Can a family court judge force my child into nurserh

[ShyasminW]

Please help I would be really grateful
I have a family court final hearing next week and my ex has put forward his position and wants 50/50 shared care and he wants our son to go into a nursery on his days during the week

i only work part time I do one night shift at the weekend when son is with his dad

I provide full time care all week for my son and son goes to dad for tea mid week after he finishes work

my worry is a judge will force me to take him to nursery half the week on dads time when I am available for him

the nursery he wants our son to go to is 30 minutes from my home approximately I know it’s in an area that’s at least this far from me, and I don’t drive so I would have to get a bus to take him to nursery on “dads days” I also don’t know the name of this nursery as he said it’s linked to his work and he gets discount but he hasn’t stated the name of the nursery to his solicitor (or they haven’t told me) so I won’t know this until we are in court (we do not have any communication me and dad so I can’t ask him)
do you think a judge would force my 18 month old son into nursery when I am available to care for him
can they force me to take him even though I am available to care for him

cafcass did not recommend 50/50 either

sorry this long post

People are assuming that if your XH gets 50:50 care, your son will be staying with him for half the week eg: XH picks him up (via your sister) on Sunday evening, and drops him off on Tuesday evening, meaning XH would be spending Sunday evening, Monday morning and evening, and Tuesday morning with your son, plus alternate weekends. Therefore XH is spending more time with your son than just doing one or two evenings a week plus weekends. This is what people mean when they say your XH will be spending more time with your son despite your son being in nursery during the days he is with XH.

This is correct

if you keep collecting the child early tenth funding will stop

so Op collecting the child from nursery on her days, would mean funding would stop and then there would be a row over who was paying for the nursery place

Id come back with another suggestion

you ex does Saturday tea time till Tuesday morning

make the collection in a supermarket with CCTV if you need

this suggestion shows you are willing to give a suggestion, he won't go for it as it would. mean he would have to juggle child care and work - which he can't do. Its not your problem though

and if he does go for it -it'll last no more than 2 months - tops

juggling work and child care isn't easy and this man thinks he is getting the easy way out which tells us all we need know

I've re-read all of the OP's posts and can't see anything where she said CAFCASS recommended not 50/50, only that they recommended a neutral handover spot.

A friend of mine, who had been a SAHM for over 10 years, recently got divorced and ran the same "I'm available to care for the kids and the ex works a big job full time" argument. 50/50 shared care was awarded.

What was she after did she expect to be looked after?

@Crackednuts they were quite a wealthy couple so I think she hoped she'd be able to succeed with the "I can only work part time because I've always been the primary carer and that should continue" argument. Unfortunately things have changed in the family court and so it didn't turn out that way. On the plus side, their kids now have two equally involved parents, which is good for the kids.

I think the OP needs to come up with some positive proposals other than just sticking to the status quo, or she's likely to be disappointed. At least if you make a proposal as to a compromise, there's a chance you might get something vaguely acceptable. If you stick to your guns saying its status quo or nothing, the judge will decide and often the outcome is that neither parent ends up with something they can live with.

Yes I suppose though I am hoping this won’t be seen as a good enough reason to prevent him spending time with me

ex husband starts work at 7:30 and finishes at 4:30 he works across Newcastle city as well so he wouldn’t be spending much time in the morning with him and he would be spending the exact same time he would in the evening after work as he already does anyway

our son would not gain much more time with him

They recommend not 50/50 because there’s a lot of animosity me and my ex husband do not directly communicate

they also said 50/50 can only work when parents have some basis of good communication

CAFCASS may well have said 50/50 works better when parents Co-parent effectively. That isn't what the law says. The couple I mentioned have about as toxic a relationship as it's possible to have. It's still 50/50 with their kids. You need to get a lawyer to talk to you about the law, not the "nice to haves"/"makes sense" options.

They have recommended this long term though they have said they don’t think 50:50 is best for our son

Sorry but I just don't believe that. CAFCASS don't make "long term" recommendations other than in the most extreme examples of abuse.

It definitely is what’s in the best interest of a child

why would they force a young child into nursery when they don’t need to attend

thanks for your reply though

There is a lot of issues in the case and they don’t want us back in court again in the future

What does the law say ?

if the law was just 50/50 then family court would not even exist

You need a strategy, OP, and you seem highly resistant to any perspective other than your own. You can go to court and say your only suggestion is that things stay as they are. Or you can go with some alternative proposals. That's the nature of adversarial proceedings: if you're entrenched in one position then you are likely to be disappointed. If you have positive alternatives to suggest then you may get one of those (and will look more reasonable). Given that you are financially comfortable I'd strongly recommend taking advice from a family lawyer over a bunch of strangers with - at best - anecdotal evidence.

Some people just don't seem to be able to stand the fact that you are a SAHM who can fund yourself from an inheritance. It really rankles some people that you don't have to/aren't desperate to work, especially when you say the kids are better off with you than at a nursery. A lot of people can't imagine kids that love being around their mum for some reason, even when they're only little.

Of course it makes absolutely no sense for their dad to stick them in a nursery just so he can say he's 'having them' when they could be with you. He'd have to have them in full time if his days change all the time (as you can't chop and change days at nursery) and he might be surprised at the cost of it. Especially when even the 30 hours free often aren't actually free because you have to pay for this or that. It's obvious he's just doing it to be an arse so I don't know why anyone is supporting or defending him.

It's also weird that people don't believe what you say. Honestly I think this thread has just turned into people looking to argue and disagree with you because they resent your large inheritance, I'd get your advice elsewhere tbh.

And re your second post: the law says that 50/50 is the starting presumption. You have to have evidence to rebut that presumption. Not wanting your child in nursery will not be good enough, nor will "I don't work so I'm available to provide childcare".

What positive alternatives are there exactly? Her ex wants to stick their kid in nursery because he thinks it'll be cheaper than maintenance. This is probably incorrect as the child will need full time nursery as the fathers days chop and change.

There is no better perspective than the OP's it's just people are being assholes about it.

Is he continuing to pay child maintenance? Wouldn't it benefit the op more to stand her ground? If they get 50/50 then the dad doesn't have to pay child maintenance and his son gets to spend the night at his dad's. Then he can drop him off at nursery and pick him up then give him dinner and then read him a story before tucking him to bed. I bet her son would love that.

Really? I didn't go to playgroup, or to nursery until the term before I was 5, could already read and do basic addition and subtraction (school weren't happy about that to be fair), tie my own shoe laces, dress myself, was fully toilet trained and had many friends. And I now have a job where I have to be able to communicate with others.

That was probably because I had parents who were fully engaged with bringing me up. I think some parents on here are trying to justify having sent their own children to nursery in order to have to work, but a parent who is involved with a child can enrich their lives as much as sending them away to nursery. And far better than plonking them in front of a TV or tablet all day.

Thank you for your kind words

sometimes I worry men are on this account trying to abuse women x

@Lyn348 have you any experience of the family court system? It's not a question of what ordinary people think or people "being assholes", it's a question of the law.

From what the OP has said, the dad has one midweek teatime currently. In her shoes I might propose that be increased to 2 midweek teatimes, with every other weekend being Friday night to Monday morning (if he's able to deliver the son back on a Monday morning). It's not difficult to come up with proposals to increase contact which don't involve moving straight to 50/50 and nursery, but it does require a less closed mind than the OP and many posters on this thread appear to have.

Women don't have to agree with you. This is Mumsnet most of us are mothers ourselves.

Sorry if someone has already mentioned this,but would you be up for researching nurseries that you like and would eventually want your child to attend? That way you could show that you are willing to meet in the middle? Xx

You have spent your entire day replying to nearly every message on this post you are being very rude to me please stop Replying now
you have also had several of your posts deleted by mumset

what is your problem you have a bee in your bonnet about something

its fine to disagree with me please do not post now x