Damned if I do.....

[Everybodyleaves]

Ok, lawyer has just advised me to cease STBXH alternate w/end access due to many issues pending resolution (hopefully over next few weeks/couple of months). Last resort I'm afraid.

Knowing it would therefore be a while before DCs overnights resumed, earlier today I asked STBXH for details of the camping trip he had mentioned prior to all this blowing up as none had been forthcoming. He had been aware DCs were unlikely to be going yet had been talking about it with them on phone calls this week. It turned out to be starting tomorrow.

I then offered to let DCs go as a) it is a holiday for them with him b) it might be the last overnights for a long while as he can be VERY stubborn and c) thought it would be a nice gesture as aunts/cousins also going too (just found that out today too).

I asked for one condition to be met: that he agreed to return DCs to me when camping trip ended on Thursday (he was originally due to have then for 11 nights). He refused. He has previously not returned DCs to me when due to, hence my asking.

Many angry texts, calls and two confused and upset children later, he is blaming me for them not going.

Why do I even bother trying???

Why does he have to tell you where he is going? He doesn't have to provide that level of details if he doesn't want to.. he has no obligation to do so

Sorry, but how anyone can think this is justifiable is beyond me! It just show a determination to deliberately withhold key information about the DCs whereabouts, like "knowledge is power".

What would it take to send a quick email the week before, nothing. My DP spent years being the magnanimous one, sending flight times, dates and destination, only to have the favour returned by hearing about a foreign trip from his DS after the fact, or getting a half-baked ambiguous text from the airport as a wind-up.

everybody it speaks volumes that a lot of things were agreed between you both at mediation, which have now fallen by the wayside, it seems your Ex's bad attitudes have become entrenched. It cannot be easy for you. Before I was on the scene, my DP invested in some sessions of counselling to help him keep things in perspective, and it did help. Was nicer to talk to an experienced professional - self-help books have their limitations when you are crawling up the walls with sheer frustration.

daisychain

I've kept to the majority of the things agreed (will have to confess to some ranty/rude emails/texts in response to his) but things just aren't reciprocated any longer.

As the mother of his children, I (maybe unrealistic ally) expect a level of common courtesy in some matters, just as I extend that to him as the father of my children, despite my personal opinion of him now. I have and will always ensure that he gets a present from the kids for Father's Day/ birthday / Xmas but he seems not to think the same way. My DP has stepped in a few times now as the DCs were upset they had nothing to give me but personally I don't think that is DPs responsibility.

I understand where you're coming from but you need to pick your battles.

I wouldn't have my ex on FB if you paid me a million pounds - no matter how many nice pics of the kids I have on there - nor do I want to see him on mine. It would break my heart to see pics of my kids doing family stuff that I wasn't a part of, I can completely understand why your ex doesn't want to have on his FB.

As far as the holiday/sleeping - he bought a sofa bed. Yes it's not ideal and yes you would have done it differently - but he and his partner chose not to do the same as you would. That's life once you're divorced I'm afraid. I don't think Social Services would be interested, and a court certainly wouldn't.

My ex took my kids away for two weeks to somewhere warm. I only found out where when they came back. I asked for contact details and was told to use his mobile phone. I certainly wasn't happy about it, but at the end of the day I don't have to tell him, he doesn't have to tell me ...

Where you went wrong was not following the legal advice you'd been given. Go to your solicitor and follow their advice - do it all right and legal and he won't have a stick to beat you with.

Never mind reading the thread , is it now a thing to comment with reading the original post?

The reason I ask is because the OP mentions, in the very first line of her very first post , that she is following her solicitors advice.

. com

Oh blimey, no wonder you're confused - I just realised my last post makes no sense whatsoever. It's the old trying to do five different things at once syndrome.

Anyway, it should read as follows:

"Never mind not reading the thread, is it now a thing to comment without reading the original post".

No, sorry flippinada not me being confused by your post, more that acids post is confused x

Yes Flippinada and Everybodyleaves - I may be confused, but was the solicitor's advice not to cease contact??

I thought it was, that was what I read in the original post, and if that was the advice (and presumably there was a good reason for it, and it was up to the ex to take it to court/be supervised in a contact centre) then I don't understand why you wouldn't follow that advice?

Apologies if I've got it wrong and the solicitor did not advise stopping contact.

Yes they did, but in a moment of (manipulated) weakness I tried to give DCs and STBXH some time away together, as this might take a while to resolve.

by your "pick your battles" comment

That's all I meant. Don't do someone like that a good turn - it ALWAYS comes back to bite you on the arse. If your solicitor has advised no contact, they've done that for a reason.

But don't fight over having him on FB - why the fuck would you want that anyway?

If you're going to go against solicitors advice and let him see them, you really aren't going to have a leg to stand on re the sofa bed.

You need to be consistent.

And this over the holiday wasn't that - and look what you've left yourself open to.

I KNOW how hard it is to deal with someone like this - I really think you should do what your solicitor told you and follow their advice.

And I don't understand why I'm getting a humphy face for having said that.

And that's what I meant by pick your battles - don't fucking fight with him over FB and whether or not he's on it - if you've got a solicitor telling you to stop all contact then fucking facebook is the LEAST of your worries and why you'd want to potentially antagonise your ex and give him an "in" to your life via facebook is not something I can understand.

Fight with him over the what must be BIG FUCKING MASSIVE stuff if the solicitor is telling you to stop contact.

Don't fight with him over fucking facebook and take the hump that he won't add you.

That's peverse - if he's THAT BAD that a solicitor has told you not to let your kids go to contact with him, then why would you want him on your FB?

It's is a confused face, because i was confused by what you meant as I said. It was not humphy, as proved by the fact you type confused not humphy so that the face appears.

I haven't "taken the hump with him" re Facebook, I just think it is a shame he is missing out and there's absolutely no need to swear, is there???

Imagine your kids lived with him. Full time. And you never ever got to see them.

And then he asked you (more than once) to add him on FB so you could see pictures of him doing nice family things with your kids. That you weren't included in.

And then think how that might make you feel.

We are allowed to swear on here. And I was trying to explain to you that I've been through working with a man like that and the absolute best advice I can give you is to do EXACTLY what your solicitor advises.

And as that has been no contact with the children (as you said in your first post??) then that's what you should do.

And since a solicitor has advised no contact, I'm assuming the back story must be fairly horrific, as I don't think they would advise that without it being horrific, and for that you have my sympathies.

Just because you are allowed to do something, it doesn't necessarily follow that you should.

And - if he adds you on FB. You'll be able to let him see all the nice family stuff you and the kids do with your partner.

But you'll also see all the stuff he does with his partner (OW) and child, and when and if he's given access you'll see all the stuff he does with your kids on his time.

That is, in my experience, emotionally very hard to deal with - and I'd suggest you think carefully re FB for that reason too. It could become like rubbing salt in a wound.

You know, I was trying to fucking sympathise, and give you the benefit of my ten years of hard earned fucking lessons.

Up until Monday, he has seen them for the whole of the 3+ years.

The point I was making about Facebook is that I wasn't trying to cut him out of the part of their lives that is spent with me, or deliberately exclude him from seeing those things. That was all. It is not any part of the current situation.

Your point re the lawyer is noted, and yes I shouldn't have, but I was just trying to do the right thing for my children.

Fair enough, but sympathy littered with expletives doesn't actually feel very sympathetic, if you don't mind me saying.

I am aware of how Facebook works thank you, and did consider that carefully before making the offer.

Its I'm sorry for the snarkiness. I can see where you're coming from. Some of the earlier posts were really unpleasant.

Sorry is. Cannot type tonight for toffee.

Look at my first post. Read it. I was really nice and really sympathetic and shared my story. Didn't swear.

I got sarcy thickasmince can't read the thread comments - and told i was confused.

I DID read the thread. I did read the opening post by the OP AND the other posts.

And I have NO FUCKING CLUE what I said that was deserving of what I got in response to that first post.

Sorry, I typed "your post is confused" when I actually meant "confusing". That's probably because the smiley word is "confused".

Flippinada thought the confused face was for them, and I made a typo in my reply to them. For that, I apologise but I did not attack you and before I had a chance to reply to your second post, you launched into a bit of a sweary rant. What did I do to deserve that except type ed instead of ing?

The second post on my thread said my post was confusing, my response was to try to explain more clearly and not take offence.

Read my second post.

I agreed with your second post, and I was replying to your third post when you posted your fourth (not third as I said) quite ranty post.