My friend has just ( temporarily) lost custody of her dc..

[Ginisnnice]

As above. They were taken from the home on an order from the family court and placed with the father without warning.

She is only allowed to see them once a week, the grandparents not at all.

She says that the father has managed this as he has accussed her of " badmouthing" him to the kids and as this is seen to be harmful to the dc, in setting one parent against another, he now has custody whilst the court process reaches any further challenge.
My friend says this is unfair and the result of a mysoginistic judge.
And that her husband has used this accusation against her and is untrue.

My understanding is that there should be an independant professional to hear the dc s wishes? My friend says the dc did see someon e " but they were rubbish"..does anyone know if dc would have their wishes taken into account. ? On what basis could this even happen?

Y.

.

Same with my family member. It’s ridiculous. I witnessed it, she was very smug about ruining his weekends etc, and ignored my pleas to put her child first.

It means without the other party being notified of the court hearing, usually results in the children being removed, and is done in extreme circumstances.

They still have the right to appeal; an appeal date is usually set at the same time as the ex-parte hearing; within 14-28 days - longer if the issues are complex/grave etc.

A friend of mine went through similar with her daughter when she was about 9/10. They had been separated about 2 years, mum had moved from the marital home, dad was being a dick about changing school when she had no option (council accomodation - no choice in area). He refused to return her home one weekend, changed her school (which court changed back immediately) tried to change her name - to an Eastern version of her name - his new partner was eastern). It was awful to watch.

They appointed a guardian for her at court and as such she had her own solicitor. That kid went through 18 months of hell back and forth. I didn't hear the end as the kids were moving to secondary but she's back full time with mum now. (And shortly after got a significant SEN diagnosis...)

Ex parte is when a hearing urgently takes place without the other party being notified.

Children who grow up with abusers don’t need to be told that their parent is an abuser, believe me, we already know.

My ex is abusive and high conflict; however he is also lazy and that is the reason why he (thankfully) has zero interest in our DC, and every day that passes I remain grateful for the fact. He never even met DC.

And I often wonder am I going to say to DC when they’re older.

Either this is some serious parental alienation, which is a pretty appalling thing to do, or there's another story here.

Some children don't want to go to their dads and the dad's then say that the mother has alienated them and that's why they don't want to see their dad. There was a documentary I watched where two teenagers were forcefully taken from the home and given to a dad they didn't even want to live with because of this.

Children who grow up with abusers don’t need to be told that their parent is an abuser, believe me, we already know.

No, this isn't true. Sexual and emotional and verbal abuse towards a parent can often happen in secret/not around the children. My ex was abusive and I kicked him out when my DD was 4. She is older now and constantly "telling me off" for getting rid of her dad and saying she wants him back in the home and asking me why I broke her family. And I have to lie and say we just didn't get on anymore.

Reading some of these comments, this is why the family courts should be open. Because people don't believe that this could happen just as OP says it has. Of course there's more to this because you can't give the whole history of the case in one short post. But people here are so quick to say it must be the fault of OP's friend, that she must be alienating the kids from their dad. Even when OP says there was domestic violence.

Judges make outrageous decisions all the time in the family courts, they often dismiss allegations of DV and even when they accept DV, the violent father will still often get contact and further use the court to control the mother.

OP, I hope your friend has a good legal team, can you pass this onto her , hopefully it might help: supportnotseparation.blog/publications/

The reason she knows it was "me who got rid of him" is because his emotional and sexual abuse of me got worse during lockdown, I had no family or friends to visit and stay with, and he wouldn't leave the home so I had to call the police to arrest and remove him.

She asks me why I did that all the time.

My elder DCs (teens) rarely stay with their Dad now; but he’s well aware that I barely see them as they’re almost always out socialising, and we’ve never been to court. We both lament the Before Times.

A friend of mine hated going to her Dads, for a variety of reasons, nothing serious like abuse or neglect, she just hated it. Lots of much younger step and half siblings, chaos, basically. Court said she had to go. He wouldn’t let her not go. She went NC as soon as she could.

Absolutely no way this is the only reason for removal. Christ, the situations sone poor children are in before they are removed....... we're talking the worst possible scenarios here.

100% this..just never happens..they weren’t taken just because she bad mouthed them something very serious has happened that she isn’t disclosing

You have one side of a very complicated story. Take it with a pinch of salt. You can support her as you wish but you are highly unlikely to be getting the full truth here

Apologies, I should elaborate. We know on some level, deep down. But as children, we’re programmed to love them, want their approval, affection, time, attention. We know something is off, and are unable to even begin to articulate it.

Emotional abuse wasn’t “a thing” when I was growing up. We were taught about physical and sexual abuse at school, nothing else. (And no internet, so no way to find information like now, fuck, I’m old).

Whereas my teen DC are well aware of what it is, how it can present and have been since primary school; which makes me wonder if things would have been different for me if it had been “a thing” they taught us about back then.

@Owlilac 💐 for you. Been there. Don’t have the same issue as I was pregnant when I fled, and he’s never bothered his arse. DC is now 7 and asking why they don’t have a Dad? Are obviously aware that siblings have a Dad, having watched him collect them EOW and in between their whole life.

4 year olds are black and white, and have no filter so will ask very blunt, difficult questions.

ExH1 fucked off with OW when ours were 4 and 2, and I was grilled constantly by the 4YO. That was difficult enough to navigate, let alone with the added mines of yours.

"Judges make outrageous decisions all the time in the family courts"

Except that's not true. I'm not saying there's never been a miscarriage of justice, but this is an outrageous statement. What you're saying is you are more willing to believe what women you've never met say on the Internet than in the integrity of the justice system.

The woman I know was a good friend. Authentic, caring, loved her kids. Has a huge supportive following of people she's met online, in online specialist forums (she seems to be friends with more people she's met online than real life friends, who ask awkward questions and know the people she's talking about). If I didn't know for a fact she'd lied I've be absolutely outraged at the way she'd been treated by the courts and social services. I wonder if she believes her own fiction, as lots of it just doesn't make sense.

Reading some of these comments, this is why the family courts should be open. Because people don't believe that this could happen just as OP says it has.

It seems that people also don't believe that parental alienation also occurs through vindictivesness. It does.

Ex parte applications are more serious than he said she said situations.

Agreed. The threshold for ex-parte is extremely high, and for good reason.

Have a stroll through the High Court Judgments, family section. They’re anonymous, but available to read. And show why it shouldn’t be wide open all the way down.

Family court also involves Social Services cases and people forget that.

As the victim of parental alienation as a child, back when it wasn’t “a thing”, I know the damage it does. Been in therapy all my damn life due to it. Ultimately, as adults - me and my siblings are closer to the adult who was the NRP than the RP.

We weren’t stupid, we knew what was happening. And I for one will never forgive it.

Ex child protection SW here, had a number of these cases, there's def more to the story, kids are likely on a Child in need play or child protection plan. In most incidences where kids were removed suddenly were mothers intoxicated with drink or drugs as an ongoing issue with other neglectful behaviour - It won't be a sudden thing with no other issues- no way would a court remove children like that, they do what's in the best interests of the child

This absolutely does happen. There's a documentary about it on channel 4 OD. It's one of the most traumatic documentaries I've ever watched. Informative but be warned.

Seen 'Torn Apart Family Courts Uncovered Dispatches'?
Watch it here on All 4: www.channel4.com/programmes/torn-apart-family-courts-uncovered-dispatches?cntsrc=social_share_android_torn_apart_family_courts_uncovered_dispatches

@DaphneSprucesPippasClack What's it called? I'd like to watch it.

Ah nvm. You already posted the link.

To be honest my main concern was for the wellbeing of the children . That their voices have been heard. She says they do not.want to be with him .she strongly manitains he was abusive to her and that he is using the courts to control her and affect hee life by stating she is doing the aniliating of him and the abuser( him) is calling her an abuser via this route.

You I presume haven't been in court, you haven't seen the evidence for what she is saying.

You have her 'side' only. The courts don't.

By all means stand by her, but don't think she is telling you everything.

they do what's in the best interests of the child

They think they do but they do not always succeed in this. There's a documentary that shows this. Linked above by another poster.