Separated parents of MN: Would you tell your ex if your child was hospitalised?

[PeeAche2]

My husband has young children with his ex partner and recently one of them has suffered a nasty accident which left them unconscious. They had to go to hospital in an ambulance.

My husband wasn't informed until the following day, after his child had been discharged. He also wasn't informed of the extent of the injuries (the unconsciousness and the fact that the child now requires reconstructive surgery)

We don't live in the same town as the children, because mum moved away but my husband has them 50% of time. The children do not have their own mobile phones.

The court order doesn't specify that mum has to tell dad about accidents, just that he is to be "consulted" on matters of health and education. So, I guess she isn't breaking any rules.

What do others think? Is this reasonable behaviour?

Their divorce was acrimonious and they don't get on (understatement).

Yes he should have been told. My marriage ended due to DV and my ex was (briefly) under a restraining order but even under those circumstances (and outside of the terms of the order) I would consider he had a right to be kept informed. I have always told him if our DD has been hospitalised.

Both my GC have been in different hospitals recently. It was a 1 carer rule. Would he have turned up at the hospital insisting to be let in? Or insisted she came out so he could swap, so there might be a gap in what the doctor was saying? Would would he have done with the knowledge?
Ideally both parents should share that information, but there are sometimes valid reasons why they wouldn't. As long as he is now being fully kept informed, it should be let go. He can get access to the child's medical records, so knows about what is needed after the surgery.

Being generous I suppose the ex could have been overwhelmed/have forgotten her phone charger etc, but on the whole I think it's pretty poor on her part.

My DD is 17 and ex and I only speak if we absolutely have to but I would immediately let him know if something like that happened.

I'm not sure what he would have done with the information. However, it strikes me as an odd idea that just because he can't do anything, it means he has no right to know.

My step children are out-and-out forbidden from talking about my husband while on mum's time. If they do talk about him, they must call him by his first name. (Which I personally don't agree with at all, but I understand it divides opinion on MN.)

I think, even if he couldn't be in the hospital, that my husband would have liked to have been given the opportunity to reassure his child. Check in. Tell them it's going to be okay. That he loves them. Normal parent things when your child is hurt and vulnerable.

When he realised his child had been in an ambulance and then spent the night in hospital, he cried and said "I just want to scoop them up and make it better"

So, again, I don't know what he would have done with the information. Nothing practical and useful, I suppose.

It really isn't that he wanted the opportunity to storm into the hospital and start shouting bloody murder at his ex wife.

Somewhere along the way, it has been forgotten that this is about a child and not just about his ex wife. She doesn't own the children. They aren't just an appendage to her. They don't cease to exist, except in relation to her.

It's also a bit weird that so many people here think the extent to which he's allowed to parent his children should be linked to how much of his fault the divorce was.

They divorced because of a misdemeanour on her part, not his. But it isn't relevant because it certainly doesn't make her any less of a mother.

I have a really lovely relationship with my own father and I did find him to be a source of warmth and comfort when I was growing up. I didn't find him to be "less" than my mum in any way. I don't think it's that unusual for a father to actually be a caring parent. 🤷🏻‍♀️

It depends on the history. I would always tell my ex if ds was injured or sick.

unfortunately the only time this has happened ds was 2 and caught swine flu. He was admitted to paed. ICU and I text ex who said 'I've put the car away. I'm sure you can cope." and hung up on me.

So while I would still text, I have every moral right not to bother.

It never fails to amaze me what absolute cunts people can be. Sounds like someone you were well rid of.

Jesus, my ex sees the kids maybe twice a year, we had a horrendously acrimonious, dragged out divorce that I had to take him to court 3 times for, but I'd tell him.

Maybe not every bump, scrape, minor illness. But (when I'd dealt with the immediate situation) I'd definitely drop him a text. 100%.

What sort of message are you giving your kids that you wouldn't inform their VERY INVOLVED other parent of an accident that required an ambulance and/or surgery??? 😡

So true & unfortunately many women think that children belong to them & if they have been hurt by divorce/separation then it gives them the right to decide how much access fathers are entitled to, it is the child's right to be with both parents not the other way around. My DSS lives with us & has done for 12 years, I’m still shocked by how many people think this is somehow not right & assume that my husband must have cruelly taken him from his mother never once questioning why he was removed from her in the first place.

This a joke? Of course he should have been told when it happened! I don't get on with my ex, can't even stand to be around him but no way in hell would I keep it from him if our DC ended up in hospital.

In practice though, i can imagine a scenario where if i was dealing with a serious health crisis, i wouldn't want someone making life harder for me, demanding updates, questionning my decisions, questionning how this ever could have ahappened in the first place, and generally being a prick. And I would choose for him to be outraged over having him make the situation more complicated

It depends who's health crisis it is though surely? The mum dealing with her own health, she can tell who she does or doesn't like.

But this child is equally the father's child and he should be informed. It's his child's health crisis, not hers.

I'm not having for a moment that the mothers of MN would be happy to not be informed their child was unconscious in hospital or they would happily accept the reasoning from the dad of 'i was too stressed to tell you'.

My ex was like that, I called him once to say our child was in hospital, he said he had no money so I transferred £100 into our joint account (was not long after he had left so it hadn't been closed and we both had access). He didn't turn up and the next day I saw the amount spent on dinner out, when questioned he'd gone out for dinner with his girlfriend instead. Some men just aren't interested, but I'll always text so he can't hold it against me.

I see Mumsnet is, once again, assuming that any stepmother must be some kind of monster.

OP, you've done nothing wrong and yes, if there is no abuse involved, no restraining order etc then of course your partner's ex should have told him his child was in hospital. He has as much right to know as she does. It's his child and he is an involved parent.

She’s obviously nuts if she makes the children refer to him by his name.
She’s completely wrong to withhold any information from him.

Still, he holds some responsibility for their poor relationship.

The court orders don’t really help. Angry people still do whatever they like and get away with it.

You are doing everything right. I think I did, also. But it’s a situation very much out of our control.

Yes I would, because that's the decent thing to do. The other parent is exactly that, the parent, irrespective of personal feelings.

No because I haven't heard a word from him for the last 6 years.