Bf’s ex says she’s moving away with the kids

[toobusytothink]

So bf and his ex separated 4 years ago. They have 2 kids who are now 5 and 7. They live near each other and bf has always been a hands on dad and for the last 2 years he has had the kids 50/50 but it has just been an informal agreement between themselves. She has a bf who she has been seeing for about 18 months who lives 45 mins away and has said she plans on moving close to him and possibly buying a place with him.

Although this doesn’t sound far, my bf works and I live 45 mins in the opposite direction (otherwise he would consider moving there himself to stay close to the kids).

Bf is incredibly upset. It would mean the kids changing schools. His ex’s mum and sister are in the area so she would be moving away from them and her support network too. Plus she works locally so she would be moving away from work.
She says she now wants to formalise the childcare agreement so that he has the kids EOW and one night per week which my bf has said is not acceptable.

So she would be uprooting the kids away from their dad who they see every other day, away from their school and friends, away from her mum and sister, away from her work, so she can move closer or in with her new partner and build a new life with him ... she says she would be able to afford a bigger house.

He is seeking legal advise but it is expensive. She said she is happy to try and do it amicably but then won’t compromise on anything. I know his lawyer will give him advise but just wanted to see if anyone here had experience of it and any suggestions. Seems so unfair when you hear of mums complaining that the dad doesn’t do enough but he wants to but she won’t let him ...

@IEat

His ex cannot be expected to not live her life. Yes it’s annoying but she has the right to be happy just as he has. An additional 45 mins travel time is nothing , if he wants it to work it will. You can’t begrudge this woman and her relationship. What if it was the other way and you lived away from your BF and he wanted to move with the kids but she was being a pain in the arse. The arrangement of who has the kids and when even if formal will still work. It’s 45mins away not 45 hours

Again I ask

If the equal parenting father decided to move away with the kids, saying the mum shud drop to EOW would you say that’s fine, she should suck it up?

And again, I predict no fucking response...

45 mins is loads for small children. Loads.

Not relevant to the specific issue of shared parenting but out of interest why did the parental relationship fail? Just wondered if there might be a moral aspiration / expectation on one side to allow them to make a life if it was not consensual to separate.
I do think it’s a shame if an apparently workable co parenting arrangement is soured by court processes (almost inevitably). I would urge him to engage in mediation meaningfully and not as a tick box - there are generally no long term winners in court

@Wingingit15

Not relevant to the specific issue of shared parenting but out of interest why did the parental relationship fail? Just wondered if there might be a moral aspiration / expectation on one side to allow them to make a life if it was not consensual to separate. I do think it’s a shame if an apparently workable co parenting arrangement is soured by court processes (almost inevitably). I would urge him to engage in mediation meaningfully and not as a tick box - there are generally no long term winners in court

I agree, I do think 'who left who' is often relevant in these situations . If the OPs boyfriend was the one who left, then perhaps the ex could make some kind of argument around 'well if you hadn't left none of this would have arisen'. I still think she would be doing absolutely the wrong thing from the children's perspective mind you. If she ended it/left well she really really hasn't a leg to stand on. When I left my husband I felt a moral duty to be the one to bear the brunt of any logistical difficulties and many years on, I still feel that way to an extent. I am definitely the more flexible one.

@IEat I do live away from my bf and the reason he doesn’t live closer or we live together is exactly so he can stay near his kids!

No one left. They fell out and it became toxic. She asked him to leave

I have been involved in many sets of family court proceedings and I hope that you have not given too much credence to the posters on here who have told you that the child's mum is being entirely reasonable (particularly the 'let her live her best life' poster ) as their views do not tally with the likely outcome of your DP's potential application for a Prohibited Steps Order.

In my experience, having been involved with lots of very similar cases, the Court/Cafcass do not like children experiencing unnecessary disruption and would view the change of school as such. Mum is unable to evidence that her decision to move her children to a new school and area and reduce their time spent with their dad is necessary or in their best interests. It is clear that the sole driving factor is her prioritising her need for a relationship (where she lives full time with her boyfriend) above the needs of her children. That's what it boils down to, and it will be transparent to the Court too.

It's not because they hate their current school, are getting bullied, aren't being supported academically to reach their full potential.

It's not because their dad is abusive and they need to move away from him, or is useless and doesn't have any input.

It's not because she is isolated from support and needs to move closer to her support network (the opposite).

I can't think of a single strength in her argument if I were advocating for her position - one that would benefit the children, not her. I believe that it is highly probable that the Court would back your DP.

OP, I would personally get legal advice on having a formal 50/50 agreement put into place and would also ask about getting a psychological assessment from a professional as to the mental health effects for small children of moving schools, leaving behind friends and family, moving house and also starting to live with strangers. All those changes are high stress even for an adult. It ridiculous to expect small children to have the rug pulled out from under them. The mother’s boyfriend knows this and is protecting his child and his interests. I think both the mother and the boyfriend are ignoring the impact on the children that are supposed to make all the sacrifices.

@anunexaminedlife

I have been involved in many sets of family court proceedings and I hope that you have not given too much credence to the posters on here who have told you that the child's mum is being entirely reasonable (particularly the 'let her live her best life' poster ) as their views do not tally with the likely outcome of your DP's potential application for a Prohibited Steps Order.

In my experience, having been involved with lots of very similar cases, the Court/Cafcass do not like children experiencing unnecessary disruption and would view the change of school as such. Mum is unable to evidence that her decision to move her children to a new school and area and reduce their time spent with their dad is necessary or in their best interests. It is clear that the sole driving factor is her prioritising her need for a relationship (where she lives full time with her boyfriend) above the needs of her children. That's what it boils down to, and it will be transparent to the Court too.

It's not because they hate their current school, are getting bullied, aren't being supported academically to reach their full potential.

It's not because their dad is abusive and they need to move away from him, or is useless and doesn't have any input.

It's not because she is isolated from support and needs to move closer to her support network (the opposite).

I can't think of a single strength in her argument if I were advocating for her position - one that would benefit the children, not her. I believe that it is highly probable that the Court would back your DP.

Thanks for explaining that. It highlights how grossly unfair the mother is expecting to be.

45 minutes is presumably daytime travel. Depending on location 45 minutes could be like 2 hours in rush hour meaning that Dad couldn't take the kids to school.

If I were mum I'd be asking my bf to move half way and keeping all kids in the same schools until secondary. I'd be doing the extra travelling to school as I was disrupting the status quo.

You have to laugh at some of the suggestions on here. Dad should follow the children? Travelling 45mins extra to pick them up when already commuting 1hr

This is the classic case of mum putting her own interests instead of the kids oh now doesn't want to share 50/50 I wonder why wants the extra money probably.

Women like this make me sick

@anunexaminedlife so what options do the courts give then to a grown adult about the options for control over their own lives?

It is absolutely possible to protect the best interests of the kids in family courts, as a father. I’ve done it twice now, but here’s what to bear in mind:

• The mothers new relationship is an absolute red herring. It’s actually irrelevant it’s about what disrupts what the children are used to that needs to be focused on, not the why the mother wants to move.
• Keep detailed logs on contact patterns even if it’s informal.
• Do all communication electronically, keep all of it, and If the mother has a history of acting unilaterally you have a record of it.
• Keep all communication with the mother beyond reproach and civil.

In truth the popular misconception that courts always work in favour of the mother are a major benefit. My ex thought it was a simple case of walking into court demanding what she wanted and they would fall over themselves to accommodate her. She got a hell of a rude awakening. It is however crucial as a man not to get involved in pointless mud slinging, whilst my ex was sat there hostile and trying to criticise anything she though she could find as ammunition. I was conversely singing her praises and asserting how important the child’s relationship was to both of us. You want to make it as easy as possible for the court to see who is being unreasonable.

I agree that people on here give terrible advice.

Moving schools does not benefit the DC. Reducing contact that is long established does not benefit the DC. For these reasons there is a good chance that the courts won't agree to this.

The courts do not care about the adults. It is never based around their needs - only if there is an opportunity for children's lives to be improved by a move.

@RetireReady they don't.

The courts expect the adults concerned to make decisions with the best interests of their children first and foremost. If this make life slightly more unpleasant for the adults then so be it.

Have a look on bailii (www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ) at some family court decisions if you don't believe this. There are many examples of adults being told that they can't do what they want to do because it isn't right for their children.

so what options do the courts give then to a grown adult about the options for control over their own lives?

I'd assume the option of, you're quite free to move if you so choose, however, you're children will be staying where they are and you can have access. She has full control of her own life. She does not have full control of the children whom she has shared care of.

Since when does mum's wants trump the children's needs?

Suppose she married for a second time and her husband's job required a move? Or he was in the forces and posted somewhere?

Does she have to leave her kids behind?

Life changes, unfortunately. I don't believe any woman should be forced to spend the rest of her life in a town that suits her ex boyfriend.

@NovemberR I don’t believe that either, but where there is capacity for the children to stay put and enjoy stability and continuity that can be looked at also.

He can ask the court to be the primary parent and keep them in the same school. Sorry, haven't read the full thread. Who is at home with them each day now for homeschooling?

@Dervel you might think that but it’s not the law fortunately. The mother has a right to a life and any court will look at a 45 minute drive as being reasonable.

I copied this from a solicitors website about this issue of UK relocation following a split

“If refusing permission to relocate will have a significant, detrimental effect on a parent who is clearly the child’s primary carer, this may impact negatively on the welfare of the child.”

November if she could show the benefit for her DC of moving that move might be granted in those circumstances. The court decides based on what is best for the children. It's not a difficult concept to grasp.

Yes in law she has the right to a life, I’m not and would never dispute that. She can move, leave the kids with the father maintain a 50/50 contact pattern that they are used to. It’s not a 100% surety the courts would see it that way but it’s not 100% they wouldn’t either. That’s not now the law works. Things have to be argued, weighed up and the best decision for the interests of the children made.

All I’d argue is the father in this instance has a case. I wouldn’t like to predict that he’d win, but neither can you predict he’d lose either. I’ve been in court myself far too often to make that determination.

It’s not about the mother moving that’s not what this is about it is and always should be child focused . Like I said a complete red herring. The issue is the father can offer to take the kids on, maintain continuity for the kids as the resident parent. This shouldn’t be controversial.

*Suppose she married for a second time and her husband's job required a move? Or he was in the forces and posted somewhere?

Does she have to leave her kids behind?

Life changes, unfortunately. I don't believe any woman should be forced to spend the rest of her life in a town that suits her ex boyfriend.*

It isn't what suits her ex-bf, it's what suits her two young children.

How does moving and having contact with their father halved benefit them in any way?

bombastical that is a reference to the main carer relocating for a better job etc. There are circumstances where a move will could be seen as a benefit to the children.