Do you think the law should stop parents who have split up taking children out of the country, if the parent left behind doesn't agree to them leaving?

[Spero]

I'd be really interested to hear what you think - I've got a professional and a personal interest in this question.

Personally I feel quite strongly that if two people decide to have a child they should accept that they need to live as close as possible to each other so that the child gets the benefit of both of them, at least while the child is little. Otherwise, how does that child get to have a relationship with the parent that he/she doesn't live with?

I had one case where the mother of a one year old said she was moving to Australia - no real reason why she couldn't have waited a few years (she had family out there to live with) until the baby could at least talk and therefore be able to speak to his dad on phone/web cam etc. by making that decision she made sure her son wouldn't know his father as neither of them could afford to fly back and forth more than once a year. The court gave her permission to go.

I feel very strongly this is just wrong and I think the courts should reflect this and only allow parents to leave the country in exceptional circs, at least while the children are, say, under 10.

It does depend on the circumstnaces. I oved to England (from Scotland) , met Xh - we married with every intention (from HIM) of moving to Scotland but never did it. Now we are divorcing (he went off with OW and hasn't seen the Dc for months - his choice). I have maintained throughout that if he lets me buy him out of the house I will stay here - he wants over and above his fair share (LONG story) and is trying to force the sale even though he knows that financially (and for support) I will have to move home with the Dc cps i can't aford to buy down here, he is ...guess what.. still trying to force the sale of the house and is also going to court to stop me taking the DC out of the jurisdiction of England and Wales!!! he works in Scotland mid week and doesn't see them anyway! He is also looking at moving to NZ with his OW but seems to be under he impression that when /if he does emigrate he can still stop me moving home!!! AAARGGGHHHHH!!! More legal bills which I can't afford. Every case is different and I do feel sorry for the genuine NRPs who get screwed here but a blanket law would not help me! I have 2 kids, 2 jobs and NO suport - would be a hell of a lot different back home...
So...

Well speaking as one that moved 5000 miles to the US, to find out now ExH was no longer interested in remaining with us and wanted the boys and I to leave the US - I fought tooth and nail to stay here - children need both parents in some form or another. I've been to hell and back in the last 18mnths and only just now are we finally getting back on an even keel, but the boys see their father most weeks (unless he's travelling). I will continue to insist that he spends time with them and as Expat says - we have joint custody - and it would have been very unlikely to have been any other way here in Colorado - the child comes first here in divorce - thank goodness.

I don't think there should be a ban, but I do think it should be decided on a case by case basis with the children's interests being paramount in all cases, and the presumption that time spent with both parents is very valuable.

A couple of years ago my dh (we were separated at the time) decided to emigrate, and wanted to take the children, on the basis that life would be better for them in a different country. We had an informal shared custody arrangement, that worked fine as we were 15mins apart, so their lives were minimally affected by our breakup. He thought this could be stretched so that instead of every three days them rotating it could be every three years. My solicitor told me that as I had them for half a day longer in a week I would count as the primary carer and could block him taking them. The fact that this would have led to a complete breakdown in our relationship was neither here nor there (he was absolutely adamant that it was the only thing that would ever make him happy).

As it happened we got back together, and this year moved to the US, and then six months later to Canada (not planned!). After a couple of weeks of seeing how the children struggled he admitted that it would have been an awful thing to have made them swop countries and parents.

Emigrating is incredibly tough, especially on children, and doing it whilst losing a parent (where that person is a loved and important part of their lives) would be doubly so. Not something to be done lightly at all.

WrongWrongWrong. Your situation sounds terrible, ad sadly not that unusual, once children have left the country it seems that it is very very difficult to do anything about it.

However I think it is probably worse for older children - emigrating gets progressively harder as you get older, as attachments to friends and familiarity with how things are where you grew up get stronger. Certainly my elder son has found our moves much harder than my younger daughter, and talking to other people in similar circumstances I think this is quite normal. Plus children moving with only one parent may also be losing all their extended family on the other side too, as how are they going to be able to visit?

Ali, I'm always shocked reading about the things your ex h has done. And I think you deserve a huge pat on the back for going through what you have with your head held high and demonstrating such dignity to your sons.

I HAVE JOINT CUSTODY OF MY SECOND CHILD ONLY. I HAVE 2 CHILDREN. WE HAVE BEEN OFFERED A FANTASTIC OPPORTUNITY TO WORK AND MOVE ABROAD.ESPECIALLY IN THIS CLIMATE AND THE FATHER OF MY YOUNGER CHILD IS NO LONGER WORKING SO I AM SUPPORTING HER FULLY. I WANT TO DO THIS AND PREPARED TO FLY HER OVER IN HOLS TO STAY WITH HER DAD. HE CAN COME OVER. WEB CALLS ETC.I THINK IT WOULD BE WRONG TO SPLIT UP SISTERS.(YET THINK IF THE DAD WAS OFFERED THE A JOB ABROAD OR IN ANOTHER COUNTY IT WOULD NOT BE A PROBLEM. I WOULDNT STOP HIM.YET I WOULD SORT OUT WHEN HE WOULD SEE HIS CHILD.)SO THEN WHY STOP THE MOTHER LIFE MOVES ON. AND YOU CANT LIVE LIFE THROUGH YOUR KIDS. FINANCIALLY WE WOULD BE BETTER OFF ABLE TO GIVE THE GIRLS MORE OPPORTUNITIES IN LIFE AND MORE FREEDOM. WOULD IT BE RIGHT TO STAY AND STRUGGLE NOT BEING ABLE TO GIVE THEM ANYTHING AND THEM GROWING UP RECALLING CANT DO ANYTHING COS WE CANT AFFORD IT BUT YOU SAW YOUR DAD.YET IM NOT STOPPING HER SEEING HER DAD IT WOULD JUST BE IN A BLOCK INSTEAD OF EVERYOTHER WEEKEND.NOBODY CAN PREDICT THE FUTURE OR IN TEN YEARS YOU SPLIT FROM YOUR PARTNER. OTHERWISE YOU WOULD HAVE HAD THE KIDS IF THERE WASNT A FUTURE TOGETHER.OR STAY TOGETHER TILL THEY LEAVE HOME.OR STAY IN SAME PLACE AND GIVE UP ANY OPPORTUNITIES FOR A BETTER LIFE TILL THEY LEAVE HOME.YOU HAVE 1 LIFE AND AS LONG AS THEY HAVE CONTACT THEN YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO LIVE LIFE AND THEY WILL MAKE THEIR CHOICES WHEN THEY ARE OF AGE.MY EX HARDLY EVER SAW HIS DAUGHTER WHEN WE WERE TOGETHER AT WORK BEFORE SHE WAS UP BED WHEN HE GOT BACK. I THINK YOU SHOULD AND LIKE THEY DO MEET OTHER PEOPLE AND MOVE ON.LOOK AT HOW KIDS HAVE TO DEAL WITH WHEN THEIR DAD HAS ANOTHER BABY AND ATTENTION IS NO LONGER GIVE ALL TO THAT CHILD. CHILDREN DEAL WITH A LOT IN LIFE. WHEN DIVORCE HAPPENS. NEW PARTNERS. NEW HOME, DIFFERENT HOMES, EXTENDED FAMILY, THE LIST GOES ON.OR MESS THEM UP BY STAYING TOGETHER AND HOPE YOU DONT MESS THEM UP THAT WAY. AND HOPE THEY HAVE NORMAL RELATIONSHIPS. YOU CANT WIN IF YOU ARE GIVEN A CHANCE THEN TAKE IT BUT OFFER ALL TO KEEP CONTACT AND THE LAW SHOULD NOT BAN MOVING YOU CAN SAY LOOK AT US ALL PARENTS SHOULD NOT HAVE HAD KIDS IF IT WAS GOING TO BREAK UP.,