DP would like more contact

[CC2B]

My DP has two DC, a DD of 7 and a DS of 3.

He left his ex last May and initially, his ex didn't allow him to have the children at his new place. However, overnights started to happen last August and things settled down a bit.

The children met me in early January, which went well, and we moved into a place together in late February, where the children have a lovely room that they love.

He currently has an arrangement with her for the children to be with us for Thursday dinner-time (5pm-6.30pm) each week, and then an overnight on Saturdays EOW (they arrive 9am on Sat and leave 6.30pm on Sun). So this is only 2 overnights per month.

He isn't very happy with this and doesn't feel it's good for either of the kids, but, of course, his ex is the RP and has all the control. He doesn't want to take it to court yet, as it's been a struggle to get to a civil way of working which only ever feels a transient thing. She doesn't want to talk, so texting and emailing is how everything has been arranged so far. Also, although his ex will probably be entitled to legal aid, my DP wouldn't be, but is horribly in debt already, because of having to take loans to fund their joint mortgage until last December, since she is refusing to sell. (She is now funding this herself with SMI benefits).

Her reasoning behind not wanting the children to stay for an extra night on the Sunday EOW was initially that the 3-year-old is too young and then became that it was "unrealistic" and "impractical". I completely understand that she may not want to lose the children for another night, but we can't understand why it's impractical, or why his DS is too young for a 2-night stay with his father, whom he loves to bits. I also have a great relationship with both children and they are very comfortable when they stay with us. It doesn't feel like this decision is remotely in the best interests of the children so I'm just trying to see if there are viewpoints out there that we've missed. This is particularly true since they have spent more than two nights with us on a view occasions now and it's always been completely fine and everyone's been happy (4 nights at Easter, and a 2-nighter to make up for a missed weekend, and then a 2-nighter last weekend when his ex went somewhere - so this one is interesting since it was definitely her choice and basically asking for a favour, which of course my DP snapped up!).

This ended up being long, sorry...

You can be as offended as you like MrGin. The point that you are spectacularly missing is that the notion that all of these arrangements can be made WITHOUT emotions, pain and distress is absurd. And that if those having to negotiate more contact acknowledged the pain, anger, hurt and distress that the other parent is feeling and just 'backed off' for a period, then the levels of antagonism wouldn't rise to a level whereby it's impossible to see the wood for the trees. People who show such blatant disregard for the feelings of people they once had a child with do nothing to help contact arrangements.

Should both parents act with pain and distress?

Can't see that helping the children.

Sassybeast If you turn up on a thread and say that anyone arguing the OP's case must be some arsehole who was unfaithful, left his partner and doesn't pay any maintenance, when in fact the opposite is true, you just show your self to be a bit of an ignorant idiot.

Of course there is pain and anger when people breakup.

The OP's DP split up with the mother of his kids over a year ago how long do you think his kids should suffer ? A couple of years ? A decade ?

The people who claim that all of these contact arrangements can be done without emotional involvement are inevitably the people who have had the affairs/walked out on the kids/don't pay the maintenance etc.

Actually I've found that the people who suggest that perhaps the best interests of the children should be regarded as more important that the emotional distress of their parents are judges, Cafcass Officers and childcare experts.

People in our society, male or female, do not have to stay in miserable relationships. And if one person decides to leave, even if it is terribly painful for the other person, it is not OK to try to restrict or damage that person's relationship with their children. Wanting more than 2 overnights a month a year after separation is hardly unreasonable and whilst emotions do make things very raw to begin with, I don't think using the kids as an emotional crutch at this point is very healthy, TBH.

Regardless of the rights or wrongs of the breakup its the relationship the children have with their parents. The mothers anxieties are really not relevant to obstructing to further parenting time between the kids and their father

You have an opinion that Sun ONs are 'not practical' really, why not? Judges seem to think its ok - families who dont go to court make it work. Its only parents who want to make life difficult for everyone else come up with this tired excuse, along with my favourite, routine...those parents who are in control...go to court, see who has the control then...

FWIW FNF is an organisation that promotes shared parenting and is in fact gender neutral despite their name - they help women too.

I cant speak for F4J, despite their publicity of yesteryear.

In reality the circumstances of the break up often do effect the relationship a father has with their child and CAFCASS and the judges cannot always resolve the issues satisfactorily. That might because of the distress the breakup causes the parent with the majority of care which children pick up on.

Other times children can make their own ridged moral judgments about a parent who leaves the relationship for a new partner or takes up with a new partner soon after the break up, although these children tend to be older. In their eyes the parent who left or the new partner is responsible for the breakdown of their family. I'm not saying its the case here, but fathers in these situations who lack empathy and understanding often bring about their own rejection and alienation.

Also new partners (and family, friends, lawyers, counsellors etc) can take on disputes between parents as their own and escalate matters. Providing a shoulder to lean on and looking at matters from a different POV is fine but getting involved in disputes is not helpful.

Far better IMHO to wait until the chaos after separation and the finances are settled and arrangements for children are well established before getting involved with a third party, although I do take the point people don't choose when they fall in love.

OP, your partner could try setting up mediation. Although his ex has indicated she doesn't want to talk people often change their mind if they are invited by the mediator. They may be resistant for a couple of meetings but often the resistance is dropped and if agreement can be reached it is more likely to be adhered to than a court imposed order. To get the ball rolling your partner could arrange an appointment on his own with the mediator to find out about the process. The mediator would then invite his ex to a similar meeting before holding a meeting with both parties.

In any event if matters can't be resolved there is now a requirement that most parents attend at least a Mediation & Assessment Meeting before a court will hear a case.

The Parent Connection is a useful resource;
theparentconnection.org.uk

If fathers (and it seems to be only fathers being mentioned as leaving or meeting new partners) wait for the dust to settle, they'll find the status-quo has been set.

And there's fat chance of getting more contact without going to court.

But to go to court parents are required to at least go to a Mediation Information & Assessment Meeting first in most circumstances before a court will hear the case.

My DP went to court without mediation. If there is sufficient acrimony to justify a court hearing, mediation can be rather pointless.

Delay is the Devil!

OP said her partner didn't want to go to court just yet.

The new Family Procedure Rules 2010 require most parents to attend a MIAM. Until now there hasn't been enough mediators to cope with the demand but as the courts get increasingly clogged up and there are delays MIAMs are more likely to be insisted upon and there is always a risk that if you attend the first hearing the judge will insist on you attending a MIAM creating even more delay.

I do hope your partner is speaking to his ex/a solicitor/a mediator/whoever might help facilitate contact.

Is it just me or are there always a number of threads on MN from women trying to manag their partner's/husband's relationship with his children? Don't do other people's work.

Because men are historically/traditionally crap at organisation, form filling, going to the doctors.

The first thing he should do is put down on paper what it is he actually is proposing, and that includes birthdays, special days such as mothers/fathers day, Christmas/Easter arrangements and holidays - talk it over, see what is practical from work commitments perspective etc, - Step 1

Step 2 - communicate that proposal to the ex which suits the circumstance, letter(recorded), email etc giving a time when you would hope for a response, say 7-14 days.

Step 3 - When there is no joy call the mediators, explain the issue - they will then contact the ex and individual assesments will be organised to guage if mediation is suitable, after which mediation can begin.

She turns up great, she doesnt not so great but then you can move to the nuclear option. Which is what you turn to when no progress is made and the mediator decides to bring a halt.

Step 4 - Make an application to the court.

If has issues with financing Step 4 get along to an FNF - they can advise.

However, HE should be driving this if he is remotley serious about parenting his kids.

Oh, and make sure he's been keeping a record of the time he has had so far and not to engage in arguments with the ex - and that goes for you too.

FnF is not gender neutral. For starters none of their staff and only one of their trustees is a women and most of their MF when put on the spot will admit they do it because of the "sh*tty" deal" fathers get. Until recently there was an article on the their website written by FnF research officer who had signed a petition of an American christian fundamentalist group that campaigned for the repeal of the 19th Amendment that gives women the right to vote.

Huansagain, you are absolutely correct of course it isn't just fathers who leave for new partners. Another poster raised the point that circumstance of the break up has no bearing on the relationship the children have with on the relationship with the father. I'm just saying the circumstances can actually effect the relationship with the father but that doesn't mean they can't have a bearing on the relationship with the mother.

As far as the status quo is concerned as long as children are surviving satisfactorily it is an uphill struggle changing from being the parent with minority of care to the parent with the majority of care but changing from one to two or possibly eventually three overnights at the weekend isn't difficult if parents are reasonable and go about it the right way.

Courts are often reluctant to give one parent all of the dc's free time, so it is unlikely that a court would agree that their mum should have them for all of the "work" stuff Mon - Thurs when they are / will be presumably at school and then dad gets all the free time to do fun stuff at weekends. It is probably worth bearing that in mind when considering how much time your dp can reasonably expect to have. I agree that 2 nights isn't fair, but perhaps suggesting another week night rather than the whole weekend would be a fairer solution.

FNF is like a federation of states - there's the national office which focuses on long term initiatives/lobbying and then there's the branches - who provide much needed help and advice to parents who want to see their children now. The majority of attendees are men but there are mothers and grand mothers. If you are using a metric such as the gender of the work force then doesnt that make CAFCASS and Social Services gender biased?

Hang on - all the staff at my local library are women, but they still provide a gender neutral service. FNF give incredibly valuable, and virtually free advice regardless of gender.

I suppose to get involved with FNF, which helps NRPs, by default you are going to be helping men, 90% of NRPs are men.

I'm going to have a guess here, but I reckon most of the board at Gingerbread are women, and the majority of the people they help are women.

I think fathers get a crap deal in this country.

Is your local library called Books Need Male Readers?

Primary schools must be gender biased also - the nations sons are under threat!

No - but they have a section in the children's fiction labelled something like 'Books for Boys' because they are responding to the problem of boys not reading as much as girls. To focus on the needs of one gender within an organisation that offers services to both does not make that service gender biased, even if the service name was born out of a time when the needs of a particular gender was percieved to be the priority.