Police welfare check on 1 year old due to.sons dad

OP, my exBIL will tell you that SIL was abusive, toxic, manipulative. He will point to her losing her temper, "making him homeless" etc. But he'll never mention that when she lost her temper it was because she asked him time and time again to step up, to do childcare, to help in the house. Because he said he'd look for a job... but didn't look for a job. When she "made him" homeless, it was after she allowed him to live with her, 100% rent and bill free for a year while he was, supposedly, looking for a job until eventually she kicked him out.

He also went through a phase of telling anyone who would listen how violent she was to him. But he doesn't tell you that this so-called "violence" was when he forced her bedroom door open, grabbed her phone, went through it to read her private text messages and then refused to give her phone back while she was physically doing everything she could to get it back.

He will admit to forcing doors open, and locking her in rooms.... but he genuinely, hand on heart, does not see why this is a problem. He once told DH that she "deserved it" and perhaps she'll have learnt a lesson about going out with other men (Not that it would ever have been okay, but for the record a) they'd been broken up for over a year already and b) she wasn't going out with other men). Listening to him, or reading his messages he sounds so SANE and genuine, it's jarring when you stop to think about what he's actually saying.

My point is that while I am not someone who believes that where there's smoke there's fire, there is no doubt whatsoever that the police do not come to a third party and warn them if there is any doubt whatsoever about his behaviour.

Also, with all due respect, this is man who has managed to get two women pregnant in quick succession, neither relationship has been very good... I think the reality is that he's NOT a good one.

Do you have any kind of relationship with the mother of the child that he is being investigated for?

Stop contact unless it's in a contact centre etc

So what sort of parent was he to his other children?

Putting in monthly supervised access at a contact centre (often at churches on Saturdays) or with a trusted relative (eg his parents) makes sense but for the sake of your dc don't withdraw access completely without more information

Honestly at this stage I would be quite relieved to have the chance to stop contact of any sort. I know I said before that you could think about supervised contact - but that was largely because mother's that are seen as not allowing contact are sometimes unfairly punished in the family courts, so offering supervised contact protects against that. But at this stage I would be thinking the same as you and just stopping contact until you know more. If he really really wants supervised contact he can ask for it and start the legal process to get it. You have enough reason at your end to justify stopping contact even the most misogynistic judge couldn't argue.

I think at this point I would cut contact. Normally contact is better for the child, but he is at best a poor dad and unreliable figure who's not putting your son's safety first; at worst he is an abuser. If he really wants contact, I would discuss with social services whether a contact centre would be in your sons best interest.

I remember your other thread. In that, you seemed to be completely believing that he was a great dad and his ex was filing malicious claims against him. But it's increasingly clear the police do not think so, and that at the very least, he has not been a responsible and safe parent for your son.

You have to understand that the courts do not stop contact except in extreme cases. Just spend 10 minutes on MN and you'll see thread after thread from women whose ex;s were violent to them AND the children, who behave appallingly with verbal and emotional abuse, who are hugely inconsisntent... and yet the courts still insist on contact.

My advice is wake up and cut contact with this man as soon as you can and before he starts hurting you and/or your DS.

You are right to stop unsupervised contact. If he wants contact he has to organise it through a family centre- which is expensive.

Alternatively he’d need to find someone that you trust to supervise.

If he isn’t an abusive arse, you could meet him to go shopping for example, or go to the park together. So you would be there. If you trusted his parents, he could have contact there with them.

But I’d get advice from SS and police about how to proceed.

And this

I am protecting my child by stopping contact

You are absolutely doing the right thing

Can you contact the police and ask if they can give you details on the arrest. If he was your current partner I know that Claires law would come into effect. But as he is still the father of your child I would think it in your child's interest for them to give you the actual details of what he was arrested for (rather than his account) and your connection to him would be on their radar. For one thing, it sounds ludicrous that he would be allowed only supervised access to one set of children but no restrictions on access to another smaller child. And if the police do come back and confirm what they said before about not allowing contact then that makes it easier for you in a way because it's out of your hands.
Some police are really crap about DV and child protection, but there are also many that do care and will be as helpful as they can. So it's definitely worth speaking to them about your concerns and ask for information on his arrest.

I remember speaking to a solicitor regarding contact with my children's dad and they said thsi (different context).
You've been told he's unsafe with dad, if you allow contact now it will come off badly on you allowing those situations.

He is not on the birth certificate so does not have parental responsibility. Refuse contact as advised. He would I need to initiate court proceedings to even get himself named on BC before they would even look at contact. If you are still feeling unsure, you could self refer to children’s services/social care for advice.

Stop contact, try and get it in writing that police advised you to do this, seek legal advice then wait and see what happens.

The only time I ever left my 1yo in the car was when I was getting fuel. I still do the same with my 6yo. It's neglect.

Sorry you're going through this OP. Sounds like he's not safe to look after your child so see it as a silver lining that this evidence has fallen into your lap, and your child is unscathed. Lots of women stop contact and get annihilated for it in court. Even if they have very good reason. He'll struggle to argue against it in this circumstance.

You’d be amazed what the police can find out. A few years ago I was contacted by the police on my mobile phone. I hardly ever used the phone and not many people had my number. They’d had a report of a young woman being bundled into a car, she was heard to shout a boys name. They tracked me down as I have a boy with that name to check I was safe! Granted it’s not a very common name but still…..

Actually you know what, if you can afford it get some legal advice on the best way forward. Just an hour with someone who knows about family courts and the law in these areas will help!

If the police have advised you to stop contact you stop contact or you risk joining him at being under investigation for neglect and child endangerment.

He can go through court if he wants but having a police report like that won't look good!

Protect your son first and foremost.

Is he paying child support though? I am guessing not as it wasn't mentioned. In which case the OP is already paying all of the costs for raising the baby. Which is a lot more than the cost of weekly supervised contact (its also a lot more than the normal CSA and supervised contact combined).

I agree. I do think offering up supervised contact as an option (he can pay unless you are rolling in it) is a good idea though because if he really really wants to prove he can and wants to be a good parent he will pay regularly, turn up on time to every appointment for as long as it takes he won't but it means he can't then turn round on you at a later stage and say "she wouldn't let me see my child etc". And that matters, because sometimes the family courts make ridiculous, hard to understand decisions and they are the ones that decide contact - not police or social services. There are women who have left physically abusive relationships and then been ordered to provide unsupervised contact. Whereas if they had stayed with that same parent, the police and social services would have sanctioned them for exposing the child to a harmful environment/person. I think worst case scenario is you cut contact on the advice of the police and then at some point - when the child is a bit older, he asks for contact and you have to let your child have unsupervised contact with a man who is then a stranger to her and who you have no faith in his ability to look after her (or go to court). By going the supervised contact route you have 2 possibilities

1. He eagerly takes you up on your offer, pays for the contact, he regularly turns up to every single appointment on time etc eventually forming a bond with the child and proving that he is mature enough and unselfish enough to look after e.g. a 3 or 4 year old.
2. He doesn't want to pay or pursue unsupervised contact. Or he does but then rapidly starts turning up late and missing meetings until they fade out entirely. At which point no harm done to the baby because they are still too young to realise their useless dad has bailed on them again. And down the road he can't claim "parental alienation" because he had a choice.

The odds of 1 happening is miniscule but hey, you tried!

It would very much be for the benefit of the child and all parents have a responsibility to promote and enable a relationship with the other parent where safe and appropriate. It would be safe if supervised. It doesnt have to be a contact centre, it can be a family member or friend who can support, but contact centres provide detailed reports and oversight and it takes it out of the resident parents hands for ease

The courts would expect that parents work together to enable this to happen, there is no way any court in this situation would allow no contact at all so if a centre is the only way they would be expected to jointly pay for it.