My son's mother wants to move abroad for a year and take him.

[Snurt]

Hi, just wondering if the collective wisdom of mumsnet could offer me some advice, hopefully it won't matter that technically speaking I'm more of a dad than a mum!

My son is 9, I was there when he was born and have been fully involved in his entire life, despite never having been in a relationship with his mother. Current arrangements are that he spends 5 nights out of every 14 with me. His mother has since married and has two other much younger children with her husband. Her husband's work want to send him to the US for a chunk of time, at the very minimum a year but it sounds like it could easily become a year and a half or two years. She wants to go, with all the children, offering skype and school holiday visits back. I am, as you'd imagine, not happy about this, both for the disruption of his schooling and my losing regular contact with him.

I know that I can legally prevent them from taking my son, as I have parental responsibility, unless they get a court order - what are the chances that they could get a court order in this sort of situation? They would cite his relationship with his half-brothers, and that his step-father would lose his job if he doesn't go (I don't know if this is true but it's how it's been presented to me).

Should I be looking to get a prohibited steps order, or is my having parental responsibility and making clear my lack of consent for him to go enough? We have so far managed to deal with things without involving lawyer/courts, so there are no residency orders in place.

Any advice on the legalities or feedback on whether my stance is reasonable or not welcomed.

But mollieo, don't you think that the child needs to see his father and have him in his life? Why should a job split a child from his father?

Expat I'm one of the more common ones

I agree that a child needs a father. That isn't the issue here though is it? It is about what the father wants.

I don't believe in the myth of "quality time", children need the stability of routine care and attention from their parents. If DH and I split up, I canot imagine either of us choosing to live in another country from our children, or imposing that on the other one.

I would hire a lawyer bloody quickly OP. Hopefully it won't come to that, and I would keep it amicable for as long as possible, but do tell them how hurt and upset you feel at the thought of not having the regularity of contact with your son. Ask them to imagine it the other way round.

I disagree with Colditz, Hulababy and Expat.

It would break my heart to see my child go, but my child's heart comes before mine. Sorry, I wouldn't put my child in such a situation, I'm sure your child would panic at contemplating the possibility of being separated from his mother, siblings and step father. You are his dad, but they are his family.

Think it through, you may loose more than a few years apart. Honest. Let him go, by the time this legal battle could finish, he would be back from the states.

Snorbs, there is no such thing as custody in this country, you either have residence, shared residence or no order.

The fact that you have an out of court agreement doesn't mean you have "shared residency" it only means your child spends some time with you.

PR doesn't trump residence/shared residence order. No order... well you both are pretty much free to do whatever you want. In the eyes of the law, however, she is the resident parent, so it is likely that the court would favour the idea that the best for the child is to stay with her, her siblings and his step dad.

A legal battle of this kind is incredibly expensive, the ones I have seen have gone above the £30,000 mark per side. IMO that money would be better spent in airfares to visit or have your child to visit.

Sorry, not Snorbs, my post was aimed at Snurt.

'You are his dad, but they are his family.'

I'd happily spend 3x that rather than wave my child goodbye to go live 5000 miles away when she/he is 9-years-old because IMO, what's best for them is to have regular contact with both their parents if at all possible unless it's a matter of life or death.

Sorry, but I stand by it. I don't believe about the salomonic approach of splitting the child in two to please both parents. The interests of the child come first.

Why apologise?

The OP needs to seek legal advice because he doesn't want the child to move 5000 miles away for an indefinite length of time.

I can see his point.

There's no way I'd ever be happy with that if I were in his position, because I don't feel it's in a child's best interests.

Agree 100% with MotherOfAllDilemmas.

OP, let them go.

Slip of the tongue, I was not apologising. :)

Be my guest Expat, spend 3 times that figure just to see your children destroyed on such a battle, sometimes is more caring just to let go.

If its really not that big a problem nly seeing one parent on high days and holidays then why isn't the step-father travlling for his job alone and seeing his children on an infrequent basis?

This isn't about the father's wants though. It's about the child's right to maintain a relationship with both his parents unless there are compelling (which generally means "child safety") reasons why that should not happen.

The situation is that there's a 9yo boy who has regularly been spending considerable amounts of time with his father for his entire life. There is undoubtedly a relationship there. If this boy's mother decides to move to the US then that regular contact would cease. That boy could go months between seeing his dad in the flesh. After all, his mum and step-dad are going to want to have some holiday time with him as well. It's unlikely he'd be coming back to the UK to see his dad every holiday.

Moreover, unless you happen to live near a major east coast city in the US then flights between the US and the UK can be quite expensive, particularly when you factor in that he's not old enough to travel on his own. Have you seen how much it costs to fly transatlantic near Christmas, for example?

In your estimation then, where does the boy's rights and wants come into this? He'll be pulled out of English school for a year or maybe two. If it was two then that would have a serious impact on his secondary schooling.

Or do you feel that as he lives more with his mother than his father then his mother should have the right to dictate everything that happens to him? If you think that really is how family law works then I strongly suggest you look again at the legislation and case law behind PR because that's not how it works.

Oh, that's right, it's so uncaring, to fight for the relationship you have with your child, rather just 'let go'.

I don't have to spend a bean because I think it's more caring to suck it up for the sake of my childrens' relationship with their father. That's worth more to me than a job. ANY job.

It means living here. That's life as an adult.

Absolutely expat. My ex sees out DCs less regularly than the OP sees his but, despite the opportunities being there in the past, I wouldn't have considered emigrating for a moment. Hell, I'd very seriously think twice about moving county. My ex, for all her numerous faults, is our DC's mother. That's important and I'm not going to throw obstacles in the way of that without very good reason.

A few years ago I would be fighting 100% on your side Expat. I know now that things are never black and white.

Snorbs you can travel as an unaccompanied minor from the age of 5.

'Moreover, unless you happen to live near a major east coast city in the US then flights between the US and the UK can be quite expensive, particularly when you factor in that he's not old enough to travel on his own.'

My folks are paying to fly us to Houston in summer, so we can have more time to spend there than just the fortnight at October, Xmas or Easter (it's all you get in Scottish schools).

The cost is staggering.

AND, if you don't have a firm legal agreement in place, the mother and stepmum can say, 'Oh, sorry, don't have money to send him back/too busy to Skype today/Little Johnnie doesn't want to talk to you just now' etc. and that's the end of contact without some serious legal outlay.

So the OP would do very very well to a) make the mother aware this isn't going to fly in the diplomatic manner ChippingIn suggests b) see a solicitor now to find out what legal recourse he does have to prevent their removing the child without his permission.

Oh, I'd be super-comfortable about sending my kid unaccompanied to the US at 9, especially if it required a plane change. Yeah. Especially having grown up there myself. NOT.

Mine are dual nationals.

Like I said, I'd definitely considered moving back. But DH doesn't want to and so it's not in the best interests of our children.

Hi, just catching up on this, never expected this many posts - too many for me to respond individually to all the points that have been made.

I would say that I don't believe that the fact that he spends less than 50% of the time with me means I shouldn't have 50% of the say, and I think the legal position is much the same, in theory anyway, practice may be another thing. I believe mothers and fathers, when they are both fully involved in the child's life, should have equal rights. I am absolutely a part of his family, and always will be.

What is best for him is very much my main priority and I would never want him to come off worse due to decisions I or his mother make. I don't think it is selfish of me to consider my relationship with him as being important to his happiness just as much as his mother's relationship to him.

Thank you all for the responses, of all sorts, I wanted to get different perspectives and I certainly have.

See a solicitor, Snurt. It can't hurt.