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

exactly for the vast majority of single mums leaving their child would literally mean abandoning their child to the system or leaving them solo in a house - for men in the majority it would just mean continuing to let their mothers raise them.

my son's father abandoned him - it hasn't left ds alone in any way. if i abandoned him he would seriously be abandoned

And a mother trapped by a POS could simply give up her dc to their father. But she won't, because she loves her children and wants to be with them.

OLKN, No that's not true, as there are many men who would refuse this responsibility. We have been talking a fair bit on this thread about men who cannot manage to stick to an every-other-weekend contact order, let alone agree to bring up children full-time. And they can't be made to.

PR is easily gained, even if the father's name is not on the birth certificate. And of course PR can be abused if a parent is abusive; my son's ex is another example. While nowhere near as bad as NicknameTaken's ex, she has tried to exclude my ds from decisions about medical care, education, baptism... and every time they disagree, she says, "You'll never see him again." Most recently she witheld contact for nearly three weeks, telling the child "daddy is on holiday" simply because she was offended by a Tweet he made (which wasn't about her.) My DS normally has 3 overnights a week, and with daytime hours almost 50/50, paid almost twice what the CSA would have ordered in child maintenance...

I don't know what a better system would look like, maybe we need to educate children about power games and head-fucking from both sexes?

and i don't think women should feel ashamed or be told off for having strong protective instincts towards their children - we carry them, give birth to them, feed them etc etc etc of course we feel massively protective of them. if we start to feel guilty for that we're fucked.

people can do as much dv and abuse denial as they like the fact is that some men are a risk to women and children and i don't want women and children to be forced into a position of being in the control of such a man. i would advise any woman who got pregnant in a violent or abusive relationship to do whatever it took to make sure that man's name did not appear on the birth certificate. the auto parental responsibility just can't be risked with a dangerous man.

we'd all protect ourselves as best we could. that's all i can envisage.

of course i can appreciate the position of men but i am a woman and a mother and i would do anything to protect my child from being at risk of being used as a porn in an abusive relationship or from being taken away from me or basically just anything that meant i couldn't protect him and raise him as i wanted to.

no one expects their partner to turn abusive/nutty/controlling/a danger to them or their children so best to err on the side of caution.

i don't think the courts will or can protect us - we have to protect ourselves for now.

Interesting conversation. I have some difficulty in working out what a better system would look like.

Intellectually I see the merits of 50/50, but it just so happens that I'm doing battle with it in my own life at the moment. I have an ex who is fighting for 50/50. He is very attentive to DD and already spends quite a lot of time with her based on the court order. He has never not turned up for contact (although I have had on occasion needed police intervention to get DD back).

He was emotionally and (to a minor extent) physically abusive towards me. He is keen to establish his "ownership" of DD. He loves the way she adores him, but reacts with rage if she shows an emotion he doesn't like, eg. wanting me when she is with him. Throughout our time together, he would punish me by withholding her - from the time as a newborn when he shut himself in the kitchen with her all night and wouldn't let me breastfeed, from the time shortly before I left, when he physically held her to his chest and held her head turned with his hand so she couldn't look at me. He wouldn't let us physically touch each other for 24 hours. That's when I left. And so many times when he would disappear with her for hours on end to make me worry. So his current quest for 50/50 residence feels like part of a wider effort to take possession of her, so I feel I have to fight it. I'm not convinced he's good for her. Plus, he has two foreign passports, and I don't trust him not to take her out of the country. Plus, he's bloody impossible to deal with, and any negotiations (eg. time and date of handover after a holiday) are highly fraught.

BUT - it's my word against his. Why should a court believe me or have a presumption in my favour? There are limitations on the fact-finding a family court can do.

What would a better system be? A better-resourced CAFCASS, yes, clearly. More mental health assessments of parents? I'd like it in our case, but it might be overly intrusive as a general system, and of course abused women can demonstrate distress, depression, etc, and it would be wrong for that to count against them.

The family courts are in a hugely difficult position. Anyone got a vision for what the perfect system would look like?

Well, he has far less contact with his son than he had when they were together. Had they remained together and he wanted to move (for a better job, perhaps) that's something they could have discussed and agreed between them. Friendly discussions are currently off the table.

OLKN: I am having difficulty understanding how your son is any more 'trapped' now than he was in the relationship. Presumably before he parted ways with the mother of his child, he wanted to live with the child and now he still wants to be near. So unless you are making a wider point about parents being 'trapped' by children, I fail to see how his situation has changed. Am I missing something?

And a mother trapped by a POS could simply give up her dc to their father. But she won't, because she loves her children and wants to be with them.

So does a father's love for his child.

old lady, sorry but itis simply not right to say that your ds is as trapped as a mother who is prevented from moving by a court order. that's like saying that a catholic woman in london is as trapped with an unplanned pregnancy, as a woman who lives in a country where safe termination is outlawed. legalities matter.

When I first left my DCs dad I swore that as long as he was prepared to be involved in the DC's life, I would not move away from him. Over the years things have deteriorated. He now sees them (supervised) for a few hours every 6-8 weeks (frequency is his choosing). We have had to have conversations about the importance of not turning up barely able to stand up with tiredness/hangover from the effects of the night before and not just putting the TV on and slumping on the sofa while DC do their own thing and ignore him. TBH if I were to emigrate and contact was a once-a-year visit and skype conversations every week, that would be an improvement on what the DC have at the moment. Which is why if the right job offer/circumstances presented themselves, I would no longer turn down the opportunity out of deference for his fatherhood status. Especially since I alone have the responsibility of providing for their needs (and therefore will do whatever best meets that responsibility).

I think that's fairly representative of most separated parents. THose who want to move probably have good reasons and have weighed it up against the negatives of moving away from the other parent. I don't think resident parents whose separated partner wants to play an active role in the DCs life and actually contributes something positive would want to move away unless it were for overwhelmingly strong reasons. Let's not forget that most cases do not end up in court or with parents being issued with PSOs.

xenia if after her partner buggers off with another woman she has the choice between live in a poxy flat in a crappy area where she knows no one and there are no job opportunities OR she could move back to her hometown with extended family on tap providing childcare and support and there is a job opportunity which will allow her to provide well for her child etc i know which option would be better for the child.

OLKN that's a very important point, about feeling/being trapped. Will ponder.

Xenia - do you actually understand what you are writing?

You are justifying abusive, violent men being allowed to bully, stalk, harass and physically threaten any woman who disagrees with them.

I don't generally agree with your opinions but I have never seen you write something so stupid.

OptimisticPessimist, his ex likes him to have contact, but only on her terms, when she fancies a night out at the bingo, or wants to party all night. Even if he had court-mandated contact it can't really be enforced either; there are no consequences for mothers like her.

Some people are just shit.

I think I've seen your situation expressed before, LineRunner; your ex isn't actually interested in your dc and used the PSO to further abuse you? It's a horrible thing to happen, but at least you have regular contact with your dc. If my son moved away he wouldn't, so he won't move because he adores his ds and is an excellent father. He's just as trapped as you. :(

My ExH refuses to see his DCs even when he could and should.

I did have a sort of 50/50 in place with my ex (although technically they were 100% resident with me because he didn't have anywhere suitable to take them but he did look after them half of the week iyswim) and there was nothing I could to a) enforce that arrangement, meaning if I didn't behave as he wanted he would threaten to stop "looking after them for me" meaning I couldn't go to work and would fall over myself to appease him and b) when he did eventually stop seeing them and move 400 miles away there was nothing I could do. They haven't seen him for 11 months and while there are no legal sanctions I can take out on him, yet if and when he decides he wants to see them I will be classed as obstructive to contact if I say no or insist on limited or gradual contact. There are no consequences for fathers like him.

I can't understand how if women love a child and know how that love feels they cannot put themselves in the shoes of a father and want him to have similar contact to that which they have. So those who think one parent can move away do you also think if that parent happens to male and wants to move with the children ton New Zealand near his mother he shoudl be allowed to take them away from you? If not how do you justify the sexism in your answers? No wonder we need F4J.

Only if he was intending on taking the children with him. If he wanted to move away and leave her with 100% residency then there would be nothing she could do about it (hypothetically I mean, I appreciate that in your son's situation his ex might prefer him to have no contact).

Sorry that should be OLKN. Duh.

PLKN, my ExH can do what he wants, when he wants, and live where he wants.

I can't.

Presumably, if it were 50/50 she could take a PSO out on him, too? I think they're still fairly rare.

OLKN, your DS might not want to leave the area, but there is nothing legally stopping him from doing so. It is becoming more common (from what I've read) for fathers to take out Prohibited Steps Orders against their ex partners meaning that they can only leave the area if they leave their children behind. There is a very big difference between choosing to stay in an area to be near your child/their other parent and being legally forbidden from moving beyond a certain distance.