Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

About friend moving out without her son

307 replies

Fanfeckintastic · 21/10/2014 10:26

I'm prepared for a flaming as I suppose my opinions on this are uncharacteristically sexist.

My friend has ended her relationship with her DP, they have a 3 year old DS and my friend is a SAHP. I understand her reasoning completely as the spark was gone, he works very long hours etc, but she has chosen to move out without her little boy. I'm finding it so hard to support her in this as I really don't understand it, her DS adores her and she has so much freedom to do her own thing, nights out, holidays without him, a very good support system etc.
She still plans to see him and be a part of his life so maybe I'm being judgmental and dramatic?

Has anyone been in a similar situation where they've had to support a friend through something they just felt was so wrong?

OP posts:
KoalaDownUnder · 22/10/2014 07:31

Those of us 'attacking' this woman think that she should prioritize living in the same house as the three-year-old she has been full-time primary carer for since his birth. There are two ways to achieve that: either she stays in where she is until he's older, or she takes him with her.

I don't know how much clearer I can make it.

(Please don't make assumptions about my attitude towards single parents claiming benefits based on that, either. You are likely to be wrong.)

jacks365 · 22/10/2014 07:40

either she stays in where she is until he's older, or she takes him with her.

We don't know the set up of the house it may well be that either the exdp owns it or he is the only one on the tenancy agreement, we don't know that she has any right to stay in the house so staying where she is until he is older may not be a possibility. We also don't know where she is living now and whether she would even be able to provide suitable accommodation for the boy to live in, she could be sleeping on the sofa at another friends for all we know.

KoalaDownUnder · 22/10/2014 07:49

we don't know that she has any right to stay in the house

I don't know much about UK law, but would the courts really allow a man to force the mother and sole carer of his 3-year-old child out of the home? Really?

I think the OP made it pretty clear that leaving the house was her choice.

NotTheKitchenAgainPlease · 22/10/2014 07:52

Thanks for sparking this very interesting debate OP.

Will you be coming back to the thread to share your thoughts and I wonder if any of the passionate arguments have managed to sway your opinion?

NotTheKitchenAgainPlease · 22/10/2014 07:53

Oops sorry left out Hmm

MassaAttack · 22/10/2014 07:58

If they're not married and her name isn't in the deeds or tenancy Koala, then yes.

jacks365 · 22/10/2014 08:00

I don't know much about UK law, but would the courts really allow a man to force the mother and sole carer of his 3-year-old child out of the home? Really

Yes, unless they were married then the courts could not give the mother permission to stay in a house she has no legal claim on. Cohabiting couples like this have no recognised status in the UK which means that yes men can throw a mother and young child out. I'm not saying that is what has happened here just pointing out that we do not know all the details and there may be reasons why this was the only realistic option.

KoalaDownUnder · 22/10/2014 08:06

Sorry, I meant 'Would the courts allow him to kick the mother out whilst keeping custody of the child?' Surely not.

But according to the OP, he's not kicking her out anyway, so I suppose it's irrelevant.

TheRealMaryMillington · 22/10/2014 08:08

Perhaps she thinks it is less disruptive to the child to have him stay in the family home
Perhaps she has no-where in particular to go
Perhaps her husband is making all sorts of threats about what he will do if she takes the child from from him
Perhaps she wishes to pre-empt the situation I have seen many people in where the absent father is useless and just gets on with his life with no engagement with his child, takes no responsibility and sees any contact as "babysitting cover".
Or perhaps he is a better parent.

OP is she a real friend or just someone you know? She may have made a selfish move here, or a very stupid one or a brave one. Whatever the outcomes of this she will probably really need your support. I honestly don't think that it is as simple as any mother who leaves her children is a bad person.

Simplesusan · 22/10/2014 08:16

Agree with therealmary.

She is seeing far more of her child than most nrp.

jacks365 · 22/10/2014 08:22

Would the courts allow him to kick the mother out whilst keeping custody of the child?' Surely not.

Like you say irrelevant in this case as they are not fighting custody but if the house was only in his name he can have her removed without even going to court. Custody is a totally different issue but he would get custody if the mother was unable to provide suitable accommodation for the child.

BustyCraphopper · 22/10/2014 08:37

I knew someone who left her 3 kids and moved hundreds of miles away. She said she still loved them and would phone every so often, and visit once a year, but that was it.
After a bit she had a new baby with her new partner. And after a few years she left him too.

I think she basically couldn't handle being a parent. She also had an alcohol problem and I suspect also substance abuse issues. It was very sad as she wanted to be there for her kids but she just couldn't cope

Luckily the second dad is amazing (I didn't know the first).

It happens. Men aren't the only people sometimes unable to handle being a parent. People are people. And whichever way round it is it is rough on the kids.

ohtheholidays · 22/10/2014 08:44

I know someone who left her 3 young children(one only being a baby)it was my ex SIL she left the 3 children to go of with a much younger(teenager) man.Just upped and left,it was years ago now so really unheard of.My brother at the time had to give up work as there was no way he could afford the level of child care he would need.

She chose not to see her children for about 6 months.This was about 26 years ago and the relationship she left for didn't last past a year.But it still to this day affects her relationship with her children.

NeedsAsockamnesty · 22/10/2014 09:20

I started reading this thinking its not good,but what it appears you are talking about is shared care and much more than loads of NRP dads do,assuming she's also going to be paying CM then whilst not ideal this is what loads of parents do all the time and nobody bats an eyelid

BringYourOwnSnowman · 22/10/2014 09:36

I think the judgment comes from the change rather than what the new status quo will be. She has gone from primary carer to two days a week and no overnights.

It also sounds like she want to punish her ex by leaving him with the responsibility.

There is obviously more to this than we can get from reading ops posts but I hope they can all find a solution that is best for all three I them.

KitbitAgain · 22/10/2014 09:43

I judge her as the main caregiver. Poor little boy.
I also judged a friend who left her husband taking their baby daughter but not their lovely little 4 year old son. Angry

HibiscusIsland · 22/10/2014 09:57

Perhaps she thinks it is less disruptive to the child to have him stay in the family home

Children cope a lot better with a house move than they do with their main care giver leaving them.

Perhaps her husband is making all sorts of threats about what he will do if she takes the child from from him.

The OP's friend has not said this has happened to her at all.

Greengrow · 22/10/2014 10:07

The lesson here as a woman is never give up full time work. I earned 10x my children's father and have always worked full time. It gives you the means to support and be with your children. Money may not be a popular topic but it certainly is a way for women to ensure they can support their children and afford to keep them with them. Giving up all work just to be with a man who will not give you an iota of legal protection as he will not marry you is a massive risk for any person. As ever feminism rules.

The issue here is that the child is used to his mother 24/7. So it will be a bigger wrench than if he did not see much of her. However there is no reason a child cannot live with his father as much as his mother. I support 50/50 with each parent after divorce.

HibiscusIsland · 22/10/2014 10:12

The OP hasn't said the woman is leaving her son because she can't afford to keep him. She has said she wants to leave her son, not that she has no choice for financial reasons.

KoalaDownUnder · 22/10/2014 10:34

How is that 'the lesson', Greengrow? I don't see how your situation is relevant to the OP's friend's.

Greengrow · 22/10/2014 10:55

People seemed to be assuming it was because she could not afford to buy her husband out of the house and had no income. It may be that she simply prefers not to live with her child.

jacks365 · 22/10/2014 10:55

The op has said very little so we know very little, all we really do know is that the mother is moving out and will continue to care for the boy part of the time. I don't even know if we can take the comments about it being harder for the father to meet someone new if he has the child at face value because it's about context for all we know the mother actually said that leaving the boy with the father would make it easier for her to be able to rebuild her life, which is very true, but that may be with the aim of getting custody back once she has done so but yes in reverse it will make it harder for the father but that might not be the focus. We don't know the ins and outs, we don't know what gets discussed behind closed doors and without that I don't feel it is fair to judge.

Greengrow · 22/10/2014 10:56

..in which case that may well be because she chose to stay at home which does not suit many men and women. It was not a myth that housewives were on the gin in the 1950s and on prozac or alcohol today. It is not a balanced existence which tends to lead to enduring happiness.

KneeQuestion · 22/10/2014 11:02

Interesting responses here.

Yes, it seems this woman will have more contact than lots of NR dads, but that still doesn't make what she is doing a good thing, just less shit than some!

We should judge Dads that fuck off without a backwards glance more, absolutely, but that shouldn't mean women like this one should be judged less any parent who does this is worthy of judgement. It is utterly selfish. It is not anti feminist to think that.

There is an element of sexism in the line many of the posts here have taken, but it is not solely down to that. It is abhorrent to many to think of any parent who is the primary carer, just removing themselves from that role.

I have read the entire thread and think only one, maybe two other posters have said similar, but IMO I think this is a situation where she has embarked on an affair and that has influenced here decision hugely. IMO, she has got caught up in a 'what if' situation with the new man and thinks it will be easier to live out that fantasy without having to be a full time parent.

vezzie · 22/10/2014 11:19

As lots of posters have said, we do not know a lot about this situation, so what I am going to say is very hypothetical. But still...

Yes, a parent should care for his / her child. But all she has to care for the child with is herself. Whatever personal resources you have - time, money, mental energy, love, a sense of humour, great cooking skills, whatever you have - this is what you have to give to your child.

When you have little or nothing left because you are too exhausted or depleted to give, you have no choice but to save yourself or go under. If you save yourself, you save the very self that can then look after your child. It isn't an either or - me or the baby - like "daddy or chips". It's all bound up togther - it's "me AND the baby" - what I have to give, I give to the child, and if I am in genuine danger of having nothing, then I have nothing for the child.

I don't know what went on here but it could be that the woman has forced a situation which has forced the man to step up - because she needed to. Perhaps some of the terms of the situation were imposed by the man "oh alright go then, but you're not taking the child" - and she had no choice, really no choice, but to go anyway.

Or, any one of a million other scenarios might have happened here, too...

Swipe left for the next trending thread