ajm

Their argument is nonsensical too. They don't support equal rights (over unequal rights) because they feel the child shouldn't be treated like a possession?

Its a non sequitur!

unclebuck

Well, we saw a perfect example this morning of how politically correct thinking just muddys the water and stifles a debate.

They are so busy fretting about what's right/wrong normal/not normal that things end up completely bogged down and just go nowhere - stuck on square one. I'm sure that's what happened again in this case. It's all very depressing.

UB

Redkop

That is incredible and beyond belief
In the already busy Courts!

Peanuts

iTrader: (15)

theres and election due next year.
they cant be seen to be alienating 50% of the vote

SiPie

Ok....

Totally feel for any fathers who are struggling with this one but I'd just like to balance the argument a bit .......

My only experience of these unfortunate situations was through being a 'pawn' in a custody battle when I was 5 (as I'm sure hundreds on here have been)

I'll tell you straight ... that if my father had been granted equal access to me at that age then I would of killed myself without a shadow of doubt In the end the courts decided that he could see me every Wednesday for 4 hours and every second weekend for the whole weekend.

For the weekends that I had to stay at his new family home, I think I ran out of made-up illnesses that could persuade my mother to keep me at home....and the one's where I did visit gave some delightful memories of what living in a violent house watching a man and his new wife kicking **** out of each other whilst under the influence of whatever that weekend's toxic cocktail really involved. It ripped my mother to bits watching her child's anguish at being forced to visit someone he didn't want to see and I don't think for a second that it helped me.

I was forced by the courts to do this every 2nd weekend for 9 years until I legally had the choice aged 14, NOT to visit anymore. On the weekend of my 14th birthday I said goodbye to a bemused drunken couple before punching a sad insecure old man straight in the face.

In NO WAY am I judging you guy's situations... as hopefully you are all 1,000,000 times a better father than the son of a bitch that signed my birth certificate... but it's my opinion that the child should not have his or her time split between two homes and security is the most important factor. It's a tricky one that needs specialist help in every case and I don't think a one off judgement by the government is the correct answer. Only wish I had the answer.

PS My dad wasn't known as an alcoholic nor was his new wife known for her violent outbursts after swallowing vodka mixed with anti-pschitzophrenic (sp) medication....On the outside the couple looked like a well off respectable couple so there is no way that the courts could make a decent assessment of the situation.

Sorry for the rant and I really don't mean to cause offence.... just want the bigger picture to be considered.

Ringpeas

SiPie

And I thought my childhood was shyte!

weapon69

Children belong with the Mother. Thats my opinion and always will be.

Peanuts

iTrader: (15)

bravo.
LOL Peanuts no but they have just alienated the other 50% of the vote so that was a no win situation for them
it is because with the present 50% they have kept happy, they have won two elections.
changing the 50% they side with will only happen when they slip in the polls and need to gather more recruits.


Sipie

SiPie

Totally agree B2Z and I totally understand what must be a brutal situation for you mate... I really hope your kid gets some stability in his life soon.

Guy's... I've come out of the whole childhood thing relatively unscathed and I know kids (my step-brother for one....) who have been through a thousand times worse... so it sure ain't a sob story.....it's really mild compared to some.

I guess it's just that every case is individual and I wish there were resources that could ensure kids are treated fairly.

Ringpeas

Have to disagree with you there. Children belong with BOTH parents, thats what helps them grow up to be well balanced individuals.

If the do have to split up, then it should be up to the courts to make a balanced and non sexist decision based on ALL the facts.

weapon69

My Father was Fuct in the head and so is my Mother so i was better off without either of them!!

Ringpeas

Sorry to hear that, it does stay with you for the rest of your life. It can also make you a stronger individual, but you don't care about that at the time.

My wife had to watch her farther hospitalise her mother every weekend, not good for any child

EddScott

Its not nice to hear of the problems people have had growing up but I can only beleive that these cases are a minority which means the majority of right and proper father are having to suffer becuase of this.

If my GF and I split my daughters standard of living would reduce considerably - not from a point of wealth as I won't see her go without but healthwise I know she'd suffer.

I enforce no smoking in the house apart from the kitchen. I make sure she eats decent food not just food stuffed in the oven or fryer. Once my GF has a drink everything else becomes secondary so its me who takes our daughter home at a reasonable time to bed not just leave her on the mates sofa whilst mummy gets hammered. And as for my GFs parents they can hardly look after themselves let alone anyone else and I'm sure thats wher my GF would go if we split.

I don't believe a child should always be with its mother full stop and thats whats wrong with the system as it stands. The mother has to be some sort of foaming, leporous psychopath before the courts will even consider giving the child to the father and then they'd probably side with the mother.

I don't want to only see my daughter every other Wednesday for 4 hours at a time what sort of a relationship is that?

OllyK

It isn't that black and white. Each case needs to be considered on its own merits, sadly there isn't the time or the money to do that. There are cases I have no doubt where the father is fine and the mother is drunk, violent and goodness knows what else.

Redkop

Agree first and foremost that kids should stay with the mother BUT I fully support that good fathers should be allowed access rights. I have witnessed the strain and stress our neighbour has gone through for nearly 2 years as his ex.wife has denied him access to his kids, by what I can only term as spite & blackmail.

He works abroad a lot and when they were married had a nice large house in nice area [which he still lives in] and good schools nearby. On his return from a working abroad, he found she had moved out and gone to shack up with some guy in the roughest part of our town. To begin with while the divorce and settlement were going through, she allowed him access. Once she got her massive payout from him, she stopped all access by him and the kids grandparents aren’t allowed to see them either. By mutual agreement, she gets a very good weekly maintenance from him and one she is happy with. This is where the blackmail comes in though… she has threatened him that if he tries to see his kids, she will put the CSA on to him, which could then make him pay a huge chunk out of his wages, which would go to supporting the out of work fella she lives with and also the kid she now has by him.

The kids are now aged 7 and 5, the eldest being a boy who absolutely idolised his dad and was besotted with performance cars like his dad has. What sort of mother would deny her own children the right to see a father who loves them and wants to see them growing up… only a selfish, spiteful mother could do that! She isn’t taking into consideration whether the kids want to see their rightful father and grandparents and is denying them the chance to.She is a good mother in all other respects though.

_Meridian_

iTrader: (1)

I can't actually see what the problem is? As far as I can see, the government are suggesting that no-one has a RIGHT to access. Where's the problem? Are you seriously suggesting a natural parent should have visiting rights to a child they abused for instance? Ditto a parent who neglected their child? Leaving it up to the courts to decide is always likely to remain the only sensible idea, given the number of splitting parents who can't even agree who gets the washing-up bowl.

There is more viciousness in custody battles than anywhere else. People will happily level accusations of drug use, child abuse, benefit fraud and whatever it takes. The courts have little way of telling if either side is actually telling the truth (and both are probably lying at least a bit). Simply saying both parents ahould always have equal access is simply stupid. I'm d*mmed if I know the answer, but that certainly ain't it.


M

(Parents divorced when I was three. No kids of my own - just to make my own position clear)

Scooby96

Well don't worry all unmarried fathers can bank on mediation to sort out access to their kids, <h1>NOT</h1>

Scooby96

What sort of mother would deny her own children the right to see a father who loves them and wants to see them growing up…

Most (99.9%) women who split up unamicably!

Leslie

I agree totally with your viewpoint B2Z. It is grossly unfair and bad for the child that the mother can effectively block access by the father. He should have full and fair rights to be able to see his children and take them out etc as long he is of good character. The woman should also be of good character and be proved to be a good mother before she has custody rights as well.

Les

Mice_Elf

Personally I think that any custody case should be reviewed every 6 months anyway. This would then give each side the chance to prove that they've got a stable life for the child and for the circumstances to be re-looked at. Also anything negative to be taken into account. (Loss of job and no efforts to find a new one, alcohol abuse, violent tendencies, drug abuse, constantly moving house and the child's school etc)...

Also, the child should be "interviewed" by trained psychologists to see if *they* are happy or would rather spend more time with the other parent and the access rights reviewed.

Any parent who bans the other from visiting or who prevents access over and again should be fined each time it happens.

I fully sympathise with those who cannot see their child(ren) as much as they would like.

_Meridian_

iTrader: (1)

Defined by who? And how? Can I just remind you that paedophiles, wife-beaters, drinkards and drug addicts are found in all walks of life. So how are you going to work out if it's right that a man can see his children? I still don't think EITHER parent should have an automatic right to access.


M

the moose

[QUOTE=Mice_Elf]

Also, the child should be "interviewed" by trained psychologists to see if *they* are happy or would rather spend more time with the other parent and the access rights reviewed.[QUOTE]

That's what happened with a friend of mine - the judge asked the kids who they wanted to live with. After years of parental bickering, it got resolved in a matter of weeks.

FWIW, the daughter went to live with mum, the son lives with dad, and they swap round a bit during holidays. No problems now.

Leslie

Meridian,

Which part of your contradictory post are you going to go with?

Les