Hope For Estranged Grandparents

Granniesunite -- "We’re talking at cross purposes then. Because this thread is about a real, reasoned, response to loving grandparents wishes to continue with a loving relationship with their grandchildren. Not in anyway controlling or abusive on their part. Just everyday people who love their offsprings children."

And my mom and MiL would say the same of themselves and as Nonnie pointed out to me, the fact that I have no contact with either side makes it look like I am the issue.

So are my mom and MiL 'wonderful and loving' parents as they claim and our No Contact = abuse OR are they abusers like We see them? How can anyone tell the difference if good and bad EP's and EGP's say the same things?

Granniesunite -- "Court could be just the place for resolution."

What is to "resolve"? We went No Contact from both sides prior to our children being born. Neither set of grand-parents have met our children.

I stated earlier what I would tell a court if both sides tried to petition for visitation. Thankfully, where we live, no relationship with Us (the parents) and no 'established relationship' with the children means ZERO chance of them being successful. The 'courts' wouldn't even allow the case to move forward.

Unfortunately that is not the case everywhere.

In the context of this discussion, no one is saying that GP's are or should be the "official deciders"*HolyHannah*. And what you think the core issue that isn't being addressed here, is being addressed.

The court decides, the court is the official decider and the court has the right/authority to tell P's they are wrong by awarding contact to GP's whose contact has been denied when that decision by the parents is unjustified.

Psychological assessments are a good idea. My brother used to say it was a pity prospective parents don't have to undergo tests before they have children because of some of the awful cases he was involved with during his career.

I dispute that the person with the most money is more likely to win a court case when it comes to GP's being awarded contact Ironflower. The success rate is relatively low and many GP's fail to get leave from the courts to go to court in the first place. My brother who practised family law for his entire career would also dispute that it's the side with the most money that has the better chance of winning.

Solicitors tend to tell GP's that their chances of winning are low when they first seek legal advice.

As for the financial cost to parents, that and a great deal of stress caused by a legal process can be avoided by simply allowing the relationship between their children and their GP's to continue.

As has been said over and over again on this thread, it's the responsibility of all adults involved to do what's best for the children. It isn't just GP's who make a choice here. They may choose to try and get their application to court, but the parents have decided to prevent them from seeing their GC.

"Children will be upset about things that upset them and their parents" of course, and one of the things that will upset children is suddenly losing their GP's.

If abuse in not the issue, if parents have decided for reasons that have nothing to do with protecting the welfare of their children, it's up to them to keep any negative feelings they have about their children seeing their GP's, away from their children.

"No responsible parent would let a child be upset by adult worries" and I would add to that Granniesunite or by any animosity they feel toward a child's GP's resulting in making a child feel guilty and/or uncomfortable by wanting to spend time with their GP's.

The same applies in the UK HolyHannah. GP's have to show they had an established relationship with their GC before they were estranged.

If there has never been any contact, any relationship between the GP's and their GC, the case would never get as far as court.

lol I can only imagine what my parents would say when asked why we estranged. Probably along the lines of:
- We just favoured the other grandparents because they are more social
- We hate them because they are quiet
- I am controlling and don't let them be grandparents (thanks but no, you want to be parents, not grandparents).

They wouldn't mention the constant physical, sexual and emotional abuse. As my mum so eloquently put it "you just blame us for everything. You blame us for what HE did." No i blame you because I told you when i was 3 what was happening and you didn't believe me. You just told me to tell you if it happened again and just like that i was left with a predator.

My parents think they are amazing parents that dedicated their lives to us. They live in an alternate reality. I do wonder how many people (EP and EAC) are also wolves in sheeps clothing.

HolyHannah - I was stupid and my parents did establish a bond with my oldest for the first 12 months. Even though I stopped unsupervised visits, I tried to still make sure they got to spend time with grandkids. I thought they had changed, they are worse. I wish I hadn't left myself open to grandparent rights like you avoided

If your parents only had contact with your eldest child for the first 12 months of his/her life and have never had contact with any other children you have Ironflower they wouldn't get as far as court as there's no history of an established relationship.

I'm sure if you got some legal advice that's what you'd be told and it may put your mind at rest once and for all. I hope so.

Smileless -- So are you saying that if We had given Our parents the chance to prove they have changed/no longer abusive and then they DID start abusing our children and We ended contact for that reason, that the grand-parent should then still have a right to go to court?

"The court decides, the court is the official decider and the court has the right/authority to tell P's they are wrong by awarding contact to GP's whose contact has been denied when that decision by the parents is unjustified."

The best way to make sure that the children are not more affected by the No Contact is to respect parents who find themselves in that situation. You seem to want it both ways. Some of Us never gave our parents a chance because of the risks and yet you you would also like to condemn those that DID "give their parents a chance" and the grand-parents proved that they had not changed and contact was ended.

"If abuse in not the issue, if parents have decided for reasons that have nothing to do with protecting the welfare of their children, it's up to them to keep any negative feelings they have about their children seeing their GP's, away from their children."

Why would children have negative feelings about their parents if they are "good"/non-abusive parents? My dislike of my 'mom' is for very good reason. If she hadn't been abusive I would still love her and would want my children to share that.

If I did allow contact (without influencing them) and later my children said, "I don't want to visit Granny she's mean to me." and I ended contact now I would be respecting Their feelings. Or do you believe the feelings of minor children don't matter and it's up to someone else to tell them how they feel? Because me telling my kids that they need to go visit their 'loving' granny regardless of how she makes them feel, then that's me emotionally abusing my children.

Ironflower -- I am so sorry you have experienced that.

It also makes me profoundly sad that people like you provide the proof that our choice was correct.

And people like Starblaze can describe how the contact went with her 'mom' and her children.

It's the patterns of behavior and cycle of dysfunction showing itself.

If parents don't decide/agree that their parents/the GP's are "good" and just do what the GP declares as "best for the minor children" then by golly, it's off to 'court' to have a "greater authority" tell the AC how 'wrong' they are to deny access and any damage caused is swept away/declared minimal by the EP/EGP.

Notice it's the EGP's that are telling everyone how to feel and behave and what is "right" and how We should react to an attack on our parental authority.

With two healthy parents, the greatest authority in their minor children's life should be them/the parents. Not my parents or his and not 'the courts'....

I know We are challenging their grand-parental authority but there's no such thing and there never should be.

Notice it's the EGP's that are telling everyone how to feel and behave and what is "right" and how We should react to an attack on our parental authority

Yes, we should just be “adults” about it, and not let it upset us or let it have any affect on our children whatsoever, because that would be irresponsible parenting, because really it is our fault we are being taken to court for being so unreasonable in the first place as we had been given adequate opportunity to comply with our parents and we chose not to, so now there is no choice but to take us to court, so that the courts can tell us how unreasonable we have been and make us see the error of our ways and force us to behave more reasonably by issuing a court order which we will then be arrested for not following and eventually be sent to prison, but that would be our fault for not doing as we were told in the first place!

So, do as we tell you, or else...

I'm not estranged and never have been.
I'm just a busybody.

I'm just a busybody

Haha!

Abuse and predatory behavior manifests in many forms- Collectively, we are not quite a civilized society just yet- And the laws we make reflect that inherited, primitive, predatory, possessive behavior by forcing parents to hand over their children to individuals whose intelligence is geared towards manipulating the flaws written into laws to acquire possession of someone who was never theirs to begin with-

It's called being awarded, of all things- For being a creep-

In other words, law leaves enough wiggle room for an individual to present a well thought out lie for the court to buy into, hook line and sinker-

Motherofdragons -- "we had been given adequate opportunity to comply with our parents and we chose not to"

I believe that is the translation of what equals Us "being unreasonable" and not "being adults" and not "putting the children first".

Last time I checked I am an adult as well. Why won't my 'parents' be "reasonable" and do what is best for my children by not smearing me to anyone who listens and claiming my mentally illnesses make me an unfit mother?

Our reasonable expectation to raise or children as We see fit is trumped by Our 'parents' "right" to tell Us how 'things' should be (their way) and if We don't agree? Then they decide we are "wrong" and however they behave is now Our fault.

It's the same mentality abusers like my 'mom' used when I was a minor child... If I hadn't been so 'bad' she wouldn't have treated me/behaved the way she did. If We as adults would just do as Our parents say then there would be no conflict.

Sometimes I want to tell EP's/EGP's to, "Go play a game of HaGFY" but a comment like that would be deleted.

rosecarmel -- In my case, as Nonnie highlighted, "HH did you really mean " both estranged sides of the 'family"? If that were the case I think the courts might ask why you had cut off all GPs as that would rather imply you were the problem. Perhaps you didn't mean that."

Of course I did mean to tell the truth... I'm 'radically honest'. My inability to tell lies (even 'healthy' lies) is one of my mental disorders.

Now, this is where debate comes in -- Is the fact that my husband and I have agreed to No Contact with ALL the grand-parents a negative reflection on Me or Our parenting? Obviously Nonnie believes it IS and maybe 'the courts' would as well.

As you said, " law leaves enough wiggle room for an individual to present a well thought out lie for the court to buy into, hook line and sinker"

In my case, 2 sets of still married GP's and other siblings all Scapegoating and calling my husband and I "the issue" for walking away. I know how I would feel in 'the courts' place... "ALL of these people cannot be lying about just 2 members of their combined families..."

Welcome to two Scapegoats getting together...

HolyHannah, if your case came before a judge, and illness were your concern, at some point intent would be presented, yours being to prevent and protect by not having established relations and theirs being to acquire and possess by hiring an attorney to procure relations -- neither of which are logical or ethical-

You cannot be held accountable for cutting off a relationship that had never been established to begin with- They can be held accountable for trying to buy one-

Further, you frequently present convincing, educated, evidenced based arguments that clarify dysfunction while advocating for change-

I wouldn't consider you vulnerable-

rosecarmel -- "I wouldn't consider you vulnerable." I am NOT and that is what makes Me so threatening to some...

And I also have a terrible habit/radical honesty of, as you say, "frequently present(ing) convincing, educated, evidenced based arguments that clarify dysfunction while advocating for change."

How dare I do 'that' when I should know that I am 'wrong' just like I was taught... Nope. I'm going to go back to Ollie... "The Jig is Up"

www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KdJZvHUfag&list=LLea_AdTJYLeYaaExuaG5y0Q&index=8&t=0s

No HolyHannah I am not saying that any parent who had abusive parents should give them a chance to have contact with the GC.

"Why would children have negative feelings toward their parents if they are "good"/non-abusive?" that could be due to a coercive, controlling and manipulative partner. It could be because the parents have refused to give them money, said they don't want to help out with child care or wish to cut back on the amount of child care they're currently providing.

All of these 'reasons' have been talked about here on GN.

I don't agree that you are challenging "grand-parental authority" you are challenging the right that children have to know their extended family. You are challenging the law that in some cases, makes it possible for EGP's to seek legal assistance and you are challenging the authority of the family courts to make decisions.

I'm and EGP. I accept that there are GP's out there who shouldn't have contact with their GC. I respect and admire any parent who fights tooth and nail to protect their children from abuse.

Virtually everything that EAC post here is about abuse; abusive parents becoming abusive GP's. I understand your concerns, your fear of your abusive parents having contact with your children, I'd feel the same.

I understand your concern that GP's succeeding through the courts could enable potentially abusive GP's to succeed too. I understand that you regard the court process as possibly opening the door, and letting those GP's in.

What you consistently fail to see though is that abused EAC with children of their own, are trying to slam the door shut on GP's who having developed a healthy and loving relationship with their GC, a relationship which means as much to their GC as it does to them, have that relationship taken away by their vindictive AC.

law leaves enough wiggle room for an individual to present a well though out lie for the court to buy into hook, line and sinker

The law isn't perfect and EAC are just as capable of lying under oath as their parents.

Starblaze Sat 20-Jun-20 17:36:20 Say what you like, you and I both know the truth.

Smileless2012 Sat 20-Jun-20 17:54:46 interesting, I've learned a lot.

Motherofdragons Sat 20-Jun-20 18:08:04 rot! You can 'stand by' whatever you like but at some point will have to recognise that there are higher authorities than you. Your comment was offensive, if you can't see that then I understand your issue.

It is not all about you! The question about the law was to the person who said I didn't know it. However, if you also think I don't then tell me what I don't understand. Throwing out generalised comments is not debating, it is dictating.

Wrong, the courts do have authority, read the OP. You can say it as often as you like but the facts are the facts. Who doesn't understand the law??

Legally parents have to do what's best for the children - true. Also true that everyone should do what's best for the children. Both have the same outcome - obviously!

Wrong again, read the OP, the courts do decide what is best for the children, they override parents when it is the right thing to do. Who doesn't understand the law?

It is not 'state interference'! It is the court taking care of children who are not getting what the law says is their right. Again, who doesn't understand the law?

Totally agree that it is 'getting embarrassing' when people think they can take the law into their own hands and do what they want with their children whether it is in the interest of the children or not. Family Courts are not stupid, they've seen it all before and Cafcass have too. That is why the case law on this is growing. Parents can no longer control what happens to their children if it is not in the interests of the child. Look it up.

"What you consistently fail to see though is that abused EAC with children of their own, are trying to slam the door shut on GP's who having developed a healthy and loving relationship with their GC, a relationship which means as much to their GC as it does to them, have that relationship taken away by their vindictive AC."

Abused adult children are collectively slamming the door shut on all abusive parents-

It's the children, not the grandparents that are loving- What the grandparent experiences is real, they "feel" the child's love- Just like they "felt" their own child's love so long ago-

If they weren't able to maintain a loving relationship with their own child, how will they do so with their grandchild as they grow?

Is it in the child's best interest to provide love to someone that can't love back?

Your post rosecarmel in response to a section of mine illustrated perfectly what I've said.

Is it in the child's best interest to provide love to someone that can't love back not is isn't rosecarmel which is why GP's who love their GC and who are loved in return shouldn't be prevented from having that relationship with them.

In those circumstances, it's the parents who are preventing their children from loving back.

Bibbity Thanks for that. It was not what happened in the case I referred to, 2 policemen came after a call to 101 and they stayed long enough to make the parent be reasonable. Star you have a very strange interpretation of 'scare tactics' and a very selective memory. I stated a fact, not a law, it happened, I was there!

I have no idea if a parent has gone to prison, I know it is an option if someone is in Contempt of Court. The Family Court Orders say that if one does not obey the order there are various penalties and states that nor obeying could be Contempt of Court. We can extrapolate what the means in practice, I only know what the Orders say.

BIbbity I refer you to my answer above, I have no idea what happens in practice.

Chewbacca thanks for that, useful info. I hope it clarifies matters for all. Probably means I wasted my time above!

Granniesunite Sat 20-Jun-20 19:37:40 so true.

HolyHannah Sat 20-Jun-20 20:00:07 you can turn that on its head too. ACs who don't care about their parents are hurtful too. Do not assume that GPs all hurt their own children, if that happened to you I am sorry but it is far from true that all estranged GPs did any harm to their own children.

Nothing to do with GPs rights (how many times does this have to be said?) about the children's rights only!

Nothing to do with GP's rights (how many times does this have to said?) about the children's rights only!

Seems that has to be said constantlyNonnie as does that not all EP's and EGP's are abusive.

HolyHannah Sat 20-Jun-20 21:05:41 oh dear here we go again. It's the Family Court that has the right to decide!

Starblaze Sat 20-Jun-20 21:22:29 I totally agree. Doesn't make any difference who the abuser is but the more people who love and spend time with the children the more likely it is to be discovered. If a child says "xxx told me not to tell anyone" that is a danger signal.

HolyHannah Sat 20-Jun-20 21:27:27 that may be your experience but others have quite the opposite ones. I listed some of the reasons GPs have been cut off up thread. I do understand how hard it must be to think everyone else is in the same situation as your own bad experience but really not all are the same.

Starblaze Sat 20-Jun-20 21:34:51 that could work if the court applied the same rigour to both sides but it would prolong the process which some feel is stressful enough. Cafcass do their best.

Starblaze Sat 20-Jun-20 21:44:04 do you think that is why some parents refuse mediation? The first session doesn't even include both parties so I have to wonder why anyone would refuse.

Ironflower Sat 20-Jun-20 21:54:31 I started to read the link but stopped when I realised it was not UK. There is too much here to go through for me without looking outside too! I think the subject of who gets hurt if they go to court has already been widely covered so will leave it there.

Ironflower Sat 20-Jun-20 22:26:35 if you believed that you would give Cafcass the reasons and they are experienced enough to ask the right questions to find out if it is true. If it is they would tell the court and the case would go no further. At this point the Respondent has incurred no costs.

HolyHannah Sat 20-Jun-20 22:55:01 yes children will be upset by lots of things, including being suddenly cut off from their loved ones. It has already been said that children can be traumatised and blame themselves. It would traumatise children to hear bad things about a GP who had always shown them love and never harm. Always two sides.