effectively...court order is for supervised contact but judge made clear this should be relaxed with time, so i have been allowing exP to have the dcs unsupervised for few hours.
sunday ystrday he had 9 yr old dd and 13 yr old ds who is autistic and has severe learning difficulties... dd says she was really bored (apart from being once again disaillusioned at having been promised an outing and this not materialising...) and was left watching tv with ds (he still watches thomas tank engine, so was not something she was interested in...).
where was dad? (who had promised to take them out but didnt)..
"he was in the bedroom with the lights off sleeping".
now i accept that parenting is different and if he thinks is ok to keep them in at home watching tv etc fine... but taking a siesta is taking the p??
espec when ds needs to be supervised - . he has escaped before - dd says "well the door was locked". or he climbs on furniture in kitchen looking for food...
if was a carer i was employing and i found otu they were sleeping on the job i would sack them right?
so why should it be different because is the dad?
go back to fully supervised?
confront him ? (he will deny/ blame dd/ make dd lie next time etc...?)