Is this morally correct??

[MissingMyBoy]

I consider myself to be a loving, caring parent of my beautiful 2 and a bit y/o DS. Unfortuneatly I have only been his permanant daddy as he was taken away by mey now ex-wife after only 8 weeks.

My ex only allowed me 2 hours per week initially and after a period of 8 months I eventually got a court order giving increasing contact up until the point in August 2006 where I started getting overnight staying contact on an alternating weekend basis. I now see my son for around 3 and a half full days a fortnight. I of course want more to the point of 50/50.

Part of the judges summing up a year and a half ago included that she did not understand why the case had come before her as there was not a shred of evidence against me as a father. She also commented that she could see how much I loved my DS.

I am now in a very happy and loving relationship with my new partner and we are expecing a child in May 2007. I found out last week that my ex is now intending on marrying again and taking my son some 4 hours or more drive away to a remote location in the East of the country.

I really cannot believe that she can have so little thought for my DS in removing him not only form me but also his maternal grandparents who looked house him for nearly a year following separation.

Directly before my last hearing on contact I had a job opportunity that would have made me significantly wealthier but taken me away from my son. I of course turned it down to be near him and have altered my working pattern to see him more frequently due to his young age.

I was just wondering what people out there thought of a mother placing her own happiness before the needs of her child adn their soon to be siblings.

Zookeeper, you've hit the nail on the head as regards that basic mistake. The idea that just because the resident parent has the children living with them, it's easier to use them as a bargaining chip, is wrong, quite frankly.

As a non-resident parent, the ways you can use your children as bargaining chips are numerous. Here's a list just off the top of my head:

1. You can not pay maintenance.
2. You can pay it, but irregularly and sporadically, and under the amount that you've agreed, so that it's a constant source of friction but not worth going to the CSA about (because as we all know, they don't work).
3. You can pay it on condition that the ex does something you want.
4. You can turn up late for contact visits, in order to disrupt plans or just annoy.
5. You can bring the kids back late, in order to cause anxiety and annoyance.
6. You can not turn up for contact visits at all, in order to show who's in charge.
7. You can undermine parental authority and boundaries by encourgaing your children to pursue activities/ behaviour that they would not be allowed to pursue in their resident home.
8. You can undermine parental authority by telling your children or implying to them that Mummy's talking bollocks about something and generally sending them the message that Mummy and Daddy can be played off against each other.

Etc. etc.

Sorry, but the "invisibility" of how a non-resident parent can use their children as bargaining counters just as effectively as that of a resident parent, cannot be allowed to go unnoted. The obvious way of denying access if you have care and control, is so glaring that we all notice it (and disapprove of it). But the less obvious ways are just not as noticed, leading to the perception (wrong imo) that it's easier to use your children as bargaining chips if you have residence. If you have two people either so selfish or so self-deluding that they're prepared to use their children as weapons, both can make a pretty good stab at it, in their different ways. On the whole though, only one will be noticed and condemned, and only one has legal redress.

I agree with everything you say, but imo the ultimate and most cutting thing to do, above everything that you list,is to stop one parent seeing the children.

That is the currently fashionable view Zookeeper, but it's not one I subscribe to. IMO the most awful thing a parent can do to a child (short of physically harming them of course) is to undermine their psychological and emotional health, thus ensuring that they can't grow up into happy confident, well-adjusted adults.

Any behaviour which contributes to that is the "ultimate" for me. Denying contact may in some cases fall into that category; in other cases, it may well fall into the category of preventing harm to the child. It all depends on the individual circumstances, you can't make a sweeping statement that fits all families imo.

to go back to the original question - mmb: what I would do in your circumstances is to maintain contact as well as you can, and push strongly for longer visits (eg school holidays) when your son is older.
Children need you just as much when they are 13 than they do when they are 3.

ohhh it is so tough.

My ex is a very good dad and sees dd 1 night a week and every other weekend and I am glad of his support. Still I don't know if I could guarantee that I will not leave lets say a 50 mile radius of where we are.

I really don't think I could - if my ex carries on being the attentive father he is now - take his dd that far away from him, unless the circumstances were exceptional.

But, I can never say never...

You sound like a great dad and I really feel for you.

(Also don't think that 50 50 care is bad, when my parents split up we stayed a week at my dads and a week at my mums. I don't think it is good for young children but yes - if wanted - for older kids).

I don't think your ex is really looking at it from your point of view.
If it was the other way round and she was seperated from your ds she would be heartbroken. Its really sad that you can't see him everyday and will be even worse if he lives so far away. He is your child too and imo you should have a say in the whole thing.
I'm not implying that she is a bad mother/person but perhaps not really thinking of it from your side iyswim.
Maybe you could agree to meet up over coffee and discuss it. If you let her know you are really upset by it perhaps she may reconsider.

If she does move away then only getting 4 hour visits is ridiculas. You will have to insist that you have your son every second weekend for the whole weekend or something.

Sorry that should say ridiculous...

Thanks so much for all of the posts - I think it is becoming a really good debate and is also opening up some other areas of difficulty in contact.

A good example of how difficult my xw is...

I drop my ds of last night - I ask when she will like him returned on Sunday as I have already agreed to change the drop off location to her parents as they are having a party there. I normally have my DS until 6pm onthe Sunday. My xw says between 3 and 3.30pm (btw I have him Friday through Sunday to take him up to see his paternal family). I reply I am not intending leaving Edinburgh until 4pm (its about a 4 hour drive) so will be looking at around four. SHe then throws a strop and says that she really needs my Ds back by about 3pm as she wants him to be with his family. Out of interest his family see him every other weekend at church for around 4 hours - my family members have seen my DS 3 times in his 2 and a bit year life. I reply to her that he also has another family that he needs to see and walk away.

Picking up on some of the posts...

Many responses - a lot of people pick up that 50/50 does not work - in general a lot of contact situations work and a lot don't the percentages are never the issues it is the people involved. If both people can agree on the level best for the child then it will work.

3andnomore - sadly talking does not work with my xw - all she closes everything out of her life to make things difficult - I can only put ideas in writing via her sols.

Tilly - I agree - 8 hours driving is a nightmare

zoo - specific issues cannot prevent mothers moving away - if I want my son near I have to go for residence (that is an option I am actively considering as I do not think xw is acting in DS best interests)

snorkle - thanks - I am already a lifetime FNF member

Caroligula - I can categorically state that I have never applied any of the 8 areas as an NRP in frustrating contact. In fact I had to self assess myself to CSA as xw refused to give me bank details to pay her as she obviously wanted to try and make me look like a non payer in court. Also, not allowing a child freedom to see his loving caring NRP is emotionally damaging to a child whether he can tell the RP or not.

LittleSarah - thanks you sound like a caring mother as does everyone in this thread actually.

Lornaloo - thanks - my xw is selfish plain and simple - she has nor never will look at things from my or my DS point of view.

Well I'm off to lovely Edinburgh with my lovely DS, new partner (with bun in the oven) to see all of my fab family.

Can I wish everyone on this site a very merry xmas and a fab New year and i will hope to speak to some of you in the New Year.

Many thanks

MMB

oops meant leaving edinburgh at 12 noon

Ah now it's becoming much clearer that your xw is intent on frustrating contact, rather than just moving away because it's a natural normal part of her life.

I think you might find that you need to go back to court to get your contact time reassessed, MMB, if she is not open to negotiation without solicitors etc. And if not, hang on in there, keep up the contact however difficult it is, because your DS is so quickly going to get to an age where he can stay longer with you and where he will actually have a say in it. (And at the same time, hopefully, her hostility to him having contact with you will have died down.)

I think if mum intends to move child away without any reference to dad in the circumstances he described from the beginning it's pretty clear she's bent on frustrating contact. At 2.5 years DS is a long way off from having a sy in teh matter.

MMB You can apply for a specific issue/prohibited steps order to try to prevent her moving MMB. Less drastic than an applicaiton for Residence. The threat alone might make her rethink.

I do hope that you can come to an agreement that works for you both and ds

ignore the typos!

You can apply but unless there is an extraordinarily good reason for doing so, a court is generally not going to stop her moving (unless it were out of the country).

And if you do stop her carrying on with her life, she is going to be very unhappy. And an unhappy, resentful mother is not in your child's best interests.

It's a no-win situation imo.

Anyway, happy christmas and good luck with whatever you decide.

depends on each individual case Caroligula.

I thought you didn't deal in generalisms

Ha ha ZK, what an infantile remark. In general, a court will not stop a partner moving unless it is to take children out of the country.

They do make exceptions, but the exceptions are rare.

Is that clear enough for you?

MMB just has to decide whether it is worth the money, emotional turmoil and bitterness it will probably cost, to do something which probably won't get him the result he wants. (Although it may of course. But the numbers aren't good on this.)

Sorry Caroligula, I couldn't resist it as you have been rather dismissive of opinions that differ to your own and you did make comment about "sweeping generalisations" earlier.

Let's not hijack this thread which MMB appears to be finding helpful.

No I was only dismissive of yours ZK.

Was thinking of something else MMB - someone earlier mentioned mediation (or was I hallucinating that?) Have you suggested that to your ex? It sounds like she might not be amenable to attending, but if you put the suggestion in writing, explaining that this is a much more conciliatory method of negotiating than court and you would rather pursue it, if she does refuse to go along with you, this would stand you in good stead in court if you do end up having to take that option. You probably already know this, but courts much prefer people who have tried to resolve their differences and have only come to court as a last resort (and her solicitor will be pointing that out to her, so she may have an incentive to agree to go). Also, it is a hell of a lot cheaper.

as caligula has said, it is VERY rare for courts to order that a mother cannot move the children away, because in doing so, they are actually restricting her movements, as well as the childrens.

This happened to a colleague of mine. His ex told the kids, who told their dad that they were moving the next weekend about 3 hours drive away. He got a court order prohibiting the move, but when the case was heard, they found in the mother's favour. So the poor kids have moved this week, halfway through the last week of term. They started their new school yesterday, and one boy had to give up his prestigious speaking part in the old school's nativity

I agree; it is rare and has obvious human rights implications but it happens and on the face of it MMB has a good case.

MMB - do discuss this with your solicitor

In canada, it is difficult to move a child if it frustrtates an existing court order. The parent who wants to move has to go back to court and give a really good reason for the move and how are they going to facilitate access if the move takes place. Courts in canada are very reluctant to let a parent move a child who regularly sees both parents.

My DH had the same situation as the OP, and a similar distance was involved. After a year of long commutes to see his three kids, he moved north to live half an hour from them. He was single then, though, so no-one else in the equation.

Thanks MMB, I am a loving mother and dd's father is very loving too, I would hate to separate them.

I am very cynical though and I see many parents move miles and miles away from their kids so I guess I can't completely trust my ex not to do the same, although I have to admit from his current attitude I can't see it happening!

You sound like a great (and very committed) dad and I really hope you work something out.