ex mil and court

[cdcd]

Hi my ex mil is currently dragging my through court for access to my 10 month old baby. Her son my ex is a violent drunk they havn't seen baby since she was 10 weeks old as ex smashed up my house stole my car and was sent to prison. when he was released he continued to harass me he was given a harassment order which he breached, smashed up my (new) car, tried to kick i my front door at 3 in the morning was a arrested and bailed breached his bail waited at my eldest childs school an threatened me. He was again arrested and given a community order, alcohol treatment and a restraining order not to contact me etc. He has threatened to kill me and my family on numerous occasions and threatened to take the baby. His mum (who he lives with) wants access just received a letter for the next hearing stating because of my Implacable hostility it is to be held at the county court. WTF!!! how is it that because I wont let my baby girl near my dick of an ex who's threatened "If I ever get to see her you'll never see her again" I'm being Implacably hostile.

What makes you exempt from people attacking you, Tyr? You've attacked several people on this thread. Are you someone special? Possibly, by virtue of having a penis, you think so.

Oh sod off and create your own thread, why don't you, if it's that important to you.

I think your posts have sounded very much like you are a C**t. does it not tell you something that almost all teh posters on here have taken great exception and offense at what you've posted? No?

Then you are even more of an idiot than I first thought.

You two need to grow up. Both of you might also benefit from reading the occasional book.
At the risk of stating the obvious, you could let this thread die out or just ignore it. It would appear that I struck a raw nerve and the best some of you can do is post expletives.
You could always start your own thread called "Tyr is a c*" or something like that which would attract other intellectual pondlife like yourselves.

Isn't it funny how people with an axe to grind on a topic like this always end up coming over as the kind of ranting, aggressive loons that make you think 'actually, i can see why their ex wants them out of their lives?'

I also feel very strongly about the kind of parents who think they can engineer their childrens' lives this way -so that THEY get the nice uncomplicated family they want, sod reality and their childrens' right to have a dad/mum. Utterly selfish. A close family member has done it. We have no contact.

But then there's the other side of the coin. Abusers and bullies can never keep up the pretence for long. It's like the Fathers For Justice scum - all sounds great, poor dads being victimised, dressing up in fluffy protests - then you read the stats on how many of them have restraining orders on them and convictions for violence, how many of them have never supported their children.

Look at Tyr. A valid point to make - yet making it in a way which shows him/her to be a bullying, hectoring knobend. And that makes you think, if Tyr doesn't get to see his/her children, then although that may be very wrong, dammit I can see where their ex is coming from if their children were also subjected to this kind of spittle-flying browbeating...

If by striking a raw nerve, you mean that you inexplicably used this thread to further your own agenda and/or bitterness... then yes. You have. But thank you for your advice with regards to intellectual stimulation. I think we can probably both manage without it.

'You two need to grow up'.

Don't patronise me, matey, that's just a very low put down.

'intellectual pond life' haha!! If only you knew!

Actually, I'm a step-parent to a DSD who's mother tried to pull some tricks - whe she was very young- trying to stop access for her father for no good reason - so I am well aware that that stuff happens - no raw nerve hit here sorry, you'll have to think of a more intellectual reason why I might think you are a bit of a nob.

I'd say you were emotional pondlife as you can't seem to see that you've behaved really badly here, you come across as so incredibly smug and arrogant and more to the point, you've hijacked the thread of a person with real problems, seeking advice.

Well said ShoutyHamster.

I think if Tyr read the occasional book they'd know that the 'disinterested dads' they refer to means non-biased.
I believe the word they're looking for is uninterested.

hairylights,

?Actually, I'm a step-parent to a DSD who's mother tried to pull some tricks - whe she was very young- trying to stop access for her father for no good reason - so I am well aware that that stuff happens - no raw nerve hit here sorry, you'll have to think of a more intellectual reason why I might think you are a bit of a nob.?

I?m ignoring the personal abuse but I?ll ask you this:

If the mother to whom you are referring had posted her story on these forums, seeking ?support,? what kind of response do you think she would/should have received?
The OP?s story had more holes in it than a Swiss cheese yet everyone jumped in feet first, trying to validate the lies and then attacking me for asking what were rather obvious questions.
Who do you think would have given the more appropriate response to your step-daughter?s mother?

Actually, I've seen various posts of that very nature, where mothers have, for example (and I'm not referring to any particular post) said things like 'I want to move me and the kids 300 miles away, and my ex is trying to stop me' where an awful lot of women on here have told the OP that actually, that's not a fair thing to do.

I also think it would depend on the information provided.

If the whole truth had been told (eg: my ex husband sees my daughter regularly, like clockwork and without fail, every Monday. I have told my ex husband that he can't see my daughter until he's bought her x, y and z. I don't work, and neither does he, but it's not fair that he doesn't pay child support/buy her everythig she needs) then she'd probably have got a fair few answers telling her that she was being very unfair on her child.

I fail to see why on earth you have brought the fact that some resident parents bend the truth and lie, when clearly the OP has solid evidence of the abuse she's suffered.

You'll notice that I was one who did not immediately jump to her defence in the way you describe, either.

and please, you've personally insulted me too, so leave out the accusations, eh? You're no better than me.

Do we actually know whether the OP is fake or not? It would be nice to know there is a real life face to the problem and that this 'discussion' (if indeed it can any longer be described as such given such a liberal use of the very unedifying 'c' word) is about something more than the purely hypothetical. Has the OP gone to ground?

OP had 2 threads running concurrently; this one and one titled 'Hubby!', also in Relationships, under a different name with a very different set of circumstances.

''OP had 2 threads running concurrently; this one and one titled 'Hubby!', also in Relationships, under a different name with a very different set of circumstances.''

Thanks Super but how could you tell that the two different names were actually one and the same? I looked but couldn't spot an obvious connection.

See post on page 2
Sun 01-May-11 01:17:25

Gotcha, thanks.

If anyone is still interested, this is what the recent Family Justice review concluded about the issue. I think their conclusions are very sensible.

First and foremost, there are responsibilities that come with being a parent ? to ensure that a child has the emotional, financial and practical support to thrive. These rights, duties, powers and responsibilities are recognised in the Children Act 1989 as parental responsibility (PR). PR does not disappear upon divorce or separation. The question arises, however, whether more should be said in legislation to strengthen the rights of children to a continuing relationship with both parents (and others, for example grandparents) after separation. We heard considerable evidence on this issue. On one side we heard the real distress of parents, usually fathers, who were now unable to see their children. On the other we heard from children?s groups and took evidence in Sweden and Australia about the significant damage done to children when legislation creates expectations about a substantial sharing of time against the wishes of the parent with whom the child mostly lives.
108.
This is a particularly emotive issue. If parents share parental care fully before separation they are more likely to do so successfully after separation. But, where the converse applies, legislation cannot change that fact. Achieving shared parenting in those cases where it is safe to do so is a matter of raising parental awareness at the earliest opportunity. The welfare of children must always come before the rights of parents. No legislation should be introduced that creates or risks creating the perception that there is an assumed parental right to substantially shared or equal time for both parents. But we do recommend that there should be a statement in legislation to reinforce the importance of the child continuing to have a meaningful relationship with both parents, alongside the need to protect the child from harm.
109.
We have heard representations that the requirement for grandparents to seek leave of the court before making an application for contact should be removed but have concluded this should remain. But the importance of these and other relationships must be emphasised throughout the process of reaching Parenting Agreements (see paragraph 111 below).
110.
From the outset of parenting, there needs to be a greater focus on, and awareness of, the importance of raising a child in a co-operative manner. We see value in parents being given a short leaflet when they register the birth of their child, providing an introduction to the meaning of PR and what this means in practice.
Parenting Agreements
111.

Spero,

These are not conclusions, as such.

There has not been a review yet; this is an interim report to which responses have been invited. The review process is ongoing.

It does give some idea as to how the panel are minded but the final report and conclusions will not be released until the autumn, following further representations and consultation.

It will then go through parliament and we will see what the politicians' promise in respect of GP's automatic right to apply ammounts to.

Ther have been considerable concerns raised already from both politicians and the Bar about various aspects of this interim report.

Well I agree with almost everything the review says. So they must be right.

The only press response I noted was the Daily Mail et al wetting their collective knickers over some misunderstanding that grandparents' status was now to be sanctified in law. Not aware of massive criticism from the Bar, will be interested to see the FLBA response at end of June.

Will be interesting to see what actually comes out of it as a lot of the recommendations for aworking IT system and judicial continuity are going to be v v v expensive, thus I doubt will ever see the light of day.

Oh I think the evidence would support you in this instance I hope it does

let us know how this goes cdcd

"Well I agree with almost everything the review says. So they must be right."

Spero,
I assume you had your tongue in your cheek when you wrote that. Secondly (and for the second time) there hasn't been a review. You are confusing reviews, consultation papers and interim reports.
The FLBA published their proposals regarding the Legal Aid aspect some 3 months ago.

Tyr, you should have a read of this thread:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/1206009-Advice-required-should-I-stop-him-seeing-his-son

I would hope it would go some way to demonstrating that the 'default' position for advice in these situations is not to advise the RP that they can do what they like re contact - quite the opposite.

This is meant in good faith - I do feel quite sad that you seem to think that MNers would leap to the defence of the RP regardless - it's not what I've seen to be true.

Shoutyhamster,

Thanks- I'll have a look at that.

Shoutyhamster,

I did look but couldn't find anything using the search function. It is probably me being completely useless at navigating internet forums. Assuming you're better at this than me and have a moment to spare (?), do you think you could post one of those idiot-proof links that you just click on?

Thanks

Will give it a go! (this might not work)

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/1206009-Advice-required-should-I-stop-him-seeing-his-son

Ooh I think it does! :)

Tyr. No. I am being completely serious.

Jesus H Christ.