To say that I’m uncomfortable with money for wedding but none to see children?

[sparkly01]

I don’t think I am BU. Willing to accept if I am however.

Here goes, my BF is planning a wedding. Her soon to be DH has children from a past relationship that he doesn’t have any contact with. The reason is that his ex won’t allow it. As far as I am aware they haven’t done mediation. He’s not contacted a solicitor to see the children due to cost. However, they are now getting married and he is working overtime etc to help pay for the wedding. I mentioned that I was uncomfortable with this. My BF said I’m out of order for saying this. The thing is, I do actually like her soon to be DH and I find it very difficult to just be alright with the fact they have prioritised a wedding above his children. I know it’s none of my business really, but I am quite confused about how you could have money for one and not the other.

What does mumsnet jury think?

They shafted him for well over a year and it was only resolved because people like me were prepared to spend time with CAFCAS and put our names to disproving her lies.

What about the one who was suicidal? If his family hadn't kept a watch on him he would be dead. Or the little boy who wants to see his dad but despite numerous court appearances and CAFCAS supporting the father his mother is still getting her own way?

ScrabbleFiend
He pays for children through the CSA
It amazes me that people think this is something to be proud of. The CSA are there to legally enforce payments for NRP's who don't pay. In almost all cases it's the RP whom opens the case due to not receiving maintenance in the first place. It's also the bare legal minimum and more often than not nowhere near the true cost of raising children. I wouldn't go near a man who had to be forced to pay for his children, even if he did see them.

Not strictly true. The CSA helped separated parents who cannot agree, also those who have come from abusive relationships and need to stay hidden. Many parents used the CSA on a voluntary basis.

The CSA no longer exists, it is the CMS now. Totally different, encouraging parents to try to work it out themselves.

What about the fact that this man has never taken a single legal step to get contact? No initial application, not even a request for mediation?

Re lying at court, both sides do this on occasion. It's not a case of vindictive women, poor men. The courts do their best to work through this. I think the evidence of where they get it wrong in terms of giving fathers contact is rather horrifically well documented.

I am really, really against this idea that the best thing to do is always to go to court for access. It frequently doesn't work anyway even if ordered. And there's not much the court can do to change that other than stripping mother's of custody altogether.

I often think that deciding to take a step back and not turn your children's childhood into a battle is a pragmatic and sensible thing to do.

If you know once a fortnight your children are going to be made to feel guilty and confused with their loyalties split. And in between that put up with a resentful mother questioning them and guilt tripping them and pouring bike in their ears?

For a lot of people a fortnightly trip to McDonalds and softplay just isn't worth the emotional damage that can be inflicted by their presence continuing.

Bile in their ears, not bike.

You're being naive to think access can't just be halted by a vindictive parent. I know some one in this position (And know enough be 100% sure it's accurate). He was stopped from seeing his kids on a whim. He's in a low paid job. Pays more than CSA for his kids, has continued to do so. But of course this leaves little money for legal fees. He scraped together money for a lawyer. It took over 6 months to get back before the court. It then got adjourned for another 6 months for reports etc. Then adjourned again. Its taken 18 months to get an order to see his DC, starting in the new year, which the ex has already said she has no intention of adhering to. And she has parents with enpugh money to fund it going to and from court indefinitely. He's spent a lot of money and still hadn't seen his DC. And if his ex has her way he won't.

I can see that you might think there is no point in fighting a losing battle and wait until children are older.

I don't get why the onus is all on deadbeat dads, not fighting to see your kids etc. Aren't the mothers who frustrate contact worse?

My Ex was a shitty partner. In the 8 years since we split I've never restricted his access. As it is my DC have seen him about 4 times this year. Mutual choice.

Back to the OP, it's really none of your business. Not contributing to kids is one thing, not spending £1000s on lawyers for a battle you may not win is another.

stitchglitched, we don't know he hasn't tried mediation, the OP says as far as she knows which doesn't mean anything really.

ikeptthemwithmebabe of course both sides lie on occasion but for people to say men are always at fault if they don't get contact just isn't fair. If you accept that courts get it wrong by giving the wrong people contact then surely you accept that sometimes they get it wrong the other way as well?

withmebabe getting it wrong about mother's is well documented too. Baby P's father wanted custody and on one occasion refused to give him back because of his injuries until the police came to seize him. That mother's lying (no boyfriend living with her) is extremely well documented.

Oh yawn at all the "I know a lovely man who's a great father and the only reason he can't see his kids is because his ex is a bit h/has a new boyfriend, he wasn't abusive or violent I am 100% sure of this".

Look unless you've hidden in their walls their whole marriage you don't have a clue. And of course they're not going to admit to any wrongdoing. FGS don't be so naive

Eltonjohnssyrup that is very true. My GC are going through similar, to be fair my exDIL has never stopped contact but the children are constantly subject to nasty comments from her, her family and friends. Constantly criticizing a child for being like his father is really damaging and when you see the results of the damage is it horrible. Ten year olds saying they wished they were dead isn't pleasant.

velvet, I suspect we may well know the same person. Was happy for contact when she wanted a bit of peace but as soon as a new partner came on the scene it wasn't convenient him handing around she became obstructive?

Or maybe there are just quite a few women like that.

CherryChasingDotMuncher before schoolage my GC would use his parents phone to call me so I could hear his mother screaming abuse at my son so that I would go and remove him and the baby from the situation. Yes there was abuse, she wasn't above punching my son in the face when he had the baby in his arms.

Yep, Granny. Constantly having to think about which toy you play with because playing with the 'wrong' one shows to much favour for the other parent and can lead to anger. Accidentally mentioning a restaurant that parents never been to or a movie they've never taken you to see causing a blow out. There does have to come a point where you consider if contact is destructive.

Eltonjohnssyrup, it is so sad. How can people do it to their own children?

Similarly to Granny, the man I mentioned was a next door neighbour in a terrace so I would be amazed if there was abuse we didn't hear. Plus she was twice his size and a threatening personality. On the other hand his ex was very vocal about tricking him into a vasectomy by promising they'd be together forever when she was already planning on throwing him out. She thought it was a very clever way of financially protecting her kids future by making sure he couldn't have any more kids. And now he can't see the ones he has.

granny I'm not saying it doesn't happen, I know it does (my DB was a DV victim from his female ex) however I think it's very telling that people buy so easily into the "my ex won't allow contact" line without question. A shame that people are happy to automatically and unquestionably believe that a woman is the bad one in all this and a man the Saint, no mater how little effort he's put in to seeing his children

YABU OP. People rarely like it when you tell them how they should spend their cash. Also, you say that it would be nice if his estranged DC were at the wedding. You have no idea if this would be true or not.

Personally I think this kind of thing needs challenging far more than it is. The welfare of children should be everyone’s responsibility. We should challenge the father’s who make decisions to do overtime for weddings but who refuse to send even a letter from a solicitor to try and maintain contact with their children, we should challenge the non- maintenance paying boasters and we should equally challenge women who withhold contact for spurious reasons. We should look deeply at how relationships plan out post- separation and encourage our friends/family members/colleagues to do the right thing by their children (and by default, their new partners). There is way too much ‘nothing to do with me/not my business/looking the other way.

Finally, it should be a criminal offence to financially abandon a child and equally criminal to wilfully withhold contact from a parent who had previously been kind and loving. More support for parents who struggle with relationship breakdown would be particularly beneficial - helping them see the two sides of the coin whilst dealing with their own anger and grief.

I would just be happy for her Life is so short, if the children have a stable mother then they will also be fine.

Jebus wept.

Nobody is saying he's definitely being abused or contact us being frustrated by his ex. We are saying it's none of the OPs business as that sort of thing is extremely common. Knowing what I know about child custody arrangements I'm far more terrified of my son having a baby with someone outside if a strong relationship than I am of my daughter doing the same.

Knowing what I know about child custody arrangements I'm far more terrified of my son having a baby with someone outside if a strong relationship than I am of my daughter doing the same.

Your DD is far more likely to be raped and abused on a relationship than your son.

And teach your son to be a good father who is as involved as the mother and treats her and them kindly and you won't have a problem.

Why do people persist that 'courts only favour of women' 🙄

And teach your son to be a good father who is as involved as the mother and treats her and them kindly and you won't have a problem. So tell me why my sons ex thought it was OK to punch him in the face when he had a baby in his arms and a toddler watching? Do you think she was doing that because he was the baddy? I brought my son up well and I have a problem with what she did and I also have a problem with the social worker who was all too ready to believe every word she said until she had proof that she was lying.

Courts frequently favour women, no one said it was always but it happens.

For every court case that allows children to remain with an unsuitable mum, there will be another granting access to an unsuitable Dad.

With a rise in children having 50/50 contact, I think you can't say that mums are being prioritised. Surely this is a reflection on courts acknowledging that some men are fully involved in childcare pre-divorce so should be enabled to continue to be fully involved post-divorce too?

OP I would have expressed a similar sentiment to my friend. Because our friendship is based on honesty and us challenging one another if there's stuff going on. We don't just make polite chit chat over tube pronunciation of scones.