Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

My Father was convicted of sexual assault on 17 year old, should I let him see my kids + MORE

310 replies

Lordvampire3 · 09/11/2025 21:37

Hi Everyone,

This is extremely hard to post and I am looking for other insight of whether I am being unreasonable.

My Father was convicted and due to be let out of prison for sexual assault of a 17 year old (in the UK this is over consent age so wasnt charged as child offense)

My DP and I made the decision that he would not see our 4 kids when he leaves prison due to what he has done. I was talking to my brother today and they exploded saying I was being out of order to not let him see his grandkids because of what he did

Am I being unreasonable? For context 3 of my children are girls, 11 9 and 4 and out little boy is 3.

I have been talking to him once a week and havent found the courage to say he wont see them as I worried about the fallout, plus selfishly I didnt want to be the cause if he didnt something stupid inside (like off himself etc)

Any help would be appericated

OP posts:
AprilinPortugal · 16/11/2025 19:00

Summerlovin40 · 09/11/2025 21:51

Your father was imprisoned for sexually abusing a CHILD ( under 18) and you're wondering if he should be around your children?? I'd also be concerned that your brother thinks it's normal behaviour...

He is abhorrent, but a 17 year old is not a pre- pubescent child. There's no reason to suspect he is a paedophile. Having said that, the fact that he is a sex offender should be enough to stop him being anywhere near the grandchildren.

Givethegift · 17/11/2025 06:38

AprilinPortugal · 16/11/2025 19:00

He is abhorrent, but a 17 year old is not a pre- pubescent child. There's no reason to suspect he is a paedophile. Having said that, the fact that he is a sex offender should be enough to stop him being anywhere near the grandchildren.

Puberty doesn’t have anything to do with the definition of a child @AprilinPortugal

PyongyangKipperbang · 17/11/2025 17:12

Givethegift · 17/11/2025 06:38

Puberty doesn’t have anything to do with the definition of a child @AprilinPortugal

No but it does have everything to do with the definition of paedophile. They are sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children, that is why she made that distinction. He is clearly a dangerous sex offender and a risk to women, but that doesnt mean that he is automatically a paedophile.

Youshouldhave · 17/11/2025 17:25

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

Hoorayyou · 17/11/2025 18:32

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

Happyher · 17/11/2025 18:49

Op I feel so sorry for you. This must have been terrible for you and you must have many mixed feelings. I think you should tell him that you don’t want him seeing the kids for the foreseeable future and then start to your own feelings which much be conflicted. As others have said, find out as much as you can about his crime and conviction and what restrictions are placed on him. When you have the truth you can decide what kind of relationship you want with him, if any. Over time things might change but always put your children’s safety and your own mental health first and go with your gut feelings

Morningrepair · 18/11/2025 06:37

PyongyangKipperbang · 17/11/2025 17:12

No but it does have everything to do with the definition of paedophile. They are sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children, that is why she made that distinction. He is clearly a dangerous sex offender and a risk to women, but that doesnt mean that he is automatically a paedophile.

you have thrown in the word “pre pubescent” as though it has any place in this discussion. The law sure as heck doesn’t!

A 10 yr old girl could have started her periods @AprilinPortugal and therefore no longer “pre pubescent ”

RedToothBrush · 18/11/2025 09:57

PyongyangKipperbang · 17/11/2025 17:12

No but it does have everything to do with the definition of paedophile. They are sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children, that is why she made that distinction. He is clearly a dangerous sex offender and a risk to women, but that doesnt mean that he is automatically a paedophile.

We are into the realms of grammar policing over a sex offender, when we start talking about the definition of a paedo - all in order to 'win on the internet'.

That's pretty grim to me. And naive. And gaslighty in its own right.

This is a sex offender. It doesn't matter if you only have boys and the sex offender only targets girls. There is still the risk of grooming behaviour and normalisation of acts which are not acceptable which means other people might be at risk in the future.

We know that sex offenders do not only offend sexually. Part of their behaviour is emotional abuse in order to justify their behaviour or to get away with their behaviour. Lying and manipulation is part of sex offending. Often it's part of the thrill.

The whole point is you need to protect anyone vulnerable from this behaviour - all elements of it. That includes the bullshitting.

What's striking about the OPs scenario is precisely the point that her brother has been employed as a flying monkey to try and force his sister to allow their father back into the lives of the grandchildren - using emotional blackmail and abuse.

This is about healthy relationships and family dynamics all round. A sex offender simply doesn't have that - even if they aren't offending against their own family or ever likely to. They will be aware of what is likely to happen to their family if they are caught. They just don't care. The narcissism it takes to be a sex offender is, in itself, a bloody good reason to avoid an offender you have previously been closed to. And the risk is you stick by an offender and they do it all again and drag you all through the process again. That should be enough to make you run for the hills, and if it's not you really should be looking up FOG and seeking professional health in how to break the cycle of being vulnerable to emotional abuse.

For all the talk that 'oh I don't think I could cope, I'll kill myself ' - there's never any regard as to how family members will cope emotionally if they find out a close relative is a sex offender and how that will impact their lives and that's the thing you always should focus on. It destroys lives.

I know a family who has been affected by the subject. Kids are tweens. There's the embarrassment and shame and there's the school gossip and there's impact to what activities the kids do and who they are allowed to see and who will still play with them. It's enormous. The family are being well looked after by friends and extended family and he's no longer welcome fortunately. But it's been devastating to them.

He, of course, span the suicide thing to his mates too. What was notable was what he did - approaching certain people but not others: the ones I would describe as soft touches and not the ones who don't do bullshit. Even in this he was being manipulative and thought he could worm his way back. Fortunately, the sensible heads got wind and they told him to do one which meant the soft touches followed suit. It was an interesting real time demonstration in personality dynamics. Miraculously I believe this guy is still breathing despite all his suicide threats, though he has moved away from the area.

Clonakilla · 18/11/2025 10:31

I cannot believe there are people who think you need ‘more details’ to decide wtaf.

It is so difficult to achieve a successful prosecution for rape that it’s almost like men have immunity for sexual offences. They are so very very unlikely to even face trial.

A convicted rapist doesn’t have access to my children. This is controversial only to misogynistic rape apologists.

WearyAuldWumman · 18/11/2025 16:36

Agreed.

Again, I can't speak for the rest of the UK, but offenders in Scotland have for some time been allowed to plead guilty to a lesser offence - particularly for a supposed first offence.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page