Woman forced to send updates to her ex-partner in prison regarding their sons after he tortured her.

[ScrambledEggAndToast]

DM article

AIBU to think this is totally crackers? The man nearly killed her fgs. Yet another example of the law favouring the guilty and forgetting all about the victim in the name of "human rights". That scum bag wasn't thinking about her human rights when he was trying to kill her.

I think we don't know the reasoning. I hate articles like that.

If it just said the children have a right to keep their father updated with their lives until he gets out of prison and contact may or may not be resumed depending on whether he's a threat to them - then no one would give a toss.

The poor mother doesn't have to call or write - she could get anyone else to write a few lines until the children are old enough to dial a number or write themselves.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/2308687-To-think-this-is-crazy-DV-Trigger

Oops, should have known it would already be on here I just felt very cross for her. As for getting her to ask someone else to write, I don't think that's the point. He gave up his rights when he nearly killed her.

they witness everything he did - poor woman and poor kids x

Yes, he gave up his rights/responsibilities when he got sent to jail (who gives a fuck about him) but the children have rights and therer are the only ones that matter.

I agree this is appalling. It has NOTHING to do with "human rights" though. The order was made under the Children Act. Not every decision that seems wrong is automatically a human rights one!

The children have rights and they are the ones that matter but their father has abused them too, they witnessed the attack he subjected their mother to and I cannot fathom how it is in their best interests to stay in any kind of contact. I assume he is using this campaign to maintain contact as another way of torturing his ex partner and maintaining control over her life as if he gave a damn about those kids he wouldn't have done this to their mother.

And that exactly is what the problem is with the biased article, we have no knowledge of how the judge arrived at his decision.

She shouldn't have to be the one to update him though, whatever the thinking is about the children's rights.

I'd think he's forfeited his right to be a part of their lives, and I'd say the children's right is to be protected from him You'd have to wonder what on earth is behind the decision.

I'm struggling to think of a decision making process which could justify this outcome though LaurieFairyCake.

I really doubt that the children want that particular right. When the authorities came they were found lying in bed next to their blood covered and unconscious mother, poor kids.

ilovepud - I agree but I bet there'll be one.

I disagree with her going to the press. If it warrants one a judicial review should happen. I just hate stories like that and I don't think they should be written.