Should grandparents have the right to access their grandchildren if the parents don't want this?

[Life2Short4Nonsense]

Came across a discussion about the rights of grandparents to see the grandchildren if this goes against the parents' wishes.

Should grandparents be able to use the courts to get access to their grandchildren or should the parents be able to decide, as long as they are fit parents?

YABU: Grandparents should have the right to have access, unless a judge decides otherwise.

YANBU: The parents should decide, unless the parents are unfit to parent.

Excellent observations!
For a while, I spent far too much time on Gransnet, home of the militant

grandparent/s, none existent introspection, thoughtfulness, consideration
and goodwill.

It absolutely is. Parental rights are just that. Parental. Parents decide.

My parents are foul. In the uk no such thing as gran parent right. My parents were involved (not for childcare but just socially) until eldest was 12. Best thing I ever did was go no contact!

Yes because on MN at least, once a baby is born it catapults the parents to the top of the pecking order and gives allows them to micromanage the behaviour of every other family member.
Misdemeanours such as wanting to hold the baby, showing affection such as calling it my baby or - shock horror - not heeding mum's expert orders (a s she has been a mother all of two weeks) seem to result in withholding the baby from its grandparents, so it makes sense for someone sensible (ie a judge) to make a decision in extreme cases.

if the law granted grandparents rights, many of us would not be able to have children. We wouldn’t be able to protect our children from the monsters because we have no proof sufficient for court.

The only people who have parental responsibility for kids are the parents. It's then up to them to decide who to encourage the kids to form relationships with, until the kids are old enough to decide for themselves.

Grandparents should not have rights, they are not THEIR children.

So in your case, it would make sense for a judge to decide your parents could not see their grandchildren, wouldn't it? It would work both ways.

I am talking about where the parents withdraw access to the grandparents (I am aware there is no law giving them this automatically) because of some of the trivia discussed every day on here. It's usually the ILs.
Not grandparents objecting to how a baby is being brought up.

It is not in the best interests of my children to see my parents. They failed miserably, I still carry the trauma. They are not getting anywhere near my kids.

i think it’s rare that grandparents get cut off thru no fault of their own (I’m sure it happens but I can’t imagine it’s common place to cut off good parents)

Parents should absolutely decide. The only exception perhaps if one of the parents were to pass away, the grandparents should still be able to see grandchild if they previously had a good relationship.

This

Id like to see the woman I have the misfortune of calling mother try and get access to my children. I regret my older DCs ever knowing her and I’m grateful my youngest has never met her.

Sadly it’s not an easy answer and one size fits all. There are plenty of loving caring grandparents who look after their grandchildren due to bad parenting. And I’m sure there are parents who withhold access for spitefulness but who gets to make that call? I certainly don’t think it should be down to an already flawed and corrupt family court.

There should be no automatic right for gps.

I would not have allowed my father access to my ds, had he still been alive.

I wouldn't have been able to demonstrate abuse to a court, but there was the relentless drip drip of misogynistic, bigoted and racist attitudes, constant belittling, undermining and nastiness.

I'd have moved a very long distance away to prevent regular contact

You are completely missing my point.

It would be dangerous and risky which is why it has never happened and never will. Parental responsibility is absolute, with good legal grounding.

Parents have ultimate responsibility for the child, therefore the decision rests with them as to how safe or otherwise a child is with other people, a child has a right to safety more than anything else, and this is more important than any perceived benefit of relationships outside the immediate family.

@ThePassageOfTime

Dear God, dont you understand the role of parents?

Yea I do understand the role of parents.

No they shouldnt. Not all damaging behavior is violent or abusive and its up to the parents who gets access to their child.

I have a difficult relationship with my parents, they have never been violent, there was never any SA, and they don't drink or take drugs, but they aren't great parents. They have a relationship with my DD on my terms, because I say so. If you asked a judge, they have never done anything wrong. If you ask my mental heath and self esteem then they definitely have.

Yes it is up to the parents.

Parents act as decision-makers for their children until their children are able to do it themselves.

Grandparents do not trump parents.

Of course there will be some parents who make decisions which may not be in the interest of the child, maybe those parents are what the OP means by fit/not fit parents.

But ultimately it is and should be the right of the parents to decide, and not strangers in a court.

well, parents can only exert that level of control for a short time anyway, so come 13 or 14, many children seek out their grandparents and then mum and dad find themselves exposed. In some cases, children never forgive the lost years, and it destroys the parents relationship with their children completely. So it isn't something to do lightly or to think you can get away with. generally, a lot of people don't.

@aerkfjherf

Fully agree with you. But that isn't the question OP asked

If there is no good reason not to then yes I think a child deserves to see their grandparents. I fell out with my parents over their treatment of my partner and step-children but I still facilitate them seeing their biological grandchildren because my sons love them. I see it as similar to when parents split up, the children’s need to see both parents is paramount, not whether the adults get along any more.

We absolutely can not trust my mother in law with our children. She has problems with alcohol, pain meds and has an incredible amount of animals, that are not trained, well cared for or safe to be around children. She was a dreadful mother to my husband, and often left him in very unsafe situations.

We’ve tried, but she is not willing to maintain simple boundaries that would help keep our children safe. She makes a lot of noise about taking us to court, but she won’t and if she did, there would be no chance of her getting anywhere. She’s met our youngest 4 times in 2 years, the postman has had more interactions with DC than that!!!

I'm sorry but your reply makes no sense.

Of course one wants a system that protects children (and parents) from abusive grandparents, but it seems that currently the system mitigates against grandparents who have been unfairly excluded by the other parent of their grandchildren.

My friends spent considerable time and money challenging their son in laws decision to prevent them from seeing their DGCs, and got nowhere until suddenly it suited him.

I wouldn't have been able to demonstrate abuse to a court, but there was the relentless drip drip of misogynistic, bigoted and racist attitudes, constant belittling, undermining and nastiness.

This is really important. When my MIL sought court protection from FIL who did all of the above exerted financial control, violence, controlled everyone in the family she did not get it. Even though a seperate sane judge gave one to SIL for much lesser levels of abuse from him towards her. The justice system has its own issues with misogyny.