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 ...

It's only a 45 minute drive so it'd be possible to see them more often if the journey is the only issue, it's hardly a great distance. EOW is standard. She isn't moving to the other end of the country and your bf can't expect her to live within the same 45 minute drive all the time

EOW isnt standard when youve been having equal time, is it?

Besides which, he's your BF and not your DP/DH so why are you posting about what is nothing to do with you?

oh piss offfffffff.

Nobody is saying parents shouldn’t have a life or be able to move on. Just that the children should come first, and that includes the children having a relationship with their dad. The mother in this situation is putting her new relationship above her children’s established and happy relationship with their dad. Her happiness above that of the children and her ex. In another ten years or less the children will have probably left home and gone to uni etc, then you can do whatever you like, but while your children are young their needs should come first.

And it annoys me that her bf is encouraging her and not telling her that she should be staying out for the next year or two at least

That's why he needs legal advice, his line on this is not very sensible.

each parent has it seems currently equal- not so much a hands on dad as an equal primary cater so I’m confused as to why he is allowing to frame it in a way that she gets automatic custody without considering impact on children?

Exactly this.

@Sittingonabench yes to everything you say. She now wants to make childcare formal and when he said 50:50 she flat out said no. Just not sure what happens and how you get around that?

He will fight if necessary if that’s what you mean. But tbh he’s a bit scared: he wants to keep it amicable (not that she ever will be unfortunately)

OP I think some people are being unnecessary harsh. 50/50 is in the best interests of the children and I agree with legal advice.

OP

Please go and post this in the legal forum.

As I understand it (and legal forum people will correct if I get it wrong)

He can apply for a prohibited Order. This will prevent her to move away from the area. The court will look at what is best for the children. It will be argued keeping the status quo of the usual of 50/50 and the same school is in the best interest of the children.

Please ignore the " usual of every 2nd weekend and one midweek" the usual here is 50/50.

However, please go post on the legal forum and see what people like

Collaborate and prh47bridge says they are both legally qualified professionals who helps out a lot on that forum

I would tag them both but I feel it would work better for you to start over.

@Summertime246

I think the main thing to point out here is the judge isn't going to give the dad custody. It won't happen. They also won't consider 45 minutes to be a big move and they will not ask the father's permission for something so small.

I think unfortunately the dad needs to move part of the way, and commute to work. So maybe move 20 minutes closer to where the kids will live, or nothing. The courts will not rule the mother can't move.

The court can't stop the mum moving but they surely can mandate that to enable the children to maintain all the other current pillars of their life - relationship with Dad, extended family, school, friends, community - that they stay with Dad during much of the school week (maybe Monday to Thursday). That seems by far the more sensible option. Still the children would be missing out on the ease they currently seem to have with seeing both parents very regularly rather than in chunks but still preferable.

@Choice4567

I’m afraid that sounds a reasonable thing to do, and EOW and one night is pretty standard

I can't imagine only seeing my children every other weekend and one night in the week. Why should any non-abusive parent just accept that?

I’m not sure how it works but based on what you’ve said if I were him I would be applying for majority custody as he can provide the most stable environment (schools and extended family etc.) then she can contest Eow and one night or he can offer 50:50 but maintaining current school arrangements. I’m not sure how that works but maybe ask lawyer and make it clear he would like custody.

She is entitled to a life and to move on up it her ex has.
Your bf should bear in mind if this becomes acrimonious it will completely change the dynamic of how much she will try to help anyway.

The most urgent thing is to get a solicitor letter out saying that he wishes 50/50 to continue and that any decision on changing schools needs to be made together. This needs to be spelt out in writing. Then mediation to see if they can agree on a way forward.

I can't believe some of the comments on here. So the fact that one has given birth to children means that you should have to put your own life on hold until the children have grown up because it might inconvenience the father? People move. For all sorts of reasons. And people also move on. The ex here has the right to move on and that doesn't always happen to conveniently happen with the next door neighbour. If the parents want to work this out, they can - but that should never involve telling one parent that they have no right to a life because they are still in thrall to the life the other one has chosen.

Ffs. This isn't what's happened at all. The dad has not tried to prevent his ex having a life. It's not about him being inconvenienced. It's about the children's established routine being disrupted. It's about the children having contact with dad reduced while at the same time having to move in with a new man and his child, a new school, new home. It's about two young children who have only ever known the current set up being moved away from their father and extended family.

If mum wants to move then she's free to, and she can see her children one night a week or every other weekend.

I wonder whether an issue he may have with any court battle is that 45 minutes from his home address is not an unreasonable move, regardless of the change in schools, but it's the commute to and from his job which will make it difficult for him (even though it's the ex who is moving).

I don't know whether a judge would consider that as they only consider the best interests of the children. Moving house and schools isn't intrinsically a bad thing for kids, so would a judge see it as the dad's responsibility to organise his work to accommodate his time with them?

Just food for though. I don't think the ex is wrong to move in isolation, BUT I do think she's is wrong to demand the contact arrangements change rather than finding a way to make it work. For example, she could meet him halfway or take turns dropping them to him.

@Enko

OP

Please go and post this in the legal forum.

As I understand it (and legal forum people will correct if I get it wrong)

He can apply for a prohibited Order. This will prevent her to move away from the area. The court will look at what is best for the children. It will be argued keeping the status quo of the usual of 50/50 and the same school is in the best interest of the children.

Please ignore the " usual of every 2nd weekend and one midweek" the usual here is 50/50.

However, please go post on the legal forum and see what people like

Collaborate and prh47bridge says they are both legally qualified professionals who helps out a lot on that forum

I would tag them both but I feel it would work better for you to start over.

You can just report your own post op, and MnHQ will move it to the legal forum for you.

I can't believe some of the comments on here. So the fact that one has given birth to children means that you should have to put your own life on hold until the children have grown up because it might inconvenience the father? People move. For all sorts of reasons. And people also move on. The ex here has the right to move on and that doesn't always happen to conveniently happen with the next door neighbour. If the parents want to work this out, they can - but that should never involve telling one parent that they have no right to a life because they are still in thrall to the life the other one has chosen.

So their dad can just move and take them away also then?? Why should he live in thrall to his ex - it doesn't matter if she sees her kids only every other weekend.

Unless he folds, it won't be amicable. He needs to have an alternative and solid plan ready for when he goes to court.

My exSiL tried this one, and my Bro got primary custody of his son. He had a good plan ready and made a strong case in court.

@Wingingit15

She is entitled to a life and to move on up it her ex has. Your bf should bear in mind if this becomes acrimonious it will completely change the dynamic of how much she will try to help anyway.

except he hasnt massively reduced her contact with her children, moved away or moved in with a partner has he now?

do you know what - its actually abusive to tell someone they better behave or youll get nasty.....

With the ex's new boyfriend's DC being 11, I can see why he wouldn't want to move her out of school. It'd be easier for a 5 and 7 year old to adjust to a new school.

I don't know what your bf does for work, but would it be possible to get a job closer to where he lives now or to where his DC will be?

I feel so sorry for those kids. Imagine going from a happy 50:50 split spending loads of time with both parents, only ever five minutes away from the other parent, school close by, Nanny and Auntie and friends again nearby, and for it all to be turned on its head- for what? So your mum can live with her bf of 18mos, and you can share a home with a quasi step sibling whose needs were prioritised over yours? No thank you.

If I were him I would send her the previous email again and say I'd really like to talk about this but appreciate our views are very different, and suggest meeting with a professional mediator to see if they could come up with a solution that works best for the kids. If she doesn't engage with that then it'll hardly look good for her if this does progress.

@Wingingit15

She is entitled to a life and to move on up it her ex has. Your bf should bear in mind if this becomes acrimonious it will completely change the dynamic of how much she will try to help anyway.

But currently they have both moved on in the exact same way - they both have new partners but both live near to their own kids' school.

It's unbelievable that the mum is causing this whole issue, refusing to continue the 50/50 (which is the issue, NOT THE MOVE), and yet the dad is getting told he should bear in mind that it might become acrimonious?

It's not him that's making it acrimonious. If she told him she was moving but that she was committed to the 50/50 and they could sort out a plan, I bet OP wouldn't even be posting here as it would be a non issue.

Few thoughts:

Regardless of moral rights or wrongs here taking this to court will destroy the co-parenting relationship and lead to years of conflict and angst. Both sides can present reasoned arguments based on notions of 'fairness' - but really there is no 'right' answer that will suit both parents and the children.

It is unrealistic to expect living and contact arrangements to remain the same over ,potentially ,10 to 15 years. Nothing is for ever - jobs, new partners, children's wants all change over time.

Having these children to do a 45 mins commute each way to school is not in any objective way in their best interests - it will impact on all aspects of their lives - friends, after-school activities, how they spend their holidays.

50/50 is often mooted as the utopia, the ideal - it is not always and often becomes less so as the children get older.

The aim is to ensure the children can have a good relationship with both their parents - there is more than one way that can be achieved, quality can win over quantity. But frankly once a couple with children split the solution is never likely to be ideal - all it can aim to do is minimise the impact on the children, sometimes regardless and in spite of decisions the other parent makes.

The problem is that all of this fighting and taking it to court etc isnt in the children's best interests at all and is likely to cause them stress. Starting this with a fight and court action isnt going to help anyone at all.

OP at the moment they are caught in an I am moving no you are not mindset which is very black and white. Surely there can be room for compromise within this that puts the children centre and enables them to come up with an agreement that works.

Where will the school be it doesnt have to be 45 minutes away there is scope to discuss that and find a place she can move with her boyfriend that enables them both to do it.

More time in the holidays to offset it/bank holidays etc all things which can be looked at to make sure the year as a whole is much more evenly spread.

He should try and keep it amicable and start the discussion now about how it might work for them to make it work. Rather than the black and white you have now.

Longer term where would High Schools be etc.

Yes arguing for the status quo is an option but that ties everyone to something including you and your boyfriend.

THe other side though that comes across is the boyfriend how good is he with the children - it seems he is pushing it as well.

All in all I think a very softly softly approach here would work best

Hahahahahah OP you best go marry your boyfriend quickly so you're entitled to an opinion. I just laughed out loud at that one.

@refusetobeasheep thank you!!! That’s exactly the kind of advice I was hoping for. Sounds like a great first step.