Music, do you get up especially early to invent such complete and utter bollocks ?
My DH (with me supporting) have spent the last decade in and out of the family courts. (Obviously I do not go in for the actual hearings as it is quite rightly inappropriate for me to do so).
There are some horrendous inaccuracies on this thread about 'parental rights and responsibilities' and even more nonsense written about what 'mothers can do/dictate/demand'
- The most important issue is for everyone to understand is that a solicitors letter is not the law.
Letters can be sent, demands can be made, but until the matter has been
ordered by a family court judge, then it can be ignored.
- Mothers do not have the 'top trump' on dictating contact. As already explained, unless the non resident parent is applying for 50/50 contact, the 'norm' is EOW and one evening in the week. The first step to agreeing anything that cannot be agreed privately is to attend mediation. This is a requirement of the court process. It can be bypassed if there are issues of abuse or if the 'respondent' (normally the resident parent) refuses to attend.
- If an agreement can be reached in mediation, the agreement is sent to the court to be 'ordered'. This then becomes the agreement that both parties need to adhere to.
If either party at mediation wants 'conditions' in the agreement that another party does not agree to. (Such as not meeting new partners etc) Then the matter will go forward to a court hearing.
- The court hearing will examine any reasons for conditions to be attached to contact. This can (and does ) often involve the hearing being adjourned whilst specialist court social workers (CAFCAS) are appointed to represent the children's best interests. They will visit the child/rent whilst they are with both parents (individually) and write reports to the court. If age appropriate they will speak to the children alone. The matter will return to the court for a Judge to make a decision based on the facts.
An order will be made based
on the best interests of the child. The Judge has absolutely no interest in parental squabbles, upset or jealousy.
The 'moral' does not come into it. A judge will only make an order that the Non resident parent cannot do something (i.e. spend time with dcs and girlfriend/friends/grandparents/whatever )
if there is good reason, shown to the court at the hearing, that to do so would be detrimental to the child. If there is no such proof, the conditions will not be attached.
A mother can indeed stop a father from seeing his child. That may or may not be an appropriate thing to do, depending on the circumstances but it is only a temporary state of affairs. Once the matter has been ordered by the court, to disregard the order is against the law and can ultimately have horrendous consequences.
I will not go into great detail, but having been through 'mother gets to say when her children see their dad' - The courts lost patience and awarded us full custody. This was also the DSC wish. Using ones children as a weapon against your ex, is a very very dangerous game.
Be very sure, before you make any decisions, that you are behaving in the best interests of your child and are encouraging a full and happy relationship with their other parent,
if it is safe for them to do so. No matter how you feel about your ex. This way you can avoid the stress and upset of court.
A judge will always look for a way for the child to have an affective relationship with
both parents if safe to do so.
Do not confuse the morality of his behaviour (which we can all agree is appalling) with the legalities of his 'parental rights' and your child's rights to a father. They are very different things.