What does shared residency actually involve?

[nicknamegame]

I don't wish to start a thread about a thread as I know it's not the done thing, so if you want some background - I posted on AIBU last night.

Basically what I'd like to know is what a shared residency order actually involves in terms of decisions made regarding the child. I know that issues such as schooling etc needs to be joint, as well as medical care, but what about changing the child's appearance? My dd's hair has been cut quite short without letting me know and I wondered where this all falls under the 'shared' residency. (If it does at all)

TIA

Anyone have an order that they can shed some light on regarding these matters? (Perhaps it's a legal question I need to ask, apologies if so)

[Bonsoir]

The OP has been particularly resistant to all the attempts to negotiate how best to co-parent in the past, so I can well imagine that the father (and his wife) are a bit fed up and make some minor unilateral decisions from time to time!

If I thought WW3 was going to break out because I wanted to take one of the DSSs to the pharmacy to buy a cure for some minor ailment or have his hair cut, I might just think it was easier to go ahead and do it rather than enter negotiations.

[ChinaCupsandSaucers]

ellie I'm not sure it would in this case.

I think the OP and her DDs Dad would benefit from implementing a parallel parenting model, in which they have nothing to do with each others parenting decisions.
A court order can ensure that key decisions; medical, schooling, changes to appearance, childcare arrangements etc are agreed via mediation (or court ordered) but the rest of the time, it is entirely up to the parent whose care the DC is in as to what they eat, who they see, where they go.

What Bonsoir has described is what CAFCASS refer to as Parallel Parenting; funny how they call it co-parenting in Europe, isn't it?!?

[ChinaCupsandSaucers]

Which is it though Bonsoir?

Either you think that in relation to the issue of haircuts and minor medical treatment Dad is co-parenting (as of your post at 14:24) or you think he's making unilateral decisions to avoid tension (your post of 14:40).
It can't be both, can it, unless your use of the term co-parenting is inconsistent with English custom and practice.

[nicknamegame]

Bonsoir, you started out saying I was neglectful of my child and now you have changed your position to that of a parent who is resistant to dad and SM's involvement.
Where the actual fuck have you now grabbed that one from???
Seems to me you've trawled through my posts, decided that actually, you can't prove neglect after all, and rather than admit that- you've now come up with another theory.
You talk rot woman, absolute rot. The court case (initiated by THEM) was because they wanted to change thr contact schedule to have DD every weekend. Bugger all to do with anything else and of course, they lost. No doubt though, you'll come along with another bonkers statement along the lines of 'why shouldn't her father have every weekend OP?

Arrrggggh! You're a mercenary sort Bonsoir, quite incapable of showing empathy to others. I think you and my DD's SM would get on like a house on fire.

[Bonsoir]

Co-parenting, and making minor unilateral decisions, are perfectly compatible concepts. They are not at odds with one another.

Co-parenting does not mean that you have to consult the other parent on every minor parenting decision. You should establish sufficient trust such that each parent can lead daily life making minor day-to-day decisions as he/she thinks fit. The problem is that the OP doesn't want her exH to do that, and in part that is because she attributes some of those minor (unilateral) decisions to her exH's wife. But, given the nature of those decisions, the OP is being a bit ridiculous. Her exH's wife is a doctor and has three DC of her own. When the OP's DD rocks up with an infectious disease, is it really so outrageous for her stepmother to treat her?

[ChinaCupsandSaucers]

Co-parenting does not mean that you have to consult the other parent on every minor parenting decision. You should establish sufficient trust such that each parent can lead daily life making minor day-to-day decisions as he/she thinks fit

Exactly! So we do share the same definition! Which makes Dads position in this case definitely one of not co-parenting!

The OP had already established her position on haircuts, through her own behaviour of talking to her ex prior to them taking place and and sending photos to him in order to avoid the shock factor that can occur.
He chose (those pesky choices again) not to respect the OPs position, which is a clear deviation from the principle if co-parenting that you have so eloquently described.

There is nothing inherently wrong with Dad making unilateral decisions about his DC - but lets not pretend he's doing that under the umbrella of co-parenting, eh?

[littlehandcuffs]

Bonsoir.... You don't half talk a load of b**lOOjks don't you...

The child was put in an awkward position for no reason, it would take five minutes to ask if it was ok to cut her hair or just mention that it was going to be done. Maybe they could have compromised on length.

Bloody common sense please prevail!!

[littlehandcuffs]

Oh and my daughter has a verrucca and the doctor has recomended no treatment, just a swim sock. Had it for nearly six months, nearly gone now : )

Bonsoir...I can guarentee I am not neglectful, you seem a bit of a nutter : )

[nicknamegame]

Yes bollocks indeed.
It makes for a very tiresome debate when a poster changes their stance at will in order to avoid admitting they're wrong.
Bonsoir- you've decided (entirely by yourself and despite my providing information to the contrary) that I fail to treat my child's ailments. Point me in the direction of a single post of mine where I said that?
Of course I know you will if if ignore this post just like you've ignored every single other post that has called you on your bollocks.
Attention seeking bull shit.

[nicknamegame]

Yes bollocks indeed.
It makes for a very tiresome debate when a poster changes their stance at will in order to avoid admitting they're wrong.
Bonsoir- you've decided (entirely by yourself and despite my providing information to the contrary) that I fail to treat my child's ailments. Point me in the direction of a single post of mine where I said that?
Of course I know you will if if ignore this post just like you've ignored every single other post that has called you on your bollocks.
Attention seeking bull shit.

[littlehandcuffs]

It is also never up to an ex-husbands new wife to treat a childs infectious disease.

That should Always be left to the childs doctor to do!! I would never treat someone elses child without advise from their doctor.

I would have understood had they actually taken her to her doctors surgery, but from what I understand childs mother had already done that.

[littlehandcuffs]

And it's a bloody Wart FFS!! Not bird flu!! ("Infectious disease" ridiculous!!)

[ChinaCupsandSaucers]

It is also never up to an ex-husbands new wife to treat a childs infectious disease

I'm not sure what the rules are in Europe where bonsoir is , but here in England there is a medical ethics issue and possible disciplinary action if a registered Dr administered non-urgent treatment to a family member in direct contradiction to the treatment advised by the patients own Dr.
Of course, whether or not a stepchild is a family member would also be brought into debate - but given the delegated responsibility that the stepmum in the OPs case has, I imagine that the GMC would probably take a fairly dim view of the situation.

[littlehandcuffs]

Bonsoir - "Safeguarding" is a very emotive word and used when serious physical or mental abuse is suspected. You say you have experience of this??
I have worked with children for many years and have had to implement measures from a safeguarding perspective.

What you are accusing the OP of is now so far out of line that I feel I have no choice but to report you and this thread.

Stepmothers do a very difficult job with not a a lot of support, you are not helping.

[Bonsoir]

"safeguarding" is not a loaded term - its meaning is perfectly straightforward.

[ChinaCupsandSaucers]

bonsoir Clearly the rules are very different where you are - its clear from the OPs posts that her DDs stepmum treated her DSD against the advice of the patients own Dr.
Whereas a layman (or woman) may be able to argue that she didn't realise that using an over-the-counter remedy was inappropriate, a qualified Dr would know that she was breaching ethical standards. There is no grey area - if stepmum was worried about the contagion passing to her own DCs, the appropriate response would be to ensure the infectious patient was excluded from her home until the infection had cleared - something that would have been quite possible as the patient has a primary residence elsewhere.

OP - if you are considering further legal redress, this might be a route you want to consider; a shot across Stepmums bows by reporting her to the GMC for treating your DD in contradiction to her own GPs advice may well be needed to get her to back off. Of course it's ludicrous to think that wart treatment could come to that, but the whole situation is bonkers.

[Bonsoir]

I've taken my DSSs to my parents' GP in the UK to get antibiotics to clear up an ENT infection - the reason being that my father gets pneumonia easily, so needs to avoid being around people with ENT infections. It was totally straightforward. It is normal practice for stepparents to take care of their stepchildren's health. It caused no problems whatsoever for anyone to do this.

[ChinaCupsandSaucers]

It is normal practice for stepparents to take care of their stepchildren's health

No, it isn't.

If my DDs stepmum did what you did, I would pursue both you and the GP relentlessly. When my exMIL sought non-urgent treatment for my DD, I did just that.

Bonsoir Your DSC mum is clearly comfortable with your role in their life. But, if she wasn't, then choices you have made could be addressed legally - as stepmum, you do not have the legal responsibility to consent to medical treatment and a Dr/school/dentist who accepts your consent in lieu of a parent could face accusations of criminal offences as well as child protection and malpractice considerations.

The fact that the law allows biological parents to prevent others (such as yourself) from authorising treatment for their DCs is evidence that your experience with your DSC mum is exceptional, not the norm.

[TheMumsRush]

Your dss's live with you? Op's dd lives with her. Sm had no place to do it.

[Bonsoir]

"If my DD's stepmum did what you did, I would pursue both you and the GP relentlessly."

The only reason would be to cause trouble and assert yourself. Why would you want to do that?

[Bonsoir]

My DSSs weren't living FT with us when that particular instance occurred - though they were on holiday with me in another country to their country of residence, so I was very much in loco parentis. But, as I say, it was totally straightforward. Children are ill, you need a solution (for their own health and for other people's), you seek it and the doctor just thinks you are a normal person going about your life in a sensible way...

[ChinaCupsandSaucers]

The only reason would be to cause trouble and assert yourself. Why would you want to do that?

Really Bonsoir? How could you possibly know that?

I know I've said this to you before but it's worth saying again - other people do not all think the same way as you do.

There may be lots of other reasons for my choices that you haven't even thought of - you do realise that, don't you?

[Bonsoir]

Such as?

[ChinaCupsandSaucers]

the doctor just thinks you are a normal person going about your life in a sensible way...

After a few high profile cases, doctors rarely think that now a days.

Have you read elsewhere on MN how Dads who take their own DCs for vaccinations have been challenged by medical staff - who have refused to treat unless both parents consent is given - even when those parents are still together?

Unless you presented as the DCs mother (which does happen) I think you'd struggle to get treatment in the way you describe at the practices local to me, anyway. Too risky for the medical staff involved.