Some advice about contact please....

[SnowWhiteWinter]

Hello. I'm hoping someone here may have been in a similar position as we are and can perhaps help or give some advice in general.

I have 2 dsc, they are both young (3 and 5). They live with my partner and I 50% of the time and with their mum the other 50% of the time.

My partner is currently having a few problems negotiating contact arrangements with their mum. Basically they have agreed that the minimum number of handovers as possible is best for everyone, as there have been problems at handover time previously. Plus we don't live that close to each other so daily handovers would be difficult for them both. They have agreed the children will stay with each of us for a week at a time and this is already happening.

My partner and I think the children are still too young to not see their mum or dad for 8 days at a time as a permanent setup. They get really upset on handover days because they miss the other parent during that time. Their mum has agreed with this. My partner has proposed that they spend one midweek night overnight with the other parent the weeks they are not with them (hope that makes sense) so they only ever go 3/4 days at a time without seeing their mum or dad. However, due to her new work rota which she has recently had put in place as flexible working she works long hours most days the weeks they are with us and much fewer hours the weeks they are with her. She has said because of this she cannot have them for a midweek overnight the weeks they are with us. My partner has offered to be flexible and help facilitate it for her and change her day each time around her days off or even if she can't do it every week just some, but she has said for that reason she will not be agreeing to the children staying with us a midweek overnight as it's not "fair". Meaning it would not be exactly 50/50.

My partner has written to her and explained it is what is best for the children that counts not what is best or "fair" for the adults. She has said her decision is final and will not discuss it further. :(

So, do any of you fellow stepmums here (or other people on this forum) have any advice?

My partner is considering applying to court regarding this, something we can't really afford if we can avoid it. There is currently no court order at all regarding residency of the children, they have tried to keep away from courts and made informal arrangements until now. However, he strongly feels it would be better for the children and she won't accept that. Does anyone have experience of family court practices? Could he apply to court for this (specific issue order could be what he needs from what we have looked up online) despite there being no current residency order? Or if he applies to court for this issue will the court/Cafcass want to bring about a full residency case? He and dsc mum both agree 50/50 with each parent (roughly) is best for the children so neither would try and go for sole residency or a much greater share of time than they currently have, it's just this one night per fortnight.

Any advice greatly received x

[brdgrl]

her again?

[SnowWhiteWinter]

Sorry for delay replying! I have no idea what or who piratecat is, I only joined here less than a week ago, namechanged once as I didn't like the other one but have never posted in this forum with it either.

Bunchamunchycarrots.. You are blowing it out of all proportion. We are not some wealthy family laughing and chasing the poor financially crippled mother. She does feed them and she does have a home to accommodate them (finally) but so does DP! She shares her rent and bills with her new partner too, nobody gets tax credits and the CB goes into trust funds. Neither home pays for any childcare costs. Our homes are pretty equal. Me being a SAHM doesn't really make any difference to things, it certainly doesn't make us any more well off than she is! The whole issue is that she can afford to pay for things for them but she chooses not to. So yes, my DP is pursuing her for a small amount of maintenance since she decided to back out of the agreement that all child related costs are split equally (once agreed on of course) he has never demanded anything from the ex, all optional costs would be agreed by both parties beforehand, well that was what was supposed to happen.

Notadisneymum.... Why is it important to me? It's hard to say exactly. We have had a pretty rough ride of things over the last two years, there have been many times when we (my partner or I) have had to pick up the slack for his EX, do things for the DSD's that she was supposed to have done, change our plans to be somewhere to collect them at very short notice because she decided to give them back early (Christmas last year in fact) or when she hasn't turned up for handover or turned up really late without warning. We do it all to make sure the DSD's don't notice and it doesn't affect them. We've put up with abusive from her, which is often in front of the children, hence the decision to take week-at-a-time until things settled down. After all that has happened we have been doing as much as we can trying to encourage her to take responsibility for her own children, to have a proper relationship with them and do whats best for them. I can honestly say I believe that I have done more for with and in the best interests of he children (especially the youngest) than she has. Not for "control" as another poster asked, but just because I've sort of had to, and that just isn't right. The money thing just seems like one last way she can exercise her right to "choose" to not be responsible for her own children, and frankly, it pisses me right off but I would never say that, I just smile and bite my tongue, over and over again.


Thanks for the info that a specific issue order isn't want DP needs, he really was hoping to not have to go to court, perhaps not for the right reasons but for reasons that feel right to him, if that makes sense. Plus it's going to cost a small fortune that we can't really afford, however, we would find/borrow the money if it needed to be done. I honestly can see how far from ideal this current situation, honestly, hence why I joined here and posted here for some advice.

We have no "big" reason why the children should live primarily with DP (and I) and we have been told a court don't want to hear about little things, don't want to hear tit for tat (quite rightly). Are a court really going to be interested in the small things like the fact that she regularly takes the eldest into school 30-40 mins late, nearly every Friday morning, that she assured us she would take her to her school meeting (the one before they start where they meet the teacher and spend a couple of hours there) and then didn't and didn't even let us know (we re booked it and took her the next week) Do a court want to hear that she sent the youngest to pre school in below zero temperatures without coats or jumpers and we have no idea why? Do they want to hear that she refuses to communicate anything about the children with DP or is that all "small stuff". He doesn;t want to go to court without a chance in hell or to be told he's moaning about small stuff. Neither of us have any experience of court of any kind, especially not family court, we don't know how it works or what likely outcomes there are (apart from what we read on here and other similar forums).

[SnowWhiteWinter]

I'm not smug and/or arrogant at all. In fact your quote was missing the sentence directly after that one which was

"Not for "control" as another poster asked, but just because I've sort of had to, and that just isn't right."

I'm not lording anything over her at all, or being superior. If I worked too then would I be less smug and arrogant?

[allnewtaketwo]

That sentence makes no difference at all. If your superior attitude is coming across on a thread to a number of strangers, then I can only imagine how it is for your DSC's mother in real life.

Saying you do more for her children than she does is wrong on so many levels. Nothing to do with whether you work or not. She is their MOTHER. You are not. Yes she does work to support and provide for her family, yet you insist repeatedly that she doesn't provide for them.

[SnowWhiteWinter]

Allnewtaketwo -

I obviously don't say that to her! I never speak to her and very rarely even see her. I said it here on a step parenting forum, I bet many step parents feel that they do more for their DSC than one of their real parents do. The only reason I do those things is because she doesn't, she chooses not to do things for her children that need doing and therefore either myself of my DP do them. You are right, it is wrong on so many levels, I agree. The other option is not to do them and the DSD's lose out, not an option for me I'm afraid.

We will have to agree to disagree because to me having job and providing a roof over your children's head is not the end of responsibilities as a parent. Children need more than a roof and a bed both emotionally and physically. Yes I insist she doesn't provide for them, she lets my DP pay for everything for the children, apart from her rent and food in her house, because she has decided that's the way she wants it and I absolutely disagree.

[SnowWhiteWinter]

Optimisticpssimist - I have absoluely no idea who "piratecat" is I have never psoted on this or any other forum about my DP or my DSD's.

[allnewtaketwo]

You are not putting your DSCs emotional needs first at all by consistently undermining their mother, taking a superior attitude and making life difficult for her by landing her with csa arrears. Don't kid yourself.

But of course you will disagree because you are right - I am wrong, all the other posters on here are wrong and the children's mother is wrong too. Whatever

[SnowWhiteWinter]

"consistantly underming their mother" I said it once, on the internet -it's words on a page. I don't say it to her, or anyone else, I do not undermine her in real life in any way.

My DP is not landing her in CSA arrears he is claiming maintenance through CSA as she will not pay for things her children need as she agreed, her ignoring the CSA is landing herself in arrears.

Do you think that one parent should cover all costs for the children if the other decides they don't want to?

[NotaDisneyMum]

We have no "big" reason why the children should live primarily with DP (and I) and we have been told a court don't want to hear about little things

Yes, you do. Your big reason is that the current arrangement isn't working for them, there is evidence from the school to back that up, and their mum is refusing to be primary carer. If that isn't big, I don't know what is.

You don't need to understand the court process, that is what your DP's solicitor and barrister are for. His DC's are unhappy, their Mum is (based on what you have said here) refusing to address it, and your DP is tiptoing around the issue.
As I said upthread, either there are other things going on that mean your DP has received accurate legal advice, or he really doesn't have his DC's best interests at heart. Only you know which it is.

[allnewtaketwo]

For the last time , your DP is not covering all the costs for the children. Their mother puts a roof over their head for 50% of the time, feeds them, keeps them warm etc etc, for half of the time, with no state support.

And I fail to believe that such a superior smug attitude on here does not seep into real life.

[NotaDisneyMum]

The only reason I do those things is because she doesn't, she chooses not to do things for her children that need doing and therefore either myself of my DP do them. You are right, it is wrong on so many levels, I agree. The other option is not to do them and the DSD's lose out, not an option for me I'm afraid

Welcome to the world of step-parenting.

You have chosen to take on responsibility for these things, because to you, the DSC missing out is not an option - and yet your choice to do this means that they experience tension and resentment between their parents.

Eventually, many step-parents come to the conclusion that the DSC losing out is the lesser of the two evils - the fallout when the step-parent does those things is too distressing and damaging for the DC's.

You can continue to take the moral high ground, step in and act as a substitute when their mum doesn't do everything you believe should be done, or you can accept that their mum is who she is, and is doing the best she can.
I used to think that the best thing I could do for my DSC is provide them with everything I would want for my own DD. I learnt the hard way that the DSC are not my children and their parents are responsible for their care and welfare. If I interfere, I make things worse for the DSC - just like you are.

[SnowWhiteWinter]

Allnewtaketwo, Ok, DP covers all cost apart from her rent and bills (shared with her partner) and food at her house. As for feeding them and keeping them warm, (not when they are at school for lunch) and yes she pays her heating bill but coats and other warm clothing is paid for by DP!

DP has to pay for school dinners, all school & preschool related items - uniforms, shoes, bags, lunchboxes etc home things like clothes, trainers, coats etc. Clubs and activities (that she agreed to). It amounts to quite a bit. There is no reason she shouldn't pay half of those things and she said she would when 50/50 time started, but she decided she'd rather not.

Thanks Notsdisneymum, you're right, it is a big reason in it's own right. I suppose we were always thinking residency gets awarded one way if the other parent has major problems, alcohol, drugs, abuse and neglect and perhaps smaller things are ignored. Yes, their mum will not address it and yes, I'm afraid DP does tiptoe around her more than the issue. His appointment with solicitor is later this week so he is going to chat things through and see what she says. He was also told before to keep a log of everything, every email that is ignored, every time she doesn't turn up to collect the DSD's or turned up an hour late, any problems there are, which he has done, plus we have all the solicitors letters that have been ignored and we have stuff in writing from the school about problems there and her lateness too.

[allnewtaketwo]

He receives state support towards this expenditure. His choice to put it in trust funds. But the bulk of her 50% costs will be housing and bills/food etc while they're there, it's hardly marginal.

[SnowWhiteWinter]

I used to think that the best thing I could do for my DSC is provide them with everything I would want for my own DD.

This is exactly how I feel. I've only lived with them less than two years but the majority of that time was when the youngest was just a baby and when they only saw their mum once or twice a week so I do feel responsible for them. It's hard to remember I am not responsible for them.

I think it would be easier if I knew that their mum was doing the best for them that she can, she's really not, and that's not me being a bitch or just making things up about her, she's not, they are simply not no.1 priority in her life. :(

[bunchamunchycrunchycarrots]

She is a single woman with children, she needs to work to support them

^^This suggests she lived on her own, no partner to share the financial burden with, yet now she has a new partner to share the burden with?

[SnowWhiteWinter]

It's not his choice, it's a choice they made for their DSD's and it has always gone into their trust funds. I suppose he could cancel it and keep the CB but then it's the DSD's losing out again.

[allnewtaketwo]

You lived with them when youngest was a baby? Had their parents just split up? That was very quick.

[pinguthepenguin]

Aww Disney please don't encourage them to go for primary residency. They don't need another reason to get rid of the mother completely

[SnowWhiteWinter]

Bunchymunchy - I mean she is a single parent, her partner is not "step dad" he doesn't take that role and he has no children of his own although they have only lived together for about 6 months I think. Single in marital status rather than living alone is what I meant, separated from my DP and solely responsible for her children when they are with her.

[allnewtaketwo]

"It's not his choice" - so you DP has no choice as to what to do with money he receives into his bank account - yeah right.

"I suppose he could cancel it and keep the CB but then it's the DSD's losing out again" - and you think they won't lose out when their mother gets stung for hundres potentially thousands of csa arrears?

[SnowWhiteWinter]

Pinguthepenguin...

"Get rid of the mother completely" My DP and I have done everything we possibly can to encourage and facilitate a relationship between the DSD and her. We have encouraged her to have them stay more than one night a week, encouraged her to turn up on time to collect them, driven them to her rather than have her pick them up etc. We have had to deal with crying DSD's when she hasn't come to get them! Nobody is trying to get rid of her at all :(

As for Disney encouraging DP to go for primary residency. Well of course he wouldn't do that from internet advice (no offense meant) he will seek sound legal advice too if he decided to take that course of action. However, if everything I say here is just to make her look bad, all untrue and we have no evidence to show a court that my DP having primary residency would be best for the DSD's then there is no problem is there, he will just get laughed out of court.

Allnewtaketwo... Yes I suppose it is his choice right now, I meant it wasn't his choice historically. DP is quite honest and believes that the agreement they made that CB would go into trust funds should stand, she has never disagreed with this since or asked him to cancel the trust fund direct debits and use the money instead of maintenance.

[pinguthepenguin]

What this is coming down to is:
A winter coat for each child per year
A uniform for one child per year
A pair of shoes and trainers per child twice a year
School lunch for one child £40 per month.
1 activity per week for older child at what- £5 per week?


Unless you are telling us that you pack a suitcase for those kids for the week at mums and provide literally EVERYTHING in that week, then apart from your usual day to day expenses, what else could there be that, in your mind justifies your DP's actions here?
Are you seriously telling me that the above costs (if its true) outweighs what you get in CB? You are hounding this woman for the cost of the above items. Yes you are...put it any other way you like. but you are. These are mere babies, not 16yolds!

[NotaDisneyMum]

her partner is not "step dad" he doesn't take that role and he has no children of his own although they have only lived together for about 6 months I think. Single in marital status rather than living alone is what I meant,

Ok, now I'm confused.

What is the definition of a step-parent? I know that there isn't one in law - although marriage or living together as a family for over two years does secure some minor additional legal rights, but other than that?

If her partner lives with them as a family, why isn't he a step-dad? I'm not married to my DP either - does that mean I'm not a step-mum? My DSC certainly think I am! Is it the length of time they've been together? Is 6 months not long enough - in which case, when will he become a step-dad?

Presumably, if he is living in the family home, he is contributing in some way, just as you are to your own family.

Bewildering!