to wonder if contact is always in the best interests of the child

[paddleduck]

Before I start I should say, I have no first hand experience, obviously do not know these people personally and accept my opinion may be unreasonable given the above.

Yesterday I took my dc to a soft play with some friends. While there a set of grandparents came in, closely followed by a couple and another boy of school age. The grandad was carrying a little girl of about 3 or 4 who was hysterical. She looked petrified and was clinging to her grandpa with white hands. She couldn't breathe for her sobs and she was drenched in her own tears. She just kept screaming 'I want to go home' 'no no no' and whenever the man from the couple approaches her, she begins screaming 'no please.. go away.. Don't want you!'

I found it so difficult to listen to her sobs, it really made my heart ache for her. Her grandparents kept cuddling her and talking softly, periodically trying to put her down and encourage her to engage with this couple. The woman part of said couple just kept standing around with her hands in her pockets rolling her eyes and huffing, man kept doing silly faces etc trying to engage little girl.

Any who, my friend visits this softplay weekly and said she'd explain when we left.

Friend explains that it is 'contact' .. The man is her dad. Woman is new wife and school child is new wife's son from previous relationship. Older couple are paternal grandparents. Dad was violent and hurt the little girls mum, so they have split and grandparents meet with the dad for supervised contact weekly. She says this softplay scenario happens every week for around 8 months now, with the little girl being distraught at every visit. - she knows this because the mother of the little girl is her aunties life long friend.

I found the whole thing so upsetting to watch and haven't stopped thinking of that little girl. The more I consider the situation the more I feel that after so long of these awful contact sessions, it would be in the child's best interests for the dad to leave her alone. To remain contactable for when she is older, if she wants to.. but that if a child finds being in your presence that distressing then that's not good to keep putting g her through that. I understand how difficult that would be as a parent. . But I almost felt it was selfish of him to keep pushing her like that. Long term she will anticipate the meetings with anxiety and they may never make progress like this? Of course he could have just not been a violent partner in the first place and my disgust over knowing what he's done makes me want to say he doesn't deserve access.. but if he's getting it someone obviously deems him not a risk to the little girl right? And presumably he has PR

Anyway. . Am I bu to think he should walk away?

It's strange how (whilst not knowing the full facts), the op has stated this man has been known to be violent, he's having supervised contact with the little girl, and the girl of 3 or 4 was obviously very, very distressed for a prolonged period of time whilst in his company.

And yet posters have come to the conclusion that his ex may be trying to ruin his character, he may have just made one mistake, it might have only been a push, the mother might be psychologically abusing the little girl and that's why she's terrified of the man. Oh and apparently you're still a Good dad if you only beat your children's mother when the children aren't there.

It sure is a mans world. It's no wonder women feel afraid to come forward.

Perhaps a zero tolerance approach to DV, whereby the perpetrator was routinely denied access to their children unless he jumped through a hell of a lot of hoops, would make these men think twice about abusing their partners?

Sorry about the terrible gammar!

It's called trying to not jump to conclusions without knowing the facts, Pyjama. The OP received second hand gossip so how does anyone know what actually happened?

I do think that a child shouldn't be forced to go to contact if that was a long term situation. It's not fair for them to be forced into a stressful situation and I don't think it's in their best interests. If I'd been younger I'd have been forced to go to contact with my Dad when my parents split up and it wouldn't have been in my best interests at all...

Agree with NannyOgg being violent towards your partner should be a good enough reason to stop contact. It's not in THEIR best interests.

I don't think violent men should have a right to contact.

Not should violent women, and despite what some think they DO exist!

It's strange how (whilst not knowing the full facts), the op has stated this man has been known to be violent, he's having supervised contact with the little girl

The OP has heard the information through the friend if a friend who knows the child's mother... Hardly first hand information.

And yet posters have come to the conclusion that his ex may be trying to ruin his character, he may have just made one mistake, it might have only been a push, the mother might be psychologically abusing the little girl and that's why she's terrified of the man. Oh and apparently you're still a Good dad if you only beat your children's mother when the children aren't there.

You are making the conclusion that she hasn't. Or for that matter what has gone on.

Nobody knows what the situation is apart from those involved.

Contact in contact centres can be orders for a number if reason, not just incidents if violence.

Sorry for typos... On my phone.

"That doesn't stop him from having a positive, reasonably worthwhile relationship with our DDs. His relationship with them is entirely separate to the relationship we had."

I agree wholeheartedly. That said, I can understand why a woman in that situation would not want a man who could do that near their child/ren. I hoep you don't mind me saying; I think the fact that you supported contact after all that happened to you speaks volumes about you as a mother.

Exposing children to domestic abuse is now considered child abuse.

Children are removed from families where there is abuse even if they are never struck.

Violent men are child abusers.

Child abusers should be allowed around children.

Obviously I meant shouldn't!

Violent men are child abusers

Violent women are child abusers too.

SIL is divorcing her alcoholic ex at the moment. IMO contact with him is absolutely not in her DD's best interest, at least not daily (SIL relies on him for afternoon childcare) and they'd be far better moving some distance away and having supervised contact now and then instead. I grew up with an alcoholic father and bear the scars.

But at the end of the day people do the best they can - SIL and her ex clearly are - and the DD will be have to make her own evaluation of her parents' decisions when she is an adult.

EarthWindFire, no, violent women don't exist. You just said yourself, if we don't see it with our own eyes it's not real. Honestly people like you are sickening, which is it, do you care about domestic violence or not? You can't harp on about violent women and at the same time continue the old lies about domestic violence to lessen it. It's clear that like everyone else all you care about is letting violent men get away with it.

OP, it's obvious, isn't it? If he cared about a person crying and saying no, if he cared about not picking on people smaller than him, if he cared about doing what was right more than what he thought his 'rights' were, he wouldn't be in this situation in the first place. He is fundamentally bad, but as other posters have alluded to or outright said, most men are, so we have to have low standards for them or it would spoil society or whatever.

EarthWindFire, no, violent women don't exist. You just said yourself, if we don't see it with our own eyes it's not real. Honestly people like you are sickening, which is it, do you care about domestic violence or not? You can't harp on about violent women and at the same time continue the old lies about domestic violence to lessen it. It's clear that like everyone else all you care about is letting violent men get away with it.

How rude and downright condescending. I suffered DV myself, knocked unconscious server all times and once left for dead so don't you spout at me. Quite frankly that is sickening!!!

I am also not blind to the fact that women can also be violent and I have personal family experience of that too!!!

The OP has not heard the information direct from either party involved.

Not do I think nearly all men are fundamentally bad or that nearly all women are wonderfully angels!

My opinion would be the same if the violent partner was the woman.

And sometimes it would be good to debate the OP. We none of us know the other side of the story or the participants' POV.

So on the face of it, taking the information the OP has as fact, I don't think the child should be put through that at all let alone weekly.

OP, you're right in that contact is most definitely not always in the child's best interest. In my experience, social workers bend over backwards far too often to keep parents happy and onside, and can lose track of what the child needs.

I agree with other posters that it is a crock of nonsense to say that violent men can be 'good fathers'. We don't know the details of this particular example but I have worked with children who had to have weekly contact with violent parents and it seemed to me that the decision had not been taken with the child in mind, but rather keeping the parent happy.

I think my post came across wrong. I wasn't sticking up for an abusive man, but just feel that judging him on gossip and a short encounter seems unfair. There could be many explanations for the little girls behaviour (such as a mum who is abusive too). Women can be just as violent and abusive as men, so it's unfair to judge a stranger like that. The situation is probably a lot more complex than it seems on the surface.

From what you say in the OP, it sounds like they were trying. She had her grandparents there and it seems she's fine with them, and her Dad was trying to engage with her making silly faces, etc. If they have been doing that for 8 months then I admire them for persevering! I can't believe that she has been distressed at that level every week for 8 months, it's possible she was having a bad day. Or maybe something had happened recently.

Obviously if there are welfare and abuse issues then contact is not in the best interests of the child. My goodness that sounded like ds 2.5 at tge barbers yesterday when trying to get his hair cut. So hysterical he made himself I'll

Oh, he was clearly trying. I felt very sad for them all.

Gatorade- I am not judging him, I simply do not know him or the situation well enough to do so. The info I gave in my OP was purely to set the scene as it where. I started this thread for this reason: Am I being unreasonable to think that, if after a prolonged period of time a child is still very unsettled and distressed over contact, that it no longer is in the child's best interest and the parent should be respectful and step back. Available to be found when the child is older but not to continue forcing their presence into their lives.

Ofc I have my own thoughts about

About his DV past. But that is irrelevant here, because there must be many families in this same situation that didn't involve violence.

She says this softplay scenario happens every week for around 8 months now, with the little girl being distraught at every visit.

If - and I know it's a fairly big if - the above statement is an accurate representation of what is happening, that's awful.

Dies the setting Vary? Mabey the little girl does not like soft play. Why does the woman have to be there, contact us between the father and child and the grandparents supervising.

YANBU. Often even if there are no welfare concerns that are considered serious enough to stop contact, it's not always best for the child, or even a good environment. I was forced to see my dad from age 3 to 8 and I hated it. He had a drug habit, had never worked a day in his life and had some undiagnosed MH issues. He never physically harmed me, hid a lot of his lifestyle from courts and had an alright house so he got EOW and half the holidays.

He stayed up late smoking weed until he drugged himself to sleep, then wouldn't wake up til 3pm the next day. The neighbour children would see me playing in the garden alone for hours and hours, and their mum twigged what was happening and would let me round to play all day long and give me a proper lunch, I'd have biscuits out of the tin for breakfast and something out of a can for my tea or takeaway pizza.

I'd come home dirty, during the summer holidays I wouldn't have been bathed more than twice in the three weeks I was there, and would be covered in flea bites from his mangy dog and crawling with lice. He encouraged me to go home and tell my stepdad I hated him and that my daddy would kill him and would tell me my baby sister wasn't my real sister, only half my sister, that sort of thing, and I'd parrot it

DM spent years trying to get a NC order, spent ages collecting little bits of evidence that eventually added up to being enough. She didn't know for sure what went on there and couldn't prove any of it, nobody official asked me, because I was young and apparently didn't get a say. All she knew is I came home filthy, angry and badly behaved and if I did say anything I was being 'poisoned against him by my mother.' He was deluded and thought I loved him so much more and wanted to live with him forever and ever. He lived close to my aunt who would cover for him and it worked for 5 years. It's easy to beat the system and get time with a child when it isn't in any way shape or form good for them.

In circumstances like violence, or mine, the contact is usually to placate the parent, or they fight for some custody to spite the RP. It's too easy for them to get it.