To think that Resident Parents should have more rights than Non Resident Parents.

[Theemeperorsnewclothes]

I think we’ve gone too far into the patriarchy of the UK, political systems, family Courts, CMS. Non resident parents (over 90% male/fathers) have exactly the same rights as resident parents (over 90% female/mothers). A child centred approach is allowing the person who knows the child best to advocate for them. The resident parent should have more rights, with regards to making decisions/advocating for their child/children in the political/legal system in the UK. They, and their children should be protected in legislation.

These women that you say have constant worry and anxiety how much effort did they take in ensuring their partner was totally on board and willing to me a normal functioning parent before they had a child with them?

How many threads on here and issues away from MN with women who have long term issues with partners before they have children but ignore all because 'I want a baby' and then want more children

Then after the fact complain?

You say the legislation isn't being administered correctly then say there needs to be a change in legislation to fix this. How will a change in legislation effect administration by courts and judges? You need a systemic approach. Things like increased funding for legal aide and family courts so its easier for parents to access the courts, removal of barriers to access, simplified language guides to the relevant laws and systems. Maybe some small changes to the law if you have to currently apply seperately for each disputed issue. Some increase in judicial ability to extend the application or specific issue orders on a wider and ongoing basis.

Seriously sorry I didn't release my XH was abusive before I was pregnant with our third. Sorry my friend didn't work out her XH was abusive until she was divorced and in therapy for a year. You have no idea how abuse works if you can post victim blaming crap like this. Lucky you.

Yanbu, the current system allows to many abusive fathers to much access and control. It's a disgrace! I speak as someone who experienced this as a child, and from everything I've read, the system hasn't improved, it's arguably gotten worse.

In general, it's good to have two people having input into big decisions about children. One person might miss something obvious or get a bee in their bonnet or whatever. Obviously there will be situations where that's not the case because one person is being obstructive, difficult, delusional etc. And I suspect OP is right to think that's more likely to be the non resident parent, because they won't know the kids as well.

But I don't think the advantages to the majority of children of having two parents involved in decision making should be lost because of a minority of unreasonable parents. It would also put children where the resident parent is the unreasonable one at heightened risk as the other parent can't advocate for them as effectively.

While I’m not fully on board with OP’s suggestion, I think you’re in a better position than she describes because your ex may be awful, but at least he just stays out of your way. The PR system as it stands means that if he ex suddenly decided he did have a view, and rang the Local Authority to say that he does not agree with the secondary school you and DS have chosen, or if god forbid your DS was hospitalised again and he turned up at the hospital demanding a different course of treatment then the LA or hospital would have to treat your views equally, and you would have to drag it through the courts to resolve.

@MulberryBushRoundabout Yes, agreed.

I think both parents should have a say to protect the child.

However there does need to be a better system regards parents who don't agree with- whether they live together or not.

An example of this is where a parent refuses a child an assessment for send, medical tests recommended by a dr, braces etc.

Because in that example it could work against the child's best interests if one parent refusing means it can't happen.

Yes - another example of here resistant parent needs a system to support their day to count more. Forgot to mention schooling in my post.

If it's a case that parents live 10 miles apart and parent a wants a school 1 mile from their home and parent 2 wants one in the middle generally catchment and space available will sort that. But where a latent lives hours away and wants to dictate something that doesn't impact them but negatively impacts the parent and child involved there's need to be a mediation system set up to resolve in a timely manner.

I agree with you op . I was in a situation where my ex had an affair when dd1 was 3 months old . He then saw her every few months, then dropped contact when she was 5 . She hasn’t seen or heard from him for 20 years. If he had reappeared when she was say 14, it would have been ridiculous for him to have had input into schooling etc .

I hear you OP. My ex was outraged I divorced him and despite doing the absolute bare minimum of parenting, moving 3 hours away and never ever having anything to do with the life admin of his kids, he has derailed some extra curricular stuff for one of them as he doesn’t want my partner paying for his kids. He could pay himself - he’s minted, but if there’s a way to have a dig at me then he will.

I’ve had to do a specific issues order, and drag him to court just for a fecking school trip, for which he has no other objections.

The question I suggest is how a non resident parents rights can be enforced.

Clearly we dont want NRP's able to plat the fool over things like holidays abroad without good reason.

On the other hand my ex believed our son had a milk allergy and sent him off to a practitioner whose techniques were unsupported by scientific literature rather than the GP so I put my foot down, talked to the School and GP and made the quack aware that she was not to see my son again.

Discuss

“Parental alienation” is the most terrifying phrase a caring, protective parent can ever hear in a family court setting.

It is the trump card played by an abuser to silence genuine concerns coming from the parent who is only trying to protect her child - often she has left him for domestic abuse and yet her children are forced by court to be with him, unsupervised and overnight.

When they come home traumatised and disclosing abusive behaviours she has a dilemma - to report to SS will add fuel to his allegations of parental alienation, yet how else can she protect them?

In reality she can’t protect them at all. SS will take his lies over the children’s testimony every time.

They then turn their attention on the protective parent, using the “parental alienation” accusation to effectively shut her up.

The court will follow the tone set by SS.

Behind closed doors the abuser will punish the children for “telling tales” and the children learn that there is no point telling anyone about what they are suffering because absolutely no one will make it stop. 😭

I think it’s impossible to generalise for all divorced couples as there’s so many different patterns of living post divorce.

However I think that there should be some sort of document that a RP can fill out after say 2 years no contact which allows them solo rights over stuff like schooling, taking kids abroad etc A surprising number of stories involve a NRP having control over issues like schools when they haven’t even seen the kids in years.

In my case it looks like I have more power but that’s because my ex leaves all the decisions to me and wouldn’t be arsed to discuss or research things. He knows I will make the best decision I can and I’m not spiting him with my choices. I suspect that it’s a common scenario that works well because the NRP isn’t abusive just cba.

@AgileGreenSeal "In reality she can’t protect them at all. SS will take his lies over the children’s testimony every time."

Really? Every time? You've been involved in every SS case so you've seen this first-hand? Wow, you must have been busy.

It does have the same weight at the moment though. I.e. I cannot register a school choice unless the second parent is in agreement.

I agree that the court is likely to side with me once it comes in front of the judge, but the current delay in just getting the first directions hearing is around 12 months - and then 6 to 12 months to next hearings.

Or is used to being the one to carry out the lion's share of EVERYTHING and is being constantly obstructed by the deadbeat non resident non maintenance paying parent who uses their rights to further control their ex.

see. it works both ways.

But if ops rules were in place, then one parent would have the power. What if it was the parent who you deem to be in the wrong. Then what?

I can see how some of the men written about on MN would make this attractive, but I don't think I can get onboard with one parent having all the rights.

Saying that, if I believe you are a danger to my child's physical or menta well-being (with good reason), I will disengage and you can take me to court.

What rights do you think you are not being afforded as the RP?

You say advocating for the child, What exactly do you mean by this, what is preventing you from doing so?

How on earth would the RP not know the child’s needs best? “They don’t necessarily have the child’s best interests at heart” please explain.

I think you are missing the point here. It’s about getting away from ‘power and control’ and truly putting the child at the centre. I don’t know many mothers who don’t want the best for their children.

Family courts are starting to default to 50/50 care without truly understanding the impact of this. CMS operate on a “something is better than nothing” approach. The UK as a society vilify and demonise Single mothers. Fathers have all the rights but none of the enforced/legally binding responsibilities of being a parent. A mother would be in jail for neglect or abandonment if she did not meet her child’s needs. The father? He can do what he wants, he can even not pay child maintenance, he can dictate when he will have any parental responsibility… or not. He will be supported in the control and abuse, and the ‘system’ will still protect him, and persecute you and your children. Absent for a week, a month, a year, doesn’t matter. He will still have all the same rights and means to abuse. Surely we will all look back on this one day and be astounded and ashamed that it was ever allowed to happen.

The law should make no assumptions about the parenting capacity of the non resident parent. In your case OP the resident parent may be better able to make important decisions but in other families it could be the other way around.

If parents can't agree what is in the child's best interests they need a neutral 3rd party, not any automatic bias in favour of one.

When there are only 2 people involved it can't be a democracy - you either agree or disagree and any rule that assumes more weight to one person's opinion is therefore totally removing all power from the other - if a choice is binary then it makes no difference if the weighting was 51:49 or 80:20 or 99:1 - there will always be one winner and one loser. So 50:50 weight of opinion with a neutral 3rd party to arbitrate is the only fair way unless one parent is so utterly awful that the courts strip then of their parental status.

Being the resident parent doesn’t automatically mean you know your child best.
being the resident parent doesn’t automatically mean you care about your child more. Nor does it mean you care about your child at all, in fact.
Not all RP are fanastic parents. Not all NRP are terrible/work shy/disinterested etc.