Transport of children

[toxicwaste]

I was just wondering how other people work picking and dropping of children/step-children at the other parents house.
My two children's father lives about 12 miles away and we share the running around between us, pretty much 50/50.
On the other hand my partners ex wife lives about 400 miles away and we have to do 100% of the travelling in order to see the children. It doesn't seem fair to me, but I was wondering what is 'normal' (!)

I agree. Its never cut and dried, which is why I said it could be viewed that way. Each case is different isn't it?

But in my case, as I do the majority of the care I think it would be taking the mickey to expect me to also spend my precious free time taking dd to her Dads. Given that he does nothing else it's the least he can do.

The children should do the journey on their own.

...or they should use flying pigs as a form of transport.

Most likely mode of transport for my step children should DP not be able to drive.

My stepson is now 18 and does the 2 hour drive to our house himself but for the 10 years we have lived here ( we moved away) we done ALL the picking up and drop offs often getting stuck in horrid Sunday night traffic on the m4 ! But if I'm honest we didn't really have a problem with it as it was our choice to move and was expected.

Oh can I add it didn't even cross our minds that there should b a money issue regarding petrol ! ( wish it did now )

wax I see that differently though - as the parent with primary responsibility for your DC it is part of your job to ensure she maintains a relationship with her Dad, as that is what is best for her, so that is more important than your free time, surely?

NADM, there are two different scenarios here, surely?

Katie referred to the fact that the RP not doing part of the travelling as "a pretty typical way of undervaluing the non-resident parent" (which is surely only true in certain circumstances), Waxtart countered that. I notice you don't seem to have a problem with Katie's generalisation, only Waxtart's reply to it.

In the situation Katie describes, I agree that when the RP moved she should have at the very least travelled back to the original location or done half the journeys and her behaviour could be described as undermining the role of the NRP; similarly in the situation Waxtart describes and my own situation, the NRP expecting the RP to do part or all of the travelling is undermining the role of the RP.

The OP says the NRP was the one to move so far away, therefore the responsibility lies with him to travel to see his children. Both parents have a responsibility for maintaining contact, not just the RP.

As the RP, I recognise my responsibility to ensure I make (reasonable) efforts to maintain my children's relationship with their father. They are pretty much always available for contact should he choose to visit them, but I do not extend that responsibility to travelling long distances to pander to his laziness, especially when I already carry out all aspects of their daily care alone and he does nothing to contribute to that (and how can he from 400 miles away?).

Waxtart I disagree - I didnt mean it undermines the RP in terms of their own feelings, I meant that it undermines the relationship in the childs eyes- which is damaging. It clearly paints the picture that "Im happy for you to see your Dad but I don't value it that highly so frankly if he wants to see you, he can get off his arse. My time is too precious to waste it driving here and there just so you and your dad can see eachother"

Its not a competition to decide who does the most, its about the child. Every time.

"pretty typical" is what i said. I don't think that's entirely generalising. Its saying that it is faily typical which in my experience is true.

But you could turn that around for an NRP who won't travel to see his/her child(ren)? "Im happy to see you but I don't value it that highly so frankly if s/he wants me to see you, s/he can get off his/her arse and bring you here. My time is too precious to waste it driving here and there just so we can see each other."

There is more than one possible scenario

And frankly, for my XP to expect me to take our children to visit him when he moved away is undervaluing what I do to care for them every single day, by myself, and it says to our children that he does not see my role as their main carer to be important or worthy of any respect.

Both parents have a responsibility for maintaining contact, not just the RP.

I see the levels of responsibility as different for each parent though; A RP has more responsibility to facilitate contact than the NRP in my opinion - I suppose I'm basing my that on the fact that the court order is on the RP, not the NRP (a whole other debate). The RP have day-to-day responsibility for the child, and that includes their emotional wellbeing, through a meaningful relationship with their NRP - even if that NRP is making it difficult, I think that the RP should go the extra mile. ('scuse the pun!)

I'm admit that I am also bringing my own baggage into the debate and assuming that the NRP is reluctantly in that role - and would happily take over the role of RP. I often forget that many NRP are not prepared to do that; as both DP and my exH would be RP in a heartbeat given the chance.

So basically the NRP can behave however he likes but the RP should continue to pander to that behaviour in order for the children to see him?

My ex has already abdicated all his responsibilities, he has already abandoned his children, he has already relegated his relationship with them to a weekly phone call which he often cuts short if he has something better to do (but woe betide me if we are a minute or two late for that phone call), I already raise three children including two preschoolers completely by myself including 3 mile bus journeys to and from school three times a day, there is no way on this earth that I am going to start taking 6 hour train journeys at a massive cost to my already painfully stretched budget in the vain hope that they might actually see him. That is his responsibility, it is not mine. If he wants to arrange a schedule of contact visits then he is welcome to do so, but it will be at his expense and on his time.

FWIW, he was a very reluctant NRP. He would have much preferred we remain together, he get to see the children everyday and I do near enough all the work both in and out of the home. He thinks I am an evil person who has driven him away and taken his children from him. I expect he'd happily have the children live with him as long as his new wife was there to do all the work involved. Actually, if I emailed him and told him I was bringing them to visit he'd more than likely tell me I had no right to dictate to him when he sees his children, because that's the kind of mentality he has. Similarly, if he emailed me and told me that he wanted me to bring them to see him and I said no, he'd tell me I had no right to dictate to him when he sees his children...

To return to the OP, obviously neither I nor no-one else knows why the relationship broke down, why the father moved away, how he views his contact with the children etc, but I stand by my response that in moving away he took on the responsibility for travelling back to his children's local area to visit and/or collect them for contact visits. If he didn't want that responsibility then he shouldn't have moved away.

Your situation is nothing like what we see in OP through - he hasn't abdicated responsibility and neither has my ex or my dh. Although my ex is a bit shit fairly often.
It doesn't matter to me, I'm happy that dd knows both her parents value her relationship with the other and make contact happen.
Recently my dsd's mum said exactly what I put in my other post to my dsd, her comment (through tears) was "I don't care who does more and who moved where, I just want to see my mum and dad when I want to"

I agree wholeheartedly with your reverse scenario pessimistic. If it were all the other way it is equally as despicable! 50/50 means no undermining either way.

I moved 300 miles away from the kids' dad.

No way on this earth I could have supported myself and 3 under 5s in London, not even on a teachers' salary. So I came home, where I have family support and better housing/ education/ lifestyle and all.

XH agreed that the life the children have here is exponentially better, so he moved here too and lives 100 yards away.

Only if both parents value the other thewickedest. Even if I had 50/50 with my XP and he hadn't moved away he still wouldn't value my parenting or my work, or my rights to free time, or a life of my own. He still would see my personal life as entirely his business. We had 50/50 of sorts after we split (in my home, because he didn't have anywhere suitable to take them) and he used it to search my house, hack my computer and hide my mobile phone so he could read my messages after I left to go to work. not that I agree with 50/50 as standard or think it works in many situations

And while the OP's DP hasn't completely abandoned his children (I presume, it seems he has up until now at least been travelling to see them), he has moved 400 miles away which means he is not able to take any responsibility for their day to day care - presumably leaving it all to their mother.

No flamng from me crunchyfrog, sounds like both you and your ex prioritsed the kids.

But it's not about who works harder or does the most - its about the child seeing both of their parents and both parents showing the child that this is important.

and both parents showing the child that this is important

Or only the RP, according to NADM.

It's not important if a parent decides not to bother with his children's day to day care, to arbitrarily leave it all to the other parent and then expects that person to make the effort to ensure a relationship is maintained? Really?

To behave like that undervalues your own relationship with your children. It undervalues the role and the work of the person whose care you leave your children in. And most importantly, it absolutely undervalues your children.

TBH, I am already hanging by a thread. I am already exhausted and drained. If I were to add on a monthly (for example) 800 mile trip via public transport just to ensure that my children see their father regularly I think it would send me over the edge, without even taking into account the financial impact. How would that help my children? It might not matter who does the most work but it certainly matters that the person who is caring for the children is mentally balanced, for want of a better phrase. It is more important for me to try and keep balanced than it is for me to make extreme efforts to ensure they see their father.

It doesn't sound like your ex wants to see the kids though, of course no one expects you to trek 800 miles to sit on a doorstep waiting for some knobber to decide if he wants to come out and see his kids. But if you're talking about a (maybe less than perfect but) willing father who wants to see his children then it IS a joint responsibility of both parents to display a respect for "contact" I am aware of the damage done to children where a willing parent is undermined that I'd rather make the journeys than refuse to do so based on the grounds that I do enough.

optimistic - in your case, your ex moved away - just like the OPs DP has, after the family broke down.
In that case, I do not think it is reasonable or to be expected that the RP will travel or incur costs.
However, it is reasonable to expect RP to do so when it is their choice to move a significant distance away from the NRP.

I don't consider that contact with a NRP is in any way for the benefit of the NRP - it is entirely about the children. For the NRP to refuse to facilitate it on the grounds that the NRP contributes nothing is, IMO, unreasonable. To refuse on the grounds that the RP is buckling under the pressure is different entirely.

Sorry, there's a stray 'N' in there!

I agree with everything you are saying Optimistic.

I fully encourage dd's relationship with her Dad. He was offered 50/50 when I left. He is free to see her whenever he wants, ring her whenever he wants, I'd love him to take more of the day to day responsibility. He refuses to pay maintenance and has recently cancelled his weekend with her because he was seeing his new girlfriend. DD knows how important I feel contact with her Dad is because I talk to her about it, she sees him come here on her birthday, at Christmas. I have never said no when he's asked to see her, she is free to ring him whenever she wants.

I don't actually have an issue with travelling - he generally does the pick ups and drop offs, but I've done them too when I've been passing. But in principle, if you look at responsibility for the child overall, and don't separate out responsibility for contact, then if we are taking joint responsibility for her that means sharing out that responsibility and me doing the bulk of it plus the travelling isn't equitable - it's something he could easily do.

And I don't feel there is anything wrong with not wanting to use up my child-free time to make things easier for him. He has much more of it than I do. It's hard work bringing a child up on your own and you need to recharge your batteries.

I felt the same about the travelling when I was with him and he had a 3 hour round trip to collect dsd. It never occurred to me that we should ask her mum to share that - she had enough on her plate. What dsd learnt from that was that her Dad bothered to do the long journeys so he could see her, not that her mum wouldn't. And it will be the same for dd - she will grow up - I hope - feeling that I did the day to day care, but her Dad would make the effort to come and get her. And I'd far rather that she thought that than that mum did all the running around and even had to take her so she could see her dad. Doesn't exactly paint her Dad in a very good light and I wouldn't want to enable that.

Oh he does, thewickedest. It's his right to see them you see. But only when it fits in with his "new life" and on his terms. And because I won't do as I'm told he won't come and see them until I do :)

NADM - Yet despite the OP's DP falling into the former category, you seem determined to push the agenda of the RP moving away, despite all responders saying that whichever parent moved should bear the burden? The situation you describe is of no relevance to the OP, the OP does not suggest that her DP's ex does not value his contact with the children or that she is using the distance as a reason for blocking contact. In fact, the OP is stating how unfair it is that her DP has to do all the travelling and that it eats into contact time despite the fact being that that situation is entirely of her DP's doing. He could have avoided it by not moving away in the first place.

I would refuse on both grounds you mention, btw.

Optimistic - apologies

my comments about RP's responsibilities have been in response to wax comments not the OP - I didn't make that clear