What happens in court when parents dispute 50 50 child arrangements?

[PeonyLoves]

Name changed because I don’t want this to be linked to my other posts.

I am really worried about my brother. He’s about to get divorced and is in the process of seeking 50/50 custody of 3 dd ages between 7 and 12.

STBEW is trying to block this. She claims that he has been a negligent father and only wants joint custody to spite her.

It is true that he put his social life first on occasion. For example, when one of the DCs was quite poorly as an infant, he still chose to go on a stag weekend and left their mother to cope with everything alone.

However, until recently, he had a good relationship with all 3 dc. But since the separation, the relationship has deteriorated to the extent that none of the dc want to spend time with him anymore. He claims that they have been poisoned against him by their mother.

STBEW has a new partner and she wants sole custody with fortnightly supervised access.

Does anyone have experience in what happens in court and how decisions are made? DB is beside himself that he may never be allowed to have a proper relationship with his children if the courts go in their mother’s favour.

I suggest you blindly don’t accept everything your brother says I know he’s your brother but has the mother really poisoned them against him? Or do they just not want to stay with him. If there is no evidence or even if there is the courts normally give men more contact than they deserve so best you just keep out of it. You probably don’t even acknowledge who he is in my experience. Also supervised contact means she thinks he is abusive,

I didn’t say that I believe that the children have actually been poisoned against him.

I believe there is a lot of hurt and mud slinging from both sides.

And that’s my point exactly. How do the courts decide what is fair evidence?

Edited as info provided.

The eldest child’s wishes will be taken into consideration. The judge. will consider what is in the best interests of the children.

round about between 12 and 7. I am being vague so not to be outing

Well then it seems unlikely he’ll be given joint custody in that case. The eldest has completely taken her mother’s side

I think its telling that she wants supervised contact? While many women may want the children to be with them the majority of the time, there needs to be a very specific set of reasons to request supervised contact.

How does your brother see 50/50 working? Id he up on their extra curricular and routines? Has he consistently been there feeding them 3x daily for days at a time? Does he receive and read and action communication from the school?

Are there any grounds for supervised visits? What accusations are there and more importantly what evidence is there to support it.
a court won’t blindly take either side

they will bring in cafcass, and children will be asked their wishes - the 12 yo will most likely have their wishes upgrades. The 7 yo not so but will friend in cafcass assessment plus any other documented evidence of abuse etc

I know he’s my brother but I genuinely think he’s been a good dad. The kids adored him during happier times. But things got difficult when exMIL came to live with them and he felt ousted from the family unit. ExMIL took over the running of the house (as per their culture) and DB felt more and more redundant.

Then STBEW got together with a colleague from work and asked for a separation.

Since then the atmosphere has been war. DB resents this new man taking over and feels cuckoo’d out of his family.

IMHO I think it is more that the eldest DC wants a peaceful atmosphere which is a big reason she is siding with her mother who is quite highly strung. It would seem to her that it’s easier to cut off her father than live in a constant state of nervous anxiety.

Unless there is a genuine evidenced risk the court won't order supervised contact. They won't order 50/50 immediately, and if there are welfare concerns being raised by the mother it's likely the court will order a section 7 report from cafcass and recommendations for a final order down the line. They will probably order some interim contact. It might end up with 50/50 but if the children are strongly opposed I would be surprised.

How poorly is “quite poorly”?

You say the MIL moving in was “cultural”? Or was it because he didn’t do the grubby, miserable bits of parenting and so his ex needed to get someone else in the do his share?

He won’t get 50/50 of a 12 year old who doesn’t want to see him. With the youngest, he’ll probably get contact building up, so a day every other weekend for six months, then a full weekend every other weekend for six months.

Does he live close enough to do school runs and does he have a suitable house?

Does he have a lifestyle and working pattern that would allow 50/50 or does he plan to rely on female family members like yourself to make it happen?

I wonder if his MIL moved in because he wasn’t pulling his weight domestically? She wouldn’t be unreasonable to be pissed off with him for being lazy.

Playing Devil’s Advocate because I don’t know your brother but 50/50 is often used by abusive men to avoid paying child support. There are men who do 50% before the split and deserve 50% afterwards but if the split is nasty and he’s trying to score points against ex, that’s really not good for the kids. If he’s not able to do true 50% (pick ups from school, taking time off when they are sick etc) then he should consider what he can do for the benefit of the kids. Is he playing foundations like living near mum so he can do school run, registered with the school so he gets info like reports and school events? As a 50/50 parent does he know their friends and ready to organise parties and play dates etc which are important to the kids?

If the 12yo doesn’t want contact then he won’t get any. The other 2 would be allowed to do the same if they wanted to once they got to 11ish. If he’s not been involved in the past and the younger ones aren’t used to being away from mum then the reasonable thing to do would be to increase contact over time. I’m not saying that he shouldn’t work up to 50% but always with mum to 50% with mum could be cruel to suddenly do.

Your brother sounds like a spineless waste of space tbf. And I very much suspect there’s more to the children not wanting to see them than because their mum says so. You said he ‘had a fairly good relationship with them until recently’. What does that mean though? He stopped abandoning them and neglecting them to go out on the piss? Or was he actively parenting them? Taking them to and from school/clubs/weekend activities? Shopping and cooking their meals? Doing their laundry? Helping them with their homework? Playing with and providing for them?

i work in child contact centres. You would be surprised at what resident parents will say to stop the other parent from being able to see their children

What do you mean?

There's a lot of wrong information here. The starting point is 50/50 if that is what one parent wants.

The wishes of the 12yo might be considered, however the word is considered. It does no mean in anyway that a judge will go with their wishes. There's even been a case, albeit exceptional where a 16yo wishes were ruled against.

The judge will request a carcass assessment. In all likelihood, that will be the biggest deciding factor.

They will have to attend mediation first. The mediator should offer child mediation to any child over the age of 9-10 years old so they get to have their voice heard.

i suspect @Goinworkandgetout means parents weaponise their children, alienate them and accuse the other parent of all kinds of falsehoods. It happens alot although on this site mum’s never do that and dads are generally abusive

All good points here.

He may well not get 50/50 if the mother can prove through evidence that he was not doing 50% before the split. The court will look at evidence only. I know someone who fought it and won because her exh never even changed a nappy.

As above your brother needs to get up to speed. Does he know their teachers names, names of their friends, hobbies, schedule during the week, is he able to do 50% of the grunt work which includes the rubbish side of parenting too. How many school runs, sick days etc does he do. Does he have a suitable home for play dates, do the children have their own space (not necessarily their own room), will he be able to facilitate studying as the children get older.

the other side of the coin some parents only want 50 :50 To get out of the maintenance and for financial reasons.

abusive partners will also claim the other partner is alienating the children when they are protecting them from abuse.

family courts often mandate children and force them against their will to see abusive parents and many have been harmed or even
murdered while under court mandated contact.

so best not to lightly pretend resident parents are weaponising their children most likely they are protecting them.

No one is denying all those things happen

equally mums do use their children, and try to control access and relationships with their dad.

doesn’t make either right and mum’s who do so are equally as abhorrent . Noone should blindly accept mums word which is why there needs to be checks and balances from authorities. It’s very easy for a mum to do

we have no idea in this case if there is any basis of the need to supervised access or not or whether she is alienating him.

My ex sil wanted ‘supervised contact’ mainly because she has personality disorder and is a spiteful cow.

a few private psychology appointments had our niece opening up about some of the things she had told her to say, the fear niece lived in of the silent treatment if she mentioned her dad nicely.

it made for a very interesting professional report to the courts.

50:50 so rarely works for children but parents are unable to see it! You need to be able to get on really well, to communicate etc. Eg child suddenly realises has left something at one parents or plans change due to a party etc
As children get older they naturally focus more on friends than wanting to be at other parents etc... in fact unless you live very close the child will decide to spend the most time with the parent nearest to friends etc.

OP firstly he’s a man so you are never going to get a non biased opinion here.

On MN all men are bastards, and all women are victims. The reality is that there are a lot of bastard men, but there are equally a lot of women who are only too happy to weaponise their children against their ex’s, and there are plenty of examples on MN to show for it, women who will swear blind that the children don’t want to spend time with dad but adore the new shag who has been living there for five minutes, having moved in after five minutes.

And let’s not pretend that there aren’t a lot of controlling MILs on the women’s side, but hey he went out once when one of the kids was little, and MN are seeing this as a reason to accuse him of being in the wrong.

He needs a solicitor because you are being given a lot of inaccurate advice here. It’s simply not true to say that if the 12 yo doesn’t want to see him then he won’t be given any contact, or that the made up schedule another PP has posted here will apply to a 7 year old.

The starting point is 50/50. The older DC will be interviewed by Cafcas, without any parent present, their wishes will be considered, but it’s not true that a 12 year old won’t be made to spend time with their father, in fact in cases of parental alienation it’s possible for a mother to lose residency if it’s proven that she has alienated or attempted to alienate the children.

I think there is a movement to try to get assumptions of contact at all costs removed. Not here though apparently people are propagating the myth that men are the victims of spiteful harpies alienating their children. I mean I don’t work in family court but my experience is women don’t make these things up.

Why does he want 50/50? How will this work for the kids? What will their days and weeks look like? Would he like to live 50/50 in two places? Would alternate weekends and a weekly teatime visit feel better to the kids? It's about them, not what the parents want to satisfy their egos and desires to win a fight.