The truth is, No Contact is certainly not abuse when a GP threatens to take their child and spouse to court and they subsequently walk away from the relationship...
Do you think you know when you are going to die?
Gransnet forums
Estrangement
Is 'No Contact' abuse?
(1001 Posts)GNHQ have commented on this thread. Read here.
This seems to be a core question where estrangement is concerned.
It's a yes/no question as far as I can see, so I will start with my example...
No. No Contact is not abuse. No one can abuse anyone they are not in contact with.
See that sounds like another blanket statement to me HolyHannah. It doesn't apply to me personally, but I'm thinking:
What about if all parties have had a good relationship, and the children have grown up with a fantastic relationship with their grandparents, and the parents stop contact just to punish the parents they are angry with though the grandchildren are very upset and old enough to have some choice if possible? It has been known to happen in divorces. I don't know much about these things, but if a court rules it is in the best interest of the grandchildren (and they sometimes do) doesn't that suggest going to court might have been correct?
What about instances where granny knows her daughter has mental health problems and needs to keep an eye out that she's managing to look after the GC?
hugshelp -- Court cases cause hardships to a family that unless you are intimately familiar with/have been through, you cannot understand.
Just the threat of such a case would cause me to end a relationship and that same threat is why 4 poor grand-parents don't know our children.
If someone has an adult child with issues that are effecting their ability to parent their minor children, then there are avenues to take beyond launching a court case to force visitation!
Do you believe someone with 'mental health problems' needs/will do "well" with the added stress of litigation? As someone that suffers with MHI's the answer is No.
My C-PTSD is caused from child-hood trauma and I am sure my 'mom' would love to be able to 'go to court' and have me deemed an "unfit parent" due to those issues.
If my MHI's are creating issues in my parenting, the 'solution' would certainly NOT include handing my children over to the person who damaged me.
As for people pulling their children away from "loving grand-parents"... That's up for debate. I know lots of No Contact AC and I haven't met one yet that was cheering, "I'm keeping my kids away to 'punish' my 'family'!"
EP's and EGP's seem to believe that it is common that NC is a 'power play' being used to 'punish' and the grand-kids are being used as 'pawns'... EAC tend to disagree there as well.
Excellent post hugshelp you obviously know more "about these things" than you realise
As I have said, it's not something I know much about. I'm here to learn as well as talk. I certainly take your point with regards to mental health issues.
However, I do have to ask. Why is there this procedure then for grandparents to go to court? Why do the courts sometimes grant it? I'm pretty sure the courts are supposed to go with what is in the best interests of the child. So are you saying the courts are always wrong? (this may be the case, I don't know).
Smileless -- So you don't think you should have apologized for threatening to take you son and DiL to court?
I would want/expect an apology if someone leveled that threat at me. I'd also want an assurance that the topic would NEVER be broached again.
Of your other son you say, "I've lost count of the number of times he said that we must have some thing to apologise for, and I told him over and over again, that we had done nothing wrong and so there would be no apology."
You didn't do anything 'wrong' but threaten to take your son and DiL to court...
The procedure is there because some GP's are cut out of their GC's lives because of a break down of their relationship with the child's parent(s).
The courts are there to do what is in the best interest of the child and yes, they make mistakes. They can make the mistake of giving a contact order to a GP where it would better for the child if there was no contact with their GP, and they can make a mistake of denying that GP/GC relationship which is not in the best interests of the child.
hugshelp -- GP Rights laws in most places are written that set very certain circumstances for visitation to be granted.
Usually those cases are for AC who have divorced or a parent dies and IF the grand-parents had an established relationship the court could grant access IF it is deemed in the "best interests" of the minor child(ren).
In the case of two married parents deciding to end contact with anyone is generally not actionable in the courts and it shouldn't be in my opinion.
I don't want to compare apples to oranges. I am talking about stable married couples being taken to court because the grand-parents don't agree with their parenting choices.... Including No Contact with them.
www.theguardian.com/society/2018/apr/10/ellie-butler-unlawfully-killed-inquest-ben-butler
The last time I posted this link re the Ellie Butler case I pointed out that the GPs lost their case, very sadly for Ellie, and that on this occasion the Court got it wrong. Ellie's father and mother had "chosen to go No Contact" with her GPs! I wonder why!!!! .
The point being that the law is there, the courts decide and hopefully usually get it right. But it would be dangerous to assume the "right" motivations of the parents and the "wrong" motivations of the GPs in every case
Poor Ellie !
Madgran -- There are stories like that that cut both ways... Certainly there was a pattern of abuse in that case and authorities did drop the ball. That said, there are also grand-parents who have killed their grand-child(ren) even when the parents objected to them having contact.
There's really not a No Contact element in the story and I'm not sure that court ordered visitation with the grand-parents would have changed the tragic outcome.
Returning a child to a known abuser(s) and two parents keeping their minor children from people whom they consider to be abusive is rather apple and orange...
I know it cuts both ways. My point is one cannot assume that the motivations of parents or the motivations of GPs are ALWAYS for the right or wrong reasons. Every case is different!!
Who knows in Ellies case and it is too late for her so we will never know
I googled how many GP's in the UK have been convicted of murdering their GC, and the only results that came up were of cases where GP's have been unsuccessful in their attempts to intervene, and save their GC.
The first that came up was the one you referred too Madgran, the tragic case of Ellie Butler.
A terrible case
. As I posted there was no record of any cases where GP's in the UK have been convicted of murdering their GC. That appalling case was in Montana.
Another terrible case which once again was not in the UK but Toronto.
Madgran what does that story have to do with what is being discussed?
But it would be dangerous to assume the "right" motivations of the parents and the "wrong" motivations of the GPs in every case
Had Ellie been placed in foster care, she would still have been returned to her parents. It has nothing to do with the grandparents, or the parents’ motivations always being assumed right. The local authority pushed for Ellie to be returned to her parents, despite, not only the concerns of her grandparents, but also the police!
This was due to massive failings by the local authority to keep Ellie safe, which unfortunately is not uncommon. I can think of many tragic cases in recent years where the local authority has pushed for a child to remain with/be returned to abusive parents - Baby P, Declan Hainey.
There is neither a grandparents’ rights or no contact element to this case in the slightest. And it is in poor taste to suggest there is.
As if AEC don't know all too well that abusive parents exist. As if AEC don't know that local authorities, police and courts make mistakes when it comes to leaving children with abusive people. I really can't understand why a child's death would be used as some sort of justification... For what? An argument against AEC saying that abusive parents become abusive grandparents and please please please consider the amount of abused children like us who have very clever, manipulative parents who would LOVE to get their hands on our children to use as weapons against us?
I'm sorry, that's just awful.
Also, no grandparents have murdered a child in the UK? What is that supposed to prove? What about the sexual abuse done to me by a grandparent? Or the emotional abuse? Or physical abuse? Doesn't count?
I feel sick.
MoD -- "There is neither a grandparents’ rights or no contact element to this case in the slightest. And it is in poor taste to suggest there is."
There are plenty of examples of grand-parents killing grand-children world-wide and for various 'reasons'. Just as there are examples of parents who kill their children.
All this article swapping just proves there are a lot of abusive people "out there" and children are at risk. That's why it's important to not erode the rights of parents to do their job.
Abuse is often he said/she said... So if married parents choose No Contact then that should be the end of the conversation.
Madgran what does that story have to do with what is being discussed?
My point is that motivations of GPs for applying and motivations of Parents for no contact have been referred to throughout this thread with assumptions made about those motivations. This story sadly illustrates that NO assumptions can ever be made about the motivations of either parents or GPs in ANY case.
There is neither a grandparents’ rights or no contact element to this case in the slightest. And it is in poor taste to suggest there is.
I haven't suggested there is!!
some sort of justification
It's not being used as a justification for anything. It shows that generalised assumptions can't be made about motivations which sadly keeps happening in this thread.
granny knows her daughter has mental health problems and needs to keep an eye out that she's managing to look after the GC?
If you were seriously concerned about the mental health of your child (and safety of grandchildren) you would NOT be suing for visitation. A child can be abused/ killed in SECONDS. Visitation would not prevent that at all. The stress of the court case could also force any mental health issues to become worse. If you sued for visitation it wasn't for the safety of the grandkids, you would have gone for custody.
If anyone ever threatens me with a lawsuit, they are done forever. Even if they apologised, I likely would never forgive them.
Also an adult does not need their mummy watching their mental health. Mummy isn't a professional and child is an adult. An overbearing mother can cause mental health issues. If you believe she's a danger, then you take the proper government channels. If there was an actual problem (and not just in your mind) then you would only be making it WORSE
This discussion thread has reached a 1000 message limit, and so cannot accept new messages.
Start a new discussion
