to request my daughters dad visits her during term-time instead of her travelling 500miles every other week

[LexyLea]

I am currently in dispute with my ex-husband who insists that our daughter travels to his home every other week. I believe this is unreasonable towards our daughter for 3 main reasons 1) the distance, my ex-husband lives 250 miles away and I believe driving there & back every other week would be unfair on our daughter, 2) her age, at 3 years old I believe the distance and the length of time in the car (not to mention dangerous moterways etc) would not be fair, and 3) the fact that she gets travel sick, to make her conduct this long journey would, has and continues to make her ill, usually at least once per journey.
It was my decision to relocate after our divorce in order that I return to univeristy to retrain so that I can properly support my daughter and I, and I can understand that my ex-husband feels angry about this, however I have invited him to visit our daughter as much as he wishes, and have asked that this be the arrangement during term-time so that her education does not suffor from tiredness / inconsistent parenting / instability etc, and I have even offered to give him a bed for the night as is it such a long journey. However, he refuses to make the journey and insists that I take her to his home, where I have been uninvited from entering and would have to drive straight back to my home, only to return a day later to pick her up (a round total of about 1000 in a 36 hour period). This is also a bone of contention for safety, time, cost isuues etc.
Please tell me if I am being unreasonable in requesting (in these circumstances) I request that my ex-husband visits our daughter during term-time.

[msrisotto]

ChaoticAngel "I think what got to me is the implication in some of the posts that she's a woman she must put herself last."

Yes, that is what I was getting grumpy about!

[franklampoon]

imagine how you would feel if the courts gave your ex residency and he moved your daughter 250 miles away.
THAT'S the problem

[bottyburpthebarbarian]

Maybe someone can tell me, but honestly, would you not need the courts permission to move that far away?

Thinking too of sloanypony - iirc you would need the courts permission to move back to Oz?

[historygirls]

If you split up from someone you are not 'glued to the spot' but you do have to accept that there are consequences to your choices and everyone else doesn't have to jump to your tune. If you choose to move away then you should also choose to facilitate access rather than saying that your childs father can 'visit' if he wants to.

I would not accept a situation whereby my dh moved my dcs 250 miles away and said rather than them staying with me in our home where we can relax and be a family (for 26 nights a year ), I have to travel to a town I don't know and wonder the streets with them until bedtime when I can return them to him. I won't get the beginning or the end of the day, the snuggling up in bed, the goodnight kiss, the normal parent child relationship.

It is a gamble for the OPs DH to give up his job and move closer. She is going to be finished her course by next summer and could move 100s of miles to somewhere else.

[CheeseandGherkins]

As long as you're not moving out of the country you can go wherever you like, so you can stay in England or even move to Wales too, you don't need permission and I don't see why you would. Improving the quality of life for the child is more important than keeping the waster of a father happy imo.

Moving abroad you would need permission but if you did it without it then it would be nigh on impossible to get you to move back in all honesty. The impact of forcing the family to move back would be worse on the child and mother than of leaving them alone and that's what the court would look at.

[Tanga]

As the OP hasn't been back to explain why her ex doesn't pay maintenance or why she hasn't, therefore, been to the CSA, I think it is a harsh to assume the father is a 'waster', particularly since the OP seems to have unilaterally moved his child hundreds of miles away from him and is now citing the distance as a reason why contact cannot take place at his home.

Am I misinterpreting the rest of your post, CheeseandGherkins? You appear to be saying that parents should simply abduct children with impunity and that you feel this is a good thing? Or is that only mothers? Studies show that having an actively involved father in a child's life demonstrably improves that child's life by many different measurements. Improving the financial situation is not the only thing that improves a child's quality of life, IMO.

[bottyburpthebarbarian]

Cheese - Up until recently I lived hundreds of miles away from family support.

If I follow your argument, I would have been justified in taking my children and leaving their home area and friends and moving them so I could be closer to my family??

How would that be improving their quality of life?

[hairytriangle]

"As long as you're not moving out of the country you can go wherever you like, so you can stay in England or even move to Wales too, you don't need permission and I don't see why you would"

Surely becauyse it's for the good of the child to have regular input from both parents.

[CheeseandGherkins]

Like I said, there are many reasons. I'm speaking from the viewpoint of my children being abused my their "father" and going through a court case, psychiatric treatment for them, my 8 year old saying she wants to kill herself so she won't have to see him anymore and self harming and many more reasons which I've posted about it too.

Obviously everyone's situation is different but I can only give opinions based on mine. Oh and I still live about 200 yards from the bastard too as he rented a place there when we split....there was also domestic violence in the the relationship so it makes it more complicated.

Tanga, where violence is involved, it harms the children to have contact, studies have shown that too.

[bottyburpthebarbarian]

Cheese - I agree totally in your situation, where a partner has been violent then contact should be stopped instantly.

And I know I've said it before but your EX is a bastard of the first order.

And you are a million times better than he will ever be and your children know this.

[hairytriangle]

"Like I said, there are many reasons. I'm speaking from the viewpoint of my children being abused my their "father" "

yours is an incredibly awful and unusual situation, though, hardly relevant to the OP's circumstances.

[tiptree]

If you have children with someone you are not glued to them for life but there is a link to each other and compromises need to be made. ( Usual disclaimer for the mumsnetter who is going to come along with an extreme situation.)

Every decision that I make that affects dd in a significant way is made with my ex husband

[Tanga]

Firstly, there is no suggestion of any violence in the OP, and whilst I have every sympathy for your particular and unusual circumstances, CheeseandGherkins, that doesn't mean it is OK to imply that all fathers are superfluous or that abduction is a 'safe' way to go.

Also, violence and abuse of children is not limited to fathers or males. The attitude that it is fine or better for mothers to move away from fathers without any kind of check or control leaves children more at risk of abuse, as they are also taken away from support networks and may then be entirely dependent on their abuser.

Sorry OP, didn't mean to hijack and am not in any way implying that the above has anything to do with your case.

[sloanypony]

If I wanted to split from my DH and move abroad I would need the permission of the courts, yes. However, it is highly unlikely that the courts would not grant this permission to the mother if she was from there in the first place particularly. I sought advice on this before I got married and had children, to know where I stood.

Strangely enough if you marry an American man and have your children in the US its not so easy.

[violethill]

I agree cat64, and this sexism is one of the bugbears of MN. You could have an identical post written by a man and a woman, and the responses will be quite different.

I don't think the key factor is that the OP is the woman. It's the fact that she is a parent. She has acted without taking into account the logistics of the situation. Once you have children, you have a responsibility to consider the other parent whether you choose to remain as a couple or not.

[bottyburpthebarbarian]

Sloanypony - I have a friend who was in your situation (not the same country)

And she did not get permission to take her children "home" even though they have joint citizenship

[hairytriangle]

Remember the appalling case of Michael Hutchence and Paula Yates wanting to take Paula Yates and Bob Geldof's kids to Australia? That was turned down. And rightly so.

[Orangerie]

I don't think you are being unreasonable, and actually I think that a lot of people here are.

Children are not commodities, far from it, and as any judge will tell both your exh and you: It is NOT about what is best for the father, it is NOT about what is best for the child. It IS about what is best for the CHILD.

Yes, you are the one that who left, but that doesn't mean that you are solely in charge of sustaining contact between your DD and her the father. I think it is perfectly reasonable to expect him to drive that distance on every second contact visit rather than doing all the trips yourself.

You said that you left your former place of residence to retrain to sustain your daughter. IMVHO and talking from my own experience, after trying to survive in a combination of child tax credits and the CSA dictated 10% of my ex's net salary, I totally understand why you have done it.

Besides, if the child only sees her dad every second weekend, it is not as if your are taking the child away from her father. The father was already away, albeit not geographically.

If he is refusing to pay maintenance... the most justified it is that you have decided to re train, you really need to do it so you can offer your DD the best opportunities you can. IMO the only justification not to pay maintenance is that the dad is unemployed, otherwise it's plain selfishness and bigotry. If he cared so much about his DD the least he would do is to pay child maintenance. If he is withholding maintenance to get at you... well it tells a lot about what kind of father he is, certainly not one that deserves so much consideration and for the child's needs to be ignored in order to accommodate things to her father's needs.

[Orangerie]

Sorry, that should have said, it is not about what is best for the father and/or mother but what is best for the child.

[happikidz]

LexyLea, if I can offer the point of view of a separated father and also a child of divorced parents, you are not being unreasonable if you are trying to build a better future for your child. The issue for me is the course. It's not the fault of your child's father that your course has to be so far away. Is there really not a course nearby, not even one that is only 3/4 as good but still feasible? Perhaps not, in which case the main thing is you focus on what can make the easiest journey and assert the principle that he should do more of the travelling so your child can do less.

[Spero]

I don't understand why it is repeatedly said that the op acted without thinking of the logistics so now she just has to suck it up.

Isn't the issue more that the father seems to be insisting on his rights without giving much if any thought to the impact on his child?

Yes, I know some of you are saying she should have just stayed put or not studied what she wants to study and 'put her child first' but if he is not paying any maintenance then frankly he doesn't get much of a say in what she has to do to keep her and her child fed, clothed and housed.

sometimes relationships break down and people want to move away. What matters is that both parents try to work together to lessen the impact on the children; I think this assumption that a mother should just stay put and suck up whatever crap is thrown at her is bonkers and misogynistic. Both parents presumably played some role in why the relationship didn't work out.

[sloanypony]

I'm not saying they would always get permission, but there would generally be some extraneous circumstances why not. The Paula Yates/Michael Hutchence example is not really a good example!

Its not something I really have to consider anyway. But as a general rule, a foreign mother having children in another country does not tie her to that country for the next 18 years regardless of her relationship status.

[booyhoo]

am i right inthinking this course is over next summer?

in that case if i was the NRP i would have no problem at all travelling every week/fortnight to see my child (in fact i would have no problem even if the child was living away permanently but that is just me) for a year. it would mean the mum got to establish a career to benefit my child and my child didn't have to endure 500 miles of travel sickness every fortnight.

[ChaoticAngel]

I wonder how many nrp's have moved away from their child/ren. How many would say that was wrong.