Legal acces when not married

[grounddown]

Sorry, not sure where to put this....

P and I are splitting, we have 2 little children. I will be the main carer with him having them at weekends I suspect.
How do I arrange some sort of legal access arrangements? I plan to be very flexible and would really like to do it without legal paperwork but don't know how that would work either!
I'm leaving him, he is EA and hasn't helped with kids. We aren't married but own a property together that I will be living in with kids.

Thanks for any help, I'm so confused and it's only when he started threatening me with 'running off with kids' that I started to think maybe I should get some legal help.

Apologies for typos, fat fingers

You can go the legal route for access if you're not married. He's responsible for them financially as well, of course. Are you comfortable with him having so much access if he doesn't take care of them now and is already threatening to 'run off'? Might supervised access be better?

He is a good dad, he said it in a very heated argument and has since taken it back. I don't believe he would, he is useless and cannot drive - he couldn't even organise himself to take them to the park!!

I want him to have access, I am happy with him having them at the weekend, if I'm being honest I need the break, DS is only 8 months and still wakes 3 times a night and I'm working aswell so I'm shattered. He loves them he just lacks parental skills which is partly my fault as I am very hands on and find it hard to stand back, I am helping him be a better father and will only let him have one at a time to start with, my DD is only just 2 so that are a handful together. Friends say I'm too nice to him but its my kids I'm thinking of.

Legal route is long and I am not sure would work for you by the sounds of your situation.
It is more about drawing things up so there is legal recourse.
If you want him to have contact and he wants contact then cant see why you would need the legal route.
You could try mediation to work out both of your expectations. You would have to have some anyway going down the legal route.
You are not being too nice, what a strange thing to say.
You are doing what is best for your children and regular contact with their dad is best unless they are in danger.
Parenting differences dont count as danger.
I have always been stunned by parents who think that going from everyday contact to once every two weeks, overnight is good for your children.

If he's EA he could get nasty later. Better to wrap it up legally, grounddown, it could save you a helluva lot of trouble later.

Wait, he's already got nasty, threatening to run off with the kids. Definitely get this sorted out legally.

I think your friends are correct actually and that if you give this man any type of unsupervised access, he will push you deeper into a hole. You also describe him as EA which I take to mean as emotionally abusive. Giving such a person unsupervised access is tantamount to complete disaster for you and them frankly.

With him I would certainly formalise all access through the courts, he will continue to be emotionally abusive and push all your buttons even when he is thankfully gone from your day to day lives. Legally sorting access is not that daunting or expensive a process.

You need a break yes, but giving him unsupervised access is not the way to go here. This type of man only cares about getting his own needs met. Are there no family or friends who could help?. What about contacting Surestart?.

You're already backpeddling re him as well by excusing his poor behaviour. Why are you doing that?. I would not trust him to look after a goldfish let alone your child.

Do you also think that such a person will be at all a good role model to your children?. You've already stated that he hasn't helped with the children and has also threatened to run off with them (ok, he took that comment back but he could well mean that as well).

And NO NO and NO again to mediation either.

Mediation does have its place but it is of no use or benefit at all when there has been abuse within the relationship.

To use mediation is to subscribe to the mistaken idea that abuse is related to "misunderstandings" or lack of communication. If discussion and compromise, the mainstay of mediation, could help in any way most domestic violence situations would be long ago resolved because victims of abuse "discuss and compromise" constantly. Mediation assumes both parties will cooperate to make agreements work; the victim has always 'cooperated' with the abuser; the abuser never cooperates.

Mediation can be and is ordered by judges/courts, as can counselling and mental health evaluations. They are tools in the abuser's arsenal to be used against the victim as often as he chooses. In order for mediation to work and to not make situations worse the parties involved must have equal power and must share some common vision of resolution. This is clearly not present when domestic violence has taken place in a relationship.

Mediation practitioners must be alert to the need to interview partners separately with specially designed questions in order to determine if abuse is or has been present. Many domestic violence professionals can train others to screen safely for domestic violence. To not do so risks unsuccessful mediations, at best, and increasing the victim's danger by colluding with the abuser, at worst.

A person who has been terrorized by an abuser is not free to participate in a mediation process with him, even if the mediator(s) assume or believe that they "understand". Being truthful about any of her needs or experiences in the abuser's presence or proximity practically ensures that she is in more danger later.

The mediator is left with a no win: either the victim's danger is increased, or she is not fully or truthfully participating, or both. The well meaning mediator may actually encourage the victim to feel safe enough to share information that could seriously compromise her safety. In any case the whole intent of mediation is lost.

To engage an abuser and a victim in a process that implies equal responsibility is damaging to both. The victim is once again made to feel responsible for the abuser's behaviour, and the abuser is allowed to continue to not accept full responsibility for his behaviour choices.

My dp ex was EA he still had to go to medation sessions both during the divorce and during contact issues.
So they could sort it all our amibically never seen someone so terrified.
I missed the EA thing as didn't realise what it meant.
Have to say though even people convicted of domestic violence are allowed to see their children if they are not considered a danger to them.
Also supervision centers are exspensive.

Thank you for your posts.
I am not terrorised by P, by EA I do mean emotionally abusive but the forms it has taken in my situation is name calling, swearing and ridicule. I am just not prepared to put up with that sort of behaviour any longer, it is making me feel low, worthless and disrespected and I will not allow that to happen. I am also leaving due to his lack of support, he helps more now but I am very, very resentful of him for leaving me to deal with 2 babies alone (he made sure he got 8 hours sleep by sleeping on the sofa)

I am in touch with sure start, they have agreed to set up an appointment when I have actually left him and have details of my benefits (which was why I rang them in the first place, for financial guidance as I work part time) so I will be doing that and maybe they can out me in touch with someone for some legal advice.

I would get on and do some research about how the family courts work and the types of evidence required if you want to show why it's beneficial to have anything other than a 50/50 residency arrangement or any restrictions in place to cover possible abuse or child abduction, etc. There is loads on the internet about this, as long as you choose your sources carefully.

If you can avoid the courts, it is better. The whole process is stressful for all concerned and very costly. It also ups the ante and can encourage antagonism rather than co-operation. However, if you have a partner with abusive tendencies, it is as well to be prepared for taking things to court even if you try to avoid it. The simple act of knowing your facts and being prepared means you have an advantage and can't be bullied into anything.

If he's rubbish with the DC, the threats of running off with them are probably idle ones. It's seems to be part of a script that such men use as a way of trying to get their Xs to tow the line. The reality is that he probably won't want the responsibility. However, make a record of when he said it, and the context, on your computer. In fact, make a record of dates, times, place and comments every single time he says or does something that you feel is remotely abusive. It may well have a bearing on your case if it does go to court.

My guess is that if you stand your ground on this, refusing to become either upset or angry but rigidly calm but firm, he'll back down. Be prepared for things to get worse before they get better though.

Sadly, you may find that he has very little to do with your DC once the dust settles and he no longer sees them as a way of controlling you. Although that will hurt, don't chase after him as your DC will be better off in the end if their expectations aren't raised unrealistically high.

WHatever you do, do not allow contact to take place in your home. Not only is this a bad idea for enforcing boundaries around the end of your relationship with each other, it is confusing for the children.

Good luck with it all.

Bare in mind just to make it all that bit easier, you get no legal aid for family matters anymore.
If you can't afford a representative and are LIP and he has a rep. You might find yourself in a tough spot.

Frankly, I'd avoid courts at all costs with someone like this. It's an adversarial system and tends to create hostility like nothing else. If you have an agreement sketched out then a mediator can draw up a contact arrangement which sets out you have residence and he has set levels of contact, and a court can rubber-stamp that agreement. It can also rubber-stamp that you're entitled to reside in the property for X number of years with the mortgage contributions/equity also agreed.

I'd be wary of offering him every weekend. You could end up with 2 school age kids and you doing all the boring, miserable weeks and no fun time. Every other weekend and maybe 1 midweek night as soon as both are old enough could be agreed as a schedule in say 2 years from now, with weekend days meanwhile? Think about how to establish contact and a relationship now, and then a workable pattern going forward, and have that schedule written into the agreement between the two of you before having it turned into a court order by consent.

I wouldn't try to argue for supervised, tbh. You have no child welfare concerns, you can't afford a legal battle as there is no legal aid in cases without evidence of DV any more, and really they're his kids too, as you know. It sounds like a shortcut to hostility and damaging conflict - damaging to the kids - and long-term you'd not be granted supervised contact anyway, as he doesn't sound like he poses a risk to their welfare. It would be a nightmare for everyone. Court proceedings over child residence and contact are toxic.

I would want that agreement that you are to be primary carer, ie to have residence of them, signed off by a court, though, and hence I'd recommend mediation. If he's made any such threats about the kids and you get residence legally established you can breathe easier. So have a good long think about the ideal contact schedule now, and in a couple of years time. Short and often is probably best with such tiny ones, and then longer and with bigger gaps when they're bigger? Maybe?