Unreasonable?

[mumtobealloveragain]

DP has 50:50 residency if his children and shared residency. We and his ex also alternate their birthdays and Christmas days-which takes priority over the normal pattern, if that makes sense.

This year is our new baby's first birthday. My DP has asked ex to agree to us having an extra day with their children for that day (as with the current pattern they would be with her). We want them here for baby's 1st birthday, family gathering , little tea party etc. She's said no. It's not until the end of the year so not like she already has plans. It's one single day out of the whole year for goodness sake, no big deal for her but it's important to us.

Is this request really that unreasonable? It is normal/ possible for this sort of thing to be written into an Order along with alternate Christmas' etc?

I know from my DH's experience how easy it would be for the OPs DSC's mum to restrict their Dads contact significantly - he could easily be facing life as a NRP seeing his DCs EOW and half of holidays at best; and years of court action just to secure that. Not forgetting, of course, that when they become teens, they can make their own decisions, which their Mum can influence.

The fact that the DCs Mum hasn't done this is a strong indication that she does put the needs of her DCs first. She may not prioritise the things that the OP believes are important, and she may behave violently towards the family pets, but she hasn't blocked contact between her DCs and their Dad and she is accepting him (all be it reluctantly) as an equal parent in their lives.

Maybe the OP needs to read some of the other threads on the SP board to remind herself of how different life could be for her DSC and their Dad and reassess her priorities?

I agree that you should do something special with the dsc when they're with you.

And you are incredibly lucky to have every other Christmas and birthday, dss is 11 and we have only been allowed to see him on Christmas Day for the last 2 years, and only late afternoon onwards.
Dp had to kick up a real fuss for that to happen

Well there it is then why should mum give up her time. Unbelievable! Mum better not give up her time to allow HER child to go to a siblings party and the other parent MUST change things not to accommodate the child but to accommodate MUMS time rota/plans... If ever there was a case of not being able to see the arae end of an elephant!

I know its right a child's interests should be put forward and a child should be included on such a fantastic occasion or is it "only their first birthday" .

Once again OP you are asking for one day that could be made up with mum at another point, another day that you know isn't a special occasion. It's not rocket science and I think its only a problem for mum (rather I know its only a problem for mum) because it is your SCs birthday. She should exchange one day.

I thought the importance was the children's best interests. Would they like to attend their (half) sibling's birthday? Most likely. So the parents should do all they can to accommodate that and that means if their Mother has made no plans, letting them go. Her response was not thinking about the children. It is a shame they can't go OP. But you can't reason with everyone sadly.

I think it's battle that's not really worth picking I'm afraid.

My DH does have it written into his agreement that where possible DSD is with him for the birthdays of our other children (her half-siblings) and with her Mum for the birthday of her half-brother there. It's not always possible though and a phone call sometimes has to suffice. As others have suggested, we just celebrate with DSD on a different day.

She probably is being spiteful. Possibly she's just making it clear to you that she doesn't want to be flexible with the court-agreed schedule. Which frankly, given that it's 50/50, I think is fair enough.

Flexibility only works when you've got two parents who want to work together. Presumably your DH and his ex went to court in the first place to make sense of the 'grey' areas and get everything established in black and white? In which case, it makes sense to stick to what was decided in court.

The whole point behind a court order is that it is put in place because the parents can't agree.

It seems spectacularly naive on the part of the OP to expect the DCs mum to agree with the DCs Dad to deviate from the Court Order that was put in place because she and the DCs dad couldn't agree .

The OP has a choice. She can schedule the party for a day that the DCs are court ordered to be in their dads care or she can schedule it on her DCs birthday and her DSC don't attend.

The ball is firmly in the OPs court. She can play the victim, run to the courts to seek clarification on yet another point or she could acknowledge that sometimes life isn't fair, she's dealing with a difficult ex and that there are far more significant issues in her DSCs lives that their Dad should be dealing with, such as their fear that their mother will kill their pet in their absence. Given the disclosures made by the DSC about that, I'm surprised the issue of the birthday party is even on the radar; which is why I think this is a fight between parents rather than genuine concern about DCs welfare. A disclosure like that made a school would almost certainly result in a safeguarding file note. Repeated concerns may lead to a referral.

Another spot-on post Frog.

I don't think anyone thinks the mum is being reasonable here raikin If she were posting I'm sure people would be advising her to let them go to their half sister's party.
But the question is whether in the whole scheme of things it's worth the OP getting upset about or trying to write into a court order. The birthday isn't until the end of the year so my guess would be that the ex might be seeing it as a bit of a power game being brought up so far in advance which could explain why she's digging her heels in.

As a single parent you want a nice happy family home with your kids. It's not always easy to create that when you're single - but buying a kitten when you had your DC suggests she feels she needs to compete over where the DCs real home and family is. So she probably sees plans for a birthday party 10 months away as an effort on your part to "own" your DSC as belonging to your family (and not hers) whether or not that was actually what you intended it to be. Give he a bit of time to get used to the new baby being in her DC's lives and do all you can to reinforce the message that their home with her is just as important and she might well relax a bit and start to be more reasonable.

If a court awarded 50:50, then they should get that, I don't really see how that's unfair.

On re-reading, op gets more than 50:50 as they ask for extra days every few months.

Frogs - Just to clarify - DP certainly wouldn't "run" to Court about this one single minor issue. Its not a huge thing I know and we won't make a huge big deal out of it, I just wanted some opinions really.

"The fact that the DCs Mum hasn't done this is a strong indication that she does put the needs of her DCs first. She may not prioritise the things that the OP believes are important, and she may behave violently towards the family pets, but she hasn't blocked contact between her DCs and their Dad and she is accepting him (all be it reluctantly) as an equal parent in their lives."

Their mum was the one who applied to Court to have 50/50 residency as before then she had less. DP had refused as she worked long hours and wouldn't actually looking after them herself, she was unbelievably "forgetful" about important things to do with school etc and thought it best they were with us the majority of the time. At Court he agreed to 50/50 residency, hoping it would improve the children's relationship with her with a number of conditions being in place, all which have been written into the Court Order, such as she must inform him by telephone call if either child is taken into hospital (she didn't previously). He agreed as long as she agreed that things would be flexible, and that is also in the Court Order so they can both make changes to the "rota" at any time if both are in agreement. Things like family events, special holidays, trips etc with both families are why he insisted on this, he wants the kids to have normal lives and (where possible) be able to attend/participate with these things. Had he known she wouldn't be flexible he would not have agreed and he would have taken his chances with a contested hearing that CAFCASS would favour the status quo and his valid arguments against 50/50 would be heard. Incidentally, it was her year to have them for Christmas last year and she didn't want them for Christmas Eve or Christmas Day morning, said she was too busy with friends and instead had them Christmas Day afternoon. We didn't mind as we had all the kids together so it was a great unexpected bonus for us, but it gives a good example that we are not talking about the typical doting mother who is trying her best for her children and is being very kind to the father by graciously "allowing" him alternate Christmas' and 50/50 residency.

Mumandboys - I agree it can get silly, but I don't think siblings birthdays (when they are all still very young) are unreasonable - Xalla has just said it's in their Court Order to clearly a Judge thought it was reasonable too at some point.

As for the kitten - We know there isn't a lot we can do really. If RSPCA went round there they would find a clean home and a well looking and well fed cat. The fact that she smacks it wouldn't be visible to them would it and they are hardly likely to listen to two small children about it. After DSC said this to me I told them to tell mummy that it makes them sad when she smacks the kitten (hoping this would stop it), the next time I spoke to them about it they said "mummy says she doesn't smack it anymore as it is good now" this is a regular thing, if she finds out from the kids that they have told us something she manages to drum it into them that it doesn't happen or never happens. We have previously told them to tell their teacher if anything upsets them as we realise often anything from us would sound malicious and spiteful but when disclosed to a teacher it holds a lot more weight to be taken seriously.

mumtobe I can only reiterate again how i believe that it would be perfectly possible for your DSC mum to withhold contact and restrict your DHs contact with them to a more traditional EOW arrangement.
You may not believe she would do it, but if she were to post on the LP board from her perspective about your repeated harassment, interference and interrogation of the DCs, then she would be advised by some to break the court order, wait for your DH to go back to court and allow the court to make a decision based on all the evidence presented to them.

Don't get complacent. Despite the rhetoric, many courts are still mother-focused, at least initially - it's a lot harder for dads to prove their worth.

But op, she has been flexible by already agreeing to several extra nights at yours for other family events.

Whereisegg, yes she has previously agreed to things and sometimes she says no sometimes she just refuses to respond or answer. She will usually say yes to them spending some of "her" time here if it falls on a day she is working and the kids aren't at school (school holidays mainly) as she'd otherwise have to arrange childcare for them. The agreement was to be flexible and allow for flexibility where possible. Of course if she had plans for that day or the kids were going to grandmas or anything then that's understandable, DO would never expect her to cancel her plans for us or our family/friend events. But saying no to this, along with the reason she gave is just being plain spiteful and not in line with what they agreed at Court.

Last summer we were given theatre tickets for a show a friend was in. Valid for a specific day and time. DO asked their mum if we could have them for that day, we'd do all the driving collecting and dropping off etc and she said no. He asked her I he wanted the tickets and she could take them and she said no. We went with the other children and had a great time and they missed it. Now I know it's not a life or death situation, I know they didn't suffer irreversible harm by not going nor will they even emotionally scarred by missing it, and legally it's up to their mum what they do on "her" time- but it was something lovely for them to do, a real treat and they would have enjoyed it. We later found out that their mum was at work for most of the day and they were with the childminder!

What DP didn't want for the DSC has happened, YOUR time and MY time rather than THEIR time. What does the odd day here and there matter? These kids have large families both sides, lots of friends and close family, there is no reason why they need to miss out on things just because their parents have separated. None at all.

Frogs- I know you are right. I know many Judges are still biased towards mothers but I like to think she'd stand very little chance of gaining majority residency with her track record of being pretty slack in the parenting dept, plus the fact she doesn't actually want them more than 50% of the time. Sounds a little harsh, but it's true. Saying that, DP is aware it is a possibility and he always makes sure he sticks to the Court Order, acts reasonably, polite, business like manner for communication etc.

whereisegg Quite.

OP, you have said that the CO states they can both make changes to the "rota" at any time if both are in agreement
That does not mean that every time a change is requested by one parent, the other must agree - otherwise the requesting parent can ask the court to rule on it.

It's beginning to sound as if you've lived a charmed life where you have either got your own way when you have asked, or if you have been refused, you have been able to seek intervention to support your cause.
You chose to marry and have a child with a man with a difficult ex; either you knew that when you married him and were naive enough to think you could change her, or you rushed in without checking, and are now in a situation you were not expecting. Given what you have said about your DH refusing to agree to 50:50 prior to court, i think its the former. The result is the same - you either have to learn to live with it, or you walk away. You can't change her and you won't always get what you want.

Have you considered the possibility that the dc are telling her they don't want to go to some of these events but don't want you to know?

Perhaps their dm feels that you are asking for extra time for increasingly random things exactly like a friend being in a show.

I don't think her agreeing to extra days with you when she would be working is necessarily her taking advantage, that is exactly what the judge was referring to when they recommended flexibility, surely?

Have you considered the possibility that the dc are telling her they don't want to go to some of these events but don't want you to know?

Yes, quite likely given the level of hostility between parents - they'll tie themselves in knots trying to keep both parents happy.

I know the OP is at pains to believe that the DCs have not been affected by their parents hostility - sadly, it will only become apparent when they are older, and have no role-models for positive, functioning co-parenting relationships of their own.

Missing out on activities - such as the theatre trip you mention - is pretty much par for the course. One of my children missed out on an activity yesterday because dad didn't take him - I only found out because they phoned me to ask where he was. I wouldn't mind, but it's been 2 months in the making and I had asked my ex if he would take him prior to paying for the activity and telling DS he could go - my ex had even commented on what an amazing experience it would be for him and how he didn't think he should miss out! I am not about to go in front of a judge to get it written into a court order because it would cost me a fortune, make me look petty and at the end of the day, it's up to my ex what he does with the children. He's digging his own grave - very slowly, but very surely, with the children and as they are getting to an age when they can decide for themselves who they want to be with, I suspect it won't be dad who constantly promises and never delivers.

Children do miss out on activities when their parents are separated. It's inevitable given the way they need to split their time. Plenty of children from non-separated families also miss out on activities because their parents have other things to do - but no one would dare suggest a 'together family' not taking advantage of free tickets was somehow 'wrong' or depriving the children of a good experience: it would simply be assumed that they had other priorities that day.

This is one of the major problems with separated parenting - it becomes a competition. It's almost as if we have to prove our worth to our children and so we compete to be the 'best' and we judge everyone else's actions by often impossibly high standards. You wouldn't bat an eyelid at children who spent time with a childminder because their parents need to work if it was anyone other than your step children, so why worry about it otherwise? Enjoy the 50/50 and be gracious about everything else, it will make for far better memories for the children and a far less stressful life for you.

We have an understanding that the children (both his and mine) are never told about things before they are agreed. So the DSC never knew they missed the theatre that day, well they knew we'd been as the other children told them, but didn't know they had missed out on going as such.

Mumandboys. There is absolutely no problem with DSC being in childcare, many parents use childcare, it was the fact that their mum wouldn't allow us to take them to see a show using the tickets we were given when she wasn't even losing any of her time with them as they were with the childminder anyway.

you're over thinking it. When the children are with you, they are your responsibility and you do whatever you want. When they are with mum, that's her responsibility and she does whatever she wants.

She had to go to court to get 50-50 which your DP didn't initially want her to have, is it any wonder she is reluctant to relinquish any of her time with the DCs? And so what if they were with the childminder? Why does she have to justify what the children are doing in her time with them? That sounds quite intrusive.

it was the fact that their mum wouldn't allow us to take them to see a show using the tickets we were given when she wasn't even losing any of her time with them

But it's not her time with them. Is that how your DH sees it? His time with his DCs, which he maximises and endeavours to fill with the most rewarding and memorable experiences he can? Fun days out, parties, family events - he wants to make sure they don't miss out if he can possibly help it?

It is shared care, the DCs opportunity to experience day to day life with each parent, be that with a paid child carer, running errands with Mum or having the time of their life at a show.

I'm sure you don't see how offensive and judgemental it may have appeared to offer her the tickets after she had declined the chance for the DCs to go with you. She parents her DCs differently from their Dad. You consider time with a childminder to be less valuable than seeing a show. Maybe she disagrees? Maybe, for her, it is a priority that her DCs have regular contact with a professional child carer, and what you were offering was less valuable, in her eyes, to her DCs.

You cannot change her values. Why would you want to? It benefits the DCs to experience different households and priorities. She has secured a court order that allows the DCs to be parented by their mum 50% of the time. Each time you ask for a swap, or extra time, you devalue that. If she chooses to give up that time, then that is her choice, which robs the DCs of that opportunity for that period. But each time you ask to change things, you are seeking to rob them of the same.

Maybe their dm feels that every time she agrees to extra days, it just fuels your belief that she isn't bothered.

I went through family court and found it pretty traumatic. Every bit of correspondence used to make me panic. Their dm has been through court and secured an order for shared care, yet she is still being hassled to change arrangements and her activities and parenting questioned. Why not just leave her alone? I feel quite sorry for her.