Grandparent rights

Smileless

Allowing a child to have a relationship with a GP doesn't always mean the GP is a safe person.

GFIL did things to his daughter that should have resulted in criminal prosecution, and he should NEVER have been allowed to have a relationship with his GC, particularly the girls. However, FIL basically thought the sun rose and set on his father, and insisted on taking the children over. MIL was, at the time, rather a passive person and didn't feel she could say no, although she did ensure that my SIL was never left alone with GFIL.

Being abused as a child can cause a person to believe that abuse is normal and acceptable. Some adults are still too much in the FOG (Fear, Obligation, Guilt) to recognize that their parents aren't safe.

Yes to Chewbacca's post at 20.01 today. Emotional maturity and intelligence are key to healthy relationships.
Most families muddle through all kinds of life's difficulties, without relationships totally breaking down. Estrangement is very difficult to recover from, to rebuild trust. Sometimes people make the least worst, most healthy decision for them, which is to stop trying to mend something that's irreparably broken.

But any adult who has the emotional maturity and stability to be able to separate their own feelings of anger or disconnect with their family, can also recognise that, unless extreme circumstances are at play, they shouldn't be passing down their conflict to the next generation

Spot on Chewbacca .

Good post Chewbacca.

Should it be foisted on the children? No, I don't believe it should. If the adults are unable to conduct an amicable relationship then by all means stop, or reduce, contact. But any adult who has the emotional maturity and stability to be able to separate their own feelings of anger or disconnect with their family, can also recognise that, unless extreme circumstances are at play, they shouldn't be passing down their conflict to the next generation. Obviously there will be certain circumstances where this is not applicable.

oops posted too soon. You can't have a relationship with anyone who doesn't want a relationship with you. That's what estrangement is all about isn't it, not having a relationship, but should the parents decision not to have a relationship with their parents, be foisted onto their children?

I would think that for those GP's who do take the court route, they already know that their relationship with their AC is unlikely to be reconciled, so in that regard they have nothing to lose.

It's always pointed out to those who post on GN because they're considering this option, that it could well be 'the final nail in the coffin' so to speak. It's very much a personal decision and while we would never have done so, I understand why there are GP's who decide to try and take their case to court.

I agree that it doesn't necessarily make for a stable relationship in the long term but if more parents took the view that Chewbacca did, none of this would be necessary.

I think it does matter who is at fault. It may not matter to some parents at the time, but may well do in the future when their children want to know why they were stopped from seeing their GP's, especially if they come to realise that it wasn't their GP's who were at fault.



You can't have a relationship with anyone who doesn't want a relationship with you

Who mentioned taking anyone to court?

I don't think it matters who is at fault really.
If someone takes you to court though to argue against your decisions I don't think it's likely they get forgiven in the future.
Is going against your child's decisions and fighting to see grandchildren more important than finding ways to have a relationship with a child.
I don't see how that would ever make things stable in the long term for any of those relationships with gtandchildren and it would be quite rare for it to have a happy ending.
It makes sense to me that the law doesn't give grandparents rights its a can of worms in the US where they do exist in a lot of states.

"I have no right to involve my DC in conflict that has nothing to do with them and that they had no part of" such wise words Chewbacca and just think of all the heartache that could be spared if others felt and behaved as you did.

That must be so hard Sparkling but how wonderful that you see your GD.

Norah, indeed waiting until they are grown is what lists of us have to do, you miss all the lovely stages in their life and don’t make a bond together, it’s different when they turn up at about 16 and want to get to know you, however well you get on, you can’t make up for lost years, when the mother gets to know they are seeing you, within minutes of arrival there’s an urgent phone call on their mobile to go back home, granddaughter says she’s like it with everyone, but still goes and you smile and say that’s ok, whenever you get the time. It’s heartbreaking.

Waiting to be asked may be the answer. The GC may ask when they become to the correct age.

Precisely Norah; exactly this. As Smileless 2012 rightly points out, every situation is different and one can't apply their own experiences and circumstances as a blanket solution for everybody else. In my own, personal experience, I decided to cut contact with my family when my DC were in their early teens. Up until then, despite there having been a long standing fraught relationship between me and my family, I was emotionally mature enough not to involve my DC in that and I continued to enable and encourage contact between them. It was only when DC reached 16 that they made their own, independent decision not to continue to see them. They didn't discuss with me how they had reached that decision, or what their reasons were but I accepted it. I have no right to involve my DC in conflict that has nothing to do with them and that they had no part of.

Waiting to be asked may be the answer. The GC may ask when they become to the correct age.

"Adults need to sort it out, not go to war over children" exactly Armadillo. Not all situations are like yours, some EP's and EGP's do want a relationship with their AC; it's their AC who doesn't want a relationship with them.

Where there's an established relationship between children and their GP's, which presumably would not be the case if there was the remotest possibility that the children would be at risk by spending time with their GP's, it's wrong to suddenly deprive those children of their GP's.

I have seen numerous examples here on GN where the threat of not being allowed to see GC has been implied or actually stated if the parents of those children don't get what they want, when they want it. Childcare and financial assistance being the two main criteria and GP's walking on egg shells for fear of doing or saying the wrong thing and being stopped from seeing their GC.

I agree that "no child should be stuck in between" and in the examples I've given, it's the parents not the GP's who are at fault.

That's a parents job to decide who their children see and where they go until they are old enough to have that responsibility. That doesn't make them bad parents if they decide if they can't have a good relationship with someone it would be better for the family to stay away.
If I took my boys to my mum when they were younger, it would be stressful for them and me. If it was court ordered and they had no choice that would cause a lot of stress.
Mum would need to make things right with me to have a chance with them. She doesn't want a relationship with me and I don't want one with her if she doesn't change and no child should be stuck in between that.
Adults need to sort it out, not go to war over children.

That's a good point Yogagirl, even when older GC are going to have been swayed by their parents view of their GP's and may not feel inclined to seek them out. If and when they do, as you say the GP's may no longer be around so they'll never have had the opportunity to get to know them or anything about them.

Sparkling it's terrible when parents turn their children against their GP's. Thank goodness we were never given the opportunity to get to know our GC. Our loss is great but could have been so much worse.

If it’s my post you’re referring to Yogagirl, can I just reiterate that our children’s grandparents did see them from birth and in their early years, on and off. It was so difficult to see them, because they were so difficult. My husband eventually would sink into a depression around his mum, and once our older two children noticed this, we called it a day. Children are not as oblivious to things as we might think. The number of things even my youngest two picked up on, was staggering, when you consider they were pre school at the time. We made the choice to cut off, with the hope our children would see their grandparents once independent. We had to choose between them being damaged by carrying on as we were....or not seeing them at all. We took a risk, and it paid off. None of my four kids wanted to pursue a relationship. That saw the problems for themselves. We learnt how not to behave with our adult children, and we’ve told them if we overstep the mark....to tell us. We all have a great relationship now....and I have the mistakes made by our parents to thank for that.

Endorse everything Smileless has said.

Dee Dee, from experience I would say no, they make it so difficult and turn the children against you. I would try to speak with the parents and see if they are willing for them to have contact, loving parents should want what’s best for their children, to be happy and know and how important grandparents are. If they make it clear they will not allow it, you can save yourself years of anguish by accepting it, send
loving messages and cards and presents, if they are returned
open bank accounts and put cash in there for when they are older. Don’t ruin your life waiting for a miracle, if it happens well and good. Good luck.

So a parent saying to the child go and see nanny & granddad if you want isn't quite as it seems/sounds, is it.

If a small child is stopped or not able to go and see their beloved GP as they are too small to go alone, by the time they are old enough, the GP would by that time be strangers, so therefore the child wouldn't choose to visit.

The golden time between GP &GC is from birth to about 12yrs, after which youngsters go their own way, off with their friends on adventures, GP now seem boring, all quite normal. They still love their GP, but now friends come first.

As the GC grows into adulthood, they may delve into genealogy and then become interested in their family history & therefore their GP, by which time the GP are probably gone. Also if a child has grown up knowing there is animosity between their parents and GP it would naturally put them off visiting the GP. Until they learn otherwise.

No you're right Toadinthehole but I'll always appreciate the thought.

Aww, nearly the same as me Smileless, I’m 62 this year.... no it wouldn’t have worked would it?!!

Similar story here too Scentia; not seen my parents for over 20 years, by my choice. But I knew that I couldn't make that decision on behalf of, my then, teenage DC and so always made it clear that I would take them to see their GPs, and pick them up again afterwards. They only went twice and then refused to go again. To this day, I've never asked them why they made that decision; I just respected it.

I have been estranged from my parents for 20 years, I always gave my DC the option to see them if they wanted to and they sometimes went with their aunt to see them. Once my DS got to 11 he asked not to go again and when DD was 20 she stopped any regular contact. She will visit at Christmas to drop off presents but that is all. I never forced my views on them and as a GP now so glad I left that decision to my children as I would be lost without my DGS.