He wants to stop me from moving

[BarbarAnne]

Recently split up with my ex. I've moved in with a family member who lives 50 miles away from my ex. We have a son who is under 6 months. Things are amicable so far but he is objecting to me living an hour away. He told me that I cannot live that far away from him and that he expects me to move closer. To a place that I've never lived before and have no support network, and also no easy access to my work. Where I have moved now, I'd like to stay. I lived there for 2 years before, have friends and family there and know the city very well. My argument is that it's only an hour and it's important that I have support. He says I'm unreasonable and that I should move closer to him. He can't move closer to me because he has a son that already lives 20 miles in the opposite direction.

Surely he can't expect me to live close by for the rest of my son's childhood years? Surely it's better that I have a support network near me? Surely it's not right that I isolate myself like that during my mat leave and make work difficult?

I don't know what to do. Any advice? We are going to mediation, but I'm scared they will make me drive miles an miles to see him on weekdays and every weekend which I can't afford and won't allow me to have my own life.

What is reasonable here?

An hour isn't much. People drive longer to work everyday.

You're the resident parent, live where you want. I'm assuminh he's not a great partnr given he has 2 failed relationships with children, maybe he should be thinking of what HE did wrong/badly that he has had 2 families split.

He is being very unreasonable to expect you to move but you may have to share the responsibility of commuting for visitation purposes. Obviously you should live where is best for you and your son but i think you should make the commute every now and then rather than expecting the father to do it all the time. As you said, it would be hard for you to have your own life making that commute for every visit so it will surely mean the same for him. Hopefully mediation will help you both come to a compromise on the commute which is the main issue for both of you.

An hour is not much at all, you could even met half way if convenient for you both. He cannot expect you to live where you have no family, friends or practical and emotional support.

I notice he is not offering to go above and beyond to make the move closer to him a viable option for you, he wants convenience but not to compromise what is easy for him.

You're the resident parent, live where you want. An hour is not that long and he has no grounds legally to stop you.

I am preparing to move an hour away (on the train) from where my son's father lives. I have sought and had advice from a solicitor that this is acceptable particularly if I am prepared to facilitate contact in future by bringing my son to see his father but I wouldn't be obliged to do that all the time, it would be split. The bigger picture is important: if you are the resident single parent then getting support from friends and family will not only benefit you but will benefit your child by giving them a bigger range of people that can help with their care and also because if you are happier and more supported then your child will thrive. This did make me feel better about the idea of "taking him away" from his father (albeit they don't have any contact currently anyway; his father's choice).

Ignore. He doesn't get to dictate where you live. Settle yourself where you have a support network. Not your problem that he has a child in the opposite direction, so that is not something you ever have to factor into your life.

If you already live there he can't do anything to make you move closer to him so I'd ignore that aspect and not engage with it. The focus needs to be on when he's seeing the child and the travel arrangements. You might be expected to meet half way or you could drop the child off and he could then return him home. Or you could alternate who does the travelling weekly/monthly so it's shared.
You are going to have to do some travelling but like others have said am hour isn't really that much, I've done that for work before for years and it was fine.

How often does he see his other DC? Eow? So you'd be expected to live somewhere that's inconvenient for you so that its more convenient for him for two measly days per fortnight?

You'd be crazy to move away from your support network. An hour is nothing.

Absolutely ignore.

He's being entirely unreasonable.

You will have to share travelling, but right now the baby is tiny and it's in your best interests and therefore the baby's to be exactly where you want to be and have support. No baby won't be travelling in the car every weekend - the norm is every other weekend when older but right now that's not applicable. But yes as time goes on you'll share travelling.

Your relationship is over and he has no say in where you live.

Another reason to not listen to a word he says is that sadly over time he's likely to drift off anyway.

It must feel crap to not only have your ds live in a different house but an hour away. I would try to compromise on travelling where possible so that you can have an amenable partnership parenting your son.

But he can't force you to live nearer given the circumstances of no other links to the area etc.

And yes he can't make you move.

He can in the future take it to court to share travelling, but it won't even be every weekend.

I moved nearly three hours away from my ex, he was really not happy, said he was going to try for custody. He thought he'd have a share of my dh salary as maintenance, when he found out he wouldn't he then decided custody wasn't a great idea but I shouldn't move because it wasn't convenient for him.
My answer was, tough I'll move in the best interests of the children. We do share pick ups and drop offs though.

Personally I think YAB a bit U but I appreciate I will be in a minority here. I think the onus should be on the person that moves to do the travelling and I think you are prioritising your relationships and your sons relationships with other people over your sons relationship with his dad. Especially as he is so young, I doubt he will be having overnights away from you? So you moving away will definitely limit his contact.

Surely you knew your partner had another child and that would limit you geographically when you were with him? So I disagree with the OP that says that he has another child is not your problem.

I don't get the 'surely you knew he had another child' argument. The other child and his ex moved away from him after we got together. There are also a lot of things I didn't know about him as a person...

Bingoitsadingo - the OP stated one of the reasons for moving was for the support network she'd have from friends and family - 'support' I doubt she was or will be getting from her ex to raise their DS. It's for the DS's benefit.

And the idea of being tied to an area because thats where his other DC lives is unreasonable - what if they moved regularly or across the world - would the OP be obliged to follow?

If a woman came on and said her exh had moved then she would be told he had to make the effort to travel as he had been the one to move. Of course its your choice where you live but you must be prepared to travel at least half of the time to allow contact.

Personally I think YAB a bit U but I appreciate I will be in a minority here. I think the onus should be on the person that moves to do the travelling

^I agree. You chose to move away, then you should do the travelling.

The other child and his ex moved away from him after we got together.
Which presumably is why he is trying to stop the same thing happening again.

@thatwouldbeanecumenicalmatter No of course the OP wouldn't be obliged to follow. But I'd hold the same view about the other child's parent - moving them away from their parent without discussion/agreement is unreasonable.

I understand why you want to move. And if there's a big back story of abuse, unreasonable behaviour, him playing no active role in parenting, etc etc then that obviously tips the balance of what's reasonable. But in the absence of that information, yes I think it's unreasonable to move a child miles away from their other parent.
It seems obvious to me that when you have a child with someone, whether you stay in a relationship with them or not, it is in the childs interests for the parents to be near to each other until the child is an adult. Obviously in an ideal world you would be able to compromise where that location is. When there are 'fixed' factors that you know about ahead of time (another existing child, a job with an inflexible location, other family responsibilities, etc) then there may well be less compromises to be had.

Although I guess you probably have a pretty good model of how much responsibility he'll take for your child based on what he does with his other child. If he doesn't step up then obviously being further away is more reasonable. If he wants to take on responsibility then IMO YWBU to move away and stop that.

I can't stay where we previously lived as it was in the middle of nowhere. Where I live now is one of the very few places I can transfer my job roles. If I move half way my commute to work would be longer, I would know nobody, I would be away from my support network (which includes childcare twice a week for my son and very affordable living for us both). I haven't said once that I'm not willing to travel. I am happy to, I just don't see how he can dictate a radius in which I should live for the next 18 years of my life. That seems like madness to me.

You said in your OP that you were scared they would ask you to travel some weekdays and every weekend which you cant afford to do. But EOW and 1 week night would not be uncommon.

Personally I think YAB a bit U but I appreciate I will be in a minority here. I think the onus should be on the person that moves to do the travelling

^I agree. You chose to move away, then you should do the travelling.

While this argumemt seems logical, it's not necessarily how it works. My DB's partner moved 4 hours away from the 2 men who'd fathered her children. She was on benefits and went somewhere she had no family or friends. As she had all the children, court rule was that the Dad's were reponsible for all the travelling. I believe it was a deliberate move to stop them having access because that is effectively what happened, certainly with my DBs child who was a baby. In the end, it was easier both practically and emotionally to stop going and just keep a watch from a distance.

Can you meet halfway with him? Makes more sense. But tbh an hours drive isn't much, and if he thinks it is, sod him, isn't his child worth the drive?

What sort of Dad is he?

Are you gou g to fight overnights and holidays?