to think I should make my ex now take me to court to see the kids after recieving this text from him..

[Ladyanonymous]

Ex asked me a week ago if he could see the kids boxing day from 2pm I told him if he wanted to see them he would need to pick them up in the monring as I had plans (picking up my partners kids from airport and others 150 miles away need collecting). He refused to comprimise so I said fine don't bother having them then. He will not see them at all during the holidays. Its his weekend to have them NYE w/e although we "take it in turns" on NYE so he has told me he'll be picking them up on the Saturday rather than the Friday (hasn't stated a time) and has told me he won't be having them on the Sunday night and Bank Holiday Monday instead either.

Kids are upset about not seeing him so I asked if he could have them from 12 noon as a comprimise - he has flat refused and has said if I want him to have them next year on boxing day I'll need to let him know now .

I said fine you'll need to have them NYE then as that is your agreed access night, and theres no guarentee you're not going to dick me about next year anyway and fufill your part of the bargain.

I've said they really want to see you so you either need to have them boxing day or have them the extra night new years eve w/e as we would like to go away. He replied "As I have already said I am away for xmas (he hasn't said that at all - and hes told the kids hes staying at home) and it is too late to change my plans. As for New Year I am away as it is not my year to have the kids. If you drop them on my doorstep you will be abandoning them and my neighbours will phone the police. If you choose not to be there on the Sunday when I drop them back then I will have to phone social services (I work for Childrens Services so am aware this is bollocks) and inform them that you have abandoned them as you are not home for the kids. Now stop texting me, if you send me ONE more text I won't bother picking them up from school tomorrow."

AIBU to want to go round there and rip his fucking head off kill him or now just deny him access.

Either way the kids miss out

santasakure it's worked out on a nightly basis, so the children have to stay over 104 nights per year, then the maintenance is reduced by 1/7th for each night.

The CSA need to see the contact order to make this reduction. So what happens is that nrp gets the contact order, sends it off to the CSA to get the reduction, then doesn't actually have the children at all.

In my case, I'm owed £2,500 in arrears, I et £5 per week that's taken off his dole money. It takes ages deciding what I'll spend it on!!

LA, have only read your own posts but not entire trhread so hopefully i am not missing something relevant.

it appears your eX enjoys messing you about and this is very obviously having an effect on you and he is acheiving his goal of winding you up.

i take it from your posts that the agreement is that you each have teh dcs on alternate weekends? if this is the case then i would just make the dcs available for contact on his weekends. if he is to collect at 2pm then you have to make teh dcs available at 2pm. sorry but you do. you know he will arse about if you try and ask for an earlier pick up so it really isn't worth teh bother to ask for any favours off him. yes that will mean you can't do the airport pick up but these are your children and really you have an obligation to make them available for contact with their dad.

if he chooses not to have them on his weekend that is up to him. simply tell your dcs that dad has chosen not to see them. do not make excuses, tell them they will have to ask him why he has chosen that. it will be difficult for them but it is all part of learning who their dad actually is.

i think you have accept that he will do you no favours and if he does, there will be a catch, so don't do him any either, you wont be repaid the courtesy.

SantaSakura....you heard wrong

Sakura you do not know what you are talking about. Family courts give the resident parent a huge amount of power and control, and while this is a very good thing where there is abuse, it unfortunately means all too often, where there isn't, a mother can erode a child's relationship with the father very badly.

Your contempt for men in general is breathtaking, and I do most sincerely hope you are not parenting any sons. Not all men are devils, and not all women are saints. And in an ideal world, children need and deserve both their parents.

Santasakura - are you actually in the UK? I ask because some of your comments are quite simply wrong. For example, it is simply not correct that "until recently" fathers owned their children.
And I don't understand what about the court system is "patriarchal". The court system is heavily weighted, still, towards the mother in contact disputes. Just because you think men need to buck up their ideas, that doesn't make the court system patriarchal.

"So have I got this right?- Dads cannot be forced to see their kids, but they have the right to take the mother to court to demand access to the kids?"

Yes of course it's right - how could a court of law force a father (or a mother for that matter) to see his/her children. you can't arrest a person or sentence them etc for not seeing their children.

But yes, each parent has a right to see their children, and sometimes the 'resident' parent skuppers that by any means, so of course the non-resident parent can take the resident to court for witholding 'contact'.

what is the reverse of misogyny? There seems to be so frigging much of it on Mumsnet.

actually hairyfairylights I think it's the children who have a right to a relationship with a parent, not the other way around

Good grief Santa I can't believe you think the courts are patriarchal!!! .

the courts generally fall very much in the mother's favour in terms of residence etc.

And there are lots of mothers who abandon their children, actually.

Well, HollyTwat I don't know what the law says, but it doesn't provide for the children to exercise that right, actually.

Nothing I've read says anything about a child's right to see his/her parent.

The Directgove site is usefull though. It talks about legal parental responsibility.

Can he collect the kids from the airport if he wants them at 2 but you have to be out at that time? I do sense that neither of you is willing to give an inch here, which is a shame for the kids at Xmas.

the court exercises that right for them though Hairy.

I think that the courts and Cafcass come from this angle rather than the parent's right to have contact.

Found this Hairy:

"The question of how much contact a child should have with a non-residential parent is a difficult matter for the court to resolve to the satisfaction of the parents and the child. Under the Children Act 1989 contact is expressed as a right of the child although the ECHR has recognised it as an element of a parent?s family life. In striking a balance between the competing interests the courts are guided by considerations of the child?s welfare as the paramount consideration but the view in the vast majority of cases is that maintaining a relationship with both parents is in the child?s best interests. Terminating direct contact between a child and a non residential parent is a rare occurrence and usually only happens where there has been violence or abuse of an extreme nature or where for other reasons the child does not wish to continue to have a relationship with his or her parents. "

Yes of course it's right - how could a court of law force a father (or a mother for that matter) to see his/her children. you can't arrest a person or sentence them etc for not seeing their children

You think it is ok for a nrp to take their child and it's resident parent through the emotional and financial process of court, not turn up to the court ordered contact and not have any prison consequences??? OMG!!! R U A MAN? or a partner of a man who has been to court?

i was always told by my solicitor taht it was my son's right to see his grandparents and not teh other way round.

however i do know of two families where the children, all aged 99 or over have expressed very strong wishes to not have contact with NRP and teh court has still granted a contact order to the NRP stating taht the children were to eb made available for contact. in both cases teh chidlren were devastated.

sorry none of the children were aged 99 or over . tehy were aged 9 or over.

yes booyhohoho, for children that young, that is the case until they are nearly 12, then the court believes them and stops making orders, they like to see the rp continuting to turn up for contact and the child continually refuse to see the parent over a long period of time, and in my case whilst the oldest kept refusing to see the nrp, the yougest continued to see the nrp so the court was satisfied that it was about the child not wanting to see the father and not about anything else!

I am struggling to understand driving the partner's DCs to see him, but not driving you're own DCs to see their dad.

how horrendous for you and your children!!!

It seems as if both are putting partners & partners children before their own children.

Diddle - why? What has the OP done to make you think that? They had an agreement for him to have the children, he continually picks and chooses when he can be bothered having them and when it suits him to pick them up/drop them off - what is LA supposed to do - sit around her house 24/7 with the kids ready & waiting, never making any other plans just so her dickhead ex can pick them up and drop them off if & when he likes?

FGS

Her Ex phones up to say he wants to see the kids over Christmas, she already has plans but tells him he can have them boxing day if he can pick them up anytime before 12 as she has other plans which means he either needs to pick them up before 12 or she needs to take them with her. Why should she continually change her plans because he's unreliable?

He is supposed to have them NY as it's 'his weekend' but he has other plans - WTF

Why are so many of you saying she isn't putting the kids needs first, she is simply living her life, trying to accomodate a twat of an ex and trying to facilitate him seeing the children but why should she change her plans all the time to suit him or be made out to be the 'baddie' who isn't putting her children first.

I did offer for him to collect them at 12 but he said this wasn't convinient - I also said he could have them after I got back which wasn't convininet either - and thanks to the PP's who understand why I refuse to bend around him for the next 10 years.

I always put my kids first but I cannot include his dicking me about in that and drop everything (and I have had to drop work many times because of him) when he clicks his fingers - My kids are my life - he is not and I do not believe them seeing me being manipulated by him is a good role model either.

I´m sure there´s more to it than posted.

It´s the "well if you can´t pick them up before 2 then don´t bother" of the OPs.

Perhaps his reasons for not being able to do so are just as "legitimate" as OPs for not being able to be there at 2.

But where´s the compromise on that point-from either of them?

If the children didn´t want to see their father, OK.

But the way it stands they can´t on BD as their mother is too busy collecting her partner´s children.

• I should have said sorry AFTER I lost it and told him not to bother.

Several times I have come home when he is supposed to have the kids and they are here on their own because we've fallen out and hes decided not to have them so dropped them off and not told me.