To have this opinion of SIL.

[Justme23]

Probably a terrible whiny thread actually but I need a vent.

The back story is that since I have known SIL2 she has wanted to get pregnant.

Her ex left her because she stopped her contraception without telling him (which in my opinion is abhorrent). He was always very vocal that he wasn't ready for a baby and neither was she, because of their age and situation. (SIL being 19 and VERY immature and him being 21 and studying furiously for a law degree, both living at respective maternal homes). He was broken up when he found out she was lying and took it very hard, poor kid.

Anyway she finally conceived after a string of one night stands and an on off thing with her ex. She told another guy that the baby was his for the last six months of her pg but when baby was born it was clear that her ex is the father.

She told him (via text) and he rang her to ask what she wanted from him. She said nothing at all (very dramatic scene, telling him he can't go anywhere near the baby, she is a "strong" woman, blah blah.

And typically after 14 months she's realising it's not as easy as she thought it was, mainly down to her doting mummy refusing to sponsor her anymore after she threw a tantrum and smashed up her room. (over a broken phone no less)

She is the epitome of a Jeremy Kyle brat. Out every weekend, no job, sees less of her child than I do mine and I have a full time 12 hours a day job!

So she rings her ex, who is doing brilliantly at his degree and job, has got a lovely girlfriend and money etc, and demands money from him.

He said no... That if she will allow him some time to meet the baby and get to know her then he will provide for THE CHILD.

And I agree with him..? So does DP.

Is it that unreasonable?

Yeeeeesssss. And the OP has pointed out that he has legal proceedings going on, I took "waiting on her" to mean that she has yet to respond to the summons (or whatever it is called).

I cant help wondering if she named as the father because he is a better bet financially and she doesnt want him to have access or DNA tests because there is a good chance that he isnt the father.

Otherwise, why wouldnt she agree to DNA tests and go to the CSA?

It doesn't work like that. She can't just ignore him and the court does nothing. The court will hold a hearing in her absence if it must. It will make an order without her input if it must. And if she breaches an order there are penalties.

Your attempt at being patronising is a little misplaced, considering you don't actually know about court processes.

I think if he denies paternity and insists she goes to the CSA, then they will insist on it, won't they?

Or he could go to court and ask them to insist on it.

According to the OP, when the baby was born it was clear it was this man's child. But also that he did not find this out until the child was 6 months old. So the child is now 14 months old, so it's been 8 months now since he was told he is the father and 14 months since the child was born and it was apparently obvious that he was (I am assuming he never saw the child and that nobody who saw the child and knew him, told him), surely he must at least have a court date? How long can one be waiting to go to court without actually proceeding?

There are many things he can actually do. He just has to do them...

Well for a start I wasnt being patronising, merely pointing out that it isnt quite as simple as "court proceedings". These things take time and by the sound of it, he is as the start of the process, he can only push for a hearing in her absence once the relevant length of time has passed.

Why so snotty?

Hec presumably he tried to deal with the mother and when she made it clear that she wouldnt co-operate, then he started proceedings. I cant imagine a solicitor advising that he go straight to court if there was a chance that access could be arranged between them.

The father shouldn't have to 'keep' the woman though. No wonder some purposely have babies with rich men. If I was a man I'd want reciepts of what she'd spent the money on. So I knew it was going to my child and not like buying a new car or getting pissed with it like a lot do.

And court proceedings can take MONTHS.

the OP has pointed out that he has legal proceedings going on, I took "waiting on her" to mean that she has yet to respond to the summons (or whatever it is called).

Family court proceedings prioritise the child - therefore, they do not take upward of 10 months to "wait" for one parent to respond.

No matter how the child was conceived, when she was 6 months old, the OP's friend, and his wider friends and family, accepted that he was her father. Yet 10 months on, he is still depriving his child of a relationship with her father, despite knowing where she lives, despite having indirect contact with her mother and despite having professional legal knowledge.

He is withholding his DD's right to have a relationship with him from his DD due to a dispute he is having with her mother, and his friends and family are complicit in this. the OP agrees that her friend has no responsibility to have a relationship with his daughter

The OP has studiously ignored any comments that have been about the DC's rights in this horrible situation - and will undoubtedly continue to do so, as it paints her friend in a less positive light. Of course, when this case does end up in family court - which it undoubtedly will, sooner or later - his behaviour now will undermine anything he might say.

You see something new every day - an absent dad defended and justified by a MN member

I'm not being snotty. I was calling you on your "yeeesss" which was patronising.

I'm uninterested in a bun fight. As Hecate pointed out he's had months. She's clearly hostile, things aren't capable if resolution between them so I think any solicitor would advise him to start court proceedings. A DNA test could be ordered within a few weeks of being applied for. It's not that time consuming or slow.

I am not defending him, but saying that from what the OP has written, he is going to court and trying to see the child, and I dont think its fair to assume that he isnt based on what has been posted.

I also dont think it is fair that people are defending the mother because her behaviour has been appalling.

Absolutely he shouldn't, ghost. You are right. He shouldn't be expected to pay for the woman's costs. But he should be 50% responsible for the costs of raising the child, shouldn't he?

So 50% of the bigger property that's required. 50% of the extra electricity that's required. 50% of the extra food that's required. 50% of the extra water that's required. 50% of the costs of the child going on holiday and so on and so forth.

and 50% of the clothes and shoes and school trips and uniform and toys and pocket money and the child's furniture (bed etc)

As an aside, I don't think there are a great deal of non residential parents who pay anything close to that, are there? The parent with custody always pays far more. It's not unreasonable to have at least a contribution towards all of those costs.

I agree Hec that he should pay, but I think the issue here is that it wont go on food, bills, clothes etc as she relies on her family to feed and house her child, but it will go on fags and booze. Its no different to a husband spending the child benefit down the pub is it? And there would be cries of "leave the bastard" if someone posted that their OH was doing that.

I just cant blame the guy for wanting his money to go on the child, when the mother has proved herself to be so feckless.

Ghostship. The nrp should be contributing to the welfare of the person who takes care of their child as well as the child directly.
You are huge over simplifying the situation.
I'm glad your not a man (with a child who you then abandon) because you sound like you would choose to be an abusive twat to the person actually taking care of your child! Hsve some respect for the people who put their lives on hold to nurture children.

Sorry boges who's defending the mother? (it's a long thread, I probably missed it) I see lots of people saying that she has behaved appallingly but pointing out that that doesn't change his responsibilities to the child. Has anyone said that how she behaved is ok or defended her right to do it?

They're bonkers if they have

I feel like I'm fighting you. I'm not, you know that, right?

I suppose I am just pissed off that "man" automatically equals "wrong". I think they have both been stupid but that she is actually worse.

I mean defending her right to a fat wodge of cash regardless of whether that cash will actually be of benefit to the child.

I know! :o

I do agree with you that he should pay, but I also agree with the OP that it isnt unreasonable to want his money to be going to the child, not on the mothers social life.

he is going to court and trying to see the child, and I don't think its fair to assume that he isn't based on what has been posted.

Given the detail that the OP has gone into about her friends sex life - I think it's a fair assumption that she would know if there was court action ongoing and give details of it here - after 10 months, there should be at least CAFCASS involvement even if a final order had not been made - are you familiar with the family court system?

Mediation should have requested by the OP's friend months ago - I'm sure if it had and the babies mother had refused, the OP would be berating her for that as well - but there is no mention of the mums obstructive behaviour regarding legal proceedings - doesn't that strike you as odd?

Of course Hecate I agree. Seen a lot of cases where that doesn't happen though sadly, with blame on both sides.

Krumbum thanks if I was a man and in this situation I'd fight for joint custody so I wouldn't have to pay maintanence. Its both of our child so I would let another person solely bring up my child. Not fair on either of them. If I couldnt do that, I'd be going through CSA. because that way it's fair and theres a consistent record of what I've paid. I wouldn't give her a penny cash because she can turn round and say I've not. Which brings up an issue of back paying...

Wouldnt*

No one has said he is in the wrong because he is a man. That's moronic.

Him being feckless is just not an appropriate response to her fecklessness. She sounds like a dreadful mother tbh, but that just makes his lack of action worse.

I gave up about halfway through because really, the point is the child is here now. Poor kid, born to two such rotten people. One a spoiled brat with serious issues, one a controlling, creepy asshat.

I'm not going into the conception issue because frankly that's irrelevant. She's here now, and like every child she deserves her best chance. If she's being mistreated, involve Social Services, please!

He needs a DNA test, and then he can go through courts for access. If you get SS involved if it's truly as bad as you say, he has a good chance of protecting his child. If that's what he wants of course, doesn't come across that way so far. :(

He doesn't get to decide where the money goes. Simple. He has to pay. Simple. He wants access, he goes through the courts. Perhaps not so simple but if it's what he actually wants and he's not just spouting off to look like a saint, that's what he has to do.

Conception is irrelevant at this point. The point is there is a little girl who isn't being well cared for, and if he truly loves her as much as he says he does...He needs to step in and help HIS CHILD!!! He needs to stop focusing on the mother on focus on his little girl, who deserves so much better than what she's getting.

Poor little girl. :( I hope they both get their act together and pull of the rose tinted glasses. They both need to stop using money to punish each other and think of this sweet baby.

He cannot change who she is. All he can do is help his child. The more he plays victim, the more he his blinded to his child who needs help. It's not about either of them, it's about her.

Why can nobody in this situation see that? Why can't you see that OP?

While I agree with the majority, even if you think he's been so hard done by, why can't you advise him to stop focusing on how she got here and focus on what he can do to be a good dad?

I'll repeat: This is about the little girl and what is best for her. Not whether it was fair the mother became pregnant. She's here now, if he truly cares he'll do something other than whine and give half hearted tokens. Lockets don't really help, do they?

Hello again pokes up head from behind parapet,

Just an update on this.

SIL was arrested on Saturday for assaulting two women and a police officer and possesion class A and C drugs. She bailed and is awaiting court now.

DPs mother and step father have temporary custody.
On Sunday the father called to their house, he had started legal proceedings and they were waiting on SILs reply.

He spent all Sunday afternoon with baby and spent yesterday evening after work with her. AFAIK his solicitor has urged him to go for custody on a 60/40 to him split. His solicitor has also advised him against contacting CSA unless he is forced to. Just for the conspirationalists on this thread, this is again feedback through DP and MIL. Not an intimate pillow chat from the father.

DPs mother has stopped contact between baby and SIL in the mean time as She is finally seeing her as the rest of us do, as an unfit mother.

Hopefully things are looking up for everyone concerned.

Poor baby girl. :(

I hope whatever the outcome, it is best for her and she is finally given the love and attention she deserves, instead of being used as a pawn between two unstable people.

Fingers crossed!