to not reinforce dc's relationship with MIL?

[elliegoulding]

I do not let my children visit Mil as BiL also lives there, BiL is on the Sex offenders register for having indecent images of children on his computer.

DH and MiL believe that BiL is innocent and was wrongly convicted (he says he was forced into a guilty plea) therefore I dont feel they would adequately safeguard my dc's as they truly dont think he is a risk. I find him sinister and tbh he scares me.

MiL hates me now as she feels I am disloyal for not standing by her son (BiL), we speak and exchange pleasantries when we see each other but there is no closeness anymore. Until the guilty plea I gave him the benefit of the doubt and since, I have invited MiL for meals, Xmas last year etc but she politely declines, the only time dc's see their gm is when DH takes them round if he knows BiL is out (he doesnt agree with me but respects my wishes, we also told the sw who was dealing with the case that they wouldnt be having contact with BiL, if they did then a risk assessment would have needed to be undertaken)

Tbh, I'm not arsed anymore that they dont see her, it upsets Dh though. she could visit them here or take them out any time but doesnt/wont presumably out of principle.

DH is torn, he loves all of us but believes his twatting brother is innocent, he respects how I feel but it still causes almighty rows.

As above.victim services.

I would stay off any conversation or argument about whether he is actually guilty or innocent as this is the fulcrum of disagreement, and in any case irrelevant to the making of arrangements..

What is relevant is that it is a court's job to decide on his innocence or otherwise an whatever anyone else thinks, he has been found guilty and is on the register. Fact. Nothing you or DH or MIL or BIL can do about it.

I would just say that you can't comment or pass judgement on his guilt or the likelihood of Ukrainian hackers, you weren't there. Bt the court have done so and so the situation is as it is. If it is a travesty of justice you sympathise hugely but as things stand all you can do is observe the fact that the kids must be kept away, the risk assessment hasn't been done, and if the kids were to be in contact then SS would want to know.

Tell your DH and MIL how much you regret the difficulty of the situation but you cannot be seen to be putting your children in contact with someone who is rightly or wrongly on the register. Emphasise again how much you would like your MIL to come and see the children at your house, and if she declines say how sorry and surprised you are that she has made that choice, but her choice it is.

In all honesty, your DH does not respect your position if this is causing rows. Even if he cannot come to terms with his DBs guilt he should be able to see that you have no choice but to do the correct thing where the kids are concerned.

I probably wouldn't feel that the kids were at actual risk if your DH was present all the time, we have all probably been in chaperoned company of a paedophile several times in our lives, but I would be very concerned if they ever had any e mail or FB or other social media way of being in contact with them.

Carobeaner, your post is very thought provoking, thankyou for taking the time to write it. I am going to reread it tomorrow when I am less tired as it has some really good advice.

You sound knowledgeable about it all, have you had experience?

I like Carobeaner's approach.

It's not even that he was convicted after a trial; he pleaded guilty! No one made him do that.

not much can happen to them sat in the living room with their father, him and MIL

I'm sorry to say that actually, something can happen. I knew someone who had been abused when a large number of her family were in the same room. It was a party, and she had been sat on her abuser's lap. The abuser took advantage of big skirts to hide his hands, and she told me she had been rigid with fear. I think it's that fear we often hear about, that somehow the child feels he/she is to blame.

And when you look at this, you have a MIL and DH who are sticking their heads in the sand so they are no protection whatsoever, even if it happens under their noses. They won't see it because they don't want to see it.

The only protection you have for your ds is no contact.

Thankfully I have not had family experience of this, but I have had to manage suspensions at work, and the only thing to do is for everyone, as far as possible, to take an objective view, and say 'it doesn't matter what we feel or think about this person's guilt or innocence, our job is simply to implement the procedure'. And I think this could be helpful in your situation.

Because one of the most important things is that this does not rip your DH and you apart as a further fall out of the whole horrible situation.

I also wonder whether your DH and MIL are just about able to face the possibility of the truth in their own minds, but that having someone openly voice belief in his guilt is too shameful and exposing for them, and they feel too defensive. So 'in theory' keeping a dispassionate view about what YOU think might be less threatening for them, and less abrasive between you and your DH.

And the procedure is very much that you keep the kids away.

Good luck!

I would agree with the advice to be careful with social media. Your son may already be in touch with his uncle in that way. I would tell him the truth at once in your shoes.

TBH if your MiL prioritises a paedophile over her grandchildren it's probably better than they don't see her.

that*

If BIL pleaded guilty, his chances of getting a retrial are pretty small. It will also tell against him that he is coming up with so many different excuses: whilst one of them might be credible on its own, the fact that he claims both that the police set him up and that it was a virus and that his computer was hacked all at the same time stinks to high heaven. I fear that dh and MIL are closing their eyes to reality, and that is a worry because if they don't think BIL is dangerous they won't safeguard the dc properly. And that is undoubtedly how social services would see it if they did a risk assessment.