Just don't know what to do

[emjanedel]

I wrote on here about 2 weeks ago in the thread CAFCASS. MY SD and i had words about her wanting to have sole contact with her father without me or my baby (her half sibling). Our cafcass officer was extremely understanding and put it down to us all being under pressure. We were in court today and the cafcass recomendation was that we slowly build up contact until she feels ready to spend nights etc.
We were in court today and the other sides solicitor explained to the judge that sd has been so very distressed since that day so i should not be included in the contact. The have asked that my partner and my baby have contact and that i am not to be there at all. The judge has said that this is to happen for 6 sessions (my dp and baby having contact once a fortnight) and that he will give a final order in 12 weeks. Is this normal? I am so upset i don't feel i have done anything wrong and cafcass have said that i haven't. My feeling is that if the 6 sessions are successful then it will be dp and baby going for contact and me excluded. I am so upset that this has happend. and i don't know what to d0 expdect cry and i've done a lot of that.

[emjanedel]

We are representing ourseleves. The judge has said that for 6 seesions i am to be excluded but dp is to take our baby and if after them 6 sessions she wants to see me then i can be introduced but if she doesn't then contact will just be the three of them. Its the idea that as of next week dp will go out for contact with dd and sd and i will be not involved. I'm just having a big pity party thats all.

[lateatwork]

That is really awful. I truly feel for you.

I havent had that sort of thing imposed on me by court and I would be livid if it did happen. For me it would not so much be about DH and DBS spending quality time together (I am all for that...) it is being excluded.

When DBS had a school event to go to on our contact night, I was totally up for ex going to said event with DP and DBS and not me. Its his school thing afterall and I was fine with it. What I was NOT fine with, was ex demanding that DD attend to (she was 5 months old at the time....) as DBS (aged 5 then...) wanted his sister to come too. I refused and wouldnt allow her to go... firstly it was over her bed time, secondly she was being breastfed and thirdly it just felt weird. What ex was trying to do was assert that she, DP, DBS and DD were DBS 'family' and that I was not. DBS was, as usual just being used. That was just one night... and I know how pants it made me feel so I really really feel for you.

Hope it gets better soon.

[pleasechange]

This is awful. I have no experience of this sort of thing but I just fnd it that you're expected to hand over your own child to comply with the unreasonable request of ex and the other child. There are in effect vilifying you, and the court is supporting that . Really feel bad for you. magicjamas has some good advice - you need some outside support as she suggests

[redfairy]

The 'reasonable' side of me says to go along with what the court has said but the human side says to put your foot down and say that if after the initial six sessions your DBD is not happy to include you then your baby will not be included in further visits until it is accepted that you, DP and baby are a family unit and must be accepted as such. This is pure manipulation on the part of the ex and I can't understand why this order has been made this way. I'm angry on your behalf.

What is your partners take on all this?

[DeLadyDeGaga]

You poor woman.

I have never heard anything so ridiculous as expecting a mother to hand over her child, in order to spend the day with her husband and step child. It's utterly ludicrous. It's sending the wrong message for a start. You and your sd's dad are a family unit. If she doesn't want to see you....fair enough. But to separate you and your child in order to make her happy? No. I would not allow this. Let her see her dad. Establish that relationship again and when/if she's ready (and she IS only a kid!) then, she develops contact with you and her step-sibling.

Is the baby actually a BABY? Are you breast feeding? I know my son couldn't be separated from me when he was still feeding.

It's all wrong. Just wrong.

[pleasechange]

The more I think about this I think that in your position I would put my foot down and say that your child stays with you. It's simply not right to show to a young child/baby that mum is to be excluded. Also why should you have to spend precious time apart from your baby . What does your DH say?

[catsmother]

Totally agree with Allnew. You are being marginalised and whilst I can appreciate, to a degree, the need for slowly-slowly catchee monkey so far as dad and daughter are concerned, it should be that relationship which is sorted out first before including the rest of the family .... and when that happens, it should be all of you. Even if the baby is literally a baby and will have no memory of this proposal, the judge has effectively given the green light to the stepchild (or her mother ???) to call the shots over her sibling .... that shouldn't be her call, it's up to the baby's parents to decide together where, when and who the baby goes out with. In your shoes, I'd refuse to go along with this ..... should it be raised at the next hearing, I think DP would be well within his rights to state (the bleeding obvious) that no-one consulted the baby's mother about these arrangements and, not altogether unsurprisingly, she was unhappy to comply. What's the judge going to do ? This is first and foremost an issue between SD and her dad and whilst yes of course the wider family comes into it, that wider family shouldn't be split.

It does sound as if SD (and mother ???) may well have an issue with DP moving on and extending his family but you aren't going to go away are you so one way or another that has to be tackled sooner or later. Pretending that SD's family consists "only" of her dad and step sibling even if for a short period of time is pointless ..... how would seeing the baby help matters if SD has some sort of gripe against her stepmother ? I can't see how, after 6 meets, SD would then magically feel "okay" about meeting her SM again and in fact, by approving this request, I feel it may stir up even more problems because it gives a small child an inappropriate level of power over another child she shouldn't have. The request actually seems very spiteful to me. The "other side" must surely include the ex, a mother herself, who must appreciate how distressing it could potentially be for a mother to be ordered to hand over her baby at set times - the fact the baby would be with its father is NOT the point here. It feels like spiteful game playing TBH and I think the judge was an idiot to approve this.

[DeLadyDeGaga]

Just got back from Sainsbury's and rejoined this thread to see what others opinions are....

The judge is wrong. Don't mean to be sexist here, but I'm assuming it's a man as am almost certain a woman would not have made this provision.

I'm terribly upset for you and would say "refuse to comply" with the order and see your solicitor or cafcass representative. I can't help thinking it may well be the ex partner pulling her daughter's strings here but it is unacceptable.

Your husband needs support you in this. What's his opinion?

[Smum99]

Hi, Poor you

I'm surprised by this - what a naive judge. How old is your SD? It just doesn't feel a usual response from a child. It would be more realistic if SD was saying she wanted to see her dad solely as she felt pushed out by the new baby - as is common with any new sibling, half or otherwise. I suspect that your SD is being manipulated but what a difficult situation for you. It's horrid. You could go along with it, give it the benefit of the doubt but I suspect it won't get better. How on earth does your SD get to know you if she doesn't see you? If this is partner alienation by the other parent then I suspect that this course of action has helped.

After many years of being messed around by the ex DH went to court and got a contact order. That however signalled the start of a campaign of trying to get DH's son alienated from me (despite him having no previous issues). Eventually DSS broke down and shared how his mum had been "coaching" him to be horrible to me. DH & I are still astounded that any mum would do this - teach a child to bully.Courts need to wise up to what the resident parent can do but if they hear a child is upset a judge will take the part of least resistance.

[emjanedel]

I wasn't expecting any replies so thanks. My dd is 10 is 10 months and sd is 10 nearly 11. SD did not meet DD until the week before xmas and since then has spent 30 minutes around her. CAFCASS recommended that my partner had one hour per fortnight with SD and that shd inculde DD as much as possible "to meet SD's emotional needs". In court it was suggesed that DP take our DD with him. The judge has allowed him 1 hour of contact per fortnight with SD and DD for 12 weeks.
The other side have made the argument that SD has been to traumatised by comment that she is having sleep and behavourial difficulties as she is scared that she will have to see me again.
I am a lot calmer than i was last night when all i could see was DP having weekend contact with both girls and me sat pining for my little girl. But DP has said that in 12 weeks if the situation hasn't improved then he will just agree to 1 hour every other week with both the girls.

I am mad to think that it is daft that one 10 year old shd have so much power.

[pleasechange]

Goodness it's all ludricrous. How anyone is supposed to work on developing any sort of relationship for one hour every other weekend is completely beyond me

[catsmother]

Admiitedly an hour isn't a long time but your baby DD isn't a dolly and I presume you didn't conceive and give birth to her in order that she can be presented to SD on demand to play with.

What is being done to address the issue of her allegedly being "scared" of seeing you again ?? That is what needs to be thrashed out.

I also think DH just can't "agree" to an hour EOW with both girls without your full consent. What if this goes on forever ? What message will that give to DD - that her mum isn't good "enough" and/or that you're some sort of monster ?

[DeLadyDeGaga]

I really don't think you ought really to entertain this situation. Yes, your DD is your sd's sibling but, at the moment she is so traumatised that it is affecting her sleep and behaviour.

She ought to have the time with her dad. Full stop.

Slowly, the idea of you may then be re-introduced and with you comes.....her step sibling. Your precious DD is NOT a toy. What if, in you sd's present state of emotional health, she decides that she also doesn't wish to see her step-sibling? Then, you DD is "put back in the toy-box" until sd feels she wants to "play" again?

The whole thing's ludicrous.

If you don't mind my asking, what heinous thing are you supposed to have done to this 10yr old child?

I still say, refuse. End of.

[Acanthus]

The most important thing to the court here is the relationship between the child and her father. You are secondary, until that is well secured. I don't know the background to why she has so little contact with her dad, but you need to put your own feelings second for these few weeks. If she wants to see the baby as well, that is something for you and your DH to discuss, I very much doubt that the court could order it.

[pleasechange]

acanthus - it looks like you haven't read the whole thread

"You are secondary, until that is well secured" - however, the OP's DD is certainly not 'secondary', nor is the OP's ability as a mother to have some say in any arrangement which affects her own daughter


"I very much doubt that the court could order it" - but indeed the court has ordered it, as per the OP's posts

[lateatwork]

jeez OP. Hats off to your for staying calm. I am struggling to work out what the reasoning behind the judges decision. bit of a mystery.

[emjanedel]

I am going back to acanthus thread with a bit of background. Dp and ex split nearly 5 years ago - i met DP just under 6 months later. The ex found out about me quite early and said to DP once we had been together for 6 months then he could introduce me as his girlfriend. After them 6 months he said right now i am going to do it. However, she then said if he did mention me she wouldn't allow contact. So for three years he had contact for 7 hours each week without m
e being present. When i fell pregnant we sought legal advice and the ex was cooperative with me being involved in the contact. This went very well - too well and once sd came to our home. The ex removed contact, refused mediation, ignored solicitors letters etc and DP didn't see SD for 12 months.

Answers to other questions - CAFCASS make no mention of behavorial problems although the ex mentions them every time in court. I am assuming therefore that CAFCASS don't know that they exisit.

The other question was what have i done to traumatise her - answer - for 3 years SD had contact with her father for 7 hours on a saturday every week - she is asking that she sees him every saturday for the day on his own - DP and I both told her that that couldn't happen anymore - she got upset and thats when said problems began

[glasscompletelybroken]

It is not the job of your 10 month old daughter "to meet SD's emotional needs".

This is completely wrong and I would say a definate no to your baby having any part in this.

I am left wondering if there is any limit to the ways that step-mothers are excluded - this really takes some believing.