Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Help please - difficult issue around child access and terminal illness

493 replies

Unhappytraveler · 04/11/2019 12:20

Hoping someone might be able to help with the following...not really a AIBU but have posted for traffic:

I'm going to have to be slightly vague about the info as it is a very sad and sensitive situation but the crux of it is that someone close to me (let's call them A) has in the last few days been given a terminal cancer diagnosis. 3-6 months was suggested but they aren't doing too well and sadly we think it might be a lot less than that. There is no possibility of a cure and they have chosen not to have any treatment which might give them a few more months but cause more pain etc.

A has a grandchild who they haven't seen for several years due to the fact that As child B ( the non resident parent/ NRP) was under criminal investigation - the offence did not relate to the child but the child's (resident) parent said they would no longer agree to visitation or contact with nrp or their family, including A. Prior to that B had 40/60 access.

B decided (and this isn't intended to be a debate about rights and wrongs of that decision) to step away temporarily a couple of years ago rather than fight for contact but with every intention of re establishing contact in the near future...obviously the current unexpected situation now means that there is some urgency to do so for As sake.

At the time B was told they could go to court or that social services would be prepared to try and mediate to facilitate contact. SS advised that from a child protection perspective they had no concerns over access.

So what I'm trying to help the family with is what's the quickest way to achieve some contact with the child for A whilst they are still with us. Clearly B could apply to court but I'm anticipating that's a process that could take a while especially if the other parent refuses to engage ( which is a possibility) and time is not on As side.

Is there any way social services could assist? Given that previously the family were advised they might (but 2 or so years on and with the current traumatic situation no one can remember who to contact)

OP posts:
Rainbowshine · 05/11/2019 09:47

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

spanglydangly · 05/11/2019 09:57

Thankfully blubelle your feelings are, like your comments, irrelevant.

And therein lies the problem you don't care about other people's feelings, in this case the child's!

Sorry but B couldn't be arsed to see their child but now A is dying feels guilty, not the child's problem, the child or the NRP don't have to dance to Bs tune.

No reason whatsoever that they shouldn't of dealt with this early and maintained contact.

chamenanged · 05/11/2019 09:57

Social services aren't the make a wish foundation Confused why on Earth would they help with this? You could try phoning 999 after that, if your 'strategy' doesn't work.

Original poster
Unhappytraveler · 05/11/2019 10:18

Why on earth would I be concerned for the feelings of an internet random? You're just words on a screen.

Let's face it little concern has been shown for my feelings in the vituperative and unnecessary comments about A, B or myself.

It's rather a stretch to say that because I'm not concerned about an anonymous poster on here that I think only of myself.

And as to why I'm here...that was clear in my OP. I didn't request opinions on whether to get in contact, or a debate on the rights and wrongs of B and RP. I was posting because we didn't have much time and I was trying to gather information.

We now have a plan in place with various options depending on the RPs response and subsequent developments.

OP posts:
holidayhelpp · 05/11/2019 10:34

Plan all you want, A is not going to get to see that child. Thank goodness.

Original poster
Unhappytraveler · 05/11/2019 10:36

Maybe they will holidayhelp. Maybe they won't. Either way it won't be your decision and your conjecture is no more than that. It certainly isn't fact.

OP posts:
spanglydangly · 05/11/2019 10:57

It may not be fact but it will turn to fact!

Simple question just why had B not bothered previously? I mean it it meant so much to A, why had it become important now? Surely it was always important?

Derbee · 05/11/2019 11:02

A will not see the child. And hopefully B will be kept away too. And the child, RP and family can carry on with their lives.

Butchyrestingface · 05/11/2019 11:02

Let's face it little concern has been shown for my feelings in the vituperative and unnecessary comments about A, B or myself

Nobody knows who the hell you are in this scenario. That’s what all the cloak and dagger stuff does.

Derbee · 05/11/2019 11:05

little concern has been shown for my feelings in the vituperative and unnecessary comments about A, B or myself

But A, B and U are horrible people that want to play with a child’s emotions as a distraction from facing death like reasonable adults

Original poster
Unhappytraveler · 05/11/2019 11:06

It always has been important. I haven't stated or implied otherwise. The only posts claiming it wasn't important are those by posters fabricating scenarios to fit their own skewed agendas.

OP posts:
Original poster
Unhappytraveler · 05/11/2019 11:08

Derbee as you're the one constantly throwing insults around and having posts deleted maybe you should look at your own conduct before vilifying and name calling others?

OP posts:
Derbee · 05/11/2019 11:09

If it had always been important, A and/or B would have tried to get in touch way before now

Derbee · 05/11/2019 11:10

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

spanglydangly · 05/11/2019 11:10

It always has been important. I haven't stated or implied otherwise. The only posts claiming it wasn't important are those by posters fabricating scenarios to fit their own skewed agendas.

But not important enough to do anything constructive about it? So you're sure that the application will be successful because B is Simon the right? So why didn't they apply before? Guilt is making them do this, not the real want to see their child .... shame on them.

spanglydangly · 05/11/2019 11:13

Not sure where Simon cane from it should say so in the right!

theWarOnPeace · 05/11/2019 11:13

I would just like to know why B doesn’t see their child. If you think it’s irrelevant to the situation, then you’re being ridiculous. Using words like ‘vituperative’ might make you feel clever, but you’ve got to be as ignorant and obtuse as it gets!

FWIW my DSD’s mum abandoned her. I know first hand the pain of a child being dropped by their own mother. Your assumption that B being a woman would make us all go easier, is laughable! Truly. But you can justify B dumping their child? If someone had made contact when DSD was 12 to say that her mum’s mum was sick and wanted to see her, they would have been told where to go.

MrsCollinssettled · 05/11/2019 11:13

I'm making the assumption that B is an addict and took the decision to step away until they were clean and have been living with A. This might explain the plan to regain contact at a later date and why the GPs haven't been a real presence in dc's life since the breakup.

Like others you need to be looking at the long term and what is in the best interests of the child. If the child agrees to see A out of a desire to please and not cause conflict (most children are like this at that age) they may well come to resent B, B's family and friends for putting them in that position. Even if A is too poorly to write you could record video messages on phones/tablets. If as you seemed to suggest earlier they weren't well enough to record a message will A actually be well enough for a visit, particularly as it won't be arranged immediately.

It's a horrible situation and you can understand the desire to be doing something/taking your frustrations out on something but this is probably not the best use of your energies in A's final weeks.

Original poster
Unhappytraveler · 05/11/2019 11:16

You actually wished someone dead Derbee. That is pretty low, even by the standards of others on here.

And what you and other anonymous posters think you know is irrelevant. We know the facts. I'm not getting into a pointless war of words in trying to explain further especially when that wasn't the point of the thread. I have better things to do.

OP posts:
Derbee · 05/11/2019 11:18

So a 12 year old child needs to be the one to try and make everything ok for the grownups around them? The child is responsible for helping A die happier, and appeasing B’s guilt for their abandonment /criminal convictions that have affected the child’s life.

Why on earth would the RP allow this circus to happen, with their child the unwilling centrepiece?

Original poster
Unhappytraveler · 05/11/2019 11:22

Derbee try to keep your posts accurate. It's quite boring having to correct your relentless hyperbole.

OP posts:
theWarOnPeace · 05/11/2019 11:23

I saw Derbee’s post before it was deleted. How did you get ‘wishing someone dead’ from that? They seemed to just say that they hope that A passes without seeing the child, for the child’s sake - for everyone’s sake really. That was what I took from the post.

Umimatly B has ditched their kid and had made no legal effort to resume contact up to this point. A’s very upsetting situation is not a fair reason to now force contact. At any rate, you won’t be able to force contact, so it’s a moot point if ever there was one.

theWarOnPeace · 05/11/2019 11:26

Unhappytraveler

You only seem to be engaging with this thread now to argue. Are you going to answer any questions or take any advice on board at all? Otherwise what’s the point?

spanglydangly · 05/11/2019 11:27

*I saw Derbee’s post before it was deleted. How did you get ‘wishing someone dead’ from that? They seemed to just say that they hope that A passes without seeing the child, for the child’s sake - for everyone’s sake really. That was what I took from the post.

Umimatly B has ditched their kid and had made no legal effort to resume contact up to this point. A’s very upsetting situation is not a fair reason to now force contact. At any rate, you won’t be able to force contact, so it’s a moot point if ever there was*

OP this is well put and very rational , you honestly are wasting time, effort and emotion.

Derbee · 05/11/2019 11:31

@theWarOnPeace and @spanglydangly glad someone read it as it was meant!