To not allow my baby son to stay overnight at his father's new 'love nest'?

[dollyindub]

I'll try to keep this brief.

We'd been together for 2 years when I fell pregnant. It was unplanned although we had discussed having a baby and were not using contraception.

He finished our relationship when I told him I was pregnant, continued to live with me for the next 6 months (disclaimer: I was heartbroken, hormonal and really thought it was the shock and that he'd get over it once the baby arrived so stupidly allowed this instead of kicking his arse out).

However he moved back to his mum's at the end of the college term (he's a 'mature' student), but attended the birth of our child.

When our baby was 5 weeks old, I found out that he was in a relationship with a fellow college student (she's married with a child)
I was so angry as I'd had previous concerns re their friendship and her inappropriateness and his apparent lack of boundaries.

I'm posting this here, as they have now moved in together - she moved straight out from her place with her husband, straight into a house they are now renting together, and they are both on easy street whilst I struggle as a lone parent.

Our DS is only 4 months old.

I'm trying really hard to maintain dignity (mostly failing!) but my ex is now wanting to see our baby at his place and take him overnight!

The thought of that woman and him playing happy families with my DS makes me feel ill TBH, so I have said he can see him when he likes (when mutually convenient) but only at my place.
Obviously he is unhappy about this.

I am trying to constantly remember that it's my son's relationship with his dad, and not my issues with him that is important, but it's just so damn hard at the moment!

I need some clarity please! Please mums net jury, AIBU?

maintenance has nothing to do with access as far as i am concerned, they are not mutually exclusive, she cannot stop access based on the fact he doesnt pay maintenance

those reasons would not stand up in court trucks

and why was he supposed to wait before moving in with his current partner? wait for what? a bus?

My DS does have a relationship with his father, he sees him every fortnight. It just isn't the sort of relationship my ex had anticipated when he marched into court demanding 50-50 care when DS was 12 weeks old. And the OP isn't stopping access, she allowed him to be at the birth and has granted him unrestricted access in her home, despite her feelings. That doesn't strike me as the actions of a nasty, unreasonable mother.

thats nice for you, but im not really interested tbh

i think she is unreasonable (and controlling, which is fuelled by her bitterness) to not allow him access (even for an hour) in his own home, you think she isnt so we will just have to agree to disagree

Yes, that is the point of a discussion board, people will have different opinions. One of mine is that continually referring to a vulnerable new mother- who was dumped and abandoned whilst pregnant and is left trying to piece her life back together- as 'bitter' is particularly low.

Millie - I think the OP herself said she was resentful. Isn't that the same thing as bitter?

Millie sadly opinion isn't the same as truth. The truth is if a parent of either sex denies access for reasons percieved as personal resentment and jealousy that thereby affects the child's relationship with the other parent you are stepping on extremely risky ground legally. I would go so far to say that advising the OP to deny access is irresponsible.

Dreaming, I don't think so in this context. There is a difference between the OP acknowledging she feels resentful about her situation and posters insulting her.

Susan2kids the OP hasn't denied access and no one has advised her to.

Dolly please consider having this thread moved t relationships.
I'm finding it hard going so I can't imagine what some of the harsher comments are doing to you.

And be assured that as long as you are facilitating a reasonable relationship between your ds and his father you will not be compelled to hand him over for overnights at this early stage.
Enjoy your gorgeous little boy.

Op is not denying access. FFS!
Is there an army of automatons on here who've had their fucking empathy chips removed?
A child's contact with the absent parent has to be in the child's best interests. Removal from his mother (aka primary carer in this situation) overnight will not be determined as such.
Fact!

As an aside, one of the major qualities in being a good father is to be a good parter to your child's mother
Opinion? Yes. But I stand by it.

millie30. The first reply suggests to the OP suggest denying an overnight visit which is already arranged. This is denying access. Thankyou.Please retract your inaccurate statement.

Nope, he requested an overnight. It wasn't agreed and wasn't arranged and retracted. It was and is an unreasonable request given the baby is only 4 mo.

She is not denying access. She is refusing unreasonable and unnecessary requests as it is too much too soon and her son is too young.

Susan2kids, denying access would be if she was refusing to let him see the baby, that is not happening here. Not giving in to every demand her ex makes does not constitute denying access, so I'm not really sure what statement you want me to retract.

Not giving in to every demand?! Bloody hell, she's not giving anything apart from supervised visits at her house.

What do you, Trucks and Millie and others, think about him having baby at his house for few hours but not overnight? That would seem to be compromising and no reasonable reason for the Op to say no, apart from her own feelings of anger and upset.

I think if there are no welfare concerns and the baby is comfortable with him they could start building up to that with going out for a walk and gradually increasing the time, when the OP is comfortable. But I would wonder why a supposedly loving father would be pushing so hard to remove a baby of this age from its mother when she is clearly not ready. That seems to be more about his rights than any consideration for the baby's needs.

But what if the OP is never comfortable? Do her feelings continue to trump those of her ex and the rights of her son to build a good relationship with Dad from a young age?

Millie Op has made no suggestion that he is pushing her hard, she just said that he is wanting to have him at his place, and even asked 'do you think I should let him take him there during the day?' and she even said he was a good dad

your making out that he is forcing her to do this, in fact your making him out to be a holy twat of a man, not the op, she admits she constanly has to remind herself that he is his dad, and its not her issues with him that are important

she seems far more balanced about her feelings and reconigising that they are somewhat clouding her judgement, than some of the neurotic posters on this thread

I think a good compromise would be for her to drop the baby at his parents/family - where he gets to spend some alone time with the baby. She has said his family are talking to her - so may be start with that and build up. A few hours in a neutral setting without the OW being involved may make her feel a little more comfortable.

When alls said and done the OW is not known to her, nor is her child and it is a very NEW relationship. It is only fair he takes small steps - not out of punishment but in gaining the OP's confidence. She has been treated badly and it has not been an amicable parting, surely he must realise how fragile she is.

One of the kinder posters earlier on said that him having access to the child at her place will not help her move on and I agree. Yes, he should see the child, but she should try to put some distance between her and him.

I don't understand some of the posters on here.

The OP is clearly in a vulnerable and upset frame of mind right now, she has been abandoned whilst pregnant, recently gave birth and is trying to put her baby first whilst also dealing with her ex, and she is given zero compassion.

The ex dumped his girlfriend on learning she was pregnant, shacked up with a married woman, had to be begged to be at the birth of his own baby and makes absolutely no financial contribution and he is given unwavering support.

I genuinely don't get it.

I know millie. It's quite upsetting.

But Millie, can't you see that she isn't putting the baby first, she is putting her own feelings first and has admitted that. It is her own feelings of distress at them 'playing happy families at their love nest' which is the reason for refusing visits at his home. She says that quite clearly in her OP.

Yes he dumped her and that was terrible timing, and i can appreciate how awful it must have been for her, but would you have told a woman that she must stay with a man because she had just found out she was pregnant, even though the pregnancy wasn't planned and she didn't want to be with him. When do you think would have been a suitable time for him to dump her?!

There are who don't want be at the birth even when they are with their partners. On other threads exes who have wanted to be at the birth have been told it's not a spectator sport!

The OP has said that he does pay maintanace, not regularly but generously. Not ideal I know but he is paying.

Isn't it funny how I can be called kind by KC225 for mentioning that contact at the OP's house doesn't allow her to recover and move on but am called an automaton who lacks in empathy by Emily!

I'm not supporting the dad or the mum, I am supporting the child.

I was left seven weeks pregnant, with a toddler and disabled and I coped. It's not easy, but when that little girl was born I promised I would do my best for her. So I let her have contact, and go overnight... but he wasn't really reliable, so let it taper off and stopped making the effort.

The moment she came to me upset about not seeing her daddy, I contacted him and arranged it so she could, because to me it's not about my worry about him being a fit father that takes precedence, it's her happiness and well being. That meant visits and overnight stays, and now I bust my ass getting her to and from his house because it's important to her.

Loads of people have said to me to stop because he doesn't make that effort himself, he doesn't deserve her apparently, and all sorts of things, be better off without him. But to me that is not my choice to make, it's hers, and as a baby I had to act selflessly in her best interests too, to have that bond with her father was very important, more important than my feelings of finding it difficult to let her go.

We made a baby together, our parenting might not be equal, but without him I would not have her, and she deserves to have that relationship and not be denied two loving parents simply because one of them has issues with their relationship. There is loads of support, as shown here on Mumsnet to help her get through it, it's actually not as bad as you might think, there are benefits to being able to rest and recharge when they are young, and as they get older this bond facilitates things like hospital visits, education, working, social life (plucking examples from my own life).

millie it's got nothing to do with supporting the father or otherwise.

It's about putting the child's long term interests at the heart of things. And the child's long term interests usually lie in having a close relationship with both parents.

Preventing this process from starting to either punish the father for his misdeeds, or to succour the OP's hurt feelings have zero to do with the child's long term interests.

It's harsh but there it is. Courts are very clear on this. Unless there are very obvious reasons to prevent or keep contact at a minimum, then contact should be of prime importance. Behaviour in the relationship is imaterial. Child support is imaterial. Feelings are imaterial.

The child's right to have a deep and close relationship with both parents trumps those things.

fan all the research seems to support you and your actions. The outcomes for DC who have had regular contact with the NRP are more positive than those without.

And there is large amounts of data showing how many NRFs drop out of the scene after a few years. They are less likely to do so if they have had regular contact with their DC actively encouraged by the RM.

Fan and Word have both put it far more eloquently than I could. I agree with you both completely