Contact Proposal

[AuntClarasBagOfDoorknobs]

Background: No court order. DH has worked extreme shifts over the past 2 years which has meant he has not taken his daughter overnight for almost 2 years with the exception of trips to his parents / short breaks etc. This has not been ideal, but given how he was unable to stick to this with regularity it was his way of providing "stability" to his daughter by NOT taking her in an unstable situation when there was no rhyme or reason as to when he would be able to take her. He has still maintained regular contact (weekly)

Over this period EXW has complained continuously about this (and I can see her point too) She has recently went to a solicitor to request a rigid contact plan and DH has started a new job in the last few weeks and is able to now propose a plan that will give her what she has been requesting for the past two years.

He has proposed EOW Friday from school - Monday starting school and half holidays.

Now that he has sent this she has come back and said this needs to be built up gradually (again fair enough) and that it will not be happening until her "trust and communication" has improved between them" He has never given her any reason to distrust him, and if she didn't trust him I find it hard to work out why she has spent 2 years pushing for him to do overnights. We had DSD away for 4 nights last year and he agreed to give her "point to point updates" about where they were which he did, but she said they were not enough.

I suppose my questions are:

• If the overnights are built up gradually can she then refuse them because she doesn't "trust" him?
• What timeframe would realistically be expected to build up to every second weekend? (When she's away for 2/3/4 nights before she's fine, she doesn't even bother, she loves being here)
• Does he have to agree to communicating with her when DSD is here? He wants his time to be his time and her demands to be updated constantly causes a lot of stress and really imposed on his time with her. What he has agreed to is to let DSD contact her mum as and when she wants while here, but will not force her to if she doesn't bring it up - and would never stop her if she did.
• If it ended up going to court, would a judge demand he contacted her during his time to "build up her trust?"

We're in Scotland if that makes a difference.

If this goes to court, whether or not his ex trusted him would not be relevant unless she could show some basis for her lack of trust. That basis would have to be about your DSD's welfare. Her desire to get regular updates about where they are and what they are doing is, at best, irrelevant. At worst, it makes her appear unreasonable which will not help her in court.

DP's ex also wanted to build up contact and holiday time gradually (from virtually nothing as she refused contact).

The judge and CAFCASS said no and awarded EOW (Friday after school to Monday before school), a tea time in the alternate week and 4 weeks holiday a year, effective immediately.

There's no obligation to keep in touch with the RP although we always answer her calls (once in a fortnight's holiday so not excessive).

She definitely has no reason not to trust him : she has agreed to let him have contact for two full weeks during the summer holidays, but under the stipulation that he keeps her updated?

The part she's refusing and is wanting built up gradually is the EOW Friday - Monday because she's saying it's not in child's best interests to go to such a rigid contact proposal (even though she withheld contact for 6 weeks until he agreed to send her said rigid contact proposal) Now he's sent it she's saying it's too much?

I think he will agree that this contact be built up more gradually to give DSD time to adjust to the new plan, it's just the bit where she's saying that she'll maybe agree to it in future once trust and communication is improved which is making me because surely that's irrelevant.

She has to siblings here and is very much involved with our family at present (exception of overnights, but like I say he thought he genuinely was doing the right thing there under the work circumstances)

Definitely go to court on this. Get it set out in writing in a court order, it stops one parent having a 'hold' over the other.
I have never heard of a requirement for regular updates being written into the order. Judges are usually keen for each parent be given the opportunity to parent without interference from the other. (Doesn't mean she couldn't have it written in but extremely unusual).
A gradual build up after a break is less unusual although it usually happens after a long period of absolutely no contact. When my stepchild had been withheld from contact for 5 months a few years ago - the build up was Saturday for 2 Weeks, Friday to Saturday for 2 Weeks then Friday to Sunday Evening .. onwards.

Thank you for the advice...

I think this is one of those situations which will end up in court just to keep everybody right in terms of what is expected of them. EXW has been known previously to withhold contact when she is unhappy with DH, and they have been in mediation previously regarding a trip away with us to a wedding in which part of the agreement was that he had to send her bi daily updates of where we were unless she wouldn't agree to let her go.

It's so exhausting.

She is saying that the contact EOW has to be built up to allow for DSD and her to adjust to a new schedule. He has proposed one night every other weekend for 6 weeks then increasing to 2 nights every other weekend for a further 6 weeks before it increases to the 3 nights EOW.

She is saying she will agree to one night EOW and she will say when it can be adjusted.

DH has been through counselling because what they had was an abusive relationship and he has proposed shuttle mediation. She is saying she will only do normal mediation. Would it be in his interests to agree to normal mediation? It would be so much easier if it could just go to court.

If he explains she was abusive he may be able to skip mediation altogether if not shuttle mediation would be suitable.