As an outside person . .

[Angelwoes]

Hi, I would like your opinion on this, I know no one here is a judge though!

I split from my ex and we've legally agreed contact with tiny DD 2-3 days a week. He has a heavy cannabis addiction which he has denied all the way through. He somehow got a clean drugs test after waiting 3 months to clear it (hair). I'm saying contact can start as long as he is honest about the issue and agrees to random tests every so often. At this point we are stuck, he seems to be refusing this (obviously intending to get back on it :( ).
As an outside person, if this went to court (basically over him refusing random testing) would a judge take it seriously? Luckily I've got pics and texts where he admits that it is a problem. . . basically I am worried that I will come off badly for asking for repeat testing given how he "Appeared to give up for 3 months" :/

If he's passed the test and you are say he's cheated somehow you may come across as unhelpful. From a neutral point of view - you're saying `Yes, I know he's passed the test but I am not interested the results, I know better and I will agree he has when I am good and ready'.

You mention random testing too - how long would you want this for? A year? Five years? Till your DD is 16?

It's not really a reasonable proposition.

I have taken it at face value, but it is more to do with retaining an appearance than being serious about giving up. This guy has never properly stopped in 20 odd years . . . I've said I've got no problem at the moment but there needs to be a safeguard against him simply resuming considering the addiction . . . surely a safeguard is not unreasonable. Otherwise every addict gets away with it after 3 months.

I can't see this being seen as a reasonable proposition, sorry.
You wanted a test. He did a test. It came back clear.
You must have known this was going to be an issue when you chose to have children with him? And if he's quit long enough to have a clear test, I would have thought the court would assume (rightly or wrongly) that he's able to quit long enough to not do drugs during a contact session.
Are CAFCASS involved?

So the alternative is "wing it and hope for the best" :/ how is that safe? Yes, I have been very stupid and often said we should have split over this - I got the "I dont want this I'm giving up etc" and was guillible/hopeful. No one else is involved yet . . I still can't get past the idea that just "hoping for the best" makes me negligent of safety.

Can you explain what you mean by legally agreed?

I can't understand you can accept having a child with a man with a 20 year drug habit, but you can't accept him having time with his child and being a father.

Drugs abuse isn't an automatic bar to contact. If that was the case there would be a huge number of children in care. Drug testing is expensive and normally only used by courts as a stop gap to give someone time to change their behaviour. The courts would then assess how contact is going and the parents' attitudes.

When a drug user has the ability (or there are measures in place) to provide safe and appropriate care for a child during contact time then the courts will often grant contact. For example the behaviour of a user won't have an impact on children if they only use cannabis when they are out with friends at times when they aren't having contact.

It's different with other drugs and/or someone has a serious long term drug addiction and their behaviour has a negative effect on children. PArents have a duty to protect children from harm. When there are legitimate concerns children are at risk they can be raised with the authorities so the circumstances can be investigated and appropriate measures put in place (e.g. supervised contact in a contact centre) to ensure contact is safe. Better safe than sorry.

In the long term if a serious long term drug addict doesn't change their behaviour it's unlikely contact will be deemed in the interests of a child.

Who did the testing you're suspicious about? Who do you propose carries out further tests? Who's going to pay for it?

Unlikely that a judge will order regular testing, especially after clear results. Tbh if you restricted cannabis using parents from having contact with their children, we'd have all kinds of problems on our hands.