To be annoyed with DH ex

[florencerusty]

Would it be beyond the realms of possibly for the bloody mother and stepfather of ss to do one bloody trip once in a while to either drop him off or collect him. It's 100 miles each way and they moved away rather than DH. SS is early teen so cant travel alone. DH left for work at 5.30 yesterday morning and didnt get home until gone 9 last night. This for a day and a half of access! Oh and come tomorrow he will do another 4 hours on the road taking him home. I mean meet half way ffs.

Before I get slated I have been a SP a long time and this is the most unreasonable ex I have ever come across.
Bang goes any sort of family weekend.

[Fairenuff]

I think your dh should get it sorted through the courts OP. Why he is reluctant to do that?

[florencerusty]

OK to be clear. X took the child from his local school one day and moved away - no discussion, no reason other than a man, no information and NO forwarding address. This was approx 8 years ago. SS was 6.

Much searching later contact was once again made.

DH had been the injured party during the divorce so there was no safety issue causing the move.

Despite the idea that NRP and RP have open discussion around their children sadly frequently it is not true.

Probably 8 months out of 12 DH has no issue with the drive, that said just sometimes it is a huge problem. We have a younger daughter, I work evenings, and his job sometimes involves very long drives/hours. I just think that sometimes there could be some meeting in the middle.

[SouthAmericanCuisine]

Being a decent, committed and equal parent means having equal say in whether the move is in the child's best interests, though, doesn't it? Otherwise the RP is acting as Alpha and unilaterally deciding what is best for the DCs.

And one would assume that if a NRP has agreed that it is in the best interests of the DC to move, they wouldn't then resent the travelling?

[NeedsAsockamnesty]

I think that if other issues meant that it was in the children's best interests to live so far away then a decent commited NRP would not care how far the drive was in order to remain an equal parent because that would be part and parcel of him doing so.

[hufflebottom]

With that distance i'd ask to meet halfway. Appreciating that they do most of running around most of the week but as she moved she should of thought of that to start with.

However I do make my ex meet me at my work to drop dd back seeing as he doesn't pick her up from my parents my parents drop her off. (Due to not being able to change my shift pattern so still working all weekends, but go on maternity leave soon so I will go back to dropping her off and probably picking her up too)

But if I do move, which is in the pipeline, I'd do half or all the the drive to dd's dads house (If he's at all interested by then, which is highly unlikely) as I'm facilitating the move.
If it was the other way round I'd tell my ex the same.

[VenusInFauxFurs]

Does your partner mind doing the long drive, OP? Personally I think that the kid is probably old enough to take the train on their own but the car journey probably provides a good opportunity for DP to reconnect with his son. Adolescents tend to open up more during car journeys than they do at other times. Its probably valuable time for both of them.

[SouthAmericanCuisine]

I would have been doing him and our children a disservice if I had taken over his responsibility and acted like I was some sort of alpha parent over him. Because I was not we were both equal. All I had to do was make sure I didn't hinder him.

I agree entirely. Does moving 100 miles away class as hinderance, or are you suggesting that as long as the kids are available, even if they're on the moon, the RP is treating the NRP as an equal?

[NeedsAsockamnesty]

I will try and explain what I mean better.

My late husband and I had what turned out to be a very short term seperation when our children were younger. I did not need to do anything at all for him to have contact, nothing at all, no ringing him to ask when where and how because he was a good father he would pick up seamlessly with no input at all required from me, if the children required collecting from somewhere or dropping off somewhere or instructions being given to a carer anything at all. If it was his time or his turn he was totally in control of it just as I would have done if it was me.

I would have been doing him and our children a disservice if I had taken over his responsibility and acted like I was some sort of alpha parent over him. Because I was not we were both equal. All I had to do was make sure I didn't hinder him.

[NeedsAsockamnesty]

In an ideal world they wouldn't need to, because both parents would be equally as good as making sure it happened without requiring another adult to make it easier for them, what with them both being grown ups and all.

But I guess it depends very much on how you personally interpret active facilitation and if it is different than just not making it hard (probally making no sense, but in my own head I know what I mean )

[SouthAmericanCuisine]

sock I realise it depends on the value that is placed on the NRP in the DCs life.

But I'd hope that a RP would choose to facilitate contact with a NRP when that was to the benefit of the DCs, even if that meant making sacrifices themselves.

There is such an enormously diverse range of views held about responsibilities towards children after their parents separate. I find it incredible that in the same week, one parent expresses their view that it the step parents responsibility to facilitate contact while at the same time, another parent does not believe it is their responsibility.

[NeedsAsockamnesty]

South someone can provide equal care without it involving a huge school run. Even if they do live miles away.

I do agree with her to the extent of saying, diddums, you are a NRP part and parcel of your responsibility to your child is maintaining contact this may involve travel, just as much as the same applies to parents with primary care because that also tends to involve stuff like actual care giving.

I think if the primary carer does not like the responsibility that role entails and the NRP feels likewise then there is scope to switch roles if both are equally equipped to do both.

I do not think it is up to the primary carer to chase or facilitate contact I think it is there responsibility to make the children availible and not sabotage it. I also think far to many people do NRP's a huge disservice by feeling the need to hand hold them through contact and not act as if they are perfectly equal competant parents.

[Oswin]

Yes south they do.

[SouthAmericanCuisine]

needasock so you don't agree with trex either then?

She made it clear that the OP's DP should step up and provide 50:50 care, or stop complaining about the travelling - because she views the travel as equitable to the responsibility of being primary carer.

Problem is, the DCs mum in this case has taken the latter upon herself by moving so far away, which has made the former impractical.

Primary carers get such a shitty deal, don't they?

[NeedsAsockamnesty]

Personally I don't go in much for 50:50 as I have quite strong anti feelings about it based on the examples I have seen of it.


But I do know many children who have huge huge commutes to school and that the powers that be consider this to be in those children's best interest.

But 50/50 shared care does not have to impact on a school education or the child. I do know it would be quite unusual for parents who did share genuine 50/50 originally to have one parent move so far away, IME 50/50 works best when both parents are very amicable and work together,one would think that in these situations if a far away move was needed by one parent they would work with the other to change the arangement so it didn't impact on education, perhaps every weekend and most of the school holidays as that would also work out as 50/50.

[SouthAmericanCuisine]

needasock do you honestly believe that it's good for DCs to do a 200 mile a day commute to and from school 50% of the time?
Or are you suggesting that they reregister at a school 50miles from each of their parents home so that their commute is only 100 miles a day.

Because that is what trex is proposing as the solution.

Even against the MN standard, that idea is unworkable, surely?

[NeedsAsockamnesty]

Trex has a legit point one that it is perfectly acceptable for her to post

[NeedsAsockamnesty]

Well, given that contact and residency is for the benefit of DCs, not their parents, you'd kind of think you'd be a bit pissed off on their behalf that contact with their dad had broken down at the last minute.
However, being pissed off at a flaky ex is one thing; expecting a stepparent to fill the gap, quite another

I would do my utmost to make sure that no child in my care of an age that required me to be anything feeling wise on their behalf understand that sometimes things beyond of our control get in the way of even the best made plans and that it had no reflection on anything at all because these things just happen,therefore nobody would need to feel pissed off about anything. Because people who are negative drama llamas suck the joy out of life

[SouthAmericanCuisine]

trex I'm not sure you're doing mothers any favours expressing that attitude publicly.

We all know there are mums who actually do think that their DCs dads have no value, but it's always denied whenever anyone dares to suggest it.
Posts like yours undermine the flamings given to stepmums when they dare to criticise their DSC mum.

[honeyroar]

Trex you're deluded if you think it's that simple!! Most dad's don't get given the option of 50% or half of them would jump at it. My DH would have killed for more access and my DSS said he wished he was here more, but his mother was having none of it and he was too nice to upset her. My DH's ex even went to a foreign country for five months and made sure DSS went to her parents, not us. Her last words before she went were "don't forget to pay me my money..."

[Fairenuff]

DH agreed because otherwise he would not see the child!

Courts would rule otherwise OP. This is a choice that your dh is making. Why is he reluctant to sort it out do you think?

[m1nniedriver]

Trex, perhaps he would if the mother hadn't decided to move the kids so far away!

[TRexingInAsda]

Meh, the mum looks after the child most of the time, the dad has set access on set days, and since no fucker has a startrek style transporter, the dad has to go and get him. I can't see the problem, and this is the 'worst' ex ever?! Ha, get a grip! If he wants to do 50% less journeys, then look after his kid 50% of the time, then they do half each of the trips, job done. Otherwise stop belly aching.

[florencerusty]

DH agreed because otherwise he would not see the child!

[sleeponeday]

Off topic, but rereading all this: I agree with the PP who said they'd never want to be a step-parent. So many expectations, so little appreciation, and while there are some shocking ones (as with parents) the majority do seem to try hard, and to care very much, and their reward is often paltry.

[sleeponeday]

Your right sleep yes it has been, but usually those orders would be decided on a case by case basis and previous conduct would be a large consideration.

It would also not be unusual for the prohibited steps order to be refused if the other parent was willing to facilitate travel.

Well, no, but if there had been no prior conduct indicative of hostility, and there was a demonstrable and convincing willingness to facilitate travel, then it wouldn't have been a move primarily to thwart contact, which was my point, would it? Hence my saying, "on occasion". Sadly, I think more NRP can't be arsed than are alienated, though the children on the end of either scenario lose out fairly identically in each, miserably enough.

Not that any of it is applicable here, I agree. But it is nonetheless not true that there is no real choice most of the time. A better question is perhaps whether the child is advantaged by the move more than the NRP is disadvantaged, and more controversially, at what point any disadvantage to a child is minor when compared to a potentially massive advantage to the parent. Careers are lifelong and childhood is short, and if good quality weekend contact is completely doable, and a job particular opportunity rare and unlikely to come up again for years, if ever, then it's not an easy choice. I'm aware that my DH's work will almost inevitably take us to London eventually, but for a divorced family, that could be one hell of a problem. And if he did move and I insisted on him doing all the travel, the kids would lose out on time with him, because there's just no way he could collect them from school on a Friday, and then down to London. I could. If I refused to travel, then they would have to start contact time on Saturday, instead. Which would hurt them.

This stuff isn't simple, no.