A terrible topic but...

[AnotherRegularPoster]

First of all, before the troll accusations start flying, I am a regular poster, but this is not a very good/nice topic to talk about and I do not want to be know iykwim. There is not a really good way of putting this, so I will just come out with it. I know there will be many reasons for this, but what are the main sources of reasons for a mother to lose custody of her children? For example, I know if the mother is a danger to the children, but what else? Can her children be taken away from her if she cannot afford to "keep" them?

Also, if a married couple are seperated, is it possible for one of them to be able to take the other's money through the courts? Sorry if none of this makes sense, but if the questions could be answered, I would really appreciate it. Thank you. And I am truely sorry for the subject matter.

AFAIK - her kids CANNOT be taken away at all if she can't afford to keep them, only if she's mistreating them - like starving them because she can't afford food, which should never happen through crisis loans etc etc.

As to the taking money - it can be done but depends on circumstances - ie if a mother looking after the kids from the marriage is left with no money and the husband has more, then some can definitely be ordered to be given to the woman - depends on circumstances.

I have a friend who lost main custody of her child because she left him in the marital home with the father. AFAIK, it was because there was no good reason to uproot the child and award main custody to the mother rather then there being a reason not to award custody to the mother.

MY male cousin got full custody of his son with visitational rights to the mother when he had to break into her house at 2 am one Sunday morning because he found out that she had left the kid home alone at 18 months old while she went out partying. He could hardly keep himself and his son fed on his earnings but he went without stuff so his son can have shoes, clothes etc.. He finally got help through social services it took a while but now they manage quite well,

so no children cannot be removed from a family just because they live below the poverty line.

My cousin is now looking for a nice woman. anyone want a ready made family?? ps he is 23!!

ARP- Don't apologise for asking a serious question that could affect a lot of people- if you're worried then MN is the place to go for answers- there should be no troll accusations as this is a serious topic and IMO not the sort of thing a troll would ask (does that make sense?- basically I'm saying- don't apologise for asking for help)
I'm sorry that I don't know the answers but IMO in this day and age there would be financial help to provide a roof over your head and food on the table- a parent should not lose their child because of money

My Dad got custody of me, my brother and sister when my Mum left and left us behind. I was 12. my sister 10 and my brother 4. This was in 1983 so very unusual at the time. Basically Dad argued (in the High Court - where custody was decided at this time) that Mum had chosen to leave (with Dad's best friend) and had chosen to leave us with him so he must be a good parent and anyway we wanted to stay with him. Eventually Mum backed down and withdrew her request for custody after Dad agreed to pay her a portion of the house value - Dad always said gettig the 3 of us for £7500 was the best bargain he ever got.

If you have not left your kids with the father (and I'm guessing not) and are not actually neglecting them (which I'm guessing not since you are posting about this! ) then I would say there is very little likelihood that their father would be able to ask for full residency.

The courts will look at what is in the best interets of the child/ren. If the mother works full-time and would have to pay for someone else to look after the children, whilst the father was at home full-time (for whatever reason, unemployment/working from home, etc), the court might feel that the children would be better with the father as they would have a full-time parent as their carer.

I don't think the courts these days have such a blinkered view on which parent should have the children with them, as they used to when custody was almost always automatically granted to the mother. There are so many factors to be taken into account.

That said, it is still rather unusual for children to remain with their father rather than their mother. The younger the children, the more likely it is that the mother would have a slight advantage.

However, every case is different and the court does not operate a blanket policy, so it is very difficult to give a firm answer to your question.

There is no such thing as not being able to keep children under English law, as the law says that you can live on the sum awarded as Income Support. Whether you can or not is irrelevant; the law says you can, and therefore children cannot be taken away from a custodial parent for this reason.

Hope you're feeling a bit better with all the advice ARP. It is not easy to get your children taken away from you AFAIK - you'd have to be deliberately mistreating them, not just making them go without toys and sweets or something like that.

(ps - cleankittycat - I'm 22!! Is he gorgeous?? )

From perosonal and proffesional experience it is very arre for mothrs to loose custody of there children to fathers, and certainly not for financial reasons.

I know this from personal exp as my ex has a much higher standard of living then myself and has tried to use this as means of getting custody of our dd.

Children are taken away from mothers usually because they are in danger and even then social services will try and help the mother rather than take the child away. This of course depnds on the severity of the situation.

AS I think someone else said fathers may get custody if they were the full time parent when the couple were married and the mother worled long hours. the only other exception is if the children are old enough and decide for themselves that they wish to live with dad.

Thank you for the feedback. The story behind this question is quite a complicated one and luckily I am not asking for myself. It has been very helpful, and any more posts would still be appreciated.

wobblyknicks he's looks kind of like a young Jimmy Cagney, but thinner. If memory serves me right

well my dh's ex has custody of their 2 children and he was told by a lawyer that he was unlikely to get cutody of his children despite her having had regular armed drug raids at her house, a husband and a boyfriend (the main two men after my dh) in prison, having attacked me when I was 6 months pregnant (i didnt press charges for the sake of the kids), 2 children permanently excluded from school and the rest with poor attendance records, regularly lets the children (including the 4 year old) wander the streets alone at 9 or 10 at night on a school night etc. etc.
I think you have to do an awful lot to get your children taken away.