AIBU to think that parental responsibility should become dormant if an absent parent doesn't bother?

[TurnTurnTurn]

My mind has been turning this over all morning now after another thread on this board about a single parent being asked for a "consent to travel" letter from the other (absent, alcoholic) parent.

From the wider replies on the other thread, it seems that the current law in this area is a blunt instrument and not always fit for purpose. It sounds like those with ill-intent could easily get around it (fake letters and other comms) but that many traveling as part of normal life are being adversely affected, esp. single parents.

I do agree with the principle of the law requiring input and oversight of decision-making around DC overall, and generally it benefits the child to keep both parents involved, but I know how insulting and demeaning it can feel as the sole parent to be asked repeatedly for the permission of a "deadbeat" or otherwise permanently absent ex for some DC life-decision. These requests can come from schools, GPs, clubs as well as staff at airports and other border points.

From a single parent perspective, it would be useful if there was a way in which parental responsibility went into "dormancy" if the absent parent were entirely uninvolved in the child's life. So, for example, if there were no shared residency, no attempt to arrange or maintain contact, and no child maintenance paid over a certain number of years, PR would automatically become dormant, unless the absent parent later successfully applied for a court order to revive it.

As a poster on the other thread indicated, this isn't just about people being irritated at another layer of bureaucracy and box ticking to satisfy a one-size-fits-all law, there are single parents who are afraid to contact ex partners because they are dangerous or unable to contact them because they're entirely off the radar.

I understand that it is very, very hard to get PR permanently removed. I imagine it would also be a long, involved and expensive process which would likely inflame some already volatile situations.

Would a "use it or lose it" approach to PR with a dormancy option be fairer, simpler and easier to administer?

NB I'm not a lawyer. I'm a single parent wondering if and how the current system could be improved so that normal people living normal lives aren't pointlessly stymied and restricted to no one's benefit.

I don’t understand how they can manage to take student loans from people so easily but with child maintenance they somehow can’t find their arse with both hands. Apparently mothers raising children don’t need money in the same way the SLC do.

SoloMummy you must accept that some fathers don’t actually want to be fathers though? I’ve got the messages from my ex where he says he doesn’t want to be a dad, and that he never will be one. That he doesn’t want to see the children. It’s his own choice. He hasn’t been stopped. Why should he still have PR in that case?

There's some real horror stories out there - thanks for sharing. This clearly goes beyond travel and the other areas I was thinking about in the first post. I hadn't even considered absent parent access to child data (health and education) - StripeyDeckchair's point about GDPR is interesting to note, in terms of older kids.

WeeNippy - I see what your point. I was looking at the payment of maintenance as one of several possible indicators that someone is still giving some level of parental support to a child. There's going to be a whole load of others too and I think considering some combination of all on a case by case basis would probably be most sensible. Paying maintenance is part of the bigger picture but doesn't make someone into an active parent on its own.

I had the feeling there must be quite a few people in DimplesToadfoot or ControlledScouse's position (what total shits!), given the way some abusers behave over all other aspects of divorce and child arrangements.

I feel like contacting single parents' charities and legal guidance sources to ask whether they or anyone else campaigns on this area (or has done in the past), and where they see the opportunities and obstacles being in the law. It just seems so badly thought-through in many ways.

I absolutely agree OP. I would go further. It should be possible to absolutely revoke PR, including where the absent parent was married (what difference does that make, what, more patriarchal ownership?!).

What's the point of an absent parent having control over address, medical and schooling where they're demonstrably otherwise totally disinterested in the child? It's nothing but pure control of the other parent mother and results in utter wastes of family financial resources and Family Court time.

Having looked into this myself (knowing this issue is coming towards me) I've discovered that it's possible to obtain a prohibited steps order restricting the exercise of PR. Not easy or guaranteed, but there does seem to be the beginnings of a mechanism there and a growing willingness by the judiciary to engage with it.

If someone can be declared legally dead after a certain time I don't see why you can't declare them legally absent too.

I don’t understand how they can manage to take student loans from people so easily but with child maintenance they somehow can’t find their arse with both hands. Apparently mothers raising children don’t need money in the same way the SLC do.

It's not that they can't, it's that there is no political will to do so. Even when a lot of the maintenance owed was owed to the Secretary of State (in previous set up only the first £20 went to the RP if they were on benefits, the rest went to the SoS to go toward said benefits) there was no desire to really push for maintenance

I've posted the list of powers the CMS already have on here a few times and people are always shocked. They have the powers. There is just no political will to use them.

I’ve travelled solo with my DS overseas a lot, probably once a year, and have never been challenged.

May I ask, if the Absent Parent, who’s had zero contact didn’t know you or the child was travelling how could they stop you?

YANBU AT ALL

TSSDNCOP - If they want to stop you, and are aware of your plans, the other parent can apply for a court order that stops you taking the kids out of the country.

If the absent parent isn't on the scene and simply doesn't care, I don't know what happens after the conversation with the border staff if you don't have the required written permission. Like you, I've never been stopped for this despite being a frequent traveller around Europe.

Why not rescind if no maintenance is paid?

May I ask, if the Absent Parent, who’s had zero contact didn’t know you or the child was travelling how could they stop you?

It’s that the airport will stop you if you don’t have permission, whether they are absent or not doesn’t come into it as legally you’re suppose to have permission off everyone with PR regardless of whether they are absent or not.

Interesting that it isn't clear about GDPR Stripe and PR Lyra. It's clear as mud and doesn't seem to be straightforward for schools. My ex is pompous and entitled and despite not seeing his kids for years, probably harrass school about his rights under PR (I can't bear to ask them if he does). They offered my child a meeting to discuss but of course child found that daunting and declined.

Cactus The way I deal with it with my girls is to point out to them that it doesn't change anything in their lives.

It doesn't change their school subjects, or their performance. It doesn't affect their day-to-day life. It doesn't mean they have to see him or talk to him.

We've now asked their school that they don't even tell the girls about any requests he makes.

In many ways all him getting a copy of their reports does is show that they are doing brilliantly well without him and don't need him

How can an absent parent stop the other parent from taking their children abroad? How would the absent parent know?

It’s that the airport will stop you if you don’t have permission

How could the airport know if you're still in a relationship or not?

I've travelled with DD without my DP and DD had DPs surname

How can an absent parent stop the other parent from taking their children abroad? How would the absent parent know?

Some are absent from their child's lives, but still take an interest in disrupting it

For example through friends and family in common my ex most likely knows I'm taking my girls to a wedding abroad this summer. He could, in theory, try and stop that.

Some absent parents will also go to court and claim fear of their ex running off with the kids abroad, get a prohibited steps order preventing holidays and then fuck off themselves.

But they don’t Pumpkin, that’s my point. I’ve travelled loads with DS and never once been challenged. Also when DS has travelled solo with school we haven’t both been asked for permission.

I suppose they might, but I’m interested whether anyone has been stopped?

Good point Lyra, absent yet close enough.

Yanbu op. I definitely think something needs to be done re this and in other areas. I had to see and pay for a solicitor to get DD a passport and sign a legal form (different country then). It was so ironic I had to pay for declaring his absence and he never pays maintenance either 🙄
Like a double whammy.

Thanks Lyra very good thought. My ex made a short-lived fuss that the kids needed his help with homework etc... They then went on to do well without his input so it's a good way to reframe it .Mine were worried about uni applications and him knowing where they might go, but I don't think UCAS form goes on record. I assume he can go in and talk to staff... But yes, I tried to play it down with them and remind them they had 100% control over not seeing him even if he could see records. They did agree to give particular authorized absences a generic label.so he didn't know the details.

I think the idea is well-intentioned but it could be misused and tricky to implement. How would you prove lack of contact? How would you guard against an abusive partner who has gained residency (as some do) blocking contact and not giving bank details and forcing the dormancy of PR?

I'm another single parent who has travelled widely with kids and never been asked for a letter of permission from ex. The only time I ever have to name him is on a passport application, school don't care...

I’ve heard of people being stopped and according to the gov. Uk website it is child abduction if you don’t have consent from the other parent. I just know I would be one of the unlucky ones! We haven’t been abroad yet but are due to go for the first time this year.

It's the luck of the draw if you get questioned at the border or not but some might not want to risk it as it's a loss of money if you get stopped.

PR should be taken away if the NRP makes no attempt at contact for x years, maybe 2 or 3.

My ex used to love being able to control us. Once he gave me permission to take DD out of the country to visit the UK but then called border control on the day we were travelling. Got to passport control at the airport and were stopped but thankfully they eventually decided, after contacting him, that he didn't have a good reason to stop us but we missed our flight and had to get a later one. Later on he used his power of not granting consent to stop medical treatment for DD which was the worst thing but it was the thing that convinced the courts to give me sole custody finally.

I often feel alone in this situation but now realise I'm not. Some genuinely upsetting stories - no holidays no maintenance :-(. In some ways then I am lucky, I have residence order so don't need his permission and he does (although I'm crossing my fingers) pay his maintenance. Yes in these cases parental responsibility should be removed

My ex has chosen to not see my child. I have no idea where he lives now and he is free to move wherever he wants to me, in the other hand, would love to move to Australia but I can't as I'd need his consent. He's a prick and he wouldn't give it.

My son doesn't want his last name and hasn't been known by it since the age of 6 when he was getting very, very upset to have a different name to me and one that belonged to a father he didn't see. He wants to change it legally, again, ex won't let him.

I think once they make that choice to not see their children, regardless of whether they pay or not, then they should lose PR.