Not allowed to see child, is there more to it?

[Baltiriceandchips]

My cousin is in a relationship with someone who isn’t allowed to see his dc. They have spent thousands going back and forth to court but all he’s allowed is a phone call and a monthly letter. He maintains that his ex has poisoned the child (11) against him which is why the courts won’t push for more as it’s not in the best interests of the child.
I know he has done drugs in the past, on weekends out. I think my cousin does them too and they like a drink recreationally.
They are both in responsible jobs. Part of me wonders though, if courts would take such a hard stance, denying access to a father, unless there was something more behind it.

I wonder if he’s telling her the same old “my ex is crazy” story or if it is normal for courts to refuse access if the child doesn’t want to see their dad. He had access in the beginning but the ex stopped it when he got into a relationship.
I just don’t want my cousin being hurt, or forking out any more money, time or stress for a man who is hiding something.

Considering the number of women on here who are forced to let their children go to their abusive ex's, I find this deeply troubling and suspicious. And your cousin is being very naive - she's clearly NOT involved in the court case/s because if she was, she would know what is being stated by the mother and why the court has decided he can't have access.

So she might THINK she's involved becuase he's telling her stuff, but clearly he's not telling her everything and that is in itself yet another red flag.

Has she read the Cafcass report?

I have only seen one dad who was not allowed to have contact with his child. (And I know MANY). This was after years on end mistreating his child.

The kid had a bad time, the dad claimed the mother was poisoning the kid, the mother was in despair because the courts didn’t believe her he was abusive…. Until the dad sent the kid to hospital with a few broken bones. It took years of abuse and court hearings before the court finally listened.

He doesn’t need to be as bad, but there is a strong likelihood that he or she may be as a vast majority of parents who have no contact with their kids, who simply didn’t care enough or wanted to put the effort to keep in touch.

Yes , lots more to it. There is a whole other story being left untold here.

If cousin has been to court with him, doesn't she know what case has been made to prevent him seeing them?

Is it possible she also isn't telling the full story?

Had she simply Googled his name? Right down to the last entries..

My daughters father is horrifically abusive and there was concrete evidence of him abusing his daughter exhibited in court, to the extent it would've either killed her or caused life changing injuries... He still has supervised contact.

Just saying.

She's very foolish to be giving him money to take this through the courts. It isn't her battle.

I know this situation. No contact granted apart from occasional letter. Was due to him being extremely violent to the mum (plus multiple other gfs too) CAFCASS said his own child was not even safe with him to see in a contact centre so no access was granted.

Put it this way, when I worked at a supervised contact centre there was a parent who repeatedly burned a four year old with a lighter who was granted supervised access by the courts. They have a very low set of requirements to allow access.

In the news today, just in case anybody is still thinking that mothers are allowed and supported by courts to stop contact on the basis of small infractions: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66531409

This is utterly horrific.

Yes, there's more to it.

Probably an awful lot more to it.

None of which is good.