Just to see the children

I do sympathise with you, the pain from estrangement is sometimes unbearable. Our two granddaughters cut us out of their lives 13 years ago and we weren’t included in their weddings which hurt a great deal and now they have both had a son so we will never meet our great-grandsons or any more children they may have. I used to go on their FaceBook pages a lot but it always upset me for days afterwards so I made the decision not to do it any more when the youngest turned 30 and I think it was the right decision for me. Thankfully their father is still in our lives, he was cut off too, and makes sure that his children with his second wife are very much in our lives. I know your situation is different but I think it will hurt you if you try to watch your grandchildren from afar and it may ruin chances of a reconciliation. I hope your pain gets less as time goes by. ❤️

Sweep123

Are other countries and the EU wrong to allow grandparents the right to see their grandchildren? I would never tell parents how to bring up their children. “Demanding” access sounds much harsher than “I am so happy that I am now allowed to see my grandchildren and hope this may lead to a better relationship between us as I’ve missed you too”

Taking someone to court for access to their!children is very rarely going to result in a healthier relationship for all.

Sweep123

I would never go to court to demand access. I was meaning if the law in this country was changed to give grandparents access. the same as in the EU and many other countries

How do they get access without going to court though?

I think you’ve romanticized this idea of access. Kindly, please try to focus on other areas of your life for fulfillment

Is it just with regard to GP's going to court to see their GC that people have an issue with? What about parents being unable to take their children out of school without the school's permission, and being fined if they do.

30 years ago this wasn't the case. We had an additional 10 days over and above the school holiday allotment to use at our discretion. Is this regarded as an erosion of parental rights?

I'm sure I have read about this in some schools where children have had items removed from lunch boxes deemed to be unsuitable, what about a parents right to give them the food they wish?

I'm sure providing the parents of their GC obeyed the granted contact order, there are some who would be more than happy to contribute toward child support. I fail however to see any sense in that suggestion, almost like blackmail; if you pay you can see them.

It does appear that when ever this issue is discussed on GN, it's bitterness toward GP's that forms the basis of the majority of arguments against this rather than what's in the best interests of the children.

No, the children aren't asked but are children asked if they want to see their GP's and if they do, are parents able to put their personal grievances to one side, in the best interest of their children.

I have taken my children out of school on school time and I will continue to.

My children are currently having school dinners as apparently that looked nicer than what I packed.

It's not blackmail. Just funny how some demand all the rights and none of the responsibilities.

Many children want and ask to do things that are not good for them. So that would be where the parents judgment comes in.

Also I put value on the parents MH. As a healthy parent is best for children. If being forced to have the GP in the parents life is negative for them then they should be able to fully remove them.

I am surrounded by My living GPs. My children worship their GPs. But GPs are not that important.

Some people would regard that as an erosion of parents rights, others would regard it as safeguarding their children's education.

It depends really.

My children have never asked to see grandparents except the one who lives abroad and they absolutely would love to see far more often. It doesn't erode their rights that he can't visit more.

Wishing to maintain the relationship you have with your GC is hardly demanding "all the rights and none of the responsibilities Bibbity; that did make me laugh.

It would appear that "the parents judgement" isn't always as it should be which is why there's provision under the law, within the Children Act to enable GP's in some instances to apply to the courts.

Exactly VS as "safeguarding their children's education" and in some instances GP's with the courts assistance safeguarding the children's relationship with their GP's.

Can you show me that, Smileless? I have asked you before because I haven't been able to find it.

You are welcome to that opinion.

If parents are deemed to raise children with no outside influence. Then they are fit or decide who is involved.

And the ones subjected to the discussed influence of the Grandparents are the best to judge.

Smileless there are instances before where I have agreed with you that some grandparents are cut off from their grandchildren unfairly, due to the loss of a parent or divorce etc.

When both parents agree a child should not see a grandparent, there should be no basis for a grandparent to come to court.

Where one parent says that grandparents are unsafe, again that is a safeguarding issue and the parents views should be paramount and the grandparent should not have leave to take it to court and cause further stress and upset to the family.

These decisions are made before the process starts, and the grandparent has to prove they have been a big part of the child's life and a positive one to start the process.

This is as it should be. Granting rights would change the law and allow all grandparents to go to court.

Not just Grandparents. Aunts, Uncles, Cousins!

Welcome or not Bibbity it isn't just my opinion I'm giving, I'm also discussing the law.

Yes and when you asked me before VS I told you I couldn't tell you where it is. I also told you my brother is a retired family solicitor who represented both parents and GP's on this matter, just in case you doubt what I am saying.

Sorry, I've studied the children's act for my diploma and don't remember seeing that Smileless. I've tried to find it again since too.

I'm always happy to be proven wrong though.

And like I said. I am thankful it is not enforced.

I don't think it being in the children's act would change my opinion though as I believe as things stand is the best way to ensure children remain safe.

Yes Bibbity extended family members isn't just about GP's.

Obviously I'm not talking about cases where children would be at risk VS and I know what the procedures are, what evidence has to be provided by the GP's etc.

One parent could be claiming the GP's are unsafe due to their personal prejudice. GP's don't have leave to go to court, they have get the courts permission (leave) before any legal process can begin. They have to apply to court to go to court.

Of course the GP's need to demonstrate they have been a positive and large part of their GC's lives. All GP's have the right to apply to the courts, but not all are successful.

And the issue is what child collects evidence while growing up?

I can't prove your wrong VS as although I too studied the Children Act as part of my degree course, I didn't study it in great detail.

As things stand the implementation of the Children Act, indeed the very reason it was established back in 1889 is to ensure children's safety.

Very few are grandparents successfully get leave and very few of those few will ever get any access through the court

This is because the mere act of going to court and then forcing a parent to hand over a child to someone else for any period of time will be detremntal in some way to both the parent and the child.

Even the other parent, where one parent says they are unsafe must jump through many many hoops to get access through courts.

This is safeguarding children and as it should be.

It doesn't matter if in some cases a child's parent refuses contact for no good reason. What matters is safeguarding children first and foremost and so the courts must do this. No one has rights to children except their parents and even some parents must fight for those rights in order to ensure all children are kept safe.

I hope all you estranged grans who have been cut out of your children’s and grandchildren’s lives will also cut them out of your wills.

Once again this is proving to be a pointless discussion with you VS as you keep talking about parents rights with regard to their children, despite my saying numerous times here on GN over the years, that in the case of children seeing their GP's it's not the rights of the parents or GP's that are the issue, it's the rights of the children.

We've done so glammagran it wasn't an easy decision but for us it would be wholly inappropriate for our ES to inherit from two people he refuses to have contact with.

Again, it is not the children enforcing their rights, it's the grandparents.

The children's act in its entirety safeguards children from harm.

So that is why things are as they are and must stay that way.

I am afraid if you do it will be a slippery slope. How long before you start to think about how to engineer a meeting?

It is pointless arguing about whether a GP is right or wrong to want access just as it is pointless pontificating as to whether the parent is right or wrong. Judgements get skewed in such an emotive area and what one person would think was acceptable, another would heartily disagree.

For my part, I think that as along as a GP isn't unsafe with the children , either emotionally or physically, or the children aren't adversely affected, it is usually best for children to have the widest engagement with their extended family. Sadly, parents are not always the best people to make that decision and it should be the children's rights that are paramount. Unfortunately, children are used as pawns with very little say and rather than a Court Hearing, I would like to see parents explain themselves to an unbiased mediator. I would like to see a system where an independent arbiter worked with the families to see what arrangements could be put in place so nobody loses out. Unfortunately, that would be expensive so it will never happen.