AIBU to not want my ex dp staying at my home?

[Anonymous2121]

I currently live at home with my parents and our son. I am 23, ex dp is 24. We broke up before Christmas, he does not have a job and has only recently (in the last week) found a house share to move into. The split was far from amicable and as such my parents (as well as myself) do not want him coming into our house for long periods of time or staying the night.

I have also started to see someone new, so even if we all had a better relationship I still don't think it would be appropriate for him to be staying the night. I do not think he should have moved into a house share as this will impair his ability to look after our son. He will not have anywhere to take our son back to (should it start raining heavily for instance), all contact time will have to be outside our home. He will not be able to have our son over night either because of this decision. He could have afforded to live in a flat of his own as he has savings, but he chose not to as it would be more costly for him.

Anyway, he is intimating that my parents and I are being unreasonable because we don't want him staying in the house for long periods of time or staying over night. He is arguing that we are blocking and preventing him from seeing his son, despite the fact that he made the conscious decision to move into a house share knowing this would affect his ability to care for our son properly. AIBU to not want him staying over? Sometimes I feel like I am going insane!

TheFormidableMrsC:

I don't mean against the tenancy agreement. I mean no external authority would stop me. My ex wouldn't have a say either, I suspect.

I don't understand your argument Trifle, it makes no sense. No, you couldn't move into an HMO with your children because a decent regulated landlord wouldn't allow it. I guess somebody could report you to social services for housing two or three children and yourself in a bedroom without adequate facilities for cooking/washing etc or indeed none of the other tenants would mind at all and you'd get away with it forever! Your ex might decide your children's living conditions are not suitable and make an application to court. Of course this brings us back to hostels where exactly that happens but are generally short term, purpose built regulated accommodation while people wait for permanent housing. My head's exploding here!

TheFormidableMrsC:

Maybe rather than telling me it makes no sense, you could give me a chance to explain and not make assumptions. You may not understand what I am saying but that doesn't mean it makes no sense.

Yes, SOME and perhaps MOST HMO tenancy agreements specify no under 16s. I will take your word for that. But they can't ALL specify this, because I know that some parents DO live in HMOs with their children.

Therefore. As we don't know whether the ex DP in this situation would or wouldn't be breaking a tenancy agreement, we can't comment on that.

Secondly, overcrowding in a bedroom (2-3 children plus an adult) is a) not usually of concern to SS - how many examples of overcrowding do we know of? SS do fuck all about it and b) isn't relevant here, since I have one DD. And yes, provided I wasn't breaking a tenancy agreement, I would be quite at liberty to move into a HMO with her

Lastly, my ex might well take issue with this. He might well make an application to the court. He might well win. That isn't the point.

The point is that there are posters here arguing that the ex in this situation shouldn't be able to arrange overnight contact NOT because there is a court order against it and NOT because he would be breaking a tenancy agreement, but because they say so. They believe he should voluntarily forgo overnight contact because the HMO arrangement (which isn't illegal) is so unsuitable.

My suspicion is, as I have said, very few of them would be prepared to apply the same standard to their own parenting, if push came to shove.

When I was younger I lived in a HMO. The man upstairs was in a similar situation.

Due to the building every noise carried, so the LL said no children or babies overnight. My neighboour ignored this rule which made my life a misery due to having a toddler over my head. Also meant the bathroom had one more person using it.

I and other residents, asked him to find somewhere else to have his son - but were ignored.

A quick call to SS sorted that one out. They agreed an HMO was unsuitable, and he had to see his son elsewhere.

Oh my God Trifle, I can't keep going round in circles with this. The OP's ex DOESN'T WANT to have the child at the HMO, he wants the child at the OP's parents house, and to stay overnight. He is not "foregoing contact", he has been offered Sat and Sun, all day. He has raised many arguments as to why he can't do this and why he has to have contact at the OP's parent's house. She is NOT stopping him from having contact, she has raised valid concerns about overnight contact at an HMO, all of which are reasonable and have been thoroughly addressed. You may know people who live in HMO's with their children, I most certainly don't and if they are, it is not regulated at all. See SooSmiths post.

HMOs aren't really a suitable place for children.

The fact that the father in this situation has chosen an HMO rather than his own flat shows a serious lack of judgement on his part. He had a choice to make and prioritised his savings over the well being of his child.

No mother I know would chose an HMO as an appropriate place to have dcs regularly overnight. Most fathers I know wouldnt either.

So when a NRP makes a decision that is clearly not in the childs interest the RP must then make a judgement call about what is best for that child. That judgement might include limiting contact.

And I absolutely support any parent who makes a call like that. And think they not only have a right but also an obligation to make those decisions.

Whether or not a HMO is suitable for a child isn't in question. In an absolute emergency when the options are sleep on the street or sleep in a HMO the HMO is the better choice and no child should be removed from its resident parent because they are the only 2 options. If the 3rd option is for the child to go to its father then again it would depend on the child and on the father and on the relationship they have.

But all that is irrelevant here because the father could have chosen a flat. He didn't for whatever reason.

MrsC:

Feel free not to respond. I may be being thick but I didn't see it written by the OP anywhere that her ex had refused to have the child at the shared home. I read it very much as she was refusing to allow this. I quite understand why she doesn't want him staying at hers, I just think not allowing him to have the child at his is unreasonable IF he is responsible enough to take the child overnight.

So when a NRP makes a decision that is clearly not in the childs interest the RP must then make a judgement call about what is best for that child. That judgement might include limiting contact.

I just can't agree with this. Resident parents aren't in charge. They just see the child more. I think it is disgusting to think you get to 'make a judgement call' on every aspect of your ex's life. Unless the child is clearly at risk, it isn't your call to make. The child has two parents, and they are equal in terms of PR.

Trifle I am not arguing with you or suggesting you are thick or anything else. Far from it. You seem completely focused on what I am saying and not what everybody else is saying, including those that have been in this situation. I think we just have to say that the OP is unhappy at the HMO situation, which 99% of other posters agree with and indeed it may not even be possible (nor would a court agree to it). I do not believe she is being unreasonable. I believe HE is being unreasonable as he is trying to control the entire situation and ignoring all alternative offered to him. Which included the child only having sleepovers at the OP's parents house, not his. In my view, and others, he's done this on purpose as he knows that it is not suitable for his child. He presumed the OP would give in to his demands and now she hasn't, he is using the age old "you're preventing me from seeing my child" when she clearly isn't.

In terms of your post about making judgement calls, I did this too! I made a judgement call due to the damage my ex-h and his partner were doing to my ASD DS. I stopped contact, having taken advice from every possible source as I was at risk of being seen as the non-protective parent as I tried and tried to keep my DS's relationship with his father going. I invited ex-h to make an application to court and he chose not to. Instead he emailed my DSs school at Christmas and told them he was severing all ties. He asked the school to tell me. My judgement call was correct and I will stand by that. I have every right to protect my son in any way I see fit. You are fortunate if you have a good relationship with your ex but in very many cases it's not possible. Parental rights does not make somebody a good parent.

TheFormidableMrsC:

Fair enough. I know these issues are difficult. I am lucky that I have a DH, not an ex, who is an excellent parent. I believe my DD would be absolutely safe with him, whether on a canal barge or in a shared flat! But obviously not everyone does know that and I understand the urge to try to control interactions.

It's not an urge to control interactions. It's an urge to make your child as safe and happy as possible.

My child has 2 parents. Myself and my dp. She has a biological father too. He is not her parent imo. He doesn't parent her. He doesn't provide for her. He used her as a means to control and influence my life and happiness when we split. He forfeited all rights as far as I am concerned 10 years ago.

Dd does have a right to a relationship with her biological father and I facilitate that relationship on my terms. That is my right as a parent.

He forfeited those rights when he chose to make decisions that affected her health, well being and safety. When he threatened her primary care giver (ie me) and made mine and therefore her life more difficult than it needed to be.

I don't actually give a flying fuck what anyone else thinks about his rights. When I and DP are the ones who provide for her every need be it emotional, physical, material or otherwise we are the parents.

And fathers don't have rights. The children have a right to a relationship with their father as long as it is not damaging to that child. If there is risk of harm then every RP, which is mainly mothers, has a duty to protect that child from harm.

You are fortunate to not have been in this position. And not have to understand it. But many of us have and understand it all too well.

Frouby:

I am not remotely surprised by anything in your post. I don't know what he did so can't comment on the rights and wrongs of it, but it is not an unusual attitude and yes, sometimes it is about control (maternal gatekeeping). I can't say that about you, but I will say I have heard many mothers say similar things and I haven't thought them justified at all.

I don't think it really matters whether you think they are justified or not. I certainly wouldn't care if someone thought I was 'maternal gatekeeping'. I just assume many mothers like me want to keep their dcs safe from harm.

It's not just me either. I have seen my sister do similar. Her ex is a heroin addict in and out of prison. I don't think he is a suitable person to have my nephew for any length of time. In fact I don't think it is in my nephews interest to have a relationship with him at all.

Frouby:

Well, no, I don't think drug addicted convicts are suitable parents either. We aren't talking about that.

Frouby your situation sounds very similar to mine. I appreciate though that anybody who hasn't been down this line hasn't got a clue about the realities of it and I am glad that they don't. It is extremely difficult/impossible to co-parent with an abusive ex. This has been the worst three years of our lives and I am SO relieved he's gone. It won't be forever though, he'll be back to stick the boot in at some point, when DS is older and he can then fill his head with what a shit mother I am. It's horrendous.

Anyway, we've gone a bit off topic here, OP hasn't been back, I hope she's able to get this sorted to the benefit of everybody and I mean that truly, even if the father is a bit of a knob.

But who gets to decide who is and who isn't suitable? The mother? Father? Social services? A judge or magistrate?

Ex bil doesn't look like a drug addict. My ex isn't obviously an abusive man. Listening to their tales of woe someone who didn't know the full story would think I or my sister were deliberately depriving them of a relationship with their children to be able to control the ex. To be spiteful. Or simply because they are neurotic.

The fact is that mothers concerns are ignored in courts and by cafcas and social services all the time. And children are placed at risk. I always always believe a RP when they say they have concerns about contact because quite often it is a valid and reasonable concern. Most RP believe a NRP should have a relationship with their dcs and that the dcs are entitled to a relationship with the NRP. It can be very difficult to facilitate that relationship when the NRP refuses to provide a safe place for the contact to happen. When they want the dcs to meet a series of new partners. When they want to swap and change contact because they get a better offer for that weekend. When they don't support the children financially. Or are consistently late collecting or returning the dc. Or a favourite trick of my ex was to phone 5 minutes before dd finished school when he knew I was at work 45 minutes away on a Friday and say he wouldn't be collecting her.

After the 4th time he did it I stopped him collecting her from school as it was very distressing for a 6 year old to be expecting to be collected by her father and then have to sit in the office until I could collect her. Someone not knowing all this would perhaps accuse me of being controlling or unreasonable when the reality was I was simply protecting dd from unnecessary distress.

Which is all most RPs try to do.

Frouby:

That's exactly the difficulty: who gets to decide. In my view it should always be a court.

MrsC it is fucking horrendous I agree. My ex eventually wound his neck in when I met my DP. I think he realised that he couldn't control or threaten me anymore unless he wanted to argue with a hairy arsed built like a brick shithouse builder as well. And like most bullies he backed down.

I hope the OP is ok too. And that she realises that for every person who accuses her of being difficult or controlling there is another person who 100% understands how she feels and that she is absolutely acting in the interests of her dcs.

Trifle the courts allow abusive NRP's to have contact with children all the time. You only have to look at some of the horrific threads on MN. There are very many. I am currently helping somebody who's abusive ex is a MARVEL in court, despite the fact the child doesn't want to see him, doesn't want to go there. He presents himself with such aplomb and so far he's got what he wanted and stuck his fingers up at the RP, despite the damage it's doing to the child. The whole bloody system needs a massive overhaul IMO and thankfully, due to the huge Women's Aid campaign recently "Safe Contact Saves Lives" the laws are being changed in terms of an abusive person's right to see their child. Too late for too many.

I remember a thread on here a few years ago. A mother was absolutely 100% sure her ex was sexually abusing the dc. The dc made disclosures to school, the police and ss about the abuse. The mother was threatened with prison if she obstructed contact. She was doing absolutely everything she could to stop contact.

If she had stopped it she would have gone to prison and her dc would have ended up with the abusive father permanently.

I don't know what happened in the end. I think she stopped posting as there was a chance the father was reading the posts.

It broke my heart that thread and I still wonder if the dc was ever safe.

Frouby All hail the family court...let them decide

I hate that we often don't know the outcomes in cases like this. Horrific.

Any system set up to make such contentious decisions will be imperfect. What's the alternative?

Let mothers decide. Or the RP at least.

Most RP just want what's best for their dcs.

I have met more accommodating, caring RP than what I have NRP. And I speak as someone who has seen first hand the issues we are discussing from both sides of the arguement.

In the nicest possible way Trifle you haven't been there. Until you have you won't understand. And with the best will in the world you can't guarantee that if you and your dh did separate that he would be the man you think he is.

No one has a relationship and a child with someone thinking 'well I will start a family but I know if it ends he will be a vile abusivr cunt who will cause harm to me and my dcs'. I am an intelligent, articulate, shrewd woman and I still fell for the shite. Ex changed in ways I can't describe while I was pg and dd was tiny.

No system will be perfect so for me let the RP decide.

Frouby:

There are many things I've never done/places I have never been. That doesn't change basic principles of fairness. 'Let mothers decide' is flagrantly unjust, so I won't even comment further on that.