access and contact for baby 6 months

[PandaSpaniel]

Just after a little advice.

My ex and I are struggling to remain on speaking terms and we have a little boy nearly 6 months old who I am the main carer for.

We really need to sort out access but the way things are between us, it would be better for mediation of some sort. His dad had been having regular access up until last Thurs the 23rd August since we split up in June but we have been having arguments and have decided it would be better to let the solicitors draw up an agreement so we both know where we stand.

My question's are:

Do we need a court order which states exactly what days and when his dad will see him?

Can we do this through family mediation and how would I go about setting this up?

I am happy for his dad to have access including overnight stays should he want them (he probably wont) what sort of timescale am I looking at for it to be sorted out?

Well quite frankly I find your posts unproductiv, irrelevant and offensive to just about everyone. So something we finally agree on.

The research I have read through so far has been taken out of context by you on here. I am yet to be convinced by any research you have directed me to is stating that the child should not spend time with both parents and that to be honest the doom and gloom you have stated before about the problems of a child spending one night away from mum are not proven without doubt.

What exactly are your qualifications munchee? Aside from reading a book that is.

'The peculiar phenomenon that we now have in this country of outsourcing our children to an impersonal institution on a regular basis is a fairly new thing. It remains to be seen what the consequences of that will be on the mental stability of this upcoming generation.'

You mean like schools?

My posts are discussing the effects of separation on infants. As that is what we are discussing, they are therefore relevant to the debate. Your last one Latemates is simply rude. I have not discussed my children on here so your comment is irrelevant.

I am not sure, Latemates, why you take offence at what I have said. How is the suggestion that an infant needs to form a close attachment to its primary carer offensive?

Collaborate-thank you for asking. I originally come from an education background and have subsequently trained in child psychology.

Balderdashandpiffle we are discussing separation in infants, not school-aged childen

I find the the fact that you're a child psychologist a bit scary.

If a six month can't see their mother they think they're dead?

Do you think mothers shouldn't work until their children are at school?

Balderdashandpiffle I think you are asking for clarifcation about what I meant by "they think they're dead". A six month old baby has not yet mastered object permanence. They only understand the world in terms of what they can immediately see around them. If they can't see something/someone they do not understand that they still exist but they are just not present, for the baby they stop existing completely.Obviously a baby has no concept of death but this is the easiest word to describe the experience they have at that age. It is as though someone has died.

Children under 3 years old need reassurance from their primary caregiver in order to form a strong relationship pattern. If that person is frequently absent (eg by being at work), it is likely that child will not form a secure attachment and is likely to experience relationship difficulties in later life. The primary caregiver does not have to be the mother but they do need to be consistenly present. It is a sad fact of modern society than many mothers are happy to give the primary care role to someone else. That in itself is not a problem as a loving nanny or childminder that a small child becomes attached to can do the job just as well.The problem with nurseries is that children end up being passed around too much and do not have their needs met by one attachment figure.

Most experts seem to agree more research is needed rather than apply generalised research findings to specific separating families. On the Attachment Parenting website linked above there is an article about fathers bonding with newborns which explains that most of the bonding research has focused on mother-infant bonding and it's only in recent years that father-infant bonding has been subject to research.

www.attachmentparenting.org/support/articles/

Michael Rutter based his work on Bowlby's theory and found children are capable of other attachments not just maternal ones so children can have more than one primary carer. In a paper published just a couple of months ago Michael Lamb said that most children in two-parent families form attachments to both of their parents at the same stage in their development and we can't talk about ?the? effects of overnights "without clarifying for whom, when, after what earlier experiences, and in which family contexts."

As far as mental health is concerned there has been almost 100% increase in the numbers of children and young people with attachment disorders and mental health problems since 1980. My understanding is this is down in part to better recognition of children's mental health problems and to a number of high risk factors - poverty, family breakdown, having a parent who was raised in care, having parents who are neglectful, have a drug or alcohol problem, are abusive, violent or criminal. Other childhood risk factors that are not as serious include parental depression, young unsupported parenthood, and lack of parenting skills. Insecure attachments with the main carer(s) and lack of attachment figures in day care are also factors, as is genetic predisposition. However, children tolerate one or two lower risk factors and it is a combination of 3 or more lower risk factors acting together that increases the risk of emotional and behavioural problems later.

For all my DC's with NRP's, their overnight (court ordered for two, agreed for the third) did not start until 16mo minimum. And the 16mo was the one that was agreed, the two that had court orders overnight contact did not start till 2yo for one, and 3.5yo for the one with SN.

Little (short times, sub 4 hrs) and often (at least twice a week, preferably 3 days a week) for access to children under 1yo is what I have been told by the courts and CAFCASS from 2002-now.

Changing as the child becomes more ready to 6hrs twice a week, then 8 hrs, then overnights, then moving towards shared care arrangements.

I have had two cases with two different fathers in that time, and a third case with one of those parents (though this time done on agreement), and that advice has been the same, even with two different solicitors.

HTH.

I would just like to point out that regardless of all the research the family courts do not use as a starting point a principle of equal contact time between parents. The new proposals, currently in consultation, are not intended to change that.

I don't think anyone said anything about equal time, did they? The issue was overnight stays. Judges aren't psychologists and don't refer regularly to any research. When required an expert opinion is sought.

PandaSpaniel, there are many years of parenting ahead and good contact for children relies on parents working together, or at least not against each other. Going to court causes resentment and resistance making that difficult so if you and your ex can't communicate it's worth making an appointment with a mediator to resolve the difficulties. The mediator can then invite your ex to attend a meeting on his own to find out about the process.

Mediation can defuse the situation and gives separated parents the opportunity to learn how to resolve their differences in a way that works for everyone. If no agreement can be reached there is now an expectation that most parents attend at least a Mediation and Information Assessment Meeting before the courts will hear a case anyway.

There is some useful advice about strategies for parenting after separating at the Parent Connection website;

theparentconnection.org.uk

It was just by way of encouragement to the OP. Some people get the wrong impression about what "shared care", which was mentioned further up the thread.

"I find the the fact that you're a child psychologist a bit scary. "

Thats not what was said - being trained in child psychology isnt the same as being a psychologist.

I would question the statement that you wouldn't see attachment disorder in a child under 10.

Have been following this thread and FWIW both munchee and olgaga become very confrontational when they're view is challenged.

I cared for my child at 6 weeks and 8 weeks 6, months 8 months for nights at a time....must have been so distraught

Unless the child is breast feeding there is no reason why a 6 month old cant have overnights with the father especially if the father has been in the childs life since birth.

Courts follow a pattern, cafcass follow a pattern however, given that there is NO research to confirm or deny that outcomes from court decisions have been in the best interests of the child then those patterns are still open to challenge.

Anyone...mothers superiour, fathers inferior...?

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

I don't often post but there is a lot of rubbish in this thread.

Attachment theory is not the same as attachment parenting. Attachment theory is the main paradigm to explain how children develop a sense of self and relationships, attachment parenting is merely a school of parenting style though it does purport to use some principles from attachment theory.

There have been many developments since Bowlby. Many posters have pointed out that children develop attachment relationships to fathers, grandparents and other carers. It is also a very western idea that a child has one carer and many cultures would have multiple carers for their children and not have the luxury of 3 years at home solely caring for their child. These cultures do not have an excess of attachment disorders. Yes, attachment style is mostly likely to be set by the age of 3 (though there is probably room for some change). That doesn't equate to the child has to be surgically attached to their primary carer for that time.

Attachment disorders can and are diagnosed before the age of 8.

Attachment style in a child is most likely to follow the attachment style of the main carer. ie if the main carer has an attachment disorder then the child may be better off having some significant input from another carer. In clinical practice, attachment theory is used to look at attachment disorders and mental health problems. To start to use attachment theory as a reason to limit contact with another main carer is odd in my opinion.

I doubt very much that a 6 month old child will suffer damage during overnight stays with another main carer, to whom they have formed an attachment, if all parties want this to work. I'm sure collaborate is not the only person to have discovered this.

However, you are highly likely to cause your children damage by conflict and arguments about contact.

FWIW I am a fully qualified and practising psychiatrist.

Thank you for your input. Hopefully now OP can be left to decide for herself whether her child is allowed overnight stays with father based on the factors listed in her first two posts, rather than on a dogmatic belief that all such contact would be harmful.

I often wonder at the agendas of those who try and guilt trip parents who send their children to nursery.

I've read (many times) the Oliver James book that munchee is keen on. I am also a divorced parent of children who were only just 1 and 2 when their parents separated. I was very upset about allowing either, but especially the baby, to go for weekend visits to their father. However, even then I understood that they must have regular contact with their father to maintain a proper relationship so young, and that a few hours during the day would not be enough.

They're 9 and 10 now and, while their dad and I still have little time for each other, I can say that the DCs would have been hugely disadvantaged if I had taken the line of "they're too young for overnight contact". Think hard about whose interests are at stake here: is it the children's, or, more commonly, the parents'?

munchee I'm afraid I think you are doing the OP a disservice with your claptrap on this thread. It is completely unsubstantiated. Both parents have an interest in their child and it is in the child's interests to have regular and frequent contact with both.

Hi all. I have been away for a week so not been able to check on here.

Well there has certainly been a response, however I wasn't looking for a argument about nurseries etc. FWIW I don't think nurseries cause a problem and lil one will be going to nursery from next week. It is a lovely nursery and I am confident lil one will be happy there.

I have an appointment to see a solicitor next week and she (and I) am hopeful that mediation will prove successful.

I would like my little boy to have regular contact and a good relationship with his father. I think children of any age are better off seeing both parents and as long as it is a regular set up, I see no problem with overnight stays.

However it would now be up to his dad to initiate this as I have had time to think about it, I was trying to insist on overnight stays as I felt his dad was getting off very lightly by not caring for him at night but have realised its not in my sons best interests and I don't want his dad to resent the time spent with his son.

Very sensible Panda good luck.