Social Services now involved due to ex assaulting ds1, feel like I've let him down (long)

[OctopusSocktopuss]

Have name changed for this thread, but have been here a long time.

There is a long history with my ex which is too long to go into detail here (I would be here all day) but don't want to drip feed, so I'll give you all the bits I think are relevant. We have been divorced for 6 years, he doesn't work and was a controlling abusive man when we were together and still continues to try to be now. I have always had to work full time to support us.

We have had issues in the past over the way he treats the dc (ds1 is 9 and ds2 is 7) and I have stopped contact in the past, only for him to take me to court, where the court have seemed to dismiss my concerns for their wellbeing.

OK, so having re-established contact last year, which was built up slowly with supervised contact, leading to him having them eventually overnight, the relationship seemed to be getting better.

He owes me quite a lot of csa money, which he has nagged me to write off so he can get a job. He refuses to get a job until I do this because they will put an attachment of earnings on his salary, I took the view that I was never going to get it anyway so if he was willing to do a deal and take on the responsibility of some of the school runs (I have just started a new job) that would make up for it. We fell out over the method of payment for the money he was going to give me instead, I wanted it by DD he wanted to pay cash. He shouted and screamed at me when picking the boys up one morning because I was changing the goal posts and refused to do anymore school runs. I cancelled the deal and told him I had sorted the school runs. It dawned on me how easily he had managed to get some control over my life again and so I disengaged from him and arranged childcare.

He is obviously enraged about this. He wanted the money to be written off.
Part of the contact order is that he picks the boys up on a Monday after school, gives them tea and drops them back - about 3 hours in total.

Last Monday ds1 told me, at bed time, that his dad had been a bit naughty. I probed a bit more and it transpires that they had fallen out, over some money that ds1 had that his dad had spent, and he wanted it back. They had a massive row, ex picked him up and threw him on the floor. He then pinned him down by his arms and legs and hit him on the chest. He had a red mark on his chest, but I didn't really notice any other bruising as his legs are already covered in bike scratches etc.

DS1 didn't want me to make a fuss, he didn't want to be interviewed by CAFCASS again and go through the court process. I did ask if his dad had told him to say that, but he says not. I told him that I couldn't let it go as it was too serious. So as a compromise I asked him to tell his teacher.
My thinking, rightly or wrongly (Im thinking I handled this badly now) was that if I wasn't the one who reported it I couldn't be accused by ex of reporting him to SS out of spite, the whole episode would carry more credibility as it would come from DS1 directly, and I guess somewhere I wanted someone else to make the decision.

I texted ex to ask what happened. He was dismissive. He said they'd had a row and he had restrained him, but it was all sorted. He then sent a load of texts reminding me of things I had apparently done in the past. I didn't respond to these (false) allegations just kept to the incident Monday and tried to get the facts. He didn't say he was sorry, or admit any kind of wrong doing at all.

It's taken D1 until today to tell his teacher. So I was called to the school, where Social Services had interviewed ds1 and were in the process of interviewing ds2 who was there at the time. I have to take him to the doctor tomorrow to examine bruises on his legs which are from his dad throwing him on the floor.

I guess I need a bit of hand holding through this one, I feel like I've let ds1 down by not reporting it myself, I really didn't know what to do. I've been accused of over reacting by ex over incidents in the past.

[STIDW]

OctopusSocktopuss, the other thing is that Parental Responsibility bestows the duty to protect. Has your son indicated how he feels about contact now?



Wooooooooooooooppity, there have always been children who for one reason or another have been separated from a parent. In the 1950s there was Bowlby's research and in the 1970s Michael Rutter revised that and looked at the complexity of attachments and separation distress finding that behavioural and emotional problems were linked to family conflict. That's why, for example, children of an absent separated parent tend to fare less well than those who are separated because the parent died - see below.

Since then the numbers of children and young people found to have mental health problems has increased across the board by more than 70%.

In the late 1990s the Joseph Rowntree Foundation commissioned Bryan Rodgers and Jan Pryor to review 200 research reports abroad and in the UK into the outcomes for children of separated families. They concluded that bereaved children are adversely affected but parental death doesn't carry the same risks of poorer educational attainment and poorer mental health affecting the long term outcomes for children of separated parents. It was also said parental conflict was an important factor in a number of poor outcomes for children, including behavioural problems.

More recent research findings from several sources are that children who are insecure about their parentage and heritage or harbour resentment against them tend to have lower self esteem leading to behavioural and emotional problems later, such as dysfunctional relationships in adulthood.

None of that is to say that children are better off living in a family with two parents when the parents don't get on. Occasionally parental separation can be a relief for children. (Dr Kirk Weir, Consultant Child and Adolescent Psychiatrist)

In any event the outcome for the majority (70%) of children from separated families is much the same as children whose parents remain together. 30% of children from separated parents have poor outcomes compared to 15% of children from families who stay together (Michael Lamb, Cambridge University)

[LoopyLoopsPussInBoots]

:(
Such a lot to deal with, I really feel for you, but I'm adding two and two together here and strongly think this needs mentioning to SS.

[Wooooooooooooooppity]

"The overwhelming evidence courts receive from psychiatrists and psychologists is that having a parent (either gender) cut out of their lives causes long term emotional harm to children. In cases where there is low level abuse the risks to children are usually outweighed by the advantages of contact in some form or other."

Yes, that is the evidence courts receive, but I really wonder whether that evidence is actually correct. We are really only at the beginning of acknowledging how a parenting deficit can long term affect a child and of course the first batch of research, will have been done on children in unusual situations, like being brought up by one parent. No one bothered to do research about children who were brought up by both parents 30 years ago (and I'm not sure anyone's doing that much now) because the fact that bringing up a child in a 2 parent family which is dysfunctional, is of no interest to anyone as it doesn't have any moral, social, political etc. implications which are immediately obvious.

"People may not agree with it but that is the legal framework and there is no point wishing something else exists when it doesn't." Agreed. Wishing is useless. Raising awareness and campaigning for change, is the way forward.

[cestlavielife]

"I want the dc to have a great relationship with their dad. Unfortunately he is a knob"

and therein lies the problem.

he is not just a knob with you he has proven to be a knob and irresponsible around the dc.

so really, the chances of the dc having a great relationship with him, long term, are limited, arent they?

[OctopusSocktopuss]

STIDW yes what you've said certainly echoes my own experiences in court. Hard then for me when I'm questioned by SS as to why I let contact move away from the contact centre. Well because I wasn't making the decisions mostly, but I also agree that contact with their dad should be a good thing. I've bent over backwards to try to make it possible and encourage it.

I want the dc to have a great relationship with their dad. Unfortunately he is a knob. If I could have changed that I guess I would still be with him though eh!

[STIDW]

I think the problem is people don't understand the law and that courts will support contact in all but exceptional cases even if a parent's behaviour leaves something to be desired by most peoples' standards.

To clarify, when there is independent evidence from professionals such as teachers, social work, doctors etc of children suffering harm the risks are balanced against any strengths (eg the child's attachment to a parent), including any measures such as contact in a contact centre, to assess if someone's parenting is "good enough."

The overwhelming evidence courts receive from psychiatrists and psychologists is that having a parent (either gender) cut out of their lives causes long term emotional harm to children. In cases where there is low level abuse the risks to children are usually outweighed by the advantages of contact in some form or other. In exceptional cases when there are high levels of abuse the harm children suffer is more likely to outweigh the advantages of contact.

People may not agree with it but that is the legal framework and there is no point wishing something else exists when it doesn't.

[blackeyedsusan]

have a quiet word with ss about the trousers. that and the previous invitation to a peadophile would definately ring alarm bells for me. perhaps your friend could support you with that?

another route for reporting abuse without doing the reporting is going to the gp. the gp then reports it and you are actively protecting your children. ss arre not always that helpful and have ahigh threshhold for involvement sometimes.

[OctopusSocktopuss]

Wooooo all they see is a mother blocking contact. All they want is to get contact resumed. Then away from the contact centre as quickly as possible.

You really don't get much of a chance to tell them why you stopped it. Also if you self rep which I had to in the end as I simply had no money left, the other sol wipes the floor with you.

[Wooooooooooooooppity]

Yes, the astonishing thing is that the court system is still so blind to what is glaringly obvious to anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of abuse issues.

It's almost as if it's not an accident. How could the courts remain so oblivious? And yet they do...

[OctopusSocktopuss]

We fell out for a long time after this. I just couldn't comprehend it either.
But I've had to comply with court orders.
I've just not been able to impose my own thoughts on these matters without a magistrate resuming contact again.

[Wooooooooooooooppity]

Actually that should set loud alarm bells ringing.

However liberal and kind and understanding we all are, we don't invite people we know to be paedophiles into our houses do we? Most of us might accept that in theory, they're not posing any threat, they'll be within sight the whole time and never left alone with our DC's, they are human beings and can be managed, blah di blah, but we don't actually want them round our kids, do we? We may not get our pitchforks out and go and murder them with a newsofthescrewsreading mob, but we don't actually roll out the red carpet and get the best silver out either. We just politely smile at them and carry on chatting to the person next to us and don't issue any invitations to our homes within their hearing. The very fact that your ex wasn't put off pursuing a friendship with this guy and actually invited him into your home and didn't feel it worth mentioning to the mother of his children and his partner whom he lived with, that the guest he's invited has a criminal conviction for offences against children, is a huge tolling bell there. [hshock]

[OctopusSocktopuss]

I'm so sad for my dc

Yes proper fucked up judgement

[greengoose]

Octopussocktopus, it is a very strange thing for a parent to invite a peodophile to come to their home to play with their children.

I think you do need to assume at the very least his judgment has been very poor in the past, and that it needs checking out this time..... sorry you have to go through this.

[AnyPhantomFucker]

it would seem your ex's idea of what is appropriate behaviour are properly fucked-up

[OctopusSocktopuss]

You have all helped me to clarify things and the point about whether it would be acceptable to wear such a garment in front of someone else's children or if a stranger were to be wearing them makes it even clearer. I really haven't been sticking my head in the sand over his behaviour in the past, but I'm battle weary. I really assumed that the trousers had been worn once, but only after I had told someone else about them did I think to ask them how often he wore them. All the time.

The very last thing I would ever want to do is make any kind of allegation along these lines if it's innocent. It's a horrible thing to be accused of and the children are likely to face more interviews as a result.

OK

There was an incident in the past which was dealt with and I did put it down to ex's bad judgement. We were actually together when this happened. He was attending AA, he had made a friend who he knew very little about apart from the fact he had been a priest and had spent some time in prison. The dc were very small then. Alarm bells rang for me and I demanded to know exactly what he had been in prison for. The problem with AA is that people don't tend to disclose their personal details. Ex spent a lot of time with him.

He brought him back to the house one Sunday and this man and his friend joined us for a bbq. I noticed that he was spending too much time with ds and it made me feel uncomfortable and I mentioned this to ex. Ex was adamant he was OK.

At least a year later I got a letter from SS asking me what contact my dc had wit this man as he was a convicted peodophile and had spent 9 years in prison. I hit the roof as you can imagine. I told them the limited contact that I was aware of (at my house). They told me that he was not allowed to be near children and it was because he had mentioned my dc to his probation officer that they had got in touch. I was told he was definitely grooming my children.

So, ex was horrified. He claimed he had no idea, but had been told that this man had been in prison for sexual offences towards minors. I went completely mad that he had allowed him into our house knowing this (even if it wasn't quite the real story it was bad enough) and questioned why he had spent so much time with him.

I then had to ask ds if he could ever remember being with this man at any other times and then had to explain, in terms that a 5 yr old could understand about bad men who do this to children. It was hideous.

First thing ds did when he went out with his dad was to tell people that daddy had a friend who like to to bad things to children. Ex was furious. He reported me to SS for telling him inappropriate details. SS supported me and told him that I had done only what any parent would have done. He then had to apologise to me.

This was a long time ago. I had put it out of my mind to be honest, not forgotten but dealt with.

[greengoose]

The thing that always makes me sad, Woooooooopity, is the difficulty for some people in seeing that the most important thing is the child. If posters could just think, 'right, I dont know these people or their history, but we need to do what is best for the child'.
Possibly the dad is just a bit of a prat who wears dodgy trousers, but possibly not. At the end of the day if he is acting in ways that are suspect, then he needs checked out. Doesnt mean he did anything more, does mean at the very least he needs some firm direction on what is appropriate, with boundaries about what happens if he crosses the line. Trust me, SS have heard it all and will not jump to any conclusions. They would rather not stop contact without very good reason, but as stated they will look into it, and a record will be made... so everyone has a heads up to whats expected and where the lines are.

[AnyPhantomFucker]

< likes Woooooopity's post >

< wonders if I put enough "o's" in it >

[Wooooooooooooooppity]

That's a very good post greengoose.

It's very important that people like you can post in such a focused and analytical way. When Octopus first mentioned those trousers, I was a bit confused about it. I suppose I thought, as so many would, that it's not necessarily an imortant thing - they're just bad trousers.

But the way you have stated the facts of it, so clearly and unemotively, is really useful in organising one's thoughts. I have a French Maid's outfit (OK I know it's naff but this idiot lover of mine bought it for me and hey, it's there now so I may as well wear it sometimes) and the thought of wearing it in front of the children, even though they wouldn't actually get the sexual connotations (it's not revealing unless you want it to be...) is simply not even a remote possibility - I wouldn't even keep it where they could find it. Your post made me think of that - it's an outfit I would not wear for any other purpose than sexual titillation, just as those trousers are. That's what's wrong with them, I was slightly foggy in my mind what it was, but your post has clarified everything.

This is why we really need to be conscious of how illegitimate the posts of some of the vicious misogynists who are determined to deny the presence of male abuse wherever it exists, are - they really help muddy the waters effectively and stop everyone seeing something that in the light of your post, is really glaringly obvious. They have a vested interest in ensuring that women are unable to protect their children, from male violence, because if we were, the sheer scale of it would become obvious and shocking and cause the same sort of psychological earthquake that was caused when people realised what paedophile priests had been doing.

[OctopusSocktopuss]

She is awsome
We have been drunk together yes!

[AnyPhantomFucker]

oo, are you a RL mate of ledkr then ?

she is fab

[OctopusSocktopuss]

Fuck
Ok I'm hoping ledkr is coming over tonight and I'm going to ask her how to go about this. Thanks for your experience greengoose.

[greengoose]

As someone who worked for years with boys who were abused by people they trusted, I think you are needing to think seriously about the trousers your ex was wearing in front of the kids.

It is not ok to be wearing sexualised clothing that show off your penis in front of your children. Thats just a fact. Sorry. The trousers can only be explained as something that he has for sexual reasons, so why is he choosing to wear them in front of his sons?? It is not enough to leave this in the hands of your sons. Just because they have brought up the fact he pushed one of them down, it does not mean that they will EVER mention this to anyone. Children react in a whole different way to sexual abuse, there is no reason to think they will ever say anything even if a lot more is happening.

If you were to mention this to SS they would act on it. The worst that could happen for your DC is that they would very carefully be asked some questions and contact would be stopped. If you say nothing the worst that could happen is that something very wrong is happening, and you would be allowing it to continue, even although you had your suspicions. You have the duty of care here, even if it is very very difficult. You cant ignore this, and you cant just leave it to him to find an excuse, this needs dealt with by SS, it really really does. Im so sorry, but you have to do this.

Lets put it this way, if DC were in a park, and a man came into park with those trousers on and sat on a bench in full view of the kids in the park, what do you think parents would do??? They would be horrified and move their children away and report him. Its just that clear that this is not Ok.

He know it is wrong too, this is not something you see him dressed in, so he is deliberately changing into this in his house with your boys. There is no way to make that reasonable is there? You need to tell someone. Please dont let things just continue. Its essential for your sons you do this, even if nothing else (because what has happened would be termed as abusive) has happened yet there is a chance this is grooming, ie preparing the ground and testing the waters for things to be stepped up.

You have a right to be protected from your husband. You can share this information with children's services, express your view that you believe you should stop contact, but point out that the risk to you (and consequently to your children) from domestic violence is substantial and that you want anonymity around this allegation. Children's Services and the police can then use this information in their interviews with the children (I'm guessing the children will be video interviewed anyway as a result of the allegation about being thrown to the floor). They can then talk to the children about normal family life with their father, what they do, what they wear etc and without prompting give the children permission to talk about what is happening in their father's home. Children's services will then have this information directly from the children giving you a greater degree of protection. Even if they do not and things come up at a later point there will be corroborative information on children's services' files which will help you protect your children and help them protect themselves.

You should try to get some support for yourself through this process. Women's Aid is a good starting point. you can find their details online, and speak to them in confidence. I will keep an ear to this thread, and be thinking about you.

[ComradeJing]

Well done octopus. I really hope everything works out and your ds get through this with as minimal fuss and upset as possible.

I'd have a chat with your son's teacher and the sw about how you aren't sure what you are and aren't over reacting to. Better to tell them too much than too little now.

Pleased to see mnhq are finally seeing tyr for what he really is.

[OctopusSocktopuss]

thin end of the wedge isn't it. That's what I think. If the only control he now has over ds1 is a physical one, by the time he's 14 they'll be having stand up fights. I do think it escalated beyond ex's expectations, I don't think he ever meant it to happen, but that 's not an excuse. Once you start controlling your kids in this way it's never going to get any better is it?

I've never smacked my dc, never, I just don't agree with it. They know I don't agree with it and fwiw I did tell ds1 that his behaviour towards his father wasn't acceptable, he shouldn't swear or hit anyone, but I've had to concede that on this occasion he was defending himself, under extreme provocation. So hard to be able to explain this one to him. Sometimes it's ok to defend yourself, but mostly it's better not to retaliate but walk away

[AnyPhantomFucker]

pin to floor ?

throw on floor ?

it's all crossing a line innit...the line that tells you not to physically abuse your children

it is wrong...and your ex should face the consequences