please please help really scared

[scarlettandrhett]

DH and I have our own DS and DH has a DD my DSD.

Getting contact was horrendous as ex stopped all contact when she found out about me. I was not the OW. I met DH long after they split up, they were not married.
During the court hearing and out of the blue, she phones me and wants a agreement over contact that we can put before the judge. The suggestion she gave was what DH had wanted. The judge stamped the order.
My gut was telling me that as long as DH played by her rules, all would be ok but if he stepped out of line, all hell would break loose.

Contact was great for the next 3 years. We got DSD more than the court order stated. I became ex "new best friend" and DH and I played her game.

Last month, DH made a geniune mistake over drop off and she went nuts, calling DH every name under the son. DH had had enough and told her so. Yes, contact was stopped, all attempts at communication were stopped.

About 3 hours ago, she came to our door and said she wanted to sort it out. Like a fool, I let her in.
I cannot believe what happened next and even as I write this I feel that I will wake up from a dream.

She proceded to tell us if we take her back to court, she will say DH was abusing DSD. She said that even though it is not true the fallout will affect our own DS. She said she will go to SS with these claims and will say she has real fears for my DS as well. She will go to the police and ensure our DS is removed from our home until an investigation is completed. She said she will tell SS that was why she stopped contact. She is a teacher and knows what do. I thought DH was going to go for her. She was calm, not shouting, screaming, just very calm and smiled through it all.

I cannot believe this is happening, I cannot even find the words to describe it. After she said this, it is all a haze, she walked out our home them. What do we do? What happens. I am really scared now.

I have changed my name

They are not keeping her from going home though Purple. They are following correct procedure in informing the court that child is refusing to comply with a court order.

The court agrees that she should not be forced to do so.

End... Until a further date is set to discuss the way forward.

If you read my posts you will see that I think the best thing for all children is to have a relationship with their parent in an ideal world. Despite the actions of this mother I think that a reconciliation should be attempted (but not forced)

However she has two parents and can live with whichever can meet her needs

surely this situation (which I think scarlett and her DH have handled fantastically, in my very uninformed opinion) the fact that the mother came round and, not emotionally but cold-bloodedly, threatened the OP and her child, thus committing, I believe, a criminal offence, takes this well beyond the realms of a girl having a strop with her mother and ta-da, residency is changed. The mother is incredibly lucky that she hasn't been arrested. She is also, in my view, damned lucky not to have been suspended from her job and I would be most surprised, once the HT is made aware of all this, if something doesn't happen there. A person who can behave like that should not, IMVHO, be working with DC.

*The offence of blackmail is set out in s.21 Theft Act 1968. Under the Act, blackmail consists of making an unwarranted demand with menaces with a view to making a gain or causing a loss. By s.21(3) Theft Act 1968,the maximum sentence for blackmail is 14 years.

Elements of blackmail

To be liable for blackmail the defendant must:

Make a demand
With menaces
The demand must be unwarranted
have a view to make a gain for himself or another or have intent to cause a loss to another*

No way of proving it as it would be your word against hers but I suspect this is why the police took it so seriously.

OP has done a fantastic level headed job of protecting both children.

She immediately took action to show this woman she will not take this threat to either child/her and DH and that she will not put up with her shit any longer.

The ex made an attempt to continue manipulating OP's stepdaughter. SD is distressed and OP took action to protect her from further distress until this can all be handled officially.

She had been calm and not stooped to ex's level and has done things by the letter of the law.

No sympathy her for the ex either and no criticism for the OP's handling of things.

I get that the father might need to go to court in order to enable his daughter to stay in his house without his being in breach of a court order.

What I don't get, nor do I think is ok, is the way in which this process has been executed. Normally when you go for residence of a child it is all done with the knowledge of all parties. If one or other decided not to show up for the hearing then the decision could still be made in their absence, but all parties would have the right to speak.

In this instance the father has gone to court with his dd to secure her (temporary) residence with him. All without her mother's knowledge. Following the delivery of this decision, it has been left to him to deliver the order, does this really happen? I was under the impression that delivery of legal papers had to be done officially? but before all this her employer has been informed of what is happening (unfortunate as she works at her daughter's school) and informed not to tell her, and he has then shown up on her doorstep with the police to deliver the residence order. No court contact with the mother, no legal involvement on her side, no right of reply, nothing.

Regardless of the mother's manipulation of the situation in the past, do people really think that this is ok? At the very least the party gaining residence shouldn't be the one delivering the order - to the aggrieved party this could well seem like gloating.

purple

I'm just shocked that, in general, it can be so quick and simple to keep a child from going home

What do you mean by 'keep a child from going home'?

She has two homes.

No one is stopping the child from going to her mothers home.
The court is supporting her choice of staying at her fathers home, until this is sorted out.

Why do you think that her mothers home is her only home and why should a 12 year old be forced to live with a parent who is acting this badly, simply because she is the mother and not the father?

The way you are writing about it makes it sound like some stranger is holding her hostage.

do people really think that this is ok?

In order to have an opinion on whether this was OK, I would have to learn a lot more about the legal system and the reasons why certain processes are in place.

Ex parte hearings are one small part of the judicial system and I don't even know whether they are commonly used to determine or change residency arrangements for children.

There could be all sorts of reasons for the process being as it is. If you're concerned that it should be changed, maybe there is a monitoring body you could join and have your say.

it says

\link{http://www.compactlaw.co.uk/free-legal-information/children/how-to-apply-for-orders.html\here}

"However, the courts do not usually like to make Ex-Parte Residence/Contact Orders without hearing from your opponent first. You can however get an Order that when your application is served on your opponent that they need only be given short notice and that an early date is fixed for the hearing."

I find it amazing that this was so easy to obtain then. And that the order was served by the op's dh in person and that although the police were present this was at his request - essentially he was able to obtain temporary residence and could then deliver the news to the mother without any legal involvement...

I'm just shocked that, in general, it can be so quick and simple to keep a child from going home.

The child is being supported in her need to take some time away from a difficult situation.

I'm GLAD that someone is hearing her. I doubt this was an easy decision for her, it sounds as though it must have been terrifying and upsetting.

Dontdrink - I have read your post and am offended that you think DH and I have fallen into the trap of overplaying DSD wishes in order to teach the mother a lesson.

Yes, DH and I are angry, the ex threatened not only DH but MY son for God's sake but you know what, I would NEVER sink to her level.

My dsd came to us wanting to know what had happened. I did not think it was approriate to tell her. In fact, she thinks all her mother said was she would claim DH hit her and hurt her. She does not know that her mother threatened to make sexual abuse allegation. But if I wanted to teach her mother a lesson, I would have made sure DSD knew that but I would not do that. I don't want to teach the ex a lesson, I want nothing to do with her because where would it end? Tit for tat?

DH and DSD went to see the HT, I did not. The HT was told the basics, that Dsd is living with us on a temporary basis. He does not know the reason why and if he finds out, it will not be from us.

I will support my dsd with what ever discussion she makes, I will also encourage her to met with her mum. As I have said all along, despite what has happened she is her mother and no child should ever have to lose their mother. I am not nor do I want to be a replacement mother to Dsd.

My DH had no option but to go to court yesterday. DSD was refusing to go home, the ex had made threats of allegations. If we had refused to return Dsd without the courts authorisation, then there is not doubt in my mind that the ex would have used it to her advantage. Then where would that have left us.

Sometimes I feel that I am dammed if I do and dammed if I dont. Its a no win situation and in the meanwhile I have a dsd angry confused and upset, an exwife determined to blame me for everything, a Ds who is too young to understand what is going on but got worried in case someone tried to remove him from my care and a DH who had been determined for 12years to forge a relationship with his DD despite an ex who seen him as nothing more that a babysitter when she needed it.

No matter what I do, I have no doubt that I will be painted out as the villian and it is not fair

you are doing brilliantly, OP - don't think for a minute otherwise.

and for you all.

scarlett

You have done the right thing, every step of the way. Don't let anyone make you feel bad about it. I would have done a couple of things slightly differently (such as telling the HT exactly what had happened as I think the school has the right to know what she is like) and then on the other hand you have been calmer when I would have exploded (well done you!!).

Read all the posts, take what you want from it, do not let the others upset you.

GoblinLittleOwl I am sure you are aware of MN's troll hunting policy. If not, it's ^ for all to read.

There is very little the dh can tell the school other than that the dd is living with them temporarily. Everything else is just allegation and the school would not get involved in a “he said, she said,” discussion, especially as there has been no charge made. Equally the school won’t facilitate no contact between the mother and her dd, because there is no order in place which says there should be no contact.

Scarlett there are clearly some on here with their own agenda (as ever on this board) and I suspect a bit worried that children also have a voice to speak up when they're being emotionally abused. The fact that children can hold their parents to account is deeply worrying for some, but I for one support it. It's a shame more children don't get the chance. But hey, even when mothers carry out criminal acts they can't do any wrong, can't imagine what this thread would be like if the dad had made the threats!! Society has some strange prejudices.

I for one think that you are doing great and deserve a huge pat on the back.

Don't waste your time listening to noise. There are some trying to drive you away. Don't let them.

Scarlett try not to pay mind to those who are trying to 'get your goat'. As the saying goes; 'haters gonna hate'. People project their own 'issues' on other people's problems. And many people have the attitude of 'mums over dads' no matter what. There are times when it is in the best interest of a child to live with their dad. This is one of those times because of the mother's actions against the child's dad and stepmum. Your DH had to take legal steps to protect your family (including DSD) during this 'cooling down' period.

Scarlett never doubt for a second that you & DH did the right thing. The Ex of one of my DH's friends threatened to accuse him of abuse because she wanted him to sign the child over for adoption by her new partner. He did nothing because he refused to believe she would do it. As a result he was put through hell after she carried through on her threat.

The fact that children can hold their parents to account is deeply worrying for some, but I for one support it.

Well said.

What Scarlett has described to me seems entirely plausible because we went through similar.
In our case the ex went straight to SS with the allegations launching a grenade into our lives which has NEVER left us the same.

Once allegations are made the whole process plods into motion leaving you in Kafkaesque nightmare who cannot seem to escape.
People who make false allegations work of SS, police and the courts so much more difficult, clogging the process up and embroiling innocent parties in their web of lies.

People who make or threaten to make false allegations are truly SCUM.

Well done Scarlett on handling this so well

My DH had no option but to go to court yesterday. DSD was refusing to go home, the ex had made threats of allegations. If we had refused to return Dsd without the courts authorisation, then there is not doubt in my mind that the ex would have used it to her advantage. Then where would that have left us.

Yes you are absolutely right of course, I overlooked the bit about you being in breach of the court order if you failed to return her, and I apologise. you are right, you are damned if you do and damned if you don't - you are the wicked stepmother! That's why I said you need to be very, very careful and make sure you are above reproach. I am sorry I offended you, honestly I think you've done a brilliant job. I suppose I just worry that DD is going to be a bit traumatised by all of this, but then she has her own mother to blame for that.

I suppose I just worry that DD is going to be a bit traumatised by all of this

Imagine how traumatised she would have been if she had to examined to see if sexual abuse had taken place.

My DSD has been traumatised and blames herself for telling social workers that daddy tried to punch her in the head. I know because I found the letter she wrote to herself calling herself a bitch and monster.

essentially he was able to obtain temporary residence and could then deliver the news to the mother without any legal involvement

Maybe the courts interpreted the situation as the child obtaining a variation to a court order in order to allow her to temporarily reside with the parent of her choice. In that situation the mother wouldn't necessarily have a right to put her views in opposition to those of the father. This isn't a battle between two people over an inanimate object. The first responsibility of the court is to act in the best interests of the child, that doesn't necessarily always include seeking the views of both parents.

It is a temporary order, in place while the matter is explored further during which time the mothers voice will no doubt be heard very clearly by all concerned.

Hi everyone,

Thanks for your reports.

We currently have no reason to believe the OP isn't genuine. Wishing you all the best with your difficult situation scarletandrhett.

This is not about criticising the op, nor is it about being afraid that children have a voice, it’s about expressing concern over a system which essentially will make a decision based on a one-word-against-another discussion in which the child has taken sides based on who she believes.

How many posters do we get on here saying that their ex has threatened to take away their children. That they will tell the children x and y and the children will believe them and want to live with them. And those posters are reassured that of course it can’t happen just like that – that anything to do with residence takes time to happen and they won’t lose their children etc. Except it seems that it can.

In this instance it appears that the op’s dh is the one who has been wronged by the ex and his daughter has chosen to believe him and as such she is currently able to live with him. But what if it had been the other way around? What if a similar scenario had played out except the ex hadn’t actually made the allegation and the dh had actually had her arrested and they had both given similar accounts and the dd had chosen to believe her dad and chosen to live with him? The outcome would be the same – they could go to court on the Monday, get an ex parte hearing and a temporary residence order and a mother could be served by perhaps an abusive ex partner telling her that she has (for now) lost residence of her daughter....

If the system really does work like this, to the extent that it is the person who gains the residence who actually gets to deliver the order to the “losing” party then that is terrifying, because it is hugely open to abuse. Fortunately most of us have the best interests of our children at heart. But unfortunately there are some who would abuse a system like that not only to gain residence of their children and turn them against their other parent, but also to use their control to be the one to deliver the news, as it were.

Surely as many women on here come from abusive relationships where their ex would be only too happy to do this kind of thing, this is not a positive reflection of how the system is supposed to work.

Scarlett I can imagine you feel set upon and damned if you do and don't. So easy for people to comment and criticise and so hard for you to live through this.

I think there have been several wise words of caution for you in support. It is inevitable that the tide of sympathy turns as people start to empathise with the mother - the internet allows people to flit between drama and situation without the emotional memory of living it.

I would caution about the wisdom of letting the thread run. I think it may cease to be supportive and you need more anonymity for the long haul that this will become