To think this is f*cking terrifying?

[RomeoBunny]

news.sky.com/story/grandparents-right-to-see-grandchildren-could-be-protected-by-law-11363044

Genetic connection should not equal an automatic right to see a child. Grandparents are NOT the parents. How many times does this need to be stated? They are not 'entitled' to anything. In many cases they are toxic and it is beyond the simple reason of their children's divorce for not seeing their grandchildren.

Your time with them is what your children wish you to have with THEIR children.

This is batshit.

I actually keep a log of the incidents that occur with PIL's, and if possible I keep screenshots of messages, photo's of the items they send with the proof of postage to return those items (always signed for so I can prove we've returned them).

That's all I can suggest to people here, keep evidence of everything you possibly can, with dates and times, because if you need to try and prove the relationship is toxic then this is perhaps the best way.

Considering the Actual Parents don't have rights towards their children, giving grandparents rights is a fucking joke. Will they be held responsible for their welfare either emotionally or financially? Unlikely.

Will they extend it to aunts and uncles? Will the line be drawn at those who are blood related or related by marriage? What about children who have been permanently fostered or adopted from abusive parent situations? It's a mess waiting to happen.

Hygge I’m so sorry you had to hear those awful questions.

Wouldn’t make a jot of difference here as MIL hasn’t been arsed with her son or our children for a decade. Very much her loss and the children’s gain (in not having to deal with her toxic favouritism.)

Brash the BBC reported aunts and uncles included.

Even then I don't think this is healthy, the burden of split loyalties when a child knows someone has made their parent unhappy, but they have to go with them and have a relationship with them anyway

I was placed with grandparents by SS - mum hated it because her mother put her in foster as a kid and a lot of resentment. There were lots of arguments and court battles, but ultimately I think it was the best place for me rather than shipped out to randomers like my mum was.

I don't mean that negatively to adopters! It's just how I feel about my own situation. Adopters do an important job, but I feel family was best for me and I'd have hated being with unrelated people. Sorry if that came out wrong bit of emotion there

Hygge that is beyond awful. I'm so sorry that this is causing you additional stress.

I totally agree about the cards. DC's GM has never missed a birthday. Sends money too. The cards are awful They refer to him by a different name, insult and threaten us and are largely written by the birth mother.
One contained phone numbers and the offer of McDonalds and a mobile phone if he met up with them. In any other circumstances that would be classed as grooming.
DC didn't learn to read until he was around 8 so it was easier to protect him. Now he can read its really difficult.
The last one said they were not going to send him any more money because they had heard we stole it from him. They referred to me as my OH's wife throughout.
For context, DC has been with us since he was 8 weeks old. When I offered GM a visit (years back) she told me it was too far. We live a 20min tube ride or half hour drive away.

I have just realised that if DC's birth GP hears about this they are going to think it applies to them and we might start receiving all kinds of demands from them. Thats all we bloody need.

As i said on the other thread on this.

A there's usually a damn good reason - I've not come across one case either in real life or on forums where it's genuinely been "for no reason" and that's even when I've originally been more friendly with the grandparent side of things. Every time it's turned out the grandparents/extended family member did something that absolutely warrants lc/Nc

B while emotional abuse, narcissism and toxic families are still so poorly understood and difficult to prove this is a TERRIBLE idea.

"As for this Nigel Huddleston MP and his comments that grandparents have been accused of harassment for sending birthday cards or Christmas presents, he really needs to understand that this can be another way of forcing contact and continuing abuse." Exactly. He has absolutely NO expertise in this area either. Plus this is him commenting merely on comments from constituents who he's MAYBE met for all of 10 mins AND he's only got their side of it. He's citing cases where there's been police involvement that strongly suggests to me serious harassment/abuse involved.

"I wondered if the MPs pushing this have spoken to the parents involved in their specific cases." I very much doubt it.

"They'd charm and bamboozle whoever had to assess them." Expert at it.

Coffeeonthesofa well said.

MrsDV excellent point - looked after children situations are already very complicated and distressing without this thrown in the mix! Would add to the workload of ss too because they'd have to legally sever the relationship to all the family members who could potentially access the child and possibly even attempt to circumvent orders to protect the child from the parents.

Arcadia I've knowledge of some horrific examples of the current system not working. It's already VERY hard to even get supervised access ordered even when there's been awful, documented physical/sexual abuse. The statutes may SAY it's the rights of the child but in my experience it's more the desires of the adults that are deferred to.

I'm Nc with my sister for lots of reasons. Dd is thankfully old enough this won't affect us but I know this is not an uncommon issue. One of the MAIN reasons I went Nc was the way she treated my dd. Dd can't stand her wants nothing to do with her but if my dd were much younger my sister can be VERY convincing on the "poor me I've done nothing wrong" score. To the point that once she assaulted me, tore my coat, I'd red marks from her slapping me and a scratch and yet it wasn't until police viewed cctv that they believed me!

I've emailed my MP about this because although I am not going to be affected I know how Frightened and worried I would be if dd were still young enough to be vulnerable to this change.

I've now emailed my MP about this too. DH has an estranged father. He's had no contact with him in over 10 years, he's never met our DC, if he knows we're married it's not because we told him. If this was to become law, this man (and more to the point, his awful wife) would be able to legally pursue contact with the DC. Because of course we wouldn't allow access in the first instance - the knob abandoned DH and SIL whenever it suited him as children, and would come flitting back into their lives as though nothing had happened until they both told him to fuck off for good at 18 and 20.

It's difficult but I can see both sides.

A parent might object because they had an abusive childhood and don't want their own children to be put at risk.

But in another case, the grandchild might have had a good relationship with the grandchildren, even been a primary carer. A parent cutting off that type of relationship suddenly coild be traumatic. The child has a right to continue contact with a 'significant' person in their life

All cases are different, but it must be whatever is best for the child
The childs welfare must always comes first

Alpineflowers, isn't the type of case you mention the sort that would already be covered by the existing process; they'd have to apply to the courts to be allowed to apply for access but I thought that was the sort of case where - assuming sufficient evidence - they'd get leave to apply?

I foresee the courts getting absolutely slammed if this gets through.

, isn't the type of case you mention the sort that would already be covered by the existing process; they'd have to apply to the courts to be allowed to apply for access but I thought that was the sort of case where - assuming sufficient

Yes but these things are expensive and can be dragged out over months or even years. By then the child might have forgotten the GP.

My point was more about a young child suddenly being denied contact with his/her primary carer (a GP who looks after a baby/toddler while the parents work full time for example). A sudden split like that is harmful

But then I do understand the other side as well. That a parent might not want their children anywhere near the GP in the first place. To be dragged through the courts, even when the DC has had no significant contact with the GP, must be upsetting especially if they have to prove to the judge that the GP was/is unfit to have contact

Not sure if anyone has said this but this could be a factor in pressurising women to stay in abusive relationships, knowing care of their children will go out of their hands if they do not. Seriously bad idea.

I don't think it's all bad. There are decent grandparents out there who have been heartbroken by being denied access.

Equally there are some arses who are only out to make a parent's life a misery.

It has to be decided individually, but will the courts be able to cope with all the cases?

I wish my parents had had some rights to see their grandchildren in the 1980s when my DB's ex wife and her parents stopped DB and my parents seeing them just because they (ex wife and her parents) were nasty pieces of work.

Not sure if anyone has said this but this could be a factor in pressurising women to stay in abusive relationships, knowing care of their children will go out of their hands if they do not.

Yep - I know a couple of women who felt this was a major factor in why they stayed with their abusive ex for so long - if they were together, they could protect their child from the equally abusive grandparents, but as soon as they separated they had no say in who the children spent time with when they were with their dad.

I think anyone who instigates court proceedings involving children really needs to take a long hard look at themselves to judge whose interests they're really acting in - because it's certainly not ideal for the child to be dragged through a court process, and (I say this in the nicest possible way) it had better be worth it.

There is already a way to get access in court.
Its odd that when i speak to cut of grandparents its all about their rights.
Not the childs. I use gransnet a lot and some of the gp on there will refuse to see anything they have done is wrong. Even if a court have repeatedly denied them access its always someone else fault.

Don't get me wrong, I am sure there are many grandparents who are denied access in circumstances that may not be considered fair, or even in the child's best interests, but I fundamentally believe the decision about how a child spends their time should rest with a parent.

Would this stop people from moving?

We want to move abroad one day - if a relative got given rights over our children would we be forced to stay in the uk?

Boomers, eh?

I had every intent of maintaining and encouraging contact - am going through divorce now. However MIL has suddenly started bad mouthing and cold shouldering me so I'm not facilitating it and her son, my Stbxh can't be bothered.

They rarely saw their Gp anyway. Too much effort for the Gp. One of them doesn't remember them. I could see SIL threatening to use this law though. However, as she is unimaginably lazy, she'd never get round to it

This is not right.

I had an emotionally abusive grandparent that I myself told my parents I didn't want to see at aged 9.

I'm not personally invested in this: never had a toxic grandparent, and not a grandparent, nor likely to be - but my first thought on hearing this was how it could so easily be a weapon for abusive toxic GPS, who are often likely to be far richer than parent(s) so more able to buy top legal representation.
Trouble is, most people think grandparents = cuddly, ah! - but GPs are as various as any other class of people and some of them you wouldn't want within a million miles of your children. It's all very well saying it's a question of children's rights rather than grandparents' rights (too right!) but if it's a wealthy grandparent arguing the case against a penniless unrepresented parent, guess what?

No, this is a terrible idea.

YANBU. I heard this on the radio earlier and couldn't believe it. The only people who should have a right to see children are the parents IF they are suitable and fit to do so. Not every grandma and grandad are kindly white haired cardigan wearing dears who only want to love their darling grandchildren