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?

[Micah]

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

Seriously? A man takes on his stepchild, treats him as his own, accepts 50:50 care when he splits with the child's mum, takes on the responsibilities and financial burdens, and people here are still calling him a bastard for not paying maintenance and pointing out that he might not be meeting 50% of every single cost.

Men really can't win, can they.

[Italiangreyhound]

I'm not saying he should pay 50%, I am just saying he may well not be. And he may no be doing 50% of the work. He may get the fun times while the OP is in charge of homework, dental visits etc...

[Italiangreyhound]

Micah this is all in your mind. I am not slagging off men in general!

In the OP's position I would not want a man I hated who I felt was bullying and controlling paying for my child at all (unless it was his child too). I am simply pointing out that because the child spends 50% of his time at the step dad's house does not mean he is paying 50% of the costs of being a parent.

Who is talking about men! I am talking about this man. Who sounds controlling and bullying. If a woman met a nice man and married him, he loved her son as his own and had an good relationship with the child, even after an amicable parting of the ways, I would imagine many mums would not feel worried that the desire to continue parenting was a bad thing! The fact the OP is worried suggests that this is not that type of relationship with this one man not men in general!

[lostinmiddlemarch]

I think it was a mistake to allow 50:50 care if this is really your opinion of the man, OP. More important than a male role model is a good role model. And it's perfectly possible to have a role model in your life without living with them half the time anyway.

I'm inclined to feel that if you weren't prepared for him to have the sort of responsibility that PR implies, then you made the wrong decision re: custody and are now in a mess. The PR issue is only a symptom of that.

You need to go back to the drawing board (if this is an option) and consider what's really best for your son. It sounds like you've provided him with a rubbish dad, to be honest. Not necessarily an improvement on no dad.

[Italiangreyhound]

I agree with lost re You need to go back to the drawing board (if this is an option) and consider what's really best for your son. but I do think you can go back, what is right for your son is always best...

But NOT " It sounds like you've provided him with a rubbish dad, to be honest." She has not provided a rotten dad, she presumably chose a man she loved or at least liked and he failed in the role model department.

I agree Not necessarily an improvement on no dad.

[NameChange30]

I agree with lost's whole post (19:27)

[amarmai]

as he is already seeing your s 50/50 and as your son id reaching an age where he will have more choices, you cd be limiting your son's and your choices in the future by allowing this to happen. He will get more power and you and your son will have less power. Do not do it as in the future you and your son will not want him to be able to obstruct your life choices. He has a reason for doing this and it will not be to advantage anyone except himself.,

[amarmai]

also op, if you decide to marry again and wanted that nh to adopt your son, this wd cause problems big time.

[SoapandGloryisDivine]

Seriously? A man takes on his stepchild, treats him as his own, accepts 50:50 care when he splits with the child's mum, takes on the responsibilities and financial burdens, and people here are still calling him a bastard for not paying maintenance and pointing out that he might not be meeting 50% of every single cost.

Would you say the same about an actual dad not paying maintenance? Would you say it's ok for him to not pay towards his child? Towards things such as uniforms/school dinners/trips/a new bed/shoes etc... Men can win, and if you're a stepdad and want to play be dad, then you do what an actual dad would have to do and pay your share towards that child's upbringing as well as seeing the child. If you are a stepdad and just want to see the child without the financial obligations that come with it, then you aren't taking it 100% seriously and shouldn't have that title.

Technically speaking a biological father is still a father even if he doesn't pay towards his child. A stepfather who just wants the fun bits and to have a say in a child that isn't his without paying towards the child... Well, what is he?

^^This would all apply if it was a woman by the way. So it's not a man hating post!

[DPotter]

DP and I are not married and he has PR for our daughter ( he is her actual father), but DD has my surname. Whenever there's anything needed signing (consent form for surgery, school forms etc) my consent / signature has always been asked for, even if DP has already signed. We have shown copies of PR form but hospitals and school, and Bordered Control for that matter, aren't interested, they just wanted my (the mother's) consent.

I don't know if this is reassuring and even more confusing.

[abigamarone]

Nope, it's all there. Physical abuse towards the OP, verbal abuse towards her son. Controlling, bullying and abusive behaviour
The OP specifically states no physical abuse and that her son said he sometimes got a bit shouty. You're seeing what you want.

How much of your judgement is clouded by your mutual dislike OP? Is he a rubbish dad or just a lousy partner?

[NameChange30]

abigamarone
No, I'm not seeing what I want. I don't want the ex to be abusive, I just recognise it when I read it. Sometimes I read between the lines, but that's informed by reading what is there.

"not physically (at least not with the kids)" - that means he has been physically violent or aggressive with the OP.

"He [DS] often mentions how shouty he [ex] has been"
This is regular anger and verbal abuse in front of the children. Do not fall into the trap of minimising it.

[Micah]

Would you say the same about an actual dad not paying maintenance? Would you say it's ok for him to not pay towards his child?

I would say the same if there was 50:50 shared care. He is still paying for his child. If both parents truly contribute 50:50 then why should one pay maintenance to the other. Especially as only one can recieve child benefit/tax credits etc- so technically I'd say that parent needs to share child related benefits too.

[mojoawol]

Thanks for all the input everyone.
Ex's control is largely based around him wanting to get his own way. And as a divorce lawyer he has spent most of his life adopting an adversarial stance which, in my view, is pretty aggressive. As an adult (and the same for his other ex), with my own views etc, I was unable to live with his attitude. He pushed me a couple of times over the 7 year period when I stood up to him. I'm not a doormat, but could not continue living with a man who insisted on getting his own way.
Having said that, he was always the 'fun dad' with the kids when we were together, or at least when it suited him, so the kids obviously enjoy that side of him. He is controlling with the kids, but not to an extreme and I trust that he wouldn't hurt them. To a certain extent, some might say that he's just strict with them. Inconsistency is probably the biggest problem - veering between 'fun dad' and shouty dad, but who of us can claim constant consistency?
Over the 7 years, DS and ex have developed a relationship. While me and ex were together I could monitor and protect DS from any unreasonable behaviour from ex and hopefully help equip him emotionally to deal with it. It's not a simple case of him being a bully and controlling and having to remove the kids from him. I do trust that he wouldn't hurt them, and until they get a bit older and wilful, they are generally happy to go along with his (not hugely unreasonable) will and therefore they're safe. I think it's important to DS to feel part of a family that has been so important for most of his life. I felt that insisting DS couldn't spend time with the ex would have damage him more than agreeing to it would. Hurt like hell.
So, my main concern is just whether PR will give him any rights and power that I will regret. If it is just a case that it means ex can see his school report, and make life or death decisions on his medical care when I'm not available, then fine. But he already sees his report, comes to parent's evening, and surely the life or death thing is pretty edge case? It is his insistence on it (20 or so text messages today alone) and statements like 'if you don't agree, I'll apply to a court and get it anyway' that that piss me off and lead me to think there's more to it.
And yes, I think I need to get a second legal opinion.

[Obviouspretzel]

SoapandGlory, but where is the suggestion that he isn't meeting the costs ?

I'd be pretty fucked off if I had 50:50 custody of a stepson, was paying fully for his care when he was with me, with everything that goes with it - food, school trips, clothes, bedroom in my house decorating etc, then someone told me I should be giving his mum maintenance on top of all that. What for ?

[SoapandGloryisDivine]

I'd be pretty fucked off if I had 50:50 custody of a stepson, was paying fully for his care when he was with me, with everything that goes with it - food, school trips, clothes, bedroom in my house decorating etc, then someone told me I should be giving his mum maintenance on top of all that. What for ?

I know but if parents have to pay maintenance even when there is a 50/50 arrangement, then why wouldn't that apply to someone who is the child's parent in every way bar biologically?

[Obviouspretzel]

I thought the point that was being made is that biological parents don't have to do that either. As someone said, each partner would need to pay each other maintenance, making it pointless.

[ADishBestEatenCold]

"It's just if it allows him to make decisions without consulting me that I'm concerned."

I may be very out of date, OP, bit I think much, much worse than this ^ ... I think it would leave you in a position of having to consult him, seek his permission in fact, before you could then make certain decisions for you and your son.

For example, I think you couldn't change his name without ExH's agreement (and I am already guessing that your DS has got ExH name, not your name or his dead dad's).
Also that you couldn't move with your son to another country without ExH's agreement.
In fact, lots of things that are beyond the scope of day-to-day care, you may require his agreement for.

[MiniCooperLover]

I can't understand giving him parental rights when he's not a biological parent now you are divorced. If still together maybe. And definitely not when you e said he's a mean divorce lawyer. He's clearly leading up to something and it won't be to your good

[jay55]

It's not about what things PR allows him to do in relation to your son in terms of medical care or school reports.
Its about him being able to step in and have a say on things you can currently decide without him like school choice and going overseas.

[SmillasSenseOfSnow]

I do trust that he wouldn't hurt them, and until they get a bit older and wilful, they are generally happy to go along with his (not hugely unreasonable) will and therefore they're safe.

You do know your son is about to grow up into a more independent, occasionally potentially cocky teenager, yes? If on some level you recognise that there is the potential for this to be a big problem for your child, why on earth are you still considering it?

[friendafar]

20 text messages about it in a day? Was he on holiday - I thought this was a busy period for divorce lawyers! Is it normal that he sends so many messages in a day?

[Italiangreyhound]

Just for the record, I don't think he should necessarily be paying 50/50 at all. I think in the OP's shoes I would rather take less help and have more of my son to myself than with someone if I was not happy with the way I felt they were behaving. My point was just because someone is wth a child 50 % of the time doesn't mean they are paying 50% of costs or doing 50% of the work, if they get the fun stuff and the other parent gets the more difficult stuff. Kids will be delighted with a parent who springs for a £5 McDonalds meal but not bat an eyelid at £30 or £40 worth of school shoes. That's all I'm saying.....

[DPotter]

20+ text messages in one day on the same topic - surely that's harassment ? and if it's not in the legal sense it certainly seems obsessive. I'm beginning to see what you mean about there being something more to just gaining PR. How does your solicitor stack up against your ex ? Has the ex got a local 'reputation' that your solicitor battles against ? Just wondering if it might be worth asking around for someone with more of a rottweiler approach............
In the mean time, how would he react if your were to answer 'I am considering your request and will answer when I have decided. Please desist in sending multiple text about the same subject' ?

By the way, if heaven forbid your DS was in A&E in a life threatening condition, the medics would just save his life and ask questions later. The problems happen when its something more straightforward a broken bone / something needing a small stitch, that gets left until consent can be obtained.

[BillSykesDog]

I am having a little chuckle at this thread. Some posters seem to be working themselves into an increasing froth suggesting contact is stopped and so forth. And the OP seems so much more calm and reasoned; I don't know why she is asking for advice, she's the most sensible person on the thread! And she does seem to be the person with her children's best interests at heart.

OP, I can't pretend I know anything about the legalities of this, but get yourself a second opinion. I wonder if there is a third way where you could agree to give him some of the things PR gives voluntarily without going the whole hog?

He will already have PR for DS2, so I imagine things like needing permission for a holiday etc wouldn't be that big a deal, as you'd be obliged to get it for one son anyway.