limitations.

Coolgran65,

The resident parent may have more calendar hours with the child, but it may not translate in physical available hours.

Children go to school, extracurricular activities, homework, etc.

Those 5 days the resident parent technically has are eaten up by responsibilities that cannot be avoided- no hours to spare for extended family.

So, resident parent really has two weekends a month to spend with the child, same as the non resident parent.

As a resident or non resident parent, I would really think twice about the occasional sleepover with grandparents, having so few nights with my kids.

I am afraid it is not as simple as you put it

agnurse mentions that if each parent has the child every other weekend, then if grandparents want to see the child it eats into the family time of the parent/child.

Something to bear in mind is that the resident parent will have the child all week (5 days), then their access weekend (2days) then another week (5 days) total 12 days, before the child goes to the non resident for their weekend of 2 or 3 days. Even if resident parent works full time there are still a lot of hours to be able to find a few hours spare for a grandparent.

Speaking generally and not specifically.

It doesn't seem much to ask that the resident parent could agree to grandparents having the occasional weekend afternoon visit or the odd overnight visit, be it at the weekend or during the week, depending on commitments etc.

My concern is always the child. Children are fully capable of the same levels of stress, anxiety and depression as adults. A lot of adults just can't see it because children express it differently. Stressing the parent highly stresses a child who is dependant on them. I would never do this. Often forced contact will lead a child to estrangement later because they will associate the GP with stress. Better to wait and reach out when they are old enough to make their own decisions. That is a choice I left to my own AC. They chose NC due to witnessing abusive behaviour though.

I am sorry about whatever happened to make you feel so strongly. I don't see how further discussion will help so I will stop now and continue to see the best in people.
As long as those people are grandparents trying to circumvent what parents think is best for their own children?

It doesn’t matter who is at fault. It doesn’t matter in the slightest. The courts are hesitant to interfere with the rights of the parents to make decisions for their children. It would undermine the very foundations of parental rights. Look at the Alfie Evans case and the outrage it caused. Courts will rarely override parental autonomy, unless the child’s welfare and safety are in jeopardy.

My neighbour desperately wanted contact with her grandchildren.

She had the police visit and say they would arrest her if she contacted her son again, or anyone connected with him.

Her grandchildren were put into care less than 6 months later and are still in the care system 10 years later.

My friend is the only person who has kept contact with the grandchildren..

I dont think it is about which adult is at fault Nonnie..

... I think it is about the child...

I don't think we are getting anywhere notanan. It feels like you condemn all GPs and don't think a parent is ever at fault or that people can work together for the interests of the child.

I am sorry about whatever happened to make you feel so strongly. I don't see how further discussion will help so I will stop now and continue to see the best in people.

Unless the GP previously had PR or fostered the child(ren) the legal advice is almost always to not persue a court order.

Why? Because there is no happy ending. Yes, the GP may "win". But the child always loses.

Why does the child even need to know the parent has been to court?

Are you kidding? You think kids wont pick up on the HUGE trauma to the family of being taken to court, even if the child doesnt know the details!

I dont think you understand the first thing about court ordered access! Of COURSE the child will know. It is nothing like normal visiting!

No court would give such an order if there was evidence the GPs would harm the child
The whole process harms the child regardless of who is granted the visits!

notanan2 Tue 20-Aug-19 16:26:25 No need to be so rude!

Yes, but what if the child has a good relationship with the GP? Is it worth going to court for the child's sake? Let's face it, if the parent makes a fuss and tries to alienate the child it is the parent at fault. Why does the child even need to know the parent has been to court? Why does the parent want to make it difficult for the child? Surely any good parent would abide by what the court said and not involve the child? No court would give such an order if there was evidence the GPs would harm the child. There are always 2 sides to these things and I can see both.

Court ordered contact arrangements traumatise and disadvantage children and their primary family unit.

Regardless of which of the adults you think is most to blame!

FGS

notanan "Which by default means that the visit will involve someone unable to communicate or negotiate with the primary carer .." No, it doesn't, it could also mean the parent refuses mediation

Oh FGC the consequences for the child is the same either way! Or dont you care about that?

notanan "Which by default means that the visit will involve someone unable to communicate or negotiate with the primary carer .." No, it doesn't, it could also mean the parent refuses mediation!

"Its not about grandparents Vs parents" has it occurred to you that it could be parent vs grandparent? Is it in the interest of a child who has a good relationship with the GP to suddenly have that relationship stopped because the parent has a non-child issue (rightly or wrongly) with the GP? I don't think that is good for the child or the parent. If a child is brought up to think it is OK for their parent to drop one side of the family might they not do the same when they are adults?

Summer perhaps I put it badly but I meant that all the things about not doing what is best for a child, allergies etc, car seats, could also apply to a parent so no more relevant to a GP than to a parent. If anyone does not have the child's interest at heart they are, imo, in the wrong whoever it may be.

Unhappy, it sounds as if you have been very involved w/ your GS. Ans as I said above, I have trouble understanding how parents can totally tear a child away from someone they have such a close relationship with. I am deeply sorry this happened to you and your GS.

It seems as if your son and DIL were not fully satisfied w/ your relationship w/ the GC for whatever reason (NOT saying they're right). Unless that was a total act on their part (you did say they were lying). Obviously, the judge believed them, and, of course, as others have pointed out, the burden of proof is on the GP. Again, I am so sorry you had to go through this.

Glad, though, that you have a good relationship w/ DD (dear daughter) and your GD. Hope you can focus on enjoying that.... Peace...

So many strong feelings about this sensitive issue!

My heart goes out to you, Unhappy! In fact, my heart goes out to everyone here, whether parent, GP or GC who has been hurt by estrangement or by the painful events that led up to that estrangement.

I am always especially astounded by the cases where parents CO a GP who has been a major part of their child's life (unless GP became abusive, etc). And I'm not surprised that the children in these instances often grow up very angry about this.

Kaimegan, as much as I sympathize w/ your situation, I can't imagine a court ever taking a parent away from their child and imprisoning them for 5 years just b/c they didn't let the child see a GP. As harsh as it might be to separate a child from a GP. IMO, in most cases, it would be even worse to separate them from a parent, especially if it's simply b/c the parent exercised their parental authority.

Granted, some of the examples of GP offenses given here are extreme, as has been said. But others are not, IMO. Ive seen cases on MN where GPs ignored rules/information regarding a child's allergy, for instance, b/c they "never heard of it" or "don't believe" the child has it and just think the parents are saying this as a way of exercising "control." Ive also seen complaints about GPs not complying w/ car safety rules, etc. While I don't think this behavior is common, it is not "extreme." B/c the GPs who commit these offenses are not always bizarre people - often they are well-intentioned but erroneously think they are right and "know better" than the parents since they have more experience, etc. Not saying that any of the estranged GPs here are guilty of any of these transgressions, just that it does happen.

EMMF, IDK, but I imagine some men go along w/ their XWs insistence that the kids not see the PGPs b/c the XW threatens to take them back to court and get the custody/visitation arrangements changed if they don't. Or b/c she convinces the court to include this "rule" in the custody/visitation arrangements (if that's possible). Granted, of course, in some cases, the man may actually agree w/ XW about this issue, but not in your case, I hope.

As for waiting for the dust to settle - I get the point that legally, it may be detrimental to a GPs cause not to be able to show that they tried to see the GC. But where family relations are concerned, it can be detrimental if they are seen (by the parents) as pushing too hard. Unfortunately, Ive noticed, that what works legally often does not work socially and vice versa. Since I'm not in this situation, IDK, but I guess one has to choose which way they want to go.

Every negative thing about GPs would also apply to an estranged partner so what's the difference?

The difference is one is a parent.

The other is extended family.

Following the thought from nonanan2: or anybody who formed (or claimed to ) have a bond with the baby?
For example, nanny, babysitter, friend of the family?

What if ALL extended family went to court? Should the child be ordered to give 8 people a month their "go"?