Contact with older children after absence WIBU?

[Beckasaur]

Emma and Dave (not their real names) have DD aged 10 and DS aged 12. They split 5 years ago. Dave has not seen the DCs for 3 years. The 2 years he did seem them he was inconsistent. Dave reckons Emma made it too difficult and Emma reckons Dave was messing her about and that once she put boundaries in place he bailed. Both have new partners and are in long term relationships with those partners. Dave pays maintenance in line with the CSA.

Dave now wants to start seeing the DCs. Emma wants Dave to write first and explain and say sorry for disappearing for the last few years and to write for a bit to show he is committed to seeing them. Dave feels they know and remember who he is and although he accepts the memories they have of him are both good and bad he doesn't want to write he just wants to arrange to see them. DS has said he doesn't want to see Dave. DD has said shell would like to see him. Dave doesnt only want to see one of them.

I am friends with both Emma and Dave, and frankly am a bit fed up of being stuck in the middle and trying to explain the opposing point of view. I can see why both of them are having the stance they are in part, but equally think they both being idiots. I am getting splinters form sitting on the fence on this, so thought I would put it to the MN jury ......

What would dave say if someone said to him that writing the letters might be a way to convince his son to see him.

Letter writing to start a reintroduction is such a common common approach. It makes it really clear to me that Emma has thought about the best way to go about a reintroduction while dave hasn't even considered it.

It's his way or the highway. Whereas Emma is probably aware that this will go nowhere, and would prefer not to put her kids through added trauma but is willing to give it a go but in a measured and considered way.

When dave gives his little speeches I would counsel your friend to listen carefully to what he says he is willing to do. I'm not actually hearing anything

"Flaky" such comfy feel fluffy language for what was essentially leaving two children sobbing wandering why dad had said he'd be there today - but never showed, despite the fact that they waited and waited and probably cried themselves to sleep that night... "controlling" yes i can well imagine "emma" putting boundaries in place for the sake of two heartbroken children - who she had to console.
"stupid" slightly unpleasant but no where near as truthful as "inconsiderately selfish" - anyone who thinks that they can treat their children like inconsequential 'mates' that they can let down and fob off, is no decent parent.
"Dave" is using the children as "pity puppets" he gets sympathy for his "plight" it's a script. The children are at risk of emotional abuse damage FROM being in contact with him because he likely use his tactics on them.

At this point I would suggest that you hope for the best and plan for the worst.

You've tried to mediate. Your mediation has not resolved the situation. It was nice of you to try to reason with them. Maybe they will sort it out soon. You've done your bit, now leave them to while making non-commital noises if pressed. That's the hope for the best.

The evidence does seem to point quite strongly to Dave being a right controlling dick, just like Emma says. If he's a bog standard abusive man, and you've pretty much described him following the abuser's script, then your dear friend, the new gf, is in for a rough ride. The poor dear is in an abusive relationship. That's your plan for the worst.

Could you plan for that? You were in an abusive relationship yourself. What would have helped and not helped you in your situation, especially in the early days? Could your friends have become collateral damage? How could they have protected themselves?

Imagine the dc in 20 years time. "My Dad disappeared, didn't fight to see me then when he wanted to couldn't even write 1 letter to make that happen. Can't have wanted to see me much!"

He's an embarrassment to dads. If he was inconsistent then Emma was totally right to enforce boundaries to protect her dc and herself.

Knowing Dave, he probably thinks because he pays for his kids, he has every right to see them, not ever thinking about them being kids and having feelings, and him buggering off for 3 years leaving them without a dad.

He cant see just DD because last time it caused hostility between DD and DS when DD wanted to see him and DS didnt.

Surely it will cause more hostility that he's telling his daughter, "I won't see you unless your brother comes as well." That's a horrendous position in which to put a twelve-year-old boy. It's emotional blackmail - "I'll punish your sister unless you see me, even though you've made it clear you don't want to."

How could Emma "make" the boy see his dad, anyway? Punish him for not going? Manhandle him into the car and drive him there?

I strongly suspect that even if both kids wanted to see him, he would still come up with some excuse as to why he couldn't. Or he would see them for a few months, then lose interest again.

As someone who has been the child in this sort of scenario, I think Emma is right. Dave needs to take responsibility for his actions and apologise, at the very least. He spent five years (half their lives, and probably their whole living memory!) treating them poorly, he cannot expect to walk back in on his own terms without any lead up and resume the relationship. They need time.

To refuse to apologise or acknowledge his poor treatment of his children may well affect their self esteem. He is telling them, it's ok for people to treat you this way and you should accept it. Your feelings don't matter. This is your worth.

Emma seems justified in seeking a slow reintroduction given the length of absence/age of kids/previous flakiness, and is guarding their self esteem in asking for an apology from Dad.

I have just read that your good friend is pregnant with his baby. I can see why this is hard but honestly that shows her lack of judgment as well as his. Having a baby with a man who is prepared to abandon his previous children is usually always a mistake.

It's easier said than done but I would be looking for some friends with better judgment that Dave and gfriend and perhaos focusing more on Emma who seems to have her childrens' best interests at heart. Most men don't abandon their children for three years after a divorce. His excuses are pathetic and as a daughter of a divorce I would find that hard to forgive.

The news of the baby will be far more damaging to his two existing, abandoned children than it will be for Emma. I feel very sorry for them

Dave's immature behaviour just shows how unprepared for parenthood he is, and how really he just does not have a clue, and how self absorbed and self centred he is. He has not changed one bit, and his behaviour about not seeing his dd, because his ds does not want to see him, proves that. Just shows Emma what a wanker he is.

Both kids or no kids is chilling tbh. Poor DD.

Add in years of zero contact and a newly pregnant partner.

Emma sounds like a saint for just entertaining the notion of letting him play at daddy.

My ex (and the dc's F) is very similar to 'Dave'. My DC are a bit younger, I have had to deal with so much upset and tears especially from the youngest who doesn't understand why his dad suddenly stopped seeing him and moody strops from the older one who realises their father has other priorities but doesn't know how to deal with it.

When he wanted to see them again after no contact at all for a year I asked him to start with phone calls and FaceTime calls at a regular time once a week to start to rebuild the relationship and show that he could be committed to speaking to them at a regular time to rebuild the trust. He has been reasonably reliable at that recently and the times he forgets to call (and never apologies to them ) are easier for them to deal with than the times before when contact had been arranged, they were excited to see him and then he failed to turn up or to explain or apologise . He rarely actually makes the effort to see them but they have a sort of relationship maintained through the calls.

I know that he tells anyone who will listen that I took his children and won't let him see them. He is a nasty, selfish, manipulative and controlling man. He has caused my dc enough upset and I now try to manage the contact in such a way as to reduce the negative impact on the dc who are and always will be my priority.

So I'm very much 'team Emma' in this situation. You OP are obviously in a tricky situation and you may want to stay well out of it, however if you are involved then could you suggest to both sides that they consider FaceTime calls to start with - that is a 'compromise' between Emma's (v reasonable) request for letters first and Dave's insistence on seeing both DC and means that neither of them are 'giving in' to the other one.

If the DS doesn't want to participate in the phone call then at least the DD has an opportunity to talk to her dad.

Also the new partner not wanting to hear of him being stupid its her way of trying to convince herself hes not a shit Dad and she hasnt messed her life up getting pregnant by him.
My exs new wife got pregnant very soon in their relationship and gave me utter hell of what a fantastic Dad he was to her kids (she had kids of her own) How I was so awful, 2years down the line she was messaging me telling me how awful he was to her and a rubbish Dad he was to their kids and at the time she was messaging me telling me how great he was he was actually abusing her, he made her feel worthless even threatened to take her baby off her once she was born as "she would make a shit Mum." He was also very controlling.
From the outside world they were a "strong couple" and "in love" when really she was the most miserable she had ever been and was so upset with herself that she had made the biggest mistake of her life getting pregnant by him.
The fact Daves gf is also going along with it all doesnt mean she really believes it, Its a front for the outside world and the fact she feels she cant agree hes being an idiot when he obviously is sounds like there is most probably a controlling element to their relationship.
Wait till the baby comes and she wises up.

Also the son should not be forced to see his Dad he is old enough to make his own decisions regarding Dave he isnt the small child Dave left anymore.
My children are similar ages and do not want contact with their "father" and if he came back on the scene and asked I would say no they arent interested.
Kids love stability they have that with Emma, Dave cant be allowed to come in and out when he feels like it its detrimental to the kids.
My kids flourished after their Dad completely left, no more waiting at the door crying because he didnt turn up, being told he will take them places and not going, watching him abuse their mother telling her how shit she is.
I guarantee if Dave sees his daughter he wont be consistent every action he has made during her life shows he cant, even now.

The more I think about it, the more horrified I am by his behaviour. What kind of father plays mind games like this with his own children? Trying to make a twelve-year-old boy feel responsible for the fact that his sister can't see her dad... How can people be so cruel to their own kids?

OP, do you think he'd listen to you if you told him frankly how horrible he's being?

Of course the man who won't see his daughter if he can't see his son who literally doesn't want to see him is at fault. This is one step removed from Solomon's judgment, which is an obviously fake made up story to make a point, because in reality the false mother wouldn't actually be okay with the baby being chopped in half just because she was willing to steal a child.

But here the real father who so desparately wants to see his kids is full of excuses. He couldn't see them for the past 3 years because his ex is horrible, he can't write letters because... (was there even an excuse for that one?), he can't see one and not the other. Like he'd literally rather die having never seen his daughter again than not force his son to see him on his terms? A normal parent would walk through fire to see one if it was the only choice they had. No-one's asking him to walk through fire or anything bad at all.

Your post at 28/7/18 22:52 - Dave is full of shit! His ds wouldn't HAVE a negative view of him if he hadn't fucked off and abandoned them! And I don't just mean 3 years ago, inconsistency in the 2 yrs previous is also a form of abandoning behaviour.

As for the only way to 'replace' negative memories is by creating in person positive ones - WHAT. THE. FUCK!! No!

1 he's taking NO responsibility for the creation of these negative memories.

2 Memories cannot BE 'replaced' he needs that arrogant assumption well & truly knocked on the head! I get the feeling from this Dave will blame ds for 'choosing not to forget' those negative memories.

3 It also sounds like he is placing more importance on ds's response than dds. That's shit approach to both of them.

A - as if dd matters less
B - another reason I think he'll blame DS if it's not all rainbows and unicorns!

He's STILL not putting the DC first not by a long way!

They're (the DC) gonna be hurt & pissed off when they find out the truth - that he only got back in contact because his partner is pregnant and probably under pressure from her. I for one wouldn't blame them if they basically told him to fuck off!!

"Op Dave is a cunt of the highest order and the fact that you know he's not seen his kids for 3 years and is refusing to see his DD to hold his DS to ransom and yet are still friends with him frankly reflects poorly on you" couldn't agree more.

His partner is naive & gullible if even with you (arguably an objective observer) pointing out he was at least partly to blame she STILL believes it's all down to Emma, but then I suspect she'll get a rude awakening in a few years when she does EXACTLY the same to her child.

"Dave is playing a game called 'Why Don’t You – Yes But'.
www.ericberne.com/games-people-play/why-dont-you-yes-but/

In transactional analysis terms, WDYYB is played Parent to Child, with Dave choosing the position of the child." Well spotted!

"Most men don't abandon their children for three years after a divorce." Actually stats show a significant no. Of nrps don't maintain contact after divorce/separation. In the first few years most do but as time goes on (and they start new families) they have less and less contact with the children from their earlier relationships.

Nah - he's full of shit! I suspect even if ds does now agree to see his dad there'll be another excuse!

Emma sounds like she's trying to be controlling and make him jump through hoops. Childish power play.

"she put boundaries in place" says a lot.

gunnyBear Are you reading a different thread to everyone else? Or did you abandon your kids too?

Emma really should not be attempting to insist on him writing letters. Bang out of order.

Either he sees them, and attempts to re-establish a good relationship, or he doesn't. But that shouldn't be because of some arbitrary condition that XW comes up with.

She sounds very controlling and unreasonably so. That doesn't excuse his earlier behaviour, but might give an insight into it.

As I have the startpoint that DC should be it's both parents, Dave should be seeing them without pre-conditions. If the DC want to talk about his previous contact, it can happen led by them.

S/he is simply saying what many other posters have said on this thread. Behind each abusive man there is generally a queue of supporters banging on about how it's all his ex's fault and painting him as the victim. Perpetuating the narrative of abuse with 'oh he's a lovely bloke, his ex is mental'. This is one of the reasons why it's so hard to leave. Abusers are highly manipulative people and some of their fans are very happy to play the game in the supporting role. OP is a thinking person, enough to come here and ask questions, but I think it's fair to say that OP came here with a 'six of one and half a dozen of the other' approach. Abusers walk among us and we persuade ourselves that it's everyone else's fault, especially the victim's, rather than name the crime. And it is a crime. But where are the police and family courts in dealing with these issues?

Case in point!

Cross post. Case in point!

There's a big difference between 'you know you'll need to apologise to the kids, and there's a big mountain to climb' - which is reasonable

• and 'you must write them a letter' which is unreasonable and controlling.

It is not a comment on relationships in general, but the one that is described here.

@tillytown

Read less selectively and you'll see that my opinion is not a solitary one.

Have you been abandoned?

"- and 'you must write them a letter' which is unreasonable and controlling."

No its not, if you have ever been through your kids being mucked about by an ex it is something which is often suggested as a form of contact, Contact should be eased in slowly.
Its not unreasonable at all lets face it its a letter, how bloody hard is it to write a letter?!
Think you are putting far too much emphasis on Emma than Dave who is the unreasonable one here, Totally selfish and abusive.

"Behind each abusive man there is generally a queue of supporters banging on about how it's all his ex's fault and painting him as the victim. Perpetuating the narrative of abuse with 'oh he's a lovely bloke, his ex is mental'. This is one of the reasons why it's so hard to leave. Abusers are highly manipulative people and some of their fans are very happy to play the game in the supporting role. OP is a thinking person, enough to come here and ask questions, but I think it's fair to say that OP came here with a 'six of one and half a dozen of the other' approach. Abusers walk among us and we persuade ourselves that it's everyone else's fault, especially the victim's, rather than name the crime. And it is a crime."

I totally agree!