Hope For Estranged Grandparents

I started commenting on this post trying to explain that court cases can be damaging to children. Badly. The link I posted said that children caught up in custody battles between parents can even become suicidal. That's an extreme of possible damage.

Then we have gone to another extreme that parents have the potential to be put in prison which is another extreme kind of damage to children.

So why is anyone still arguing that grandparents should go to court for access, just because OP did (not knowing the long term implications in that case).

Doesn't matter who is at fault, doesn't matter who is to blame for the relationship breakdown, we are talking about inocent children.

This is exactly why in the majority of cases courts won't even entertain this idea and its also why (because I have read a lot of interesting old threads I was recommended recently) the majority of grandparents that do manage to go to court, fail.

I think the conflict is in part due to this absurd view that some EAC have that all parent who are estranged were abusive in some way Chewbacca. That being the case, any GP who successfully obtains a contact order could potentially abuse their GC.

I get the distinct impression that this is less to do with whether or not GP's should be able to go to court in some cases and more to do with an uncontrollable urge some EAC have to pin the label of abusive on all EP's.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

as you clearly know it was you I was referring too, why didn't you just respond?

I did!

I haven't seen anyone "gleeful at the prospect of a parent being sent to prison" for failing to comply with a GP's contact order; where was that expressed?

Right here:

Smile if a parent subverts the court order then the police can be called to enforce it. I know of a case where that happened. If they continue to do so it goes back to the court which imposes penalties and if the parent continues it is Contempt of Court which can result in a custodial sentence. Now that really would affect the child!

Note the exclamation mark used at the end of the paragraph for extra gleeful effect!

It's especially important when attempting to convey the depravity of some of the posters here, yes". Yes indeed and I see one of your posts has just been deleted

Haha, I can’t believe YOU in particular think the use of the word “sicko” is depraved!

I'm struggling to understand what it is that is causing such conflict on this subjecf. The OP was raised and discussed and the issue of whether GP had the legal right to proceed with legal action aginst estranged adult children, so that they could have access to the GC. It was quickly established that their are legal avenues that they can follow. It was further revealed that, in the case of an estranged adult child not following the rule of court judgement, they could face further legal action against them and even imprisonment. Proof that a legal precedent has been made was demanded. And supplied. But some of you are now back at square 1, huffily announcing that any GP who resorted to such legal action is a sicko and depraved. You've used those words to describe worthitall, who started this thread, knowing that she has successfully obtained a Court Order. How sick and depraved are you that you'd do that?

Actually I was wearing my "big girl pants" when I posted Motherofdragons and as you clearly know it was you I was referring too, why didn't you just respond?

I haven't seen anyone "gleeful at the prospect of a parent being sent to prison" for failing to comply with a GP's contact order; where was that expressed?

*It's especially important when attempting to convey the depravity of some of the posters here, yes". Yes indeed and I see one of your posts has just been deleted.

Nonnie I can’t believe how determined you are to prove that a parent can be sent to prison (removed from their child’s life) for not complying with a contact order in favour of the grandparent. That is really twisted.

Reposting because it mentions the bad word which had my earlier post deleted. The bad word has now been redacted to avoid any injury to all you sensitive souls on this thread

It's interesting that a poster who repeatedly asks for 'proof' of others to support what they're posting, having been told by one that they don't have access to that proof, and suggesting they themselves find proof to refute their argument, has so far failed to do so

We’ve been going back and forward on this thread for a while Smileless so why are you now referring to me as “a poster”? Put your big girl pants on and use my name so that I can respond to you.

I have only resorted to asking for proof over the last 2 pages of a 21 page thread because of the repeated scaremongering that parents will be sent to prison for failing to comply with a contact order issued in favour of the grandparent.

As if some grandparents on here aren’t entitled enough!

It’s not that interesting, is it? My providing you with case law that parents haven’t been sent to prison for failing to comply with a court order in favour of the other parent/grandparent wouldn’t negate the fact that you believe they have or refute the argument whatsoever. So if you think parents have been sent to prison for failing to comply with a court order in favour of the other parent/grandparent then you provide the proof!

and that one poster goodness knows why, feels it appropriate to refer to another as "a xxx"

Again, put your big girl pants on and use my name!

Goodness knows why? Really? Anyone who is gleeful at the prospect of a parent being sent to prison and removed from their child’s life for the crime of not following a court order issued in favour of a grandparent is a xxx. Plain and simple. Actually, they are worse than that. But I didn’t use the word I originally wanted to because I didn’t want to give all of you pearl clutchers a nose bleed.

The language we use is important

It’s especially important when attempting to convey the depravity of some posters on here.

It's interesting that a poster who repeatedly asks for 'proof' of others to support what they're posting, having been told by one that they don't have access to that proof, and suggesting they themselves find proof to refute their argument, has so far failed to do so

We’ve been going back and forward on this thread for a while Smileless so why are you now referring to me as “a poster”? Put your big girl pants on and use my name so that I can respond to you.

I have only resorted to asking for proof over the last 2 pages of a 21 page thread because of the repeated scaremongering that parents will be sent to prison for failing to comply with a contact order issued in favour of the grandparent.

As if some grandparents on here aren’t entitled enough!

It’s not that interesting, is it? My providing you with case law that parents haven’t been sent to prison for failing to comply with a court order in favour of the other parent/grandparent wouldn’t negate the fact that you believe they have or refute the argument whatsoever. So if you think parents have been sent to prison for failing to comply with a court order in favour of the other parent/grandparent then you provide the proof!

and that one poster goodness knows why, feels it appropriate to refer to another as "a sicko"

Again, put your big girl pants on and use my name!

Goodness knows why? Really? Anyone who is gleeful at the prospect of a parent being sent to prison and removed from their child’s life for the crime of not following a court order issued in favour of a grandparent is a sicko. Plain and simple. Actually, they are worse than that. But I didn’t use the word I originally wanted to because I didn’t want to give all of you pearl clutchers a nose bleed.

The language we use is important

It’s especially important when attempting to convey the depravity of some of the posters on here, yes.

Lol

No idea Starblaze and frankly, I'm not at all interested in finding out for you.

The only thing I have taken offense too was my abuse being used to invalidate my opinion because it must have damaged me Chewbacca

I promise nothing you have ever said has hurt me.

Any reason why it's me who gets pulled up all the time when I'm not the only one saying it?

Also Chewbacca on the subject of my emotional and sexual abuse I'm "sensitive".
Did you really just say that?

Nope, but you can interpret it anyway you like Starblaze. If you dish out the snide comments, you really need to be prepared for them to come right back at ya.

Language; what we say and how it's interpreted are so important.

When a case, any case goes to court, evidence is produced by the prosecution and the defence. The case is conducted according to judicial procedure; the law. In a family court it's more often than not the parties solicitor who speaks for them in court and in a criminal case there'll be a barrister for the defence, and a barrister presenting the case for prosecution.

In either case, aside from any evidence produced it's a battle of words between the solicitors facing one another in a family court and the barristers in a criminal court.

What they say influences a jury's decision, no doubt about it and will influence a judge or a group of judges if the case doesn't go before a jury.

I think this is both important and relevant as we are discussing not just the welfare ramifications of GP's going to court to obtain a contact order, but also the legal process.

It's interesting that a poster who repeatedly asks for 'proof' of others to support what they're posting, having been told by one that they don't have access to that proof, and suggesting they themselves find proof to refute their argument, has so far failed to do so.

It is interesting that a poster has referred to 'links' they have read, which they believe supports a poster's argument, having been asked if they would provide those links, has failed to do so. Perhaps you could give us those links Starblaze.

It is IMO disappointing that some posters feel the need to revert to accusing others of "scaremongering" and "gas lighting" and that one poster goodness knows why, feels it appropriate to refer to another as "a sicko".

The language we use is important, it can either elevate our argument, whether or not it's agreed with, or it can diminish even a good argument if insults, in general or of a personal nature, are introduced.

Such tilting at windmills.

It's sunny outside!

OK Nonnie

I accept that technically the courts can put a parent they deem in contempt of court in prison for not following a court order if the grandparents are willing to fill out the
relevant forms and take the matter back to court knowing they could be putting their own child/their poor grandchilds parent in prison. Baring in mind the police would have no power*until after it had gone back to court and an enforcement order was made.

Side Note:

If that ever actually happens I will deem that grandparent highly destructive/abusive and I will fight for prison time never to be used in such circumstances ever again.

Cool?

Motherofdragons Wed 24-Jun-20 17:17:55 prove that with case law in any case.

Motherofdragons Wed 24-Jun-20 17:08:03 that is not true and you know it. Please retract. I find your language offensive.

That shows so much about you and nothing about me. Either prove I ever said such a thing or retract.

I have quoted and proved what the orders say. I have not done as you claimed. You really are outstandingly rude and constantly distort what I have said. I have no idea why you behave like this. Why can't you simply accept I have only told the truth and been factual?

Do not accuse me of something I have not done.

Penalties for breaking the order are dependent on what the order is for. Hence, case law!

Motherofdragons Wed 24-Jun-20 17:08:03 let me put it simply: case law will not give you the answer you want because, as already said, it tells you what the case was about and the outcome, it will not tell you everything on the order. Do you get that? Case law will not tell what the penalties are because that is not the point, it is about the points of law not he penalties of breaking the court order.

What you are disputing is the penalties for breaking an order not whether they have been imposed not in what circumstances they were broken. Perhaps you will finally accept that what I said is true and we can move on.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

The examples are specific to the Family Courts

So?

The examples need to be similar to the case in question.

Otherwise it is like everything else you’ve posted thus far Nonnie. Irrelevant.

The solicitors advice is general and as most cases in the family courts are between parents it is pretty obvious they would refer to them. However, a court order is a court order.

Motherofdragons Wed 24-Jun-20 17:02:35. Let me explain the principles of court orders. A court order is an order of the court, it doesn't matter who the parties are or what the case is about. An order of the court should be complied with. If you don't comply the penalties are as shown. Do you want further explanation? I hope that helped.

The examples are specific to the Family Courts.