Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

travel arrangements/NRP

49 replies

AmoraObscura · 26/11/2018 22:58

Apologies for the poor title, posting in haste on behalf of a friend.

Here's the scenario, you split with your partner, you have one child. Partner moves approx 6 hours drive away.

To what extent is it your responsibility to meet your partner halfway to handover? (Partner has child only during holidays, so quite infrequent)

OP posts:
ohreallyohreallyoh · 26/11/2018 23:01

It is likely the courts would order a halfway handover.

Extenuating circumstances - illness, family illness, a new baby, might make a difference.

I think it’s a joint responsibility morally.

ThomasRichard · 26/11/2018 23:02

No idea what it is legally but IMO the one who moves away is morally responsible for doing the travelling. If they don’t like it then they should have thought about that before they effectively abandoned their child.

Walkingdeadfangirl · 26/11/2018 23:05

Been there done that, court ordered half of the travel and costs each.

GoneForFood · 26/11/2018 23:13

Court ordered exh to do all of pickups/drop offs when he moved 4 hours away due to 1) me not being able to drive for medical reasons and 2) the cost of me travelling halfway there and back twice monthly would be more than the amount of child support exh was obliged to pay.

Original poster
AmoraObscura · 26/11/2018 23:14

I suspect the court would award full custody to parent A in this case. But as it's on behalf of a friend I better not drip feed potentially identifying info.

OP posts:
WinterSpiceOnIce · 26/11/2018 23:16

Why do you think 'full custody' would be given to a parent?

It's not called custody, it's now residency......and courts like to favour 50/50

WinterSpiceOnIce · 26/11/2018 23:18

Also. Parent drives 6 hours to collect child,turns round and drives 6 back..... not really safe is it?

Other parent should put the child first and do some of the journey

Original poster
AmoraObscura · 26/11/2018 23:39

Parent B gets significantly more time off work over Christmas than Parent A, a fortnight vs 4 days. Seems unreasonable they chose to move that distance and expect parent A to meet them halfway on that.

Safety is only a valid issue if parent B chooses not to rest adequately or break the trip up.

OP posts:
WinterSpiceOnIce · 26/11/2018 23:54

Parent this, parent that.....

Er, there's a kid in the middle of this who would probably like some time with the other parent..... how about the adults make it happen and stop all the contact blocking?

Walkingdeadfangirl · 27/11/2018 00:25

FYI if a nrp has to do all the travel they can usually take the cost of it off any CSA payments due.

Willyoujustbequiet · 27/11/2018 01:46

50/50 is still not the norm in this country. A primary parent is.

AmyDowdensLeftLeftShoe · 27/11/2018 02:20

@Willyoujustbequiet - still doesn't give either parent the excuse to stop the child seeing the other parent. The child has a legal right to have contact with both parents not the other way round and both parents need to remember that.

Original poster
AmoraObscura · 27/11/2018 07:25

Nobody is stopping anyone from seeing the child! At all. They're just not prepared to spend the best part of their only time off work facilitating it.

No maintenance money has been received, The parent with the child resident has been giving money to the NRP to help them.

OP posts:
CJsGoldfish · 27/11/2018 07:34

They're just not prepared to spend the best part of their only time off work facilitating it
I'd go to the ends of the earth for my child and that includes sometimes doing things I don't want to for their benefit.

PoesyCherish · 27/11/2018 07:38

Why can't your friend post this if they're worried about it?

Anyway, I think given the distances it would be helpful if the travelling could be split but only because I don't think 12 hours driving is safe!

MacNcheese87 · 27/11/2018 07:39

Sounds like you've already made your mind up and you don't want to hear advice.

But if it were me, safety would have to come first. If the NRP is driving 6 hours there, picks up my child, then drives 6 hours back, I would be a mess worrying about my child's safety. So it's completely logical that the travel plans are met halfway.

However, NRP should be paying child support.

In a perfect world this would be the scenario, but we don't live in a perfect world. If the costs of meeting NRP are too high for the RP, then it would need to be discussed further.

Firesuit · 27/11/2018 07:41

I'd go to the ends of the earth for my child and that includes sometimes doing things I don't want to for their benefit.

The issue is nothing to do with what the child receives, it's about how to split the cost among the givers. Or are you saying that anyone who doesn't shove the other parent out the way and do absolutely everything for a child themselves is a crap parent?

adaline · 27/11/2018 07:43

This thread reads very much as if the current RP is angry that the NRP moved away and as such won't facilitate contact as a result.

But why did the NRP move - work? Back to their family? Back to where the couple lived originally, perhaps - all perfectly reasonable choices, as women on here are often told to move closer to their families when their relationship or marriage breaks down.

Or (as I suspect) have they moved to be with OW or something and that's gotten the RP's back up, and therefore they've gone into angry/defensive mode and refuse to help with contact as a result?

Contact is about the child - not the parents. Unless the child will be unsafe then they should have the right to see both parents - enabled by the RP if necessary.

QuarterMileAtATime · 27/11/2018 07:44

6 hours? Jesus. Are you sure the NRP even wants to see the child? What kind of parent moves that distance from their DC? Poor child.
If it’s only for some holidays (so say, summer, Christmas and Easter) and the child would benefit, then I would do half ways those few times a year.

TranmereRover · 27/11/2018 07:46

That’s a 45 minute flight not a drive

Harpingon · 27/11/2018 08:20

NRP has plenty of holiday and made a choice to move away from children, should therefore travel up to where children live stay overnight than drive back with children safely. RP needs to go to Cms.

NicePieceOfPlaid · 27/11/2018 08:27

It's up to the parent who chose to move away to collect and return the full journey. Their choice to move away, no reason why the other parent should be inconvenienced.

paintinmyhairAgain · 27/11/2018 08:37

would it be easier for your friend to ask these questions ?
not saying this is the case for you, but some people post on here on behalf of friends and then it turns out several pages in it is the op who is asking, this might be they are worried about the response their query might get.
anyway i think meeting half way would be about right, but it seems very odd to move 6 hours away,why would you do that ? but flying would be a lot quicker.
there is probably back story to this.

WinterSpiceOnIce · 27/11/2018 08:51

Have al those saying it's the NRP job to do all travelling actually been to court over this yourselves?

Judges often have a different spin on it...... it's nothing to do with other parent being 'inconvenienced' ..... how twee!! No, it's all about what's best for the CHILD,you know, the child mixed up in all this,remember?

GoneForFood · 27/11/2018 09:05

winterspiceonice yes I have been to court. They decided it wasn’t in my children’s interest to travel 6 hours (3 each way) on 4 busses and a train every other weekend to see their dad who decided to move away to an area that he had no job in or no connection to other than ‘he fancied a change of scenery’ (it’s a 4 hour drive so my ‘portion’ would be 2 hours but as my license was revoked due to medical issues we’d have to get public transport, which their isn’t a direct service)

It would also cost me over £120 a month, and ex only pays £7 a week as he signs on (and works cash in hand but I can’t prove this 100%) and it’s something I couldn’t afford to facilitate, seeing as All my full time wages go on childcare/rent/food/clothes/bills and his paltry contribution doesn’t even stretch to a school jumper.

I must have had a very unusual judge as he ruled that exh had to do the travelling at his own expense. It wouldn’t be in my childrens best interest for me to pay the £120 per month, which would mean I couldn’t afford childcare, which would mean I’d have to give up my job. And luckily the courts agreed.