Help us: Allow children to see their grandparents

Don't waste your time smarting jayanna, it's not worth it. People condemn themselves with their own words sometimes.

Yeah, I know. That's what you get for worrying about other people. All for me from now on!!

I wont be signing for 2 reasons. The first being my mother has narcissistic personality disorder but appears very charming and caring and I would have hated any court insisting she have contact with my children against my wishes.
Secondly my daughter in law has banned me from seeing my youngest 2 grandchildren (even though I was once their registered childminder) because I reported her for drug taking. I feel if she were forced to allow me to see the children it would cause even more misery for them

Why not the novel approach of getting on well with the AC and visiting GC as the AC allow?

Sorting out any issues one has with their AC seems enough.

There are way too many toxic and abusive GPs for such a law to effectively decide access.

Better the courts on a case by case basis.

Norah, the approach you recommend works well for the majority of families. Ziggy62 has been banned by her daughter in law because "I reported her for drug taking". Ziggy doesn't go in to detail about the what's and why's of this, or mention her son's role. I'm not expecting you to Ziggy, it's personal business. Ziggy has decided to let this go to avoid causing even more misery for her grandchildren.
Grandparents in her situation are between the rock and the hard place.
Those of us with ordinary relationships, no significant concerns about our adult children's ability to care for their own children need to count our blessings daily.
Having said all this, I wouldn't sign this petition. The Children Act puts children at its centre. If care proceedings are started the local authority has a duty to promote contact between the children and significant people in their lives, providing its in the best interests of the children.
It's dreadful that cuts to legal aid leave parents/grandparents in private law proceedings without legal representation. A parent will get legal aid if there is a history of domestic abuse.
It's also unfortunate that mediation services are being cut rather than extended. As a society, we need to fund these vital services.

I care about this issue with a passion....Having worked with many children in Education for 30 plus years and also worked alongside families in Child Protection I would say this.....the child's needs are often overlooked.... adults need to leave their over inflated egos at the door.....stop arguing among themselves and allow these poor children see their loving and caring Grandparents....it is truly heartbreaking and damaging for a child to be kept from their Grandparents, whom they love and in turn love them....I am going through this hell on Earth at this moment.....never ending grief. I know my Grandchildren will be suffering and missing us dreadfully.Parents are are not always child centred...they can be selfish and immature and their own children are often their weapon of choice and so they will refuse contact, if it suits their aims. A change in the law, which in my opinion,is woefully overdue, would at least give children a better chance to stay in contact with their Grandparents. I have talked this through with a number of professionals and Grandparents Plus.This is just my thoughts and opinion....best wishes with the petition....from this bereaved child centred Granny

orangelemon I empathise. My SiL thinks it's ok to use his children as pawns in his fight with D and now he's trying to using us not seeing them as a means of manipulating D.
Long story but D comes first.

Iam64 I certainly did not ask for details on her sons role, I pointed to her son as the person she should deal with regarding seeing the gc. There is no need to try to involve a dil who does not like ziggy. She should negotiate to her own child.

I am not getting involved with individual cases.

My concern is for grandparents who lose contact for no legal reason.

Umm, ego works both ways.......
From my observation Grandparents are not always as important to a child as the child is to the grandparents. Except where the grandparent has been the main, full time carer it's the parents who are the focus of the child's world.

Not always, it's true, but they can be a very important "friend" to a child.

It is the grandchilds right

What is best for the grandchild

What the grandchild wants

When the grandchild is old enough to realise and make the decision

I'd say it is the parents who have the rights over their children.

This petition fails to take to account the toxic GPs, the abusive GPs, and GPs CO for AC reasons. The courts can sort on an individual basis rather than this covering all no matter what.

It's a place to start though isn't it. A court wouldn't allow "toxic GPs, the abusive GP's" to have contact. As for "GPs CO for AC reasons" well isn't that "covering all no matter what"?

ALL estranged GP's have been cut out due to their AC's 'reasons' and in all too many sad cases the real 'reason' is one of spite. The estranged GP's on GN accept that a GC who would be at risk by having contact with their GP's is rightly kept away. As Anniesuzie said "(her) concern is for grandparents who lose contact for no legal reason".

Not all GP's are fit to have contact with their GC and not all estranged GP's are toxic and abusive. The latter are being abused by their AC children who use their own children as weapons with no qualms about denying them the love and support their GP's can bring.

No, Smileless. By this petition covering all no matter what - I mean covering all cases.

The courts can easier sort case by case - rather to put in place 'rights' where none are needed. However you and I fundamentally disagree about this.

I am completely happy to how my family sorts issues. Just a difference of opinions.

I believe the 'rights' rest in the people who conceived the child. Not their mums. I don't find it at all strange when parents CO people for their own reasons - maybe unknown.

As things stand the only real chance estranged GP's have is if they had regular and meaningful contact with their GC before the estrangement. Even in those cases the rate of success is very low and this does nothing to help GP's who've never had contact.

Mr. S. and I decided some time ago that we'd never try to gain contact to our GC through the courts. Neither of us thought it would be in the best interest of our GC for us to see them against their parents wishes but that's just our personal opinion.

I can't help but wonder though that if things changed and some AC knew there was a distinct possibility that contact could be ordered by the courts whether they liked it or not, they'd be less likely to deny contact for no good reason.

It's not rocket science is it to arrange for GP's to see their GC and the AC to have as little contact with their parents as possible. Last summer our ES told his brother he'd never said that we couldn't see our GC and would never be able to see them. He's right, he's never said so but we haven't seen the 5 year old since he was 8 months and have never seen his little brother.

When I found about this I wrote and asked if we could see them. I'm still waiting for his reply.

With all due respect Norah you may well have found it very strange as well as heartbreaking had you been unfortunate enough to have been CO by one of your own AC and CO from the lives of your GC too "for their own reasons - maybe unknown".

Norah - I'm another one who feels strongly about this issue. Your comment that "it is the parents who have rights over their children" is imo, both legally and ethically incorrect.
Parents have responsibilities to their children. Those responsibilities include meeting their emotional and developmental needs and keeping them safe. It goes without question that parents who experienced abuse either directly from their parent or because of neglect/ lack of protection, will be wary of history repeating. Those are the parents who are likely to have our understanding when they refuse to allow their children to spend time with grandparents.
The children are, quite rightly, the individuals who have "rights" here.

I agree with the points Smileless makes, although in some circumstances, it would be difficult to arrange contact between adult children and their parents. Animosity and anger can spill over into contact sessions. The kind of parents who try to turn their children against the other parents are likely to repeat that kind of emotionally damaging behaviour in relation to the parents they are estranged from.
I feel for Smileless, making the decision not to try and insist on a relationship with her grandchildren in the face of the breakdown in the relationship between she and her husband, their son and daughter in law. It's rarely the case that people have somehow "deserved" to be cut off from grandchildren, alongside losing their own adult child. Heartbreaking isn't an exaggeration. Some compassion for everyone in this rotten situation wouldn't go amiss.

Signing this petition won`t in itself lead to a change in the law but it will raise awareness of the situation.

And if 100,000 people sign (which, sadly, is not likely) Parliament will debate the problem. What on earth could be wrong with that?

Are some of you frightened that the general public might learn what is going on in a lot of families?

The fact that 90% of grandparents want to see their grandparents sounds great, but what if there are grandparents who are kept from their grandchildren because the parents and/or others have concerns about their children's safety in their grandparents presence, What about the 10% who do not want to see their grandchildren.

Laws have to cover every eventuality and if a petiton like this was granted and grandparents abducted or killed grandchildren as a result, what then?

I am not saying a that there should be a categoric 'no' to any contact, but this petition as currently worded is dangerous and would put some children at risk.

If someone does a proper study of the subject, examines how the law works in other countries and whether there have been disasters and then prepares a carefully thought out proposal based on these studies, I might well change my mind.

But this petition as presented puts children's lives and welfare at risk.

I repeat - the petition cannot affect law - and therefore cannot put anyone at risk. It can merely trigger debate by Parliament - which hopefully would then lead to a proper study etc etc

How can this possibly be a problem?

If the matter was raised in Parliament as a result of the e-petition, there would be a debate, not a discussion.
Presumably the wording of the motion would be the same as that of the petition.
I think it's unlikely that such a motion would be passed, for the reasons cited by several posters.
If what the petitioners really want is research into estrangement, then that is what the petition should be asking for.

My understanding from the Petition Website is that there could well be discussion rather than straight forward debates "Debates
Petitions which reach 100,000 signatures are almost always debated. But we may decide not to put a petition forward for debate if the issue has already been debated recently or there’s a debate scheduled for the near future. If that’s the case, we’ll tell you how you can find out more about parliamentary debates on the issue raised by your petition.
MPs might consider your petition for a debate before it reaches 100,000 signatures.
We may contact you about the issue covered by your petition. For example, we sometimes invite people who create petitions to take part in a discussion with MPs or government ministers, or to give evidence to a select committee. We may also write to other people or organisations to ask them about the issue raised by your petition."

Again - I cannot see why people are so against this problem being considered by Parliament

Again - it's the wording of the petition.

Clearly the rights (responsibilities) of parents to their children are not a part of this petition.

How could anyone sign a petition that fails to take to account why the parents object to grandchildren interacting with GPs? GPs with unacceptable behaviours.

Rather the courts can continue to sort on an individual case by case basis.

To clarify, OP is to a petition - not to mums on the support thread.

eddiecat78 The purpose of a petition is presumably to seek to change the law. I would never support a petition asking for a change in the law, where the change, as requested in the petition is too wide or loose in its coverage or, as worded here, could put a group of vulnerable people, in this case children, at risk.