Refusing to allow contact weekend to go ahead

[Notopel]

Scenario - contact weekend coming up where child (6) would normally be spending the weekend at Father’s home in London. He lives in a flat with shared entry way and staircase. There is also another child (16) living with Father who I know from social media was out socialising in central London on Saturday.

At home we live in an isolated area of South Wales, with very few neighbours and a large garden. Neither I nor child have left the house since last Tuesday.

I am extremely reluctant to allow contact to take place this weekend, not least if he passes on an infection we’ll struggle to cope as I’m a lone parent with no family or support network.

AIBU to say that contact should not proceed as planned? The country is on a lockdown for goodness sake and he wants me to take a child hundreds of miles to where there’s currently a hotspot of cases??

CAFCASS agrees with me

"Unless there are justified medical/self-isolation issues
guidance or expectation associated with leaving the house in your area – children should also maintain their usual routine of spending time with each of their parents. If there is a Child Arrangements Order in place this should be complied with unless to do so would put your child, or others at risk. This will help your child to feel a sense of consistency, whilst also reassuring them that the parent they don't always live with is safe and healthy.
✓ If you're not able to maintain your child's routine due to illness or self-isolation, or non- availability of people who ordinarily support your child’s contact, then communicate clearly and honestly with your co-parent. If it is not safe for you to communicate directly
(for example, if there has been a history of domestic abuse) then consider using a
trusted third party to help you.
✓ Think creatively about how you can support your child to stay in touch with their other parent and family members during any period of self-isolation. Skype and Facetime can be great ways to catch up and can be used to read stories, sing and play together. With older children you could also consider a watch party – where you gather online to watch a movie or video, commenting and ‘reacting’ in real time.
How to talk to your child about Covid19: “Provide facts about what has happened, explain what is going on now and give them clear information about how to reduce their risk of being infected by the disease in words that they can understand depending on their age” World Health Organisation, March 2020
✓ If any court directed spending time arrangements are missed, think about how you and your co- parent may be able to ‘make up’ your child’s time after the restrictions are lifted. Remember, any rearranged spending time arrangements should always be for your child’s benefit and should not be used as a source of tension or conflict – especially at a time when your child is likely to be feeling anxious about the effects of the pandemic."

Northern, I completely agree that parents must not hide behind rubbish excuses to withhold contact. But where there are sound reasons then the exemption doesn't apply and it IS justified.
It's about keeping people safe and stopping the spread.
Many parents will teach sensible compromises. Others are incapable of doing so because they make the argument about them and not the DCs.

TooTrusting is absolutely correct OP and I strongly suggest you discard the other alternate advice being given here.

We’re socially distancing (can’t not go out, need food and I’m on my own with dc) And as a result ds isn’t seeing his df weekly at the mo, he’s in at risk group though, and he and ds have been FaceTiming multiple times a day.

We have decided to do what’s reasonable to keep our kids safe and those at risk. Rather not kill the bloke off! If I were you I’d just keep your little one home to keep safe

How refreshing. Parents putting the DCs first, perhaps contrary to their own wishes, because it's the right thing to do FOR THE DCs.

@FenellaVelour do you have a link? I can't find it online.

I'm living in London. I wouldn't come here. We are crippled from CV.
Before I had symptoms I was walking around, avoiding people as much as humanly possible. I don't want to think about how many people that might have it now because of me.

Might also find out that by the time the weekend comes, rail and coach travel will be stopped. Nothing wrong with increasing calls and video calls. The main thing is that some type of contact remains.

And please, please, please don't do it. With all the tech in place, and your texts showing you had suggested reasonable solutions. Courts won't listen to him. The health and welfare of the child should come first. I think they have forgotten situations where parents live hundreds of miles apart.

@PanickedandFrightened sorry I don’t, I’ve lifted it directly from an email I received at work today (I work alongside the family court).

From today's Law Gazette

Edwards understands that the Ministry of Justice and the judiciary are hastily working on detailed guidance for separated parents. 'The reality is that many existing orders or agreements will have to be ripped up for the duration of this crisis; parents will have to be creative; and, if they cannot agree a new arrangement, ask for a mediator to assist e.g. via Zoom or, in extremis, for the courts to help,' she added.
Gillian Rivers, a partner at Pennington Manches Cooper, said that when Covid-19 reared its ugly head, her firm faced a sudden influx of refusal to permit previously agreed contact sessions. Rivers said judges are well aware of a parent who is 'cynically trying to manoeuvre themselves into the spotlight of their child`s eyes, putting the other parent into the shadows... I foresee any parent who believes they are outsmarting the wisdom of the family judges, by simply denying contact on the basis that they are self-isolating with the child, will be met by a robust judicial response, particularly if their denial of contact forms a pattern of historic hostility towards supporting an ongoing relationship with the other parent'.
She added: 'Whether the machinery of the courts will be strong enough to deal with the inevitable influx of enforcement applications for breach of contract remains to be seen. Although, anecdotal evidence of virtual hearings, both interim and final, is good.'

Thanks @FenellaVelour and @TooTrusting

Would you look at that? The President of the Family Division agrees with me.

www.judiciary.uk/announcements/coronavirus-crisis-guidance-on-compliance-with-family-court-child-arrangement-orders/

Children MAY move between households but do not HAVE TO where there is a sound and cogent reason not to.

@TooTrusting Thanks for your advice. I saw that too.

I’m going to give him a couple of days to calm down then suggest he sends some chocolate, toys and games for Easter and arrange some regular FaceTime calls.

There’s the link now!

Based on your OP, I find it difficult he's prioritizing seeing him in an unsafe home, which it is at the moment, rather than leaving him where he is and skyping with him more frequently.

My ex lives in London and we decided last week he wouldn't see kids till this is over. He said there was no way he'd not been exposed to the virus somewhere along the line.

He's a crap dad mostly but I think this is absolutely right atm

The government, cafcass and the legal community are very clear on this.

Yes and what they are saying is that children can be moved not that they must be moved and I read it as saying that if circumstances require it (and S Wales -> London would seem to be a case in point) they should be kept at home. The whole set of circumstances need to be considered not just on piece of advice.

MrFacey the person who said that is ignorant and ill informed. It is NOT what Cafcass says. It is NOT what the govt says and it is most certainly NOT what the legal community says.
What we are all saying is clear. Children MAY move, not MUST move, and such movement has to be safe in all the circumstances. If it is not they should stay put.
Sadly in divorces/separations people become entrenched and unreasonable. Everything becomes about them. These people will either use the situation to get one over on the other parent (eg mums refusing to allow movement when there are no risk factors) or they will believe the other parent is punishing them for no reason (eg dads insisting on movement where that is impractical/would represent a risk). They can't see the wood for the trees. Parents are parents for life. In a few weeks or months this will be over. Reduced contact for that period is not going to ruin parent-child relationships. These threads thankfully show that most parents can be reasonable. But sadly there are many who will see no reason and it will be another reason to argue. As a lawyer I do my best in these situations and take my role as potential peacemaker very seriously.

But sadly there are many who will see no reason and it will be another reason to argue.

Yes. And this is something for the courts to look at in the future, when we are through this. But this is not the time to escalate arguments, no matter how people might feel. Parents need to just grit their teeth and try to do what’s necessary to get through the next few months. Courts are not going to want to deal right now with “but they’re not really sick!” and neither will they.

In the case of the OP it’s hard to argue that it’s not eminently sensible to keep the children at home with her and make good use of FaceTime.

That link to Michael Gove isn’t exactly equivocal is it.

Indeed. Especially as he changed his mind mid-stream yesterday between two interviews.

@TooTrusting I very much doubt you are a ‘lawyer’ that would be a solicitor in the UK when you call someone ignorant & ill informed and are unable to determine basic facts from a post.

The post did not say children must move.

When that particular post you refer to was made, the UK legal community, cafcass and government were very clear on child arrangement orders.

The government and judicial system has since issued their own statement on the matter.

Get the facts straight and don’t interpret statements.

Reasonable parents will decide between themselves what is in the best interests on the child / children.

@NorthernSpirit

Oh dear.

A lawyer is a generic term. It includes solicitors and barristers. I am the former. Very much on the Roll of Solicitors. Stop being silly.

I determined all the facts from your post, thank you. It was wrong. And ignorantly so. It was made when the govt's advice had been made clear. You made a sweeping claim that the govt, cafcass and "the legal community" were all advising something they weren't. Fenella, another seasoned poster from the legal community also posted telling people to ignore posts like yours.

Your only correct statement is that reasonable parents will decide between themselves what is in the best interests on the child / children. Regrettably not all separated parents are reasonable.

Your first post said
"not up to you to interpret" the exception in children moving.
Your second post said
"Not [up to] the RP to dictate and withhold"

Your posts were demonstrably made when both the President if the Family Division and CAFCASS had published advice saying that children didn't have to move. By saying it was not up to people to interpret the exception in line with their unique circumstances you were effectively saying children had to move. CAFCASS, the family courts (via the President's statement) and the legal community are all saying that it IS for a parent to interpret. And it's also for the RP to dictate if the NRP is demanding children move in spite of obvious risks.

So here is a plate. And oh look! It's got your arse on it.

HTH

How would you feel if he decided it was in your child's best interests that actually they stay with him until all of this is over and refused to let them come back to you?

He deserves to see his children as much as you do.

MsMD of course he deserves to see his DC. But what he deserves has to be balanced against the risk. OP has already said she'd be happy to agree to it if he lived close by. But he doesn't. And her OP indicates that she was being expected to do the travel (circa 4-5 hours from rural south wakes to London). This represents a risk (along with his living arrangements).
So it's not about what he deserves. It's about what is safe.

The advice is pretty contradictory couples can not visit eachother but children can be passed between two households. I'm lucky (and extremely surprised) my ex choose to say the children should stay with me, safest for everyone as he is a keyworker and I am not, choose your children and your own safety above everything else. If something went wrong I don't think I could ever forgive myself.

@ You seriously suggesting a 6yr old child travels 200+ miles to London the Covid 19 epicentre which is KILLING people.. because father .."deserves to see his children as much as you do"?!

Multiple posts saying FaceTime - which IS dad seeing DC - until its safe .

So are you a troll or do you just struggle to read???