Ex wants parental responsibility of my son (his step-son), and I don't trust him. AIBU to block it?

[mojoawol]

Me and DH split up in October last year, I had a DS (now 11) from a previous relationship, whose father died when he was v small. Ex-dh, as a step dad, has therefore become his father figure, and now we've separated, ex has shared care of him (which he wanted as ex has DD from a previous also, and they are pretty close).
Ex is a divorce lawyer, and pretty controlling and bullying, not physically (at least not with the kids) so, although I have very mixed feelings about the kids being with him, there's very little I can do apart from be there for them when I am.
Ex has said he wants Parental Responsibility for my son. I've spoken to a lawyer who said that as he has shared care, and is playing the role of a parent, he will more than likely get it. Lawyer also told me that it doesn't really give him any rights to make decisions or anything without involving me, just to know information about him - ie his schooling etc.
However, I just don't trust him. He is an absolute narcissist who wants everyone to think he's doing the right thing for his own benefit and image. He's even said he'll be able to get it even if I don't agree (which in itself is pretty bullying)
Does anyone know anything about PR? Can it give him any rights to anything? I'm concerned why he's so desperate to get it. Could it be a stepping stone to trying to adopt him?

[Inertia]

When you say he wasn't physically controlling/ bullying with the kids, does that mean that he was physically abusive to you? If so was that ever recorded by the police at the time?

[NeedsAsockamnesty]

For what it's worth I'm not being techey

But if you can't answer the question I asked you stand little chance of stopping him

[SoapandGloryisDivine]

He's got shared care, which means when he gets PR (unless DS says No) he doesn't have to pay maintenance.

Wow. So he can play dad for all these years, control the mum of the child post split, and have the cheek not to contribute towards that child financially if he wants to carry on being dad to the child? Fucking hell. What a cheeky bastard.

I'm a stepparent and don't for one minute play mum and dad has a mum already anyway, therefore if me and DP split I wouldn't be morally liable to pay anything!

This man is unbelievable.

[SoapandGloryisDivine]

*dsd has a mum already anyway.

Not dad.

[NameChange30]

"as his real dad is dead, it's important to me that he does have some kind of male role model."

Right. So your ex, who is a controlling, abusive bully, gets to be in your son's life (half the time, to be exact) because he has a penis.

Fucking brilliant.

A woman with an inflatable penis would be better than that.

Seriously, though. Do you have a brother? A good male friend? What about your son's grandfathers? If all else fails he must have a male teacher he can look up to.

Plenty of men are brought up by single mothers and turn out well. Probably better than your son will if you keep allowing him to be influenced by your ex.

[abbsismyhero]

to those of you saying op cant refuse contact without a good reason she has a good reason he is not the father he doesn't have the automatic right to contact because he doesn't have PR and if he is going for it that tells me he is going for residency of your shared child and will use this as a springboard

start having away days for your child bonding days when he has his children you have yours alone

he can apply all he wants he won't necessarily get especially if you take control of the situation now

[Italiangreyhound]

Re Me and ex also have a DS together (4) so the 3 of them are with him at the same time (youngest is with me a little more, but only until he's 5 and then ex is insisting on 50/50 with him also). Is this in your ds2's best ineterest? To spend 50% of his time in one home and 50% in another. Do look this up. See if you can find precedents about this. It strikes me as not in the best interests of the child.

www.womansdivorce.com/50-50-custody.html

By allowing 50/50 shared care with a child your ex is not related to are you setting it up even more for 50/50 with this much younger child. The fact he got 50/50 care with his daughter (have you check this with the other mum, is it true? Did he have this before you and he split?) should not mean he gets 50/50 car with your child or the child you share in common. if you do not want this to happen you need to look into it. Enlist the help of your ex's ex. Maybe she can advise you and you can avoid whatever pt falls are there.

If you worry it is just you being unreasonable think about if you and another man split how would you feel? Hard to imagine I know but try. Is it something specific about your ex and the way he is that worried you?

[stopfuckingshoutingatme]

Right. So your ex, who is a controlling, abusive bully, gets to be in your son's life (half the time, to be exact) because he has a penis


hahaha, yeah you nailed it Emma

[BitOutOfPractice]

PR is a piece of paper, he doesn't need it to care for your son as he has been doing, so this tells me that he has an ulterior motive.

Read that statement again and let it strike a chill into your heart.

[madmotherof2]

I wouldn't give him PR either

[shazzarooney99]

I dont think he can get parental responsibility if its not his child to be honest.

[CakeRavager]

OP, does your son have any property, including money, or is he likely to inherit anything before he's an adult? Him having PR could give him access to that or at the very least a say in what happens to it.

If so you definitely need legal advice.

[Italiangreyhound]

Wannabe 7 years is the long time in the life of a child! Maybe the OP doesn't want her son to go and live with her controlling, bullying ex who she hates if she were to die! People usually want their children cared for by people they love and trust after their death! Maybe it is all down to what his motives are. If his motives are good fine, but if his motives are good why would he tell the OP he will get the PR whether she wants it or not. He sounds awful!

i would suggest mediation too, if necessary, maybe he will reveal his nasty self in front of the mediator.

Completely agree with ArmfulOfRoses re If 2 grown women couldn't live with his controlling and bullying ways, then I find it bizarre that a child that is not legally his is being allowed to spend so much time there, to dilute the experience for his step sister.

NeedsAsockamnesty re Why on earth shouldn't he have PR? Because this is not his child, he does not need to have PR and I think the OP is suspicious of what reasons he may have for wanting PR in the first place.

[whatevva]

With 50/50, you would think that this helps with bonding with the wider family on both sides of the DC's family. Does your DS, who is spending 50% of his time with his former step-father and step sister, have family of his own belonging to his birth father who he should be acquainted with? I would have thought that some of his time should be available for this, and his right to know who they are. 50% seems excessive for his needs.

With the PR, surely that is becoming less relevant because he is getting older and will have to decide more things for himself, and as you are no longer married to the step father and surely the time to have done this would have been when you are married.

Is it worth looking around at other solicitors? I am sure that a court could be persuaded that what your ex desires is not in the long term interests of the DS.

[NameChange30]

Italian You make a really good point about what would happen to the OP's son if she dies. OP, when you get that shit hot lawyer, sort out your will as well as the contact arrangements. Have you got a divorce yet?

[wannaBe]

But the op has facilitated her ds having 50/50 residency with both her and her now ex. In fact, his non biological child is has greater visitation than his biological one until such times as the other child is older.

This man has played a full parental role in the child's life since he was tiny. Does he call him dad op?

People who think it's as simple as reducing contact and that he won't get PR are being very naive. As he has lived with the child full-time for more than two years he has a legal right to pursue access. As the child is eleven his opinion will be sought by the courts if op's ex goes to court. And as the child has no living biological father and has siblings who are biologically related to the man who he knows as his father this too will be taken into account.

Op says she has sought legal advice and has been told by a solicitor that if he applies for PR he will most likely be granted it, probably based on the situation as outlined above. People are very quick to jump to the "well you've been given the wrong/crap advice," point because of course mn'ers know better. .

I'm not saying that op should just roll over and give into her ex's demands, however she needs to seek legal advice and go through the proper channels to oppose this if she stands any chance of her ex not being granted PR. But as things currently stand there seems very little reason not to based on the current contact arrangements.

And maybe the op wouldn't want to have her ds live with his father if she died. but her younger ds would automatically live with him, and as such the older one may want to go and live with his younger brother, otherwise the risk is that he would lose all contact with him as well. It's a point of consideration when you have children with more than one partner and wish to obstruct the relationship with one of those children.

[NeedsAsockamnesty]

NeedsAsockamnesty re Why on earth shouldn't he have PR? Because this is not his child, he does not need to have PR and I think the OP is suspicious of what reasons he may have for wanting PR in the first place

The op's ex has been acting as a parent for most of this child life since seperation she has been facilitating this continuing unless there is something quite serious she has left out then the ex has a damn solid case to obtain it.

There are very strong reasons for someone who has care and control of a child 50% of the time to also hold PR none of the reasons you have given are likely to be enough to stop him having it ordered.

If she wants to try she needs to be precise and clear as to why it is not in the childs best interests

[Micah]

Wow. So he can play dad for all these years, control the mum of the child post split, and have the cheek not to contribute towards that child financially if he wants to carry on being dad to the child? Fucking hell. What a cheeky bastard

Or, from another angle, he can "play" dad for all these years, split up from the mother, and still contribute both financially and emotionally by wanting the child 50:50.

If he has 50:50 care he will still be paying 50% of day to day costs- presuming he's feeding and clothing the child, heating the house he's providing, paying for the house...He is financially contributing to the child, as much as his mother is, despite having no legal obligation.

Such a cheeky bastard for continuing his responsibilities to this child.

Even if he was the biological father he would only need to pay maintenance if he had less than 50:50.

[NameChange30]

needsasockamnesty
"unless there is something quite serious she has left out"
Nope, it's all there. Physical abuse towards the OP, verbal abuse towards her son. Controlling, bullying and abusive behaviour. All this, plus he is not the biological father and is no longer in a relationship with the OP. So I think she should have a strong case for denying parental rights. Of course, I don't know for sure as I'm not a lawyer, but that's why I suggested she gets a good one - preferably one recommended by WA.

[NameChange30]

I'm shocked at some of these responses. Did you miss the fact that the ex is abusive? Or do you just not care?

[Micah]

I think the key here is that the o/p is continuing to allow her ex 50:50 care of her son.

This act, in itself, would lead to the conclusion that the o/p thinks her child is OK in the care of her ex, and not at risk in any way. Because if he is the bully and abuser she says he is, why would any reasonable person allow their child to remain in the sole care of such a man 50% of the time?

O/p. I think if you honestly believe this man is as awful and abusive as you say, you need to stop your son having so much unsupervised contact. You get on well with the other ex, the two of you can facilitate sibling contact without involving him. Let your ex take you to court, and prove himself a fit father.

wrt PR, if he has 50:50, there might be a reasonable expectation that should something happen to the child, a broken arm, or illness, for example, he needs to be able to consent to medical treatment.

[NeedsAsockamnesty]

another

Did you miss the bit where (one can only assume a court) saw fit to grant full shared care with his other child.

Due to the situation him not being biologically connected to the op's child is likely to not mean a thing.

The op's facilitation of the current arangement is almost certainly going to mitigate every single 'danger' arguement she can come up with unless she has acted through fear and intimidation and even then it's unlikely to compleatly remove his chances

[Italiangreyhound]

The costs of a child are not just food and drink. The school uniform, clothes, holidays, etc.... its a lot. The fact he lives elsewhere 50% of the time does not mean the step dad pays 50% of all the costs.