Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

STBX wanting more contact with Daughter

362 replies

btsmummy · 12/09/2011 10:52

Hi,

Thought I'd post here as well s the Divorce section, hopefully it's OK.

I have been separated from my H for just over 4 years and have just started divorce proceedings.

He moved out when we split and paid the mortgage and all the bills, along with the running costs for my car as I was at home with our then 18 month old daughter.

She is now nearly 6 and he has seen her on a weekday and on a Saturday every week since, they have been on holiday together, so there have been times when she has spent a week with him. They have a great relationship and to be fair he is a very good dad and she loves her time with him.

We have always got on very well, and many times we did family things at the weekend when he came to see our daughter (i am still in the FMH), we also continued to sleep together up until the beginning of last year when it became obvious we weren't going to reconcile, thing have been a bit frosty since but got slowly better and we started having family days out again (tho not sleeping together), that was up until this May.

He is now asking for more contact with our daughter and is asking for overnight stays, one during the week so he can pick her up from school and drop her off the next morning, and overnights at the weekends, he has said he would like 3 overnight stays a week so he can spend more time with her, possibly 4 the next, amount to equal care. I have said he can't have this but I have offered him 1 overnight every other weekend, with the usual midweek after school and weekend daytime in between. I also told him I won't discuss it any further and that he needs to speak to my solicitor.

Do you think he has any realistic chance of this, as I've told him we'll have to go to court as I won't agree it?

Thanks

B

OP posts:
Mitmoo · 13/09/2011 13:50

Grin @ Tyr I apologise to traffic wardens.

I've been on both sides in the family courts wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy never mind a child. I was taken to court for unsupervised, he didn't get it but it took years, and also helped a friend who is a genuinely good father but lost contact for years. Nightmare.

I do think that if the OP is using his shared care theory as an excuse not to pay his ex, the courts will see straight through it and won't deem it to be in the best interest of the child if it is financially motivated.

I suspect he's also been told he doesn't stand a chance of getting 50-50 on the property value as she brought into the property 75% so probably looking at how to start off again financially.

Mitmoo · 13/09/2011 13:50

cornflower Sex changes mid post usually leave me with that feeling too Grin

solidgoldbrass · 13/09/2011 16:54

IF the OP had initially posted as himself and laid out what he saw as the facts of the situation (that he wants more care and his XW is objecting) he would have recieved support, sympathy and advice, though he would also have been asked if he could think of any reason why his XW might be angry with him and perhaps offered advice on how to resolve it if she was.
But posting 'as her' and going on about how wonderful he is even though she intends to deny him what he wants - that's self-serving and dishonest and really does give the impression that there is a good reason for the real XW's obstinancy ie she knows that he's a self-righteous controlling knobber and therefore needs to be careful how much influence she allows him over the DD.

MrGin · 13/09/2011 18:16

ie she knows that he's a self-righteous controlling knobber and therefore needs to be careful how much influence she allows him over the DD.

I think that kind of proves the point that a male poster will get treated differently.

Truckrelented · 13/09/2011 19:04

If he'd posted as a man he'd have been treated the same as a woman posting?

What utter rubbish.

glitterkitten · 13/09/2011 19:09

Too right MrGin

There are posters on here whose starting point is to automatically assume men are devious, controlling, manipulative and basically liars.

I hope they don't have sons, I really do

Mitmoo · 13/09/2011 19:52

To be fair Glitter on the devious department he started the thread as a woman, it's hardly unprovoked. If he gets treated as if he is devious it's because he's tried to start off the thread as if he is his own wife.

I'd go with weird.

glitterkitten · 13/09/2011 20:01

Devious? Weird?

I'd go with misguided and maybe a bit silly.

Mitmoo · 13/09/2011 20:04

The wife would have posted something like "He's had his child and been perfectly happy with the arrangement for four years, now there are solicitors and the CSA involved he wants shared care" She probably wouldn't have been discussing snowmen in the garden.

When the OP was in his "woman guise" "she" was condemned for freaking about with contact without justification, as the layers unravelled then posters wondered, not surprisingly, how reliable everything else was.

Mitmoo · 13/09/2011 20:06

glitter not much to chose between devious v misguided or weird v silly. Sex changes, changes to personalities and personas mid thread are never useful if a poster is trying to gain trust of other posters.

If he plays that game, it's disingenuous to then go for the gender bias card. Bull is bull no matter what gender you are.

glitterkitten · 13/09/2011 20:26

Of course it's unhelpful but devious and weird are knee jerk, strong and OTT really.

appeegolucky · 13/09/2011 20:27

I find this thread very interesting,not because of the topic,but the attitudes since the OP was outed.

While I don't agree with what he did,I also don't agree with some of the abuse directed towards the OP.Couple of points,as far as I can see there is no mention of CSA involvement nor does there seem to be any suggestion of him asking for a 50/50 split,and if that is the case it makes Mitmoo look very much like one of the posters that glitterkitten describes.

As I said,I don't condone the way he has gone about it,but a lot are now assuming what he said is now bullshit,what if,despite him misleading the forum,his scenario is actually true?

The suggestion also that he is now somehow a bad father and his DD is better off without him is a disgraceful thing to say,no matter how bitter you are.

There are lousy fathers,lousy husbands out there,but there are also women out there much like the ones the OP describes.

Fontsnob · 13/09/2011 20:28

God forbid anyone should believe that he's just a normal caring dad who wants to see more of his DD. It's not even possible that he just made an error of judgement in posting as his STBX, goodness no, he must be a controlling knobber.

YouWinOrYouDie · 13/09/2011 20:40

Do many women write reverse POV posts on men's parenting forums, or even on our very own Dadsnet?

Are there many parenting messages boards mainly populated by men which discuss the wide-range of childcare topics that we do rather than just focussing on money contact and maintenance issues?

The OP is making me feel uncomfortable. It's so very calculating.

Mitmoo · 13/09/2011 20:40

Glitter how can in not be devious, it was dishonest?

The 50/50 split was mentioned by the OP appeegolucky* it was his premise whilst pretending to be his wife, that her husband wanted 50 50 split and "she" objected to it.

I am not suggesting he is a bad father for a moment, that hasn't happened but I would question why he wants 50 50 now after four years of no 50 50 now the solicitors are involved and according to the OP he has started divorce proceedings.

The first thing a divorce lawyer would go for would be the house given that he's only put in 25% initially he's not going to get half. He is a considerably weaker financial position to start again. If he gets 50 50 which is what the OP set out (when he was a woman, wife and mother) that would save him most if not all of paying maintenance via the CSA.

Put the solicitors into the middle of a split and you could well get both parties acting unreasonably on the solicitors advice and his sudden wish to be a joint parent could well be questionable after a gap of four years when he didn't want it.

He may well be able to explain that but it's reasonable to ask the question.

Fontsnob · 13/09/2011 20:42

Well, yes, you do get a few reverse AIBU here. There was one about cake the other day...didn't see her getting called a bunch of nasty names.

SickwithFury · 13/09/2011 20:44

From a child's point of view, I was used by my Mother as a pawn in her little game's against my Father. Last minute cancellations, Friday night contact only for a few hours, left alone in the house in holidays whilst my teacher Father wasn't allowed access. I've never forgotten that hurt and neither has my father. We're close now thankfully.

Fast forward 25 years and I marry a divorcee with a 10 year old daughter. He and the ExW share a 3 day and 4 days split; days are decided in advance, holidays in the summer are discussed fairly and Christmas are every-other year with one another. Both homes had girlie bedrooms with momento's from her childhood, very comfy, PJ's and underwear at both homes and a routine established. Everyone happy and working together. My step-daughter is a happy girl, secure and loving of both her parents and step-parents.

I really haven't the inclination to read through the whole thread, but what you and your Wife do now will set the foundations for your future. Hope you both make the right choices.

Fontsnob · 13/09/2011 20:44

Or maybe a 6 year old could deal with a 50 50 split better than an 18mnth old. Or maybe now they have decided to split for sure, he feels he wants to ensure he gets the time with his DD. Maybe before he felt that the reconciliation might work out?

Fontsnob · 13/09/2011 20:46

But of course it's far easier to assume the worse and make him the bad person, the controlling wierdo.

glitterkitten · 13/09/2011 20:49

Mitmoo no solicitor who was any good would encourage parties to act unreasonably. And let's not forget it was wife who instigated solicitor talk.

OP if you haven't already done so, check out Resolution accredited lawyers.

Furthermore, you assume OP is basically money motivated. Given he has gone above and beyond his financial obligations grouchy the split, what do you base this on?

There is a huge difference between being misguided and silly and being devious and controlling. It's hysterical language. Metaphorically the OP has been put in the stocks and pelted with rotten veg. It would not have yielded the same response if it were a woman posing as a man.

Honestly, sometimes I can be ashamed of my fellow woman kinds bitchiness, "baying crowd" hysterical mentality when it comes to men. If your son eg had been dishonest, would it follow that he was devious? Not in my book. Devious evokes darker more sinister undertones.

The same women who are yelling at the OP are undoubtedly the same who espouse gender equality. I would bet my bottom dollar that if OP were a woman s/he would not have come in for the same vitriolic shite

appeegolucky · 13/09/2011 20:49

mitmoo nowhere does it say he asked for 50/50 of the mh, shared care of his daughter yes,you are basing your opinion on things that do not seem to have been said

Mitmoo · 13/09/2011 20:50

It could be fonts, but it could also be that solicitors are now involved and pulling the strings. My ex for example went for the standard, every other weekend one night in the week and some of the holidays. It was solicitor speak, I knew damn well he wouldn't cope had to fight it. Long old story he ended up with indirect.

At the same time I was at the solicitors and was told that even though I didn't want it to go for 100% of the property value and I'd get 75%. For the record I went 50 50 and got the hell out of it.

I doubt very much the "unhappiness" at the contact is purely coincidental that it happens when solicitors are involved. That's not to be male or female baised but anti solicitors who don't care how much pain they cause s long as their client "wins".

Mitmoo · 13/09/2011 20:51

appee when he was pretending to be his wife that is exactly what he said. If you need me to C&P it I will. I think it was on the OP actually but could be wrong.

Fontsnob · 13/09/2011 20:52

But mitmoo what do you think he is trying to win?

Mitmoo · 13/09/2011 20:54

Sorry have just re read. No he can't ask for 50 50 of the marital home (get confused with the number of abbreviations sometimes on here). She put 75% of the investment into the home, he'd probably lose. He is going for shared care.

This would help his claim to the marital property and to the CSA claims later. Coincidence that he wants shared care now? Perhaps...... [sceptical]