Access issue - urgent advice needed

[Honeymum]

I have a friend who has recently reached agreement with an ex over access to their toddler. Visits are fortnightly with the ex-DH permitted to take the child out of town (some 60 miles away)every other visit. This is a recent agreement reached in court at some cost to my friend. The couple ended up in court after the father had disappeared from the child's life, unannounced, for 7 months. The first contact between them was a court summons from the father.

The agreement seems to suit both parties, though my friend is apprehensive. This arrangement has yet to start since directly following the court appearance my friend went on a previously planned long-haul visit to family over Christmas (which the ex objected to and again they ended up in court).

My question concerns the following: the first visit under the new arrangement is due this weekend. Under the court order the ex should be able to take the child to his home (60 miles away). My friend is saying that she doesn't think this is reasonable given the fact that the toddler hasn't seen ex-DH for 6 weeks. He is insisting on taking the child anyway. What is the worst that can happen if my friend, on this occasion only, refuses to allow the ex to take the child away (but instead says he can have unsupervised access here)?

Thanks

[Haribosmummy]

Well, realistically, nothing will happen to your friend. Mothers, up and down the country - for good reasons and for bad, withold contact with thier children's fathers.

But, I would ask the following:

1. WHat's the point in unsupervised access here? The father wouldn 't be breaking any agreement to simply remove the child from the area, so it's supervised or nothing (IYSWIM)

1. What reasons does she have for not wanting the child to visit his fathers home? Is there an overnight visitation allowed?

1. Why did your friend agree in court? Courts are usually very favourable towards mothers and if she'd said she had doubts or wished him to prove himself, I think they would have gone along with that...

FWIW, I really don't think your friend is being unreasonable for not wanting to have her son visit such a long way away, she's certainly not going to get hauled back to court for missing one weekend (though I am not sure how the next time is going to be any different), but I wonder why she agreed to it in the first place....

I'm sorry that's not more help...

[GypsyMoth]

well.as from 8 dec last year penal notices are attached automatically to court orders. (as i'm sure everyone knows!!) would she really want to be in breach? who knows what kind of trouble the ex may make for her. inclined to agree with haribosmummy.....why did she agree in court? she must have forseen this. can she not ask his thoughts,and hope (and pray) that he see's her point......

[DoubleSad]

Haribo's mummy - the agreement is one weekend in the child's home town, the next one (2 weeks later) in the Dad's home town. This weekend should be Dad's home town but Mum thinks because child hasn't seen Dad for 6 weeks it would be best for child if he's in his home environment (ie take him to local park/shops etc). After that she's happy for child to go to Dad's as agreed in court. There's no overnight vistation allowed and until recently all visits were in the child's home and supervised (by mum). She agreed in court because she's a reasonable woman, and it's not the court order that's the issue it's the fact that he won't agree that the first visit shouldn't be the away from home one IYSWIM.

Brie5 she has asked him not to take the child away this weekend and he is insisting it's his right so he will.

Since my original post my friend has spoken to her solicitor who says that the agreement was that the first visit should be on child's home turf because the holiday I mentioned had the effect of suspending the start of the agreement, so my friend wouldn't be breaching the order..

[N1]

Penal notices are not attached to court orders automatically.

How old is the child?

[N1]

What court made the court order? County or Magistrate.

[LiffeyOink]

She should say that she will build up to a whole weekend, as that's what been arranged and she should say she is glad of that arrangement for the future, but that she doesn't want to leave him with a screaming child as it wouldn't be fair to either of them.

He mght balk at the thought of a crying toddler when he's trying to sleep.

[Haribosmummy]

120 miles round trip for a day seems overly long to me (IMHO)

If there are no overnight stays at the mo, why would the dad not prefer to spend the day in the child's home town?

Seems a lot to spend on travel (not to mention the time) when the day could be better spent in the child's home town.

Just my opinion, though. I have two DSDs and we never would drive them such long distances for one day.

[N1]

120 miles is a round trip. say an hour or 90 minutes in a car.

Pick up at about 9 or 10 and drop off for about 16h00 or 17h00. Puts it at about 4 hours meaningful contact odd or 6 to 7 hours meaningful contact if the child doesn't travel far. I have to agree that the child not going far for contact does make more sense if the contact is for a day or less.

[DoubleSad]

There is no mention of overnight stays yet. The child is just 2 years old and as I said the father went awol when he was about 15 months and showed up again 2 or 3 months ago. He wants to take him to his home town ostensibly so the child can see his family (including another, older child). The agreement is 5 hours contact on those days, around an hour in the car each way. I agree it's bonkers from the childs point of view, certainly whilst he is so little.

The situation is that my friend is happy with this arrangement, just that on the back of a long separation she thinks the first meeting should be in her town.

I don't know if the court concerned was county or magistrates, sorry.

[N1]

all common sense suggests that the older child should travel with the dad to visit the 2 year old for a few hours.

The 2 year old is hardly likely to remember their father and more likely to feel like (s)he is being taken away.

Your friend can agree with the arrangement in principal and make that "goal" but I would imagine that a few steps from nothing to a day away is much better. Perhaps an agreed plan of steps might even be better so each knows where they are in terms of increments.

[Surfermum]

Well I'll go against the grain here and say that I think it would be better for the child to go to his Dad's home. What is he going to do with a 2 year old in a town where he doesn't live for a day? I think to have somewhere to go would be much better.

Dh had to have contact like this while he was building up to dsd coming to stay. We took her swimming, to soft play, to the cinema or the park, or any combination - but we inevitably ended up having something to eat in a pub and having to stay there for the last hour or so as it was too cold for her to be outside any more. And this child is just 2 - it's going to be freezing outside for him at the moment, plus what if he needs a nap (if he's still having them)?

I can understand how nervous she must feel about it though, but I don't think he's being that unreasonable.

[KingCanuteIAm]

If he is having time with the child it dosn't really matter where it is, wherever they go he is going to have to deal with his childs reactions to being with his dad after the gap in contact.

I understand your friend being nervous but she is going to be nervous no matter what isn't she? I mean this is the first contact after a court battle etc, it is going to be hard on her. I would imagine that keeping her child close by will help her feel in control. In reality though, this first distance contact has to happen at some point.

Her ex is not really being unreasonable, it is hard on her but he is within his rights to demand this contact, ard as it is on your friend.

[KingCanuteIAm]

N1, if they wanted a stepped arrangmetn then that should have been agreed in court. A court would not be happy to hear that she is going back on the agreement she signed up to in the court order

[Judy1234]

This has been agreed by teh court after some effort. For once can't we just have a mother who abides by it rather than continuously disobeying? Doesn't she have a moral duty to comply. The 2 year old will be fine and you should be encouraging her to stick to the order. Children love routine so the sooner an absolutely routine is estatblished which is never varied and which she never ever breaks everyone will be happy and know where they stand and can plan. She could make compliance her new year resolution.

[Haribosmummy]

What did your friend decide to do, DoubleSad?

[DoubleSad]

Hi again

I am sorry that my original post didn't present the full facts. The access today was due to be in the child's town, not the father's....If you look further down the thread (Since my original post my friend has spoken to her solicitor who says that the agreement was that the first visit should be on child's home turf because the holiday I mentioned had the effect of suspending the start of the agreement, so my friend wouldn't be breaching the order.. you can see that it's actually the father who is breaking with the court order since the first visit should be in the child's home town, and the father wants to take him away...My friend is following the rules, it turns out. I didn't know this when I started this thread.

Let me repeat the circumstances here - the DP disappeared for SEVEN MONTHS unannounced and without a word of explanation before, during or since. They had already split up. When they split my friend agreed that the child could go every other weekend to the father's place for the day. They were looking at starting doing that when he did his Houdini act. She contacted him on and off during the 7 months but with no response. The next she hears she gets a court summons from him. Despite his total lack of involvement in his child's life for 7 months she is happy for the child to go to his home once a month and therefore has since complied with the agreement put in place by the court. However, today was the first visit in six weeks and the first since court and she just wants to make the start easier for her little one who has only had contact with his father for about three months before Christmas.

So, to today. What happened was this. She called him, they had an amicable discussion. They agreed that he could take the child to a friend in the next town (15 miles away) for the afternoon (the visit is 3 hours). But when he turned up, he said that this wasn't possible and could he go to his home town (60 miles away) but for 3 hours only. My friend agreed, because the child seemed happy and she is lovely like that. I don't yet know if he's returned the child in time. We will see.

[Haribosmummy]

I hope the child is returned on time.

[DoubleSad]

So do I. I think the problem is my friend needs to feel that she can trust that he is concerned about the child's interests first and foremost, and secondly that he respects her as the mother and child's carer. If he brings him home on time then fine. If he doesn't the it's going to be mistrust and recriminations all round.

[Judy1234]

A lot of people manipulate situations and want to feel the power and control that they call the shots not the mother etc (and I suppose vice versa). I don't like it that my children's father will never speak to me ever about contact with the children or anything at all and just communicates with the child but I still would not deny him contact.

[Haribosmummy]

HOw old are your kids, Xenia?

My DSDs are 14 and 11 now and, TBH, we deal primarily with them about arrangements. But, obviously, at 2 it's not feasible.

[DoubleSad]

Xenia - you're not suggesting she's denying him contact (or thinking of doing) are you? I hope not because that isn't the case at all. She wants not to feel bullied by this man and she's doing what's best for her child (by any reasonable standards), that's all in the face of some very unreasonable and at times vindictive behaviour.

[Judy1234]

No, I can see what the position is now you know the facts. If peopel fall out the only way contact works is by doing 100% what the court order says or the agreement between them says without variations ever and exactly to the times agreed as the other person is unlikely to acecpt even reasonable requests for changes.

My children were 4 when we divorced and the youngest are 10 now. I just think it's bizarre we never had a single discussion about contact with their father before or after the divorce.

[Haribosmummy]

Doublesad - I hope it all went OK.

I think the earlier days are imperative to instil trust and respect between the parents and a sense of calm and happiness for the child.

[DoubleSad]

I still don't know if he returned the child on time. (Don't want to text and ask as I'm sensitive to the fact that my friend isn't me and wouldn't react like me). But I'll let you know. I am worried that if he "gets away with" varying things on day 1, to suit him, then he'll do it again and again and it won't be good for my friend's self esteem, or emotional well-being nor the child's well-being. I do hope that he will stick to the rules as I know that she will.
Thanks all...

[DoubleSad]

I found out that he rang to say he'd be 15 minutes late - which he was. My friend says it's clear that he had every intention of taking the child back to (his girlfriend's place in) his own town, contrary to the court order. From now on, as Xenia, said, she'll have to make sure they both stick to the letter of the court order, which is sad.