Contact Arrangements

[MrsChiefTyrell]

Thought I'd post here to see if anyone has a similar situation or any knowledge of this.

My partner's kids live with us and see their mum alternate weekends. She wants more contact and he has offered her more - mid week contact. We have a final court hearing in a few weeks when hopefully this will all be sorted and a final order made.

She refuses to pay maintenance, none at all. She also refuses to contribute in any way to her own children's costs for activities, clubs, uniforms or anything. She is self employed with her unregistered small business and so CSA cannot touch her (we have tried for ages!). She has told the Judge she is unemployed and isn't claiming benefits or looking for work.

We are struggling to manage financially as we have to also pay for child care for before and after school for them, again she will not contribute.

So, what do you think of him suggesting that her contact days are arranged around my partner's working days? He works a rolling shift pattern so she'd get 50% of weekends but not alternate exactly and also she'd have midweek contact but on different days. This could be planned out well in advance for a whole year is necessary.

He wants to suggest this at the final hearing but is concerned how it will go down. He has to work as she won't contribute so i sit fair to ask she has them around his work to help us financially so we don't pay for childcare (plus then they don't have to go into childcare too!)

We know that their 'mother' claims she has absolutely no income, she isn't working (apparently) she isn't clsiming benifits because she has no plans to work and that she doesn't contribute financially at all to the uobringing of her children, as stated by the OP in the opening thread, read it, That's how I know. HTH

As for her being biased, you could say that about every post on this site. None of us know the full story of any thread and we form our opinions based on what we know? That's how it works Perhaps the posters that complain that their Exh that pay no maintenence are being biased too. we should really try to see things from the non paying maintrnence dodging fathers? Don't see them getting as much understanding as this woman has, ever!

If it was the same I would have expected to see posts such as
'doesn't matter if she isn't working, the children are her responsibility'
'Why is she not taking any menial job to help support her children'
She should be claiming benifits to help support her kids'
She should be looking after them until she gets work to take some of the burden of RP'
'She is a useless waste of space and hopefully the children will realise this as they get older'
'NRP thinks it's fine to leave RP to pay for everything just because they abandoned their marriage' etc etc

These are all things I've seen written on here to female RP in similar situations. This thread has a very different tone and I fully believe it's because RP is the father.

perhaos they felt the children were better off with their father and SM who is clearly working hard to try and orovide for them than their mother who appears to be living off fresh air

These are all things I've seen written on here to female RP in similar situations. This thread has a very different tone and I fully believe it's because RP is the father

I disagree - if a mum posted that she has recently gained residency from the father with no clear reasoning and he is fighting for it back, and at the same time, mum (or stepdad) is worrying about where the next meal is coming from, then it's a lot more complicated than just a deadbeat dad.

Do you really think that because I certainly don't. If he came on here saying that he lost residency, wasn't working, decided not to give his children support because he was pissed off/didn't have it/wanted them to struggle so he could gain residency back I doubt very much he would have any sympathetic ears

She sounds like a total chancer! I wouldn't trust her with my pets far less children. She is either a liar or lazy. No wonder the court took action! I hope the stepmother and father can continue to care for these poor kids, terrible situation!

Jakie Im aware that this has been said already, but you seem to know more about the situation than the OP has written on this thread .

There is nothing to suggest that the courts awarded the OPs DP residency; the OP said that the DCs now live majoritively with them because they thought the DCs would be better off. It may have been court ordered, but it is by no means clear based on this thread that it definitely was.

The Op has also said that the change from the previous 50:50 care to majoritively resident with the OP happened while the DCs mum was working - so if there was a court case, that could not have been used by the court as a reason to, as you put it, "take action".

Whether you know the OP in RL, or have other information that hasn't been posted on this thread through PMs, I'm not sure, but I echo the previous posters comments about your posts - they appear to be based on more than just this thread alone.

It was you that suggested the courts placed the DCS in the OPs DPs residence despite DP and OP being able to afford it. That is what you wrote not me!

The PPs you refer to were actually 1PP who agrees with you that the jobless non maintenence paying mother would be better suited to care for the DC because their father is struggling financially because said mother is refusing to pay for her children!!

Think we should just agree to disagree on that one and probably most posts on here I suspect and leave it at that because it really is getting silly now

Sorry I haven't been back to this thread sooner. We are preparing for a full day final hearing and so everything here is very busy.

The children came to live with us after an incident during which one of them was hurt by their Mother (won't say too much as it's quite specific) and contact was supervised for a while then once Police decided not to prosecute the Judge ordered unsupervised contact again. Children's Services have identified some issues but they are not deemed serious enough to be considered a risk of significant harm and so the Judge made an order for her to have alternate weekend contact. She needs to have contact and it will be ordered but my partner wants them to reside mainly with us as that is better for them.

Thanks for all of your comments and opinions. Much appreciated.