DS wants to live with his dad

[darkestevening]

I've had an awful time of things from dh over the years in many ways. It hasn't been easy but I can't live like this now, I want to go.

My son however wants to live with his dad. (He is 11.)

There doesn't appear to be any way I can change this. I don't know what to do. To hold off the split were my first instincts but things are getting worse and there are other children to think of.

All I can think of is to let him know I love him and he has a home with me whenever he wants it.

I can’t for one minute imagine what you must have been through OP and I think you know you have to leave. But just wanted to say do as much as you can to tell your son you want him and love him. My Aunt and Uncle split up years ago. They had two boys. One stayed with mum as he was naturally closer to her. The other stayed with Dad (by his choice) but has never really forgiven mum for leaving him. It’s very tricky. Maybe put everything in a letter for him so he has it in writing how you feel and that you want to respect his wishes but you are prepared to fight for him.

My secret hope is that dh will meet someone new pretty rapidly and ds will be surplus to requirements, then.

Not that I want him to be unhappy, of course. This is where it is so hard because inevitably there is going to be so much hurt. I can take that a thousand times myself but I don't want my son to.

Whilst I might be being ‘naive’, all of the things that keepon have listed are considered emotionally harmful to children from the point of view of many courts, but for some reason not the court you’re dealing with which is why this situation is very confusing, for me anyway.

It seems that no matter what terrible or illegal thing your husband does unless he does it directly to the children then the courts believe it will have no affect on your them, even indirectly?

It’s difficult to comprehend how living with a cocaine using violent rapist is not harmful to a child but it seems that’s what ‘your’ court seems to think? And I take it social services in your area are ok with it too? It’s the first time I’ve heard of unsurpervised access being granted to such a parent so please forgive me for being a bit
Also I should clarify that when I was referring to the emotional abuse of my friends children it was the indirect kind as the situation appears to be for your children.

I have worked in children's services. They most certainly DO care regardless of whether you're from a council house or super middle class. In fact one of the social workers there used to work in London in an area with a lot of 'posh' folk and they treated them exactly the same.

You also say that there's nothing you can pinpoint as an effect of what's gone on (in your DS) - really? I actually can't believe it. There MUST be behaviours or things your DS has said or something that indicates there's been an effect on DS?

What do you think is driving DS to say he wants to go with his dad?

You may be confused all you like Slarty

As I indicated over the page, this is a long relationship. Some of the things that I mentioned when asked happened many years ago. He is not, for example, a cocaine user now. I outlined to Women's Aid last summer exactly what DH did to me sexually. They offered me a place in a refuge but confirmed DH would still be able to see the children: not at the refuge but elsewhere, which rather negated the whole point of going to the refuge.

As I explained to a previous poster we do not and never have had social services involvement.

I don't really mind if you believe me or not. But there are some things that for whatever reason seem to cross the threshold for supervised contact. Domestic abuse for example, when it is the (forgive the term) "typical" punching your wife, may well lead to supervised contact whereas raping your wife apparently does not.

At any rate, it doesn't really matter what you think or what I think: what matters is how things are.

No, I don't believe that there is keepon

I always find it a bit peculiar when people insist there must be. Many people growing up in dysfunctional families only realise their families are dysfunctional when they hit adulthood. I sat with parents necking back bottles of wine night after night: I only realised they were alcoholics when I was well into my twenties!

It isn't uncommon.

Actually my post was sincere, my confusion is real and I’m just trying to understand.
I’ve never said I didn’t believe you either, I’m just struggling with the lack of protection the authorities are failing to provide your children with when it’s afforded to others in similar situations maybe if SS were involved it would give your case more weight, you say you won’t involve them but how do you know they won’t help if you’ve never asked them to? It’s anothet way of trying to protect your children.

Well then, I am sorry if I sounded defensive.

Dhs job means he is certain to sidestep SS should I involve them and therefore they would come crashing down on me.

I respect what you say when you give the example of your family and the drinking. It seemed normal. But at the time did it make you feel scared or uncomfortable - like it would if you heard constant arguing between your parents, or one parent tried to strangle another in the kitchen whilst you were in the living room (you didn't see it, but you did see the missing skin where your mother bit your dad's arm to stop him?).

The main issues in my house as a a child was just constant arguing.

That alone has left me with lifelong anxiety (which I didn't realise what it was until I was about 34).

The lack of realisation until much later does NOT mean I wasn't suffering the damaging effects at the time and every minute after. Because I was.

It's not 'peculiar' to insist there 'must be an effect' - of course there's an effect, come on!

Agreed Slarty

I totally would go out of my way to avoid involvement with SS but if I thought for a minute that they could possibly help, I'd do so.

Of course, if OP genuinely believes her DS hasn't been affected then...

Yet OP you're v concerned about DS going to live with the guy - because he's so horrible.

What i mean is that, even assuming teachers are hovering over anything nice middle class children might casually mention, there is a very good chance nothing would be mentioned.

At any rate, it appears we've gone off topic and I am having to justify - what? I don't even know!

SS cannot help.

I do think there is a certain amount of naivety here, I am sorry.

Dhs job means he is certain to sidestep SS should I involve them and therefore they would come crashing down on me.

You assume that this affords him protection, but it may equally be his achilles heel. Sometimes it's easier to assume the worst case scenario in preparation. And you may be right. It's a very tough road, but staying will kill you

I agree OP that there is a lot of naivety here. The truth is that the court strongly promotes contact and they aren't interested in restrictions unless there is proven risk of harm to the child.

With no police records of my ex's behaviour towards me the courts showed no concern and the ongoing emotional abuse and manipulation of my dc by my ex is of no interest to anyone.

Ok, let's go forward on the basis that there is no use involving SS and the courts are going to be of absolutely no use to you and rule those options out for the sake of argument.

Nobody is asking you to justify anything. We are asking how it is that you feel that there has been (no, only a little, some?) ill effect on your DS when hands down without knowing the ins and outs there WILL have been an effect? And that no effects have ever manifested themselves.

I already said that I agreed the courts on the whole were vastly deluded about contact and safety and that they treat contact as king when they often shouldn't.

But.

On the one hand you're saying you don't want him to go to his dad's because of how vile a man he is (so the preference is for no contact at all or contact that's supervised/controlled). But then you say there's no point going to court or going to SS because they won't prevent or supervise contact. So do you want, in order to feel your son is safe, only supervised contact? If so, then he cannot go to live with him.

Your DS going to live with is dad (which you are contemplating for the reasons you've set out) must surely be the worst of all outcomes? (I'm just trying to follow this through in my mind).

He would be there without whatever level of protection you are able to give him TOTALLY not supervised by anyone at all - other than by this abusive man.

Does his dad actually want him?

SS can help. Not naive.

Sorry OP but you are talking so much rubbish at times.

YES SS do interfere in nice Middle Class families - and actually in cases I know have done a wonderful job at times.

OP, I do know where you are coming from. I was in a refuge with a woman whose teenage son had chosen to live with his father, even though the father had been found guilty in court of an assault on the mother. He was seen as old enough to choose so there was nothing to be done about it (although he was a few years older than your son).

Because your H's behaviour comes down in ingrained misogyny, I can totally believe that he treats you badly but treats the son like a golden boy, on the basis that he is male.

I don't have the right answer, but in your shoes I would leave. As other previous posters say, you will have to make it clear to your son that you love him and he has a standing invitation to come and live with you. Yes, I think the relationship with your son will suffer, but I also think that the relationship will suffer even if you stay. Your son will not be able to show you respect when the message he gets from his father is that you are not worthy of respect. I think you need to create a new home and demonstrate that you are strong and independent and happy, rather than a cowed person who can't survive alone (I'm talking perceptions, not the reality). He will resent it because there will be cognitive dissonance between the messages he gets from his father and what he sees from your new life. This will be painful for him and yes, he might take it out on you for a while. But it's still better for him to see that you don't accept bad treatment from your H. Might make him think twice about the way he treats his future gf/wife.

You also mention that there are other children involved, so yes, you have to think about them too, and they are better off out of this.

Excellent post @bibliomania

Thank you. I really appreciate that honest and thoughtful answer.

For your sanity you need to get out.

But does his father actually want him to live there full time? My STBEXH was all mouth about this, threatening to take my DS, but after a hideous three weeks of DS lashing out I called and said “ ok, I think he should come live with you”

I’ve never seen anyone backpedal so fast. He spoke to DS and said the best place to live was here

I’d tell DS that he is entitled to his choice, but that of course there is a bed, toys, home for him with you anytime and he is free to change his mind whenever he wants.

I can imagine looking after a child full time and working will scupper his teen shagging and cocaine binges somewhat. Even if he is a stubborn man.

I agree with everything bibliomania said.

When the realities of life without you (and the other DC) kick in, either your H or DS may decide they don't want residency after all. What would your DS say if you offered a 50/50 split with his Dad? Staying with this man is no choice, not for you or your other DC and not even for the DS that wants to remain with his Dad. I can't imagine how hard this must all be but, even with the situation as it is, I really think you should leave for yourself AND all the DC.