To ask the MN jury to deliberate on this case?

[InTheDock]

I'll try and keep the information neutral, including gender and which side of the argument I'm on.

Background: Couple married for 12 years, two children, separated a year ago after one party's infidelity. One parent has main residency, the other has the DC eow and a couple of times a week for tea.

Eldest DC has a birthday which falls on the day that the resident parent normally has the DC. This parent asks non-resident parent to tea to watch DC open presents and do the cake etc.

After this, the resident parent drops the DCs off at their grandparent's so they can visit someone they are in an early relationship with. The NR parent then calls the R parent to speak to the DC and at this point discovers that they have been left at the grandparent's house. The NR parent is very angry about this but the R parent maintains that the DC enjoy spending time with their grandparents and wanted to stay over that night. The NR parent says that if they'd known about these plans they would have had the DC even though they already have birthday plans for the next day with the DC.

So, oh wise MN jury, considering the facts:
Was it unreasonable for the DC to be left at their grandparents' on their birthday?

Thanks everyone for your input .

I would love nothing more than to be able to co parent amicably with H but he makes it impossible. He calls me all the time about inconsequential minutiae. If I don't answer, he gets abusive. This was before he discovered I was dating (also discovered because he was hounding me). I feel like I've tried everything to keep things just about the DC. He just won't let go. In addition he doesn't share things equally so most of their care falls to me, things like finding childcare even though we both work etc. I try and be flexible for him - I've swapped visitation for him before as he's had to work or had to go on a stag do - but he doesn't reciprocate.

There is no way I could have said the DC are sleeping at their GP's without him knowing exactly what that meant. He had to work today and is picking them up at tea time as it's his usual day. He has made plans with his family to celebrate DD's birthday. If he'd had them on her birthday night, he'd have dropped them off in the morning then picked them up again at tea time.

For those that asked, I had a lovely time on my date . He cooked dinner for me, the first time any man has ever cooked for me unless you count the toast that H once made . I'm just enjoying it while it lasts because no doubt H will be seeking to put a spanner in the works sooner or later .

Sorry Book.

NRP should have had first refusal IMO as it was a special day.

Flossy- apology accepted

He sounds like a dick.

That said, a lot of people on this thread were talking as if the children here were inanimate objects. "Offering first refusal", indeed ...

"That said, a lot of people on this thread were talking as if the children here were inanimate objects. "Offering first refusal", indeed ..."

I was one of the people who had that in my post, Sicaq.

I was responding directly to a post written by OP, where that phrase was used by OP and I took that phrase (along with others) directly from her post, reiterating it in mine. I certainly don't regard her children as inanimate objects.

I cannot know, as I skimmed over some posts, but it may be that others who also used the phrase (you said there was "a lot") also took it directly from OP's post.

She wrote:

"There were several reasons I did not offer him first refusal but I can see I was perhaps unreasonable on this front"

I agree with adish , I also used the phrase in that context . I think the OP would have had very different responses had she posted her explanation first instead of drip feeding .

I used the phrase 'first refusal' as it had been used several times in the thread. I didn't use that phrase in my op. Also, I made it clear that there would eventually be a drip feed because I was trying to state the facts as neutrally as possible.

I just wish you'd asked your question properly, the whole NP/NRP thing made it very confusing. Just say I left my children with their GP and went on a date and exH is annoyed .. What's so hard about that ??

Agree mini

"I didn't use that phrase in my op"

No, I didn't say you used the phrase in your OP, InTheDock. It was your post of 13:33 which I quoted, and it was in response to that post that I copied your use of that phrase.

"I used the phrase 'first refusal' as it had been used several times in the thread"

I wasn't really speculating as to why you used it ... no reason why you shouldn't. It was an explanation of why I used it, in response to Sicaq's post, which seemed to imply that posters who used that phrase were talking as if your children were inanimate objects.

I didn't understand from your OP that you were making it clear that there would eventually be a drip feed (although I guessed there it was likely there would be), but I do agree with Floralnomad that there would have been very different responses had you posted your explanation first instead of drip feeding. For me (despite the fact that a lot of it came as no surprise and I am not unsympathetic), by the time I was half way through your posts I was starting to feel as if my opinions were being manipulated. (I'm sure not your intent, but it bears mentioning).

Because it changes the answers. Strip it back to basics and the real question can be answered. Seems there was a more or less even split on that.

On reading the OP my immediate thought was that, if the children, especially the birthday child, were old enough to express their opinion, they should get to choose where to stay that night.

If your assertion that the birthday girl would have chosen to go the her GPs has a firm foundation, you did the right thing.

Contact is about the child's right to see the parent, not either parent's right to have the children.

"Because it changes the answers. Strip it back to basics and the real question can be answered"

I can understand that, but if you wanted to strip it back to basics, so the real question can be answered, why then later add all the drip (a lot of which, while very relevant to your overall situation, wasn't relevant to the question)? That's exactly why I, for one, was left feeling manipulated.

Do one or the other.

(I would have preferred the way mini suggested).

To be honest, I didn't think too much about it. I was getting abuse from H for going out on a date on DD's birthday night and wanted to find out if he had a point. I wanted to be fair to his point of view. There was lots I knew would be relevant to the question but those are things H won't be considering (he doesn't see his own wrongdoing) and I knew would sway the argument.

I got my answer to that question and then continued the conversation. I don't post much in AIBU these days so wasn't aware of the preferred posting format .

Your ex is a tosser, yanbu.

There is no preferred way In the. AIBU has a life of it's own

I understand why you worded the OP the way you did. It was an even split until you added the detail. As somebody said up thread the devil is in the detail

OP, your ex is a tool. You sound lovely and deserve happiness, don't let this sorry excuse of a man sabotage that.

It does sound like he is harassing you, keep a record of all communications and report him. It is utterly unfair that he, the one who cheated on you, is so angry with you. I think it is because you are not mopping around miserable and lonely, it dents his ego that you don't care anymore and are moving on. He probably has narcissistic tendencies and seeing you happy and unbroken must really piss him off. Good for you OP.

For what it is worth, I think YANBU and I do get why you posted as you did.

Thanks Flossy. That's exactly why I didn't post the detail. If I'd just wanted everyone to agree with me, I'd post in chat or relationships but I wanted the straight talking of AIBU in a neutral manner so I could gauge whether H had a point.

I also was hoping I might get some pointers on how to deal with him because I'm finding it very difficult. I may repost in relationships for that though.

Thank you PrettyToes . I think I'm so used to the way he behaves, I can't see the wood for the trees iyswim. The new guy has made a couple of comments though and it's made me sit up and think 'why am I taking this from him?!'.

I've considered calling the police for advice but in a way I just feel like it's so trivial. Ideally I'd like us to just communicate by text and have suggested that several times but he always end up calling me anyway .

Probably best OP as he sounds like knob and relationships have great advice for dealing with knobs, in the useful sense aswell as the not so useful sense

Can you not change your number so that the existing number is just for his use ( don't tell him ) then leave the phone on silent and only respond if he texts . Sorry if that's too simplistic an idea ,but that's what my DS did when he was being harassed by an ex partner .

Hi op I would inform your ex that from now on you will only communicate via text and for the time being will not be answering any calls. If he becomes abusive report it to the police and get a crime number.

Then I form him of this by text.

His behaviour, though ridiculous, irrational and totally unacceptable is common in partners who think they could have their cake and eat it. Then get very riled when reality bites them on the behind.

You do not have to endure anything from him.
You are being very reasonable and doing a great job of raising your dc.

Keep contact between yourself and ex to a minimum. Friendly for the sake of the dcs.

Whether you were out or sat in the lounge the whole time you were away the dc were asleep - he missed no real value contact with them during the period that you were out. And staying over at gps on a birthday is fab too. The dc got to have a nice morning rather than being shipped out early.

He is so unreasonable and a dick!