Access And How Much To Offer? - Help!!

[noraledger]

Hello All,

Need a little help with knowing how much access to offer.

As the court date and meeting with Cafcass draws closer i am getting more and more flustered and confused.

If any one has read the 'is my ex exposing himself' thread then this will give you a bit of background in to my concerns. Yes, i am also zippy96!

Exp is currently being supervised on his visits of 11 hours per week split up over three days.He is supervised in my home by my parents. This is due to the fact that there was a threat of abduction from exp as well as physical and verbal abuse in front of dd and the judge decided it would be safer for my dd to remain in her home with exp during supervised visits as it would set my mind at ease.

I received a letter form the solicitor stating that exp will be asking cafcass for unsupervised visits and wishes to take her out of the family home as he see's fit.

I have said an outright NO to my solicitor and he has advised that cafcass will make this decision.

Other than the toilet exposure he has also been shouting at dd during visits and has called her stupid on many occassion. This is diarised by my parents during their supervision. He has also fallen asleep on the sofa when dd had a nap.

So, how much should i offer for access?

Gut feeling is none but i have been told this could be seen as me being obstructive and could work against me.

Should i try and take it to a contact centre or would this be over turned by cafcass?

What is reasonable to offer under these circumstances?

i'd go contact centre route. BUT courts like to see progression. and usually like it out of the contact centre at some point.
not read the exposing thread....so off to do that now!

Once you have read the other thread Tiffany please let me know your thoughts.

i think you should stick to your guns with this one, you are not denying him access but his behaviour etc is worrying and wiht the threat of abduction no court would surely allow unsupervised access? as long as you let them know why he has supervised access you can not be seen as obstructing as yo are allowing access. just have everything he has done in writing what you have stated here.
hth

Thanks bethoo, i do have a lot in writting as my parents have been keeping a log at every visit they have supervised. It is just wether or not the cafcass officer will see them as being biased? I am their daughter after all.

In regards to the abduction, exp has put in to his first statement that he did say he would take dd but never meant it to be abduction just meant it to be that he was taking her at that time.

It's all about how it is perceived?

well its definitely odd!!

you will be able to explain in front of him and cafcass whats been going on. he'll either have an immediate answer,where he'll probably show himself as a fool....or......he will deny it. so i would assume that cafcass will want to interview your mum also. its going to be a long process.....my own case is a year in and nowhere near any solution.

I have read a lot of your threads and you are an incredible women!! Your so strong and believe me i will be taking a lot of your advice with me.

My mum, dad and i have all had back ground checks done by cafcass so i am guessing they will probably want to speak with all three of us?

yes,think they will.

at your hearing next week the judge should set a timetable,and will give you the waiting times for cafcass....here in bedfordshire its currently 12 weeks,but at the time,our judge coomented that in kent it was longest wait for cafcass,at something like 27 weeks..

My solicitor has advised that the court i am going to will have 2 cafcass officers present so will be asked on the day to speak with one of them. Have been told it may be best to go in with exp even though it will difficult.

He said that he briefly mentioned but off the record to one of the officers the incident with the toilet. Aparently the officer said this is inapropriate and that they hope they get my case.

He said no names, dates or times were mentioned to the officer so as not to influence them.