AIBU or is ex re. motorway drive?

[Mellaa]

Ex h recently moved to a town 4 hours away tonne with his girlfriend.

He used to have the dc for 3 nights a week and has now cut it to one night a fortnight.

He collects them first thing on a Saturday morning and brings them home on a Sunday evening.

He's now telling me from now on he will be collecting them on a Friday night at 9pm to drive them to his house, arriving at 1am...

I am not happy with this as he will have been working all day then doing an 8 hour round trip with my dc in the car on a regular basis.

He is very tight with maintenance, (he owes me a fair bit in unpaid) and I suspect his plan is more to do with having the dc an extra night so cutting his maintenance by a fair bit...

AIBU?

He met someone else, he fell in love, he moved. No I wouldn't do it either but I know a few that have and do you now what? They make it work with their ex's for the kids. He does deserve s life as well.

He's not making it work for the kids though. He's trying to make it work for himself.
MRA's everywhere these days.

I think there is enough anecdotal evidence on here from people who have been through the courts to back up what I'm saying.

I'm not saying it's right but I also don't see the point in name calling and telling the op she is doing the right thing etc.

She needs proper advice to move forward. Maybe you should consult a solicitor op who will let you know if they think he/you are unreasonable and what would likely happen in court.

I actually don't think late on a Friday night is a massive issue - the kids would sleep most of the way, and it means they get to spend longer with their dad. However, I do think the drive is too long (whatever day it is on)

I understand that the OP currently feels unable to take the kids half way because of the baby (though obvs in the future she could) but why can't OPs DP take the kids half way? It makes the driving time much less dangerous, and would shift the time od day they were travelling back a bit.

I judge people as crap parents who give up time with their children when they don't have to.
Yes OP has remarried and had another baby - she didn't dump her children in order to do so. There is no man on earth who I would give up proper time with my children for. That's the difference between a real parent and a deadbeat one.

but why can't OPs DP take the kids half way?

Why on earth should someone's who isn't even their parent put themselves out both physically and financially for someone who cares so little about his children? Why should these two people give up their Friday evening as a family to make this man's consequences for his shitty decision easier for him?

People seem to be falling over themselves to find any solution to prevent this man shouldering the cost of his decision.

if compromise was on the cards why shouldnt the OP comrposie and do part of the driving? oh wait she doesnt have to as "comprosiing to most on mumsnet is get what they want exactly and NRP just deals with the whims)

If it goes to court the OP would most likely be expected to ether do half the travel aka taking them their or picking them up or taking them half way (it would be soooo much safer for the children if the OP drives them to their dads after school so they wouldnt be traveling til midnight but no that would incovinse the OP and the court would see right through it and could in fact order her or her new partner to do it)

I had a case were the RP sold her car to attempt to avoid having to take her children to newcastle after moving to cornwall and the courts saw through her attempts and basically said she will ether take them herself or would be responsible for the FULL costs of transport and if she did not pay for the plane / train tickets resiendecy would be re-evulated (aka she would become the NRP)

the NRP was legally not allowed to drive due to medical condistion so she was infact trying to stop their dad seeing them saying they were free to be seen but making nay on impossible for there dad to see them.

She moved to cornwall simply because she wanted cause problems to her ex partner her family and friends were all in the north east and she worked from home in a job that could be done anywere there was a internet connection

comprosiing to most on mumsnet is get what they want exactly and NRP just deals with the whims)

Yes it was OPs whim that he move 4 hours away and leave her to do almost 100% of the parenting of their children. She hasn't compromised at all by sucking it up and getting on with it

and could in fact order her or her new partner to do it

How the fuck can a court order her partner to do anything?

With that logic the court should order his new partner to do the driving as it was because of her this whole situation happened.

WorridMum

I agree. Facilitating a parental relationship with the NRP is sometimes more than accepting their cheque and opening the front door when they turn up to collect them.
The general MN Consensus is that an NRP isn't doing 'enough', unless they are not only paying maintenance and having frequent overnight contact, they should also pay half the clothing costs, uniform costs and school trip costs.

So shouldn't it stand to reason, that the RP should cover at least some of the travel costs?
Why is that particular job always the NRPs sole responsibility?

There seems to be a mindset, certainly in the people I've met, of "If he wants to see them that much, he'll come and get them himself"

What message does that send to the little ones who hear that, and then their Fathers subsequently don't then turn up? That they can't have been that bothered.

And as it is, OP's XH can be bothered, and he's still in the wrong.

I wonder how he explained that to his kids....

Yes, I do love you. I want to be part of your lives. But I'm going to move across the country and let your mum do all the parenting instead. To be there when you're sick. To do the school runs. Because I have found another woman and she's more important to me than you are.

So shouldn't it stand to reason, that the RP should cover at least some of the travel costs

Because the NRP has moved away. Why should the RP pay petrol money when the NRP has taken the decision to move away?

Will he be paying for loss of earnings when the children are sick?
Will he be paying for loss of earnings because she has to do the school run?

I doubt it.

What message does that send to the little ones who hear that, and then their Fathers subsequently don't then turn up? That they can't have been that bothered

Of course it does, because they can't have been that bothered.

Some of you people are crazy. A man can move 4 hours away from his kids, leaving his ex with all of their day to day care, and you expect HER to drive them to him to facilitate the relationship? And when he can't be bothered, you blame HER?

Bonkers. Or MRA's. Or probably both.

All these people who are saying OP hasnt comprised and should pay half the travel costs/do half the journey, are you actually parents? Have you done any parenting? There seems to complete ignoring of the they physical and mental workload involved in being the full time carer for children. It is acknoweldged when a spouse dies but when it is because a parent has walked away it seems to perfectly acceptable that the parent left behind just sucks it up and doesn't complain. They are doing a full other parent's workload. But yet that isn't enough. She has to also pay for his decision to move and do the travelling too. Why is this? She is already doing his share of the parenting.

I was not referring to OP, as OPs XH has already said he's happy to do the trips. He already has been doing this up until now, so him travelling isn't the problem .

I was replying to a PP who said RPs can be ordered by court to facilitate contact even if they try to avoid doing so. I was just wondering why it is generally always seen as the NRPs sole responsibility.

Worrid the RP would only be responsible for taking the children to contact if she had moved away with the dc.

She did not, the NRP chose to move away to be with his girlfriend, so he does the legwork and bears the expense of travelling to see his dc.

The NRP could have chosen to stay or move somewhere not as far.

I know someone who move nearer to the NRP & he took her to court to force her to do handovers from the original place where she moved from. He was laughed out of court for that.

MRAs is right. Family courts, by men, for men, just like the CSA / CMS. Here's a link to the other recent thread about contact.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/relationships/2950080-how-can-cou

I was just wondering why it is generally always seen as the NRPs sole responsibility

IF the NRP is the one who chose to move, then yes it should be their sole responsibility. I would think that was obvious. You can't leave someone holding the baby and then force them to spend their time and money faciliating your choice to move.

fuzzy why am I having to drive halfway then when I'm looking after a disabled DC and my other child twelve days straight when ex does and pays fuck all 200 miles away?

Lolololol at tit of XH in the case you mention. What a prick.

I grew up thinking equality for women had been attained. In western societies at least. I'm certainly learning about the fucking patriarchy on this thread!
Sure nrp, you can follow your dick and drastically reduce the time you sprnd eith your kids and your physical responsibility for them in terms of covering child care when they are sick. Sure, you can pay less than it really costs to financially support them. Hell, you can even not pay that. Who gives a fuck. We'll even facilitate all this by telling the female parent, y'know, the one who does all the work that she needs to either let you drive the kids when you are tired and it is dangerous or she has to do half the driving and suck up the costs!
For good measure we'll even throw in some (presumably) female apologists to tell you how unreasonable you are!

In a dispirited sort of way...

Njord, ime you need to be properly represented to get any kind of sensible outcome. Even then you as the RP and your poor dc will go thro the ringer first.

It's really shit if you can't afford legal representation.

Why on earth should someone's who isn't even their parent put themselves out both physically and financially for someone who cares so little about his children? Why should these two people give up their Friday evening as a family to make this man's consequences for his shitty decision easier for him?

Because it is not about the parents, it is about giving the the children as much opportunity to spend time with both parents as possible. The childrens' needs are paramount, not the parents'.