Hope For Estranged Grandparents

"In fact I should probably serve as a warning because I've had to fight very hard for a very long time to undo a hell of a lot of damage. Why ever add more stress and difficulty to any child's life if you believe they are already suffering."

The answer is ultimately because it really isn't about what is best for the minor children. It's about power and control.

Language and content warning on this video but I think it's very telling:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoojIXdz2Oo

I've seen that thread too Pantglas and agree that that mother is being abused by her son.

We didn't want to see our GC if it was against their parents wishes which is why we didn't go to court and I wrote to our ES telling him that was something we would never do.

Holyhannah I can't on this one, not for me, we don't have guns here

Starblaze -- I understand. If you can at all, try starting at around 11:00 that is the key portion of the video that relates to the topic here. Stay strong.

The answer is ultimately because it really isn't about what is best for the minor children. It's about power and control.

I personally think that going to court is a huge decision usually made amidst much pain and angst. If someone has built up a strong and loving relationship then to have that completely removed will be agonising. Going to court may well not be the best decision, but it is not a given that going to court will be for power and control.

Madgran -- We'll just have to agree to disagree on that one. If my grandma had been running around trying to gain court ordered access to any of her grands, it would have created even more dysfunction in our 'family' as a whole. The dysfunction that was present made me suicidal as it was. If my parents had been blaming me for all the costs of having to go to court and the inconvenience it would have created it probably would have made me follow-through on killing myself.

If I wasn't 'around'/didn't exist, the adults would ALL be happier because there'd be nothing to fight over/about. So abused children from dysfunctional families know what legal battles do to them as minor children and now that we are adults we are speaking out. Who listens? No one did then and no one does now.

But yes, if adults tack on, "it's for the good of the kids" anything is fine right? So the damage done is of no consequence?

There is, in my opinion and from my experiences, very few cases were court action 'helps' a situation or makes things "better" for minor children involved whether there is 'real' family dysfunction going on or not.

If the family was healthy and now the legal system is getting involved, that will impact them home-life of the minor children. So, in the case of a healthy family where the adult children deny contact for whatever reason, are now having dysfunction/chaos brought into their children's life by a third party adult (the grandparent) and the legal system. Can that be good for the children?

it is not a given that going to court will be for power and control precisely Madgran. GP's go to court to be able to continue the relationship they had with their GC. They have no power or control, that is in the hands of the children's parents.

It's the responsibility of all the adults to put aside their personal grievances and put the interests of the children first. It isn't just the GP's who miss their GC, GC miss their GP's.

I gave earlier, just one example of a son no longer wanting contact with his parents who has not allowed that to impact on his children's lives by preventing them from seeing their GP's.

All arranged without the need to enter into a legal process as the children's interests were put first, and that's how it should be.

Smileless -- And that is why many AC go No Contact with their parents before the birth of the first grand-child and often never allow a relationship to be established. They know what their 'parents' are and know they will use legal avenues to beat them back into 'their place'... As a lesser/subservient entity to what the 'parent'/grand-parent wants.

Just a legal-process going on damages the minor child. So even when the courts try to put the minor children first, the damage is done. So IF the GP's biggest concern is the well-fare of the grand-children? Then 'good' EP's that are cut off for 'no reason' would know the damage that will be created and avoid it/not do it.

In cases of the parents of the grand-child(ren) divorcing or dying and that changes a healthy relationship already established is a different scenario and may be a legitimate reason to use the courts.

So if the reason for petitioning the court is that the parents have restricted/banned their children from the GP's as a united front? Two parents should not be dragged to court to justify No Contact or be bullied into contact they do not want.

The positive side is, the more 'success' EP's have in 'the courts', the more adults will cut those people off before grand-children arrive and ultimately that will be the healthiest thing for the minor children/next generation.

Pantglas I think you made the right decision, hard as it is. Custody cases can span into years of stress and financial hardship. Seen it happen.

Also seen clearly abusive/neglectful/addicted parents get court awarded access to their children so I know the system doesn't always work no matter how many organisations are involved. I do worry about precidents becoming norms and yet more stress for minor children.

So many people just discredit children as not able to suffer stress, anxiety and depression. I am so glad you see deeper. Perhaps they will find you one day.

Holy Hannah That is your experience with your family and clearly very dysfunctional. And dreadful for you as a child, going through such dysfunctionality.

However, that is not evidence that GPs going to court is always about power and control. Different circumstances and different family dynamics and reasons for estrangement may bring about different motivations for that decision by GPs.

My comment was purely that it is not a given that GPs go to court for power and control. It MAY be the case in a particular family situation. That does not make it a given in EVERY decision.

Yes we will have to agree to disagree

I've been talking about GP's who have established good relationships with their GC and then have them taken away HolyHannah.

AC who estrange their parents before having children of their own, so those children will never know their GP's is a different issue entirely.

As I keep saying, in the situations I'm talking about it's up to all the adults involved, the parents and the GP's, to put the interests of the children above their own.

Again as I've already posted, it is possible for an AC to allow their child's relationship with their GP's to continue, without the need to be dragged into court.

It isn't as Madgran has posted a given that for GP's going to court it's all about getting power and control. For many it's about the love they have for their GC and the love they know their GC have for them.

There are just so many of us Madgran We are the children of the rug sweeper generations. Unseen, unheard, unnoticed. There are millions of us, abused by immediate family or close family members. I know 4 women personally that were sexually abused by close family and it was all hidden and denied for 3 of us. I know 5 other women who were emotionally abused by a parent (4/5 mothers) and only 2 of us estranged but the other 3 just moved far away. I know 2 women who grew up in addicted households who were neglected and lost their parents young due to the parents alcohol abuse. These are all intelligent, lovely people.

These are just the ones who I have been close enough to to know this information. I don't have a huge list of friends. Yes still many more have strained relationship with a parent.

Its a hugely common thing that no one seems to want to face up to.

Then there could be abusers reading this success story and thinking they will give it a try. They got away with it for years until those pesky adult children took themselves away so now they want to get their claws into the grandchildren. Some for power and control, some because they believe getting access to the grandchildren will somehow prove their innocence. Yes some who have lost access to grandchildren through no fault of their own but still willing to risk damaging their grandchildren so how can they be completely blameless?

Who wants another generation of damaged children when a large portion of society is waking up and putting measures in place, that my generation had no access to, to try to protect children?

I know that Starblaze and it saddens me greatly. Yes there could be abusers who decide to give it a try.

My concern is that it is not assumed that in EVERY case that decision is made for power and control. It might be but it is not a given

Actually if you read my original post Tue 19:53 Starblaze you’ll see I’ve long been reconciled with my DD and family.

I think I always knew during the dark days of estrangement that I would make things a million times worse, possibly irrecoverable, if I’d gone down the legal route. It would be seen as control - me taking it and them losing it and no parents should be made to feel that.

Even better Pantglas ?

"I think I always knew during the dark days of estrangement that I would make things a million times worse, possibly irrecoverable, if I’d gone down the legal route. It would be seen as control - me taking it and them losing it and no parents should be made to feel that."

That times 1000. No healthy parents should feel that their autonomy to parent their children is being impeded by any outside influence. Including the grandparents of those children.

It is well within a parents rights to restrict or end contact with any other adult for whatever reason they want whether the other party (grand parent) agrees or not.

As Starblaze said, "Yes some who have lost access to grandchildren through no fault of their own but still willing to risk damaging their grandchildren so how can they be completely blameless?" -- I agree. They are not putting the children first as they claim. AC who have been through these types of situations are screaming at the 'adults' "Just do not. Please stop." and yet are the 'adults' here "listening"?

Nope. They know what is 'best' for the kids and they are putting them 'first' while their actions are doing anything but. IF the 'adults' around me had been doing what was best for Me, I would not have end up abused and damaged. And now I see more 'adults' doing the exact same things that damaged Me and act like the same things won't damage children now?

Do we really think that grandparents who are estranged are always aware that they are a negative impact on the grandchildren? That they might not be in the children's best interests? Of course not, sometimes they don't see or want to see the problems. They think they are great grandparents and should have a relationship with the grandchildren.

Yet they don't know what goes on for the grandchildren after they have left from a visit. They don't see what happens when, say, the children open the gift they sent for Christmas and they sent one child one gift and another child that same gift plus two more. Or sat there cuddling one while the other was asked to run around fetching them things. I would not have wanted my children to have visitation with a dynamic like this going on, especially if the grandparent refuses to see the favouritism and change it.

Grandparent rights are certainly a good thing in some cases. Unfortunately its also something that abusers love to use to force parents to bend to their will. My parents have mentioned it and the thought terrifies me.

We could go to court. Unfortunately most of the incidents that happened, I have no proof of. I would for example say something they did and they would immediately say 'shes lying.' They're doing it now, deny deny deny! If courts were perfect then it wouldn't be a problem, but they aren't. A lady in a group had to go to court, the judge refused to read the threatening text messages that the MIL had sent to her where she was going to beat her. Would not even look, and that woman was granted unsupervised visitation. Can you imagine handing over your kids to someone that wants to do you physical harm?

A judge could side with my parents, and just think that I'm lying. I have every message and email they've sent, but there isn't much there. Most things have few witnesses. I could be forced to hand my nonverbal children over to adults that want to beat the autism out of them, and who covered up my sexual abuse. My dad also physically abused my brothers. It would destroy me and them.

Someone said that suing for grandparent rights doesn't have to affect the kids if all the adults act like adults. It still does. The stress, fear and emotions, it would be very hard to function at 100%, I'm shaking just thinking about the possibility of having to go to court about this.

Ironflower, I don't know what the law says in your area, but my understanding is that (in many areas) where there are two married parents who agree on no contact, grandparents do not tend to succeed in getting visitation. The law wasn't designed for them. GPR was originally designed for children, with an existing relationship with grandparents, who were denied visitation after divorce or the death of their child.

I'm sorry you have to live with that worry. At least children are not blind and will see things for themselves sooner or later and make their own decisions. Children who have visitation forced on them when they don't want to go are not likely to grow up with warm fuzzy memories of the grandparent.

The lady I was speaking about with the threatening messages was from the US. The law there varies in each state. I've heard of quite a few cases where a judge has been biased and awarded visitation despite the lawyer for the child (not parent) saying that it was not in the best interests of the child. I am from Australia and grandparent rights do exist. In my state, the law is (copied and pasted from legal site) "grandparents do not have implicit rights to have a relationship with their grandchild. However, like any other person who has a vested interest in the child's well-being, they can apply for a parenting order to try and secure visitation rights."

"I don't know what the law says in your area, but my understanding is that (in many areas) where there are two married parents who agree on no contact, grandparents do not tend to succeed in getting visitation. The law wasn't designed for them. GPR was originally designed for children, with an existing relationship with grandparents, who were denied visitation after divorce or the death of their child."

Exactly and like anything else, abusers when cut off will try to manipulate the system by saying the children are losing out on a "loving relationship" with them even if it is against the parents wishes. Any GP who is going to court where both parents are in agreement with the No Contact is immediately suspect to me because a court proceeding does cause harm to minor children.

So for all those say, it's "not all EGP's" that are using the system to manipulate and bully, I know but if your married adult children have walked away and stayed away, then regardless of previous relationship, IF you want to run to court under the guise of it being in the "best interests of the children", then I'm going to assume you are one of the parent's that is trying to abuse the system.

And regardless of 'success rate' -- the children are the most negatively impacted in even the most civil of court case. So, if AC think/believe their 'parent' may try, that is more then enough justification to never allow the grand-parents to meet the children.

At this point some EGP's will say, "But if the AC would just allow the contact then there would be no need to go to court." My counter to that is, "If you have to go to court to force a relationship you are not taking 'No' from the parents as their decision. People who don't accept 'no'/respect the choices of other adults are usually the issue."

OceanMama -- "Do we really think that grandparents who are estranged are always aware that they are a negative impact on the grandchildren? That they might not be in the children's best interests? Of course not, sometimes they don't see or want to see the problems. They think they are great grandparents and should have a relationship with the grandchildren."

In my case my 'mom' was aware of the damage one GP was creating by her overt favoritism of certain grand-children over others. And since that behavior caused me distress, of course my 'mom' didn't protect Me by cutting contact. No Contact would have at least reduced my number of abusers and would have been in my "best interests".

Abuse is often/almost always a generational condition and the only thing I have seen to effectively combat it is No Contact and even I waver on 'that'. So if parents have taken the step to remove an older generation/grand-parents from their own minor children? I have to assume that is a protective measure. To do the opposite/force contact with grand-parents is removing the decision making power of the guardians of minor children.

Eroding "parental authority" is not in the "best interests" of minor children unless the minor children are being abused by their parent(s). And I'm not talking about "perceived abuse" here...

So if the only "abuse" the minor child(ren) are being 'subjected to' is being cut off/removed from a relationship with their GP's? The best interests of minors should always rest with their parents/guardians and can include No Contact with grand-parents as the parents see fit. No contact is NEVER abuse when compared to contact that includes ANY ABUSE. Shouldn't the parents get to decide which is the lesser evil, like their parents had the right to choose when they were raising their children?

Ironflower -- "grandparents do not have implicit rights to have a relationship with their grandchild. However, like any other person who has a vested interest in the child's well-being, they can apply for a parenting order to try and secure visitation rights."

That is scary worded concept... "Any 'other person'?" So by "any" does that mean other biological relatives? Religious 'leaders'? ANYONE, so long as THEY have the "best interests" of the child in mind or believes they are justified in seeking/demanding access to the child? Does this include good/involved neighbors? Yikes.

I believe this whole legal fiasco of procuring and defining rights and responsibilities began at some point in the 1960's, when there was an increase in parents looking after their children's children do to yet another increase in pregnancies-

Prior to that, people simply raised each other's children without much legal involvement, if any-

The opioid epidemic, coupled with poverty due to financial inequities, created a unique situation where a glut of grandparents wound up caring for their grandchildren- Because it was either that or foster care, which isn't free-

HolyHannah, here's the rub ..

Parents of addicts weren't held accountable for any of it- Doctors, big pharma, pill mills- But not parents- They became a legal league of people, involved in making decisions for their grandchildren via temporary guardianship-

What do you think of that?

This generation of grandparents are the tipping point, the beginning of the end of inherited crazy trainwrecks- The beginning of the end of grandparenting as a grandstanding sub-culture, a sub-culture that raised their children and then aim to raise their children's children too-

It simply isn't sustainable-

It's damn near pre-meditated enabling in an effort to raise two families or more- Then grow old, tired and can't do it anymore AFTER creating a pattern of dependency -

Any Sabbath fans out there?

All aboard!

Hahahahaha

Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye...

HolyHannah - Yeah the law is a bit scary here