Really? we think that "that organisation" are representative of fathers in general? really?

so you think domestic violence, child abuse, drug addiction, personality disorders etc etc are really, really rare then xenia?

I really really do disagree that the vast majority of women who stop contact do it for the child's wellebing and safety. I would estimate it was something like 20% believe they do it for that reason and many are delluded and may be 5% of cases their genuinely is a problem with the man. I have known far far too many very good men who are denied contact to believe most women who deny contact are doing it for the sake of the children.

We certainly need real penalities on both parents if they do not do as they are obliged to do as the current system rewards those who fail to abide by what is agreed.

it still totally ignores the fact that the vast majority of women who stop contact will be doing so for the child's own safety and wellbeing. so there can't be blanket actions or it will mean endangering women and children.

litter picking on the local common.... hmm. why not just put her in the stocks and let people throw rotten tomatoes.

so if he doesn't bother to turn up he doesn't have to turn up for four weeks? that sounds fair on the mum doesn't it?

basically just the same old story of men get to be feckless and not turn up but if a woman dares to deny contact she's in the shit.

we need leverage for making people take more responsibility not have yet more rights.

50/50 is a fair starting point which works well in many countries. We will move to that and actually at the moment with most contact agreed between couples many of whom both work full time that is becoming a de facto arrangement.
Speeding up of procedures would be very helpful. If the welfare of the child comes first (which most of us agree over) and a child has been wrongly denied all contact with a father (or mother) for say 6 months it is hard to say massively altering what is its status quo is going to be good for it. If as soon as the mother stops the first week's contact she has a visit from CSA, emails, contact from volunteers and an email saying the cout officer will be there on the following Saturday 15 minutes before the contact time to ensure the child is handed over or some sort of system like that then she might realise being exactly on time (and that applies on both sides) is important. Similaryl if the man misses a time or is 15 mins late perhaps after 3 late or missed times he loses contact foer 4 weeks entirely or perhaps pays a financial penalty that side of compliance might be aided.

To ensure those of us like I am who pay heaps of tax are not penalised by all this the person breaching the agreement should also pay a fine to the state for being late or missing their time or not making the child available. Hit them in the pocket where it hurts. If the mother has no money to pay make her do 2 hours of litter picking on the local common.

Well, at least we can agree on that. :)

No, a 50 50 startpoint is a blanket rule which fails to put the welfare of the child first.

The startpoint now, is that the stability and continuity of care, is in the best interests of the child and that the best interests of the child should be prioritised.

I think that is the best principle to approach parenting and break ups.

But I do think court procedures should be speeded up, so that the continuity can't be broken as it has been in the case of yoru DS OLKN.

A 50/50 startpoint assumes that both parents are equally important to their child. In my ds's case, that would be true, there are no allegations of domestic abuse from either party, and each is an equally good parent, equally interested and involved. In other cases one parent or the other is not equally involved or interested, and the court order would reflect that.

I don't think any system could be perfect, because we are human and fallible and emotions run high. Some parents treat their dc as possessions and weapons and don't put their well-being first and foremost. But the system we have at the moment is failing all sorts of dc in all sorts of situations, so it needs to be at least looked at. It may be that 50/50 is not the right way to go, but at the very least it should be seriously examined.

Anyway, have to go out to work now. May be back later.

it wouldn't solve his problems - he'd be in the same boat of needing to go to court and sort things out.

Yes but as said before, hard cases make bad law. An automatic 50 50 assumption would solve your DS's problems, but it would cause enormous problems for a much greater number of parents and children and from a philosophical basis, it is not an assumption which puts the needs of the child first. I simply think that putting the needs of the child first, is a good principle and I really don't understand how anyone could think anything else is preferable.

An automatic assumption of 50/50 would have meant that he would not have had the fear that she really could stop him ever seeing his DS again. As the system stands, she really can, because even with a court order she can simply withold contact if she chooses and there's not a damn thing can be done about it.

No, Basil, he did not threaten suicide, he never even mentioned it. But I am his mother, he is a young man, he was very, very distressed and angry and I know that sometimes young men turn such distress on themselves, so I worried. He believed, for a short time, that he might never see his child again, how would that make you feel?

His ex broke her hand when she punched a wall in a drunken rage at New Year. (DGS was not in the house.) Should I be concerned that she should not have care of a vulnerable child?

I agree the system needs to be speeded up.

That's the essential problem with it.

Having a 50 50 assumption is inappropriate and doesn't solve the problem of your ds, which is the speed of the system OLKN.

Also why are you saying that you were worried about suicide? Was your son threatening it? Because without wishing to be unsympathetic, tbh htere's no way I'd allow any child to be looked after by someone so emotionally unstable that they would consider suicide. I might feel compassion and want to get him or her help, but my first priority is htat they didn't have care of vulnerable children.

Most parents after a split divide contact between them in a way that works for them so in general things work very well and it is best not to forget that. Most adults love their children and make arrangements which are a compromise on both sides and work okay.

The difficult comes when that isn't possible and then most people know the court system isn't the best way so try mediation and discussion as OldL says and often that works fine. The difficult cases are where the courts are asked to decide, where mothers denying contact are rarely jailed and the longer a child is used not to seeing the other parent the less likely they will get meaningful time with it and in worst case will even have forgotten how to speak the language of the non resident parent. In other words there is a reward for disobeying any court order and virtually no sanction aganist those who withhold contact.

Those who want the absent parent to have more contact (I have my children 365 days a year and would be happy with 50/50) do not even have a legal right to go to court over that and of course that is because most people accept that you cannot force a mother or father to be with a child if they choose not to which is equally a difficult issue and infact more often the problem - men have bred and fled since they started populating the planet. However even though the latter is a problem that does not mean those of us who are feminist or indeed just want what is right for children cannot support F4J and men whose ex wives deny them meaningful contact.

I suspect theb est routes if you are denied it are to try to think of a way to make it in the mother's interest that you see the child. So if the child really wants you or some other basis then it's easier. If you can be nice about it. Some men also want total contact all or nothing as a matter of principle and some have to be banned by the courts because they just cannot accept a compromise of less than they want. Not all of course by any means.
Some need to think about ways to keep everyone happy too as you have your children for many more years once they are 18 than before and you need to play a long game in terms of relationships. Also there are things they can do which may be hard work but worth doing like giong to parents' evenigs at school even if it means arranging to go on a different day from the mother, with the school, sports days, driving them to sports matches, skype, facebook and the multitude of contacts that are possible. It's awful to say it too but many older children will be around if there is something nice in it for them ./ I don't delude myself that all 5 come on holiday at Christmas because of my lovely personality but because they get a luxury ski holiday. if I offered a wet weekend in wales in a tent I might not find so many takers thus if men and women can earn a lot more they might even find their contact hours are higher perversely. In other words think laterally. Make the difficult parent want that you can offer her or him, consider their psychology. Bide your time. At 13 chidlren can decide with whom to live on the whole which is not that old. I know someone who waited until the youngest was 13 to divorce and the children chose to live with him, not the mother and her new man.

I'm sorry you feel that comment was uncalled for, LineRunner, but I was enraged by sAf's comment that my DS isn't fussed. He is very, very fussed.

Are you actually reading what I'm posting?

They started off amicable, no need for lawyers or letters or anything else like that. Being amicable is in the best interests of the child, can you understand that at least? If there is no need to involve a lawyer, it is better not to engage one, because when the letters start flying backs start going up and it all gets awkward.

Even after a lawyer is engaged, you're not in court the next day. The first letter says, please can we go back to the regular routine we had established, failing that can we please go to mediation to come to an agreement like grown-ups? And she responded by going back to the routine, so no need for further action, letters, mediation or court.

Then she got arsey again, so another letter, saying pretty much the same thing, but also mentioning court, was sent. This time she engaged a lawyer (it takes about 10 days to get a first appointment in this area) and responded with a letter. Letters take about a week to arrive after the meeting with the lawyer.

So he saw his lawyer again, and another letter, refuting her lies and again asking to return to the established routine, or for mediation, was sent. He is currently awaiting a reply, and accepting her demand for substantially reduced access, because he has no fucking alternative if he wants to see his son at all. And he very much wants to see his son, to play with him, feed him, bath him, discipline him, you know, just generally play his part in raising him, like any other good parent.

He does not want to have his contact reduced to one overnight a week and every other Saturday as she proposes. He does not want his contact reduced to one night in the week and every other weekend and half the holidays, as a court is likely to order. He wants the three regular nights and days he had when they first broke up. Is this so wrong?

The system is slow and painful and drawn-out. It failed LineRunner, whose situation is almost diametrically opposite to my DS. The system is currently failing my DS, and more importantly his DS, who is kept from his devoted father on a whim, and told lies about why. The system needs an overhaul.

My god but there's some ignorant stupidity about this place sometimes. Couple that with the attitude I've seen expressed here that only abusive men take their exes to court for access, and I start to understand why some men do just give up and walk away.

That was not called for, OLKN.

no i don't think he can just turn up in court but clearly you can do more in a year than send one letter.

He is using the system. But the system is slooooooow. Do you really think he can just turn up in court one day and demand an order? It simply doesn't work that way.

I hope you never have to find this out for yourself.

my point is you are on here saying how the system has failed your son when he hasn't used the system - the system has had nothing to do with it.

That's one hell of an assumption, sAf. Do you know anything about going through the system? It is generally advised to avoid court action if it is at all possible, and it takes months, if not years, to get to that point. My ds and his ex only split up a year or so ago, and intially they were able to sort out access arrangements amicably between them. Since then, her attitude has changed, sometimes she's amenable for weeks on end and all is fine, then she throws a hissy fit over something and it's "You'll never see your son again."

"Not fussed"? When you have seen your adult child sobbing and raving, and you spend a weekend terrified he'll suicide, then you can tell me what "not fussed" looks like.

The first time this happened, he went to a lawyer, by the time of the appointment (it took 10 days to get one) his ex had calmed down, so the lawyer advised taking no action. The next time it happened a letter was sent, the ex started co-operating again. The next time it happened another letter was sent, this time she got a lawyer (more delays) and that's the stage we're at now.

Tell you what, next time he has contact I'll tell him that if he's really that bothered he should refuse to hand his ds back, and let her take him to court, shall I? Because that would really be in the best interests of the child, eh?

My god but there's some ignorant stupidity about this place sometimes. Couple that with the attitude I've seen expressed here that only abusive men take their exes to court for access, and I start to understand why some men do just give up and walk away.

the system hasn't failed your ds - he hasn't involved any system - he's just let this happen. you can't blame a system that you haven't even tried.

well then frankly he's not that fussed is he if he's let it go on this long without taking any action.

if someone kept my child away from me and i was desperate to see them i'd be in court.

Was that to me, LineRunner? My DS's case hasn't got as far as court yet, thank all the good things, but if his ex keeps carrying on the way she has done, there may ultimately be no alternative. At the moment he's at the pleading for regular overnight access and begging her to go to mediation stage.

If it does get to court, he's been told (by his solicitor) that he's likely to get one night in the week, every second weekend. Much of his work is at weekends, so he may have to leave his DS with me and DH. Whereupon she can say, look, he dumps our ds on his parents...

The system has failed you and your DC as it stands. It's also failing my ds and dgs. Something has to change.