Can anyone help with PR issue please?

[bettiboo]

My ex has involved a solicitor in reducing contact with DS (yes, you heard right - reducing contact). Anyway, he has pushed for me to do the drop off and pick up for his once a week contact. I've refused this and I received another letter today saying they were disappointed in my refusal to do the transportation and clearly I'm not doing this in my childs best interest. I can't quite get how it's my responsibility to do transportation (he lives about 2.5 miles away). Anyway, that's another story. I'm concerned about giving PR until I can afford a solicitor. The solicitor is pushing for me to do this within 2 weeks. I've told them I can't get the time off work to go to court (which I can't). Can they force me to do this within their timescales?

Why do you reservations about PR? If PR isn't agreed it is open to a father to apply to court at any time and the probability of the court ordering PR is high.

As far as travel is concerned it would be reasonable to offer to share.

I would say it is in his best interest for father to collect. Tell them that you feel that, as contact is being reduced, your ds will enjoy that travel time as extra time with his father allowing the opportunity for further father/son bonding (claptrap I know but hey, that is all solictors deal in sometimes anyway).

As for PR, if you are not comfortable doing it then let them take you to court. Chances are that it will be awarded but at least you will get the opportunity to air your concerns.

I would advise that no-one ever makes these decisions without good legal advice if they have any concerns at all. It cannot be undone once the forms are signed!

I think you need to go to the CAB or find a way of funding a solicitor I'm afraid.

Regarding PR, whilst they can't directly force you to do it in their timescales they can apply to the courts for a Parental Responsibility Order if you don't comply with their wishes. You can't force them to wait until you can afford a solicitor. It is essentially the same as someone saying to you "pay this debt by Friday week or we will start court proceedings".

Whilst going to court does, as WhyHavePets says, give you the opportunity to air your concerns, the courts will almost certainly award PR and you could end up looking unreasonable, which won't help you with sorting out the other things.

If there is only 2.5 miles involved, I would expect travel to be shared.

The courts have a very dim view of people trying to use them to force child contact arrangements. They prefer to see people sorting it out themselves as this is likely to result in a more amicable and stable arrangement. I think his attempts to bully you into doing the transport by using a solicitor would go down like a lead balloon.

However, I would get some advice on the PR order and the implications of you agreeing to it.

Thanks for your advice. I've decided to bite the bullet and get legal advice. I find it really strange that some of you think I should share travel. I spend 24/7 managing my DS needs. I take him to and from school, clubs, extra activities, friends houses, the park, shopping... and the list goes on. The child's father does absolutely nothing other than sit at home while I courier him to and from the visit. It was his father that requested I do ALL the transportation and not even so much as a compromise in the first instance. It is the father reducing contact, it is the father's solicitor suggesting I'm being difficult by not doing the transportation. Forgive me if I disagree with those of you who think I'm the one being unreasonable. Sorry but that viewpoint makes very little sense to me! I guess if he wants to take me to court for PR in the meanwhile then it looks like I can't do much to stop him.

I don't think you are being unreasonable but what children need is for parents to forgo the determination of "who is right and who is wrong" and put their interests first. It's always a good idea to see a lawyer to find out where you stand and what the options are but if you don't have much money it could be much better spent on taking your child on holiday than a legal battle when the probability of PR being awarded is high. Also good contact for children relies on separated parents learning to work together. Going to court tends cause further resentment and resistance it tends to make this difficult.

As for travel I don't entirely agree that courts will expect you to share. Each case is treated separately depending on the situation and the fact that in some circumstances the non resident parent can apply for a downwards variation to child support but the parent with the majority of care cannot apply for an increase indicates there is an expectation that NRPs do the traveling. Courts are sometimes reluctant to impose the costs of traveling onto the PWC because children of separated parents often do badly because there isn't enough money and increasing the financial burden on the family isn't seen as being in the best interests of children. Alternatively it may be deemed more practical for the NRP to do all/most of the traveling if, for example, they have access to a car and the PWC doesn't or the PWC cares for young children from a new family. Also there are differences in how local courts individual judges view matters. There is often no absolute right or wrong about parenting issues and like parents judges and court advisory officers have different attitudes.

Having said that it's worth remembering that contact and facilitating it is for the benefit of children, not the convenience of parents. Being flexible and sharing travel helps make contact work which can only benefit your children.

There is no reasoning, appeasing or negotiating with someone who is being unreasonable. All you can do is detach yourself and not stoop to that level. Unreasonable, self interested, aggressive and demanding behaviuor does the person no favours should the matter go to court. Being constructive, offering compromises and keeping child focussed makes it easier to distinguish between who is being reasonable and putting the interests of children first and who is not.