Hope For Estranged Grandparents

I'm not surprised it was deleted. It's up to Nonnie if she would like to address it with me though. How else do these things become resolved and bad feeling moved past?

I may be wrong but as far as I'm aware when a post is deleted, any subsequent posts that are in direct reference to the deleted post may be deleted too.

Maybe as you've asked her on more than one occasion to address the issue with you, and she's not done so, that's because she doesn't want too.

I can see that for you this doesn't resolve the matter but it's up to you whether or not you want to move past it.

Not all the comments saying it were deleted so I am OK to reference those.

Nonnie may have just missed my asking the first time. I'm not trying to turn it into a massive thing Smileless just answering you and MissA continuing the discussion about it

You can be damaged and strong, but either way, Nonnie was sympathising with you, not trying to do anything else.

I read Nonnies comment as meant to be acknowledging and sympathising, although I cannot speak for her. I certainly don't think it was intended to bully as referred to as a potential interpretation by MisAdventure

I can see why it might be unappreciated by someone who is being called "damaged" in this context. An unfortunate phraseology. However it may have come about because the word "damaged " had been used in a number of posts prior to that post, by several posters, in a generalised sense. The difference in one post was the word was applied to an individual and that is unwise on a public forum in a conversation between strangers.

The post has been deleted.

Starblaze As I said previously I don't think it was appropriate in this context. One of my reasons for that is that interpretation is so individual

TBH I'm rather confused too. Not by your post Madgran because as you rightly point out "the word "damaged"had been used in a number of posts prior to that post".

As far as I can see you referred too "damaged children" in your post on Wednesday at 21.12 Starblaze.

In Nonnie's post on Thursday at 14.15 she posted "I can see you know a lot of damaged people" and again at 14.26 Nonnie posted "can see some people are very damaged".

Then on the same day Starblaze your post of 16.53 included
"do you see me as damaged goods"; "Am I just too damaged"and finally "Am I so damaged".

Nonnies post today @ 10.45 was then deleted.

I agree with Madgran about someone being offended at being referred too as damaged, and I can't remember what the deleted post said, but you yourself referred to that term Starblaze in general, and then in one post asked Nonnie 3 times if she regarded you as damaged.

I already explained the difference in the way the word was used, as did Madgran. I also clearly didn't like to be called damaged. Do you think I would ever say that to a child or someone else? I certainly wouldn't use it in such a way as to imply they were permanently damaged.

So please stop now Smileless I shouldn't have to defend my feelings to you or anyone else. Especially when I have already explained myself several times.

Nonnie will address this with me or she won't. Reading back through, she was upset with something I said and I apologised because it did indeed come out harshly and I owed her that.

I just reread the comment you quoted Smileless and I said "willing to risk damaging their grandchildren" which is referring to being the causation of damage or harm, not that those children are permanently harmed or damaged forever.

Actually won't ever use that word again because I wouldn't want anyone else to read it as me thinking they were permanently damaged by abuse even if that's not the context I'm using it in

But honestly, you could cause damage to my table and I would fix it. You would be the one who goes around trying to break tables but my table would still be good as new with a bit of hard work.

Stupid analogy

I'm going to bed.

Its taken me a very long time to get to where I am, there's been a lot to untangle and understand- Countless hours of difficult discussions with my children-

We've had 6 deaths and several other life changing events over the course of a short period of time which involved more talking-

It's taken many, many years to digest what happened to us, a process that will be lifelong for all of us, immediate as well as extended members-

With all that in mind, I couldn't fathom the thought of forcing visitation- Ever- I'm many things, but not that- My focus is more on my own grown children and my relationship with them-

Grandparenting has gone off the deep end ..

rosecarmel, I think that is how it is supposed to be, where we think about our relationship with the parents, our adult children, first. Even in good relationships it seems like a lot of grandparents forget all about the adult children when grandchildren come along. Then it's all about those babies and those parents better get out of the way. Probably the cause of a lot of the problems.

OceanMama -- "it seems like a lot of grandparents forget all about the adult children when grandchildren come along. Then it's all about those babies and those parents better get out of the way."

I hate to 'do' what many EP's/EGP's do when they chant, "The 'horror stories' I have heard from other EP's..." but... I too have heard 'horror stories' of daughters/DiL's being treated as "incubators" and GP's insisting on naming the children etc. Placing demands on being present for the birth and over-all trying to take over the parents authority. When those parents say, "No. We are going to 'parent' Our way and you can either 'buy into' Our program or not be involved. Your choice."

The GP will then move to the, "You are being 'unreasonable'."

As MoD said, "The parents don’t need to be reasonable. They are the parents and can be as unreasonable as they like. It is still their decision who their children have a relationship with. I know that is difficult for many of you to accept, but it is the reality of the situation nonetheless."

And again... Who decides/gets to decide what is 'reasonable' when minor children are concerned?

If I was taken to court by both estranged sides of the 'family' and both sets of GP's were seeking visitation? I would look at the judge and say, "I'm not religious or 'into' the Bible but, there's a story 'in there' about splitting a baby and who would make the right/best choice for the child. Since a child cannot be cut in half, let alone 3 ways, We will give up custody for the best interests of Our children. You as 'the court' you can decide how to split them from there. OR you could trust that We know what is best for Us and our children and tell all these other folks to pound turf..."

Starblaze -- Oh my, the controversy on the word 'damaged'.

Healthy people know that abuse causes damage. I say/acknowledge that my abuse damaged Me. Damaged does not mean irretrievably broken (not repairable) -- We are proof that healthier IS possible.

Yet when We own our 'damage'? Abusers cling to, "Well I was abused as well and I got 'better' and the way You are acting/behaving/talking shows You are still 'mentally ill'." OR the worser, "You were 'damaged' by abuse so you should let your 'betters' decide what is 'best' for You/your children."

And I say, "You mean my 'betters'/the ones who caused my mental illnesses in the first place? Those people didn't care about Me/my needs at all BUT all of a sudden they have burning care about My children and their needs?"

Our healthier outlook/behavior looks 'mentally ill' to THEM because it is so radically different from dysfunction.

Worthitall, I've only read the opening post of your thread and I just want to say that Im very happy for you and your grandchildren.

Here's to happy happy days

I assume you mean the adults participating in this thread. Some of them are listening but they are disagreeing with a blanket statement that appears to say that all GPs who go to court are motivated by power and control. That is not "not listening", it is disagreeing with a generalisation that appears to be based on no measurable fact across ALL cases!

Going to court may well not be the best route for many many cases. I have knowledge of at least 2 where it was the best route, in the interests of the children, because of the motivations of the parents for refusing contact and the motivations of the GPs for requesting it through a court. I won't give any further details due to confidentiality issues but it is part of why I feel that generalisations are not helpful in these discussions

This in my mind says it all. An excellent post.

Grandparents rights are certainly important in some instances. For example if the grandparents have been primary caregivers to a child when the parent abandoned them etc. Or in sad cases of someone passing. There are 100% times when its needed. However I don’t believe that it should be there for the times where both parents say that the grandparents should not be in the grandchildrens lives (or at least make it harder for a grandparent to obtain). Hear me out here on why:

-We aren’t talking about abuse, first off. If you suspect that the parents are abusing their child then contact the relevant authorities and go for custody. Visitation rights would do nothing to protect the grandchildren and instead could increase violence
-Courts are not perfect, they can’t be. If they accept all testimonies then people that make false accusations could win, if they only accept proven evidence then abusers could hide their crimes. The worst case scenarios for both is that loving grandparents miss out on a relationship with grandchildren. This is incredibly sad but the flip side of this is that children are sent into abusive households. That makes me cold to my stomach.
-Even if the issue is between adults, I don’t think that gives them rights to the children. Adult issues can cause trauma to the adult children. I’m going to use only examples of adult centered reasons that people have estranged that I’ve read on reddit (r/justNOfamily and r/justnoMIL are good for seeing the other side). A teenager that is kicked out of home for having an abortion, an 18 year old that is disowned for being homosexual, A mother that uses a childs social security number to take out numerous loans and destroy their credit for life (I’ve read this so many times). I don’t think that abusive or not abusive should be the criteria.
-Parents forums are full of grandparents trying to force their will on parents. For example, trying to force their way into the delivery room, giving babies cereal before the current recommendations (4 months at least), giving babies honey, sending a message/call before showing up on the doorstep. These aren’t cases of abuse but rather parents just trying to parent. The grandparents usually explode upon realizing that they don’t have control anymore. Its not a quick process, but the parents try to get the grandparents to back off, try to have healthy boundaries and the controlling grandparents then use the court system to impose their will again. Going to post a link to just one story showing this.

Here is just one story of an overbearing grandparent that won't listen or give AC space. This is not abuse, so should the grandparent have rights to see the child unsupervised?
www.reddit.com/r/JUSTNOMIL/comments/glmj81/my_mom_has_gotten_way_too_overbearing_with_her/

I am sorry if my last post confused you Starblaze. That was not my intention

Before I read this thread today I would like to explain that I had a message from HQ that my post was deleted. The reason given was the honest answer I had given to Star's question and appears not to have taken into account the sympathy I showed. I am sorry if that caused anyone upset because I always try to answer questions put to me however uncomfortable that might be. Obviously I cannot use the words I used as they were deemed inappropriate.

I do hope others will answer questions put to them as it helps the debate.

Madgran77 Fri 19-Jun-20 15:57:51 you said that so much better than me! I would not have expected anyone to see that as an insult, it is a recognition that someone has been deeply hurt. I can pinpoint areas of my life which have damaged me as I expect many can. The extent of the damage varies according to the severity.

rosecarmel Fri 19-Jun-20 16:17:42 this is another thing that could be turned on its head to apply the other way

Motherofdragons Fri 19-Jun-20 17:11:46 I think we see logic differently, I see this as a situation where a parent could be manipulating the child/children by involving them in an adult situation whilst knowing this would hurt them.

If you believe the courts don't know best what other independent system would you suggest? Before a case even gets to the Family Court everyone is offered mediation and Cafcass interview each of them and give the courts a report.

You misunderstand, the court has overruled in the case of the OP and in the case I know of. It is not the 'parent's decision' if the court sees that they are wrong.

"The parents don’t need to be reasonable. They are the parents and can be as unreasonable as they like. It is still their decision who their children have a relationship with. I know that is difficult for many of you to accept, but it is the reality of the situation nonetheless." No, that is not the case, in law the parents have to do what is best for the children, no what they want. When the court sees that the parent is being unreasonable they can give a Court Order which makes the parent/s be reasonable. Fact

Star I did't "call you damaged" You asked me if I thought you were which is rather different. I answered and also showed you sympathy for the awful things which you had been through and said what I thought it would have done to me. I can't use the actual words for obvious reasons. It has been taken out of context.

If you look at the terms in which I post I do not make such personal comments. Everyone has a choice how much or how little they read on the threads and also how they interpret that. My post was kind, it was not intended to hurt but I'm sorry if you read it as hurtful. If it was still there you could go back and read again and understand my intention.

It is possible to be both strong and damaged. If I drop a glass and break it, it is damaged, if I break a leg it is damaged. If someone attacks me I am damaged. I do not see that as derogatory. Have you in your studies read Depression the Curse of the Strong"? It is an excellent book by Dr Tim Cantopher and discusses what makes us strong.

I hope that 'empathy' also works for gps who have been badly treated.

Granniesunite Fri 19-Jun-20 17:44:35 well said

I know of a few (not a lot handful at most) where the parents moved house post order, said they had to due to work. One even emigrated To Aus I believe.
It’s not as enforceable as a CAO for biological parent to PR.
Once visitation was disrupted long term I believe one case did go back but the parents won and one the GP couldn’t find them.

So the order isn’t always the be all and end all for the parents.
Thankfully my MIL wouldn’t ever had a chance with our children.
She would tell anyone who would listen that they adored her and how wonderful she is forgetting that every time my son saw her he asked her who she was.

Star I did not use the word 'permanently'. Now I am reading on it is quite clear that some people understood I was being sympathetic. I answered your question, please now answer the one I have asked you twice. Thanks

rosecarmel Sat 20-Jun-20 01:39:04 forgive me if I don't respond. Your posts are about your personal situation and I have no opinion on that. You are also removed from UK legislation so I don't think there is anything helpful I can say to you.

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.

Yes, again, it is the court that decides.

I don't recognise your description of the way we treat damaged people. Are you in the UK? Here we have great emphasis on helping anyone suffering mental illness and there is a lot (not enough) support for people.

Good to see your input BibiSarah

Ironflower Sat 20-Jun-20 08:39:18 those are awful situations but I don't think they are normal or at least I hope not! Just for balance let me give you some of the 'reasons' AC cut off GPs: GPs don't do enough childcare, GPs don't help financially, GPs moved further away from them, GPs didn't jump to help when asked and so on. I have also heard of cutting off because GPs were still friendly with someone the parents didn't like. However, none of the above are good things and the fact that some behave in such ways should not prevent good gps and gcs being able to retain their good relationship relationship.

In summary, we all know of people who behave badly so in cases where the situation cannot be resolved but the adults the only solution is the court process. It may not be ideal but it is all we have. If there are other solutions I would love to hear them,

Bibbity what are CAOs & PR? I think parental responsibility may be the latter but don't think the OP meant that. Is CAO Child Arrangement Order? Just think it is a good idea to spell it out for those who don't know