who has the rights?

Question

Hi and welcome and the question is does any 1 parent have the divine right to stop another from seeing their children without taking into account the childrens feelings.As once a child reaches the age of around 12 years old the courts can and do listen to them and the child can decide if they want to visit and even if they want to live with the absent parent.
Unfortanatley too many times the children are used as weapons and are caught between battling parents but this should never be the case and as long as the absent parent does not pose a threat or a risk of any kind then the child should be allowed to decide for themselves.In most cases the english courts side with the mother until the children can speak up for themselves but is this always the correct decision? As inbetween contact periods and court hearings the children can often be manipulated into whatever the parent that they reside with wants

This is a harsh world at best so shouldn't any child have the support and love of both their natural parents and any other siblingsin order to help them survive in it.

in my expereience the reasons that children often don't voice their opinions are they don't want to hurt the feelings of either parent they are afraid of being stopped from seeing the absent parent afraid of being the cause of any arguments and afraid that no one will listen any way.To me this seems a lot of pressure to put upon any child and often results in very unhappy children and loss of contact with their natural parents.

This is a sad world and break ups happen but never the lessthe end result doesn't have to be a sad 1 and all children could be with both parents although independently .

This is only my opinion whats yours

No wonder this world is full of confused and hurt children who will give them a voice
when they need it most?
The world has gone mad and maybe this is part of the reason.
there is an old saying suffer the little children this seems to fit quite well under these circumstances.

Answer 1

It is unfortunate that divorce is usually due to a couple falling out for whatever reason. There are some women who will make up any story to stop the father having any access to their children. It happens, and the father then has to go through a very lengthy, degrading and expensive process to regain access. Sometimes this is still not enough of a punishment in the eyes of the woman and regardless of what the courts may say, the woman still witholds custody. I have seen this on far too many occaisions to my friends. It is wrong and is not good in any way for the children. Parents should always be pleasant in front of children, no matter what the cause of the break up. They need to know that they have two loving parents that will always love them and have their best interests in mind when making any decisions.

Answer 2

As unpopoular as this may sound the reason the courts decide is that the parents are normally so engaged in point scoring against eachother they forget about the wellfare of the child.

Both parents see there view as the right one.

If parents split and can talk through access and contact etc then the courts are happy to ratify any arrangement if they cant agree an independant person has to decide.

Not in everycase does the mother get the children ( my best freind was raised by his father because his mother was a drunk and used to beat the children regularly)

Sadly most fathers say they are good dads but the reality is mums generally do a better job at raising kids.

( Too many of these fathers for justice guys have proved themselvs to be irresponsible examples of fatherhood- I personally would not have been disapointed of the nutter who scaled the buckingham palace walls when we had high security alerts had been shot)

Answer 3

Congratulations, will written, i totally agree, to often the child does not have a say in this, and wonders what happen to the absentee parent, they end up thinking that the parent didn't wont them, and what makes it worse is the other parent usually runs the other down, so that makes things worse. Yes and the kids, get used as a pawn in the battle, which is so sad, they didn't ask to be born.. and they have to put up with one parent gone, not being able to see the other, and listen to all the crap that is going on in the meantime, Her in New Zealand, when there are custody battles, the child no matter what age, even as young as one, they are appointed there own lawyers by the court, i think that its a great system, as this person, talks on behave of the child.............good luck.

Answer 4

Sadly children are often used as weapons against warring spouses. Whilst I believe that children should have right, I also believe that children should never be placed in the position where they have to choose betwen their parents. It is cruel and incedibly destructive for the child. The adults need to be just that and to prioritise their child and the child's welfare above all else...even above their wants. The child should, ideally have access to both parents..I know this may seem over-simplistic, and i know there are many many reasons this may not be easy but forcing a 12 year old child to sit down and assess which parent they would like to live with is child abuse. Children should be allowed to enjoy their childhod and it is unforgiveable for parents to foist such dreadful choices on their children. Regrettably far too many parents are too wrapped up in what they want to recognise what is best for their child...and people wonder why so many young children exhibit such rage... start doing the right thing and let children be children...adults sort out your own problems and start putting your kids' welfare first

Answer 5

Hi, I am a mother who would now be very reluctant to let my ex partner see my son again. He was never violent but was irresponsible, self centred & dishonest & I do not think a relationship with such an individual is in my son's best interests.

He sporadically reappears in my son's life, makes all kinds of promises to take him out, spend time with him, which I agree to as my son longs for a father, only to disappear again, breaking my son's heart along with his promises.

I don't want to stop this man seeing my son as some kind of punishment, it's about protecting my son from being rejetcted time and again. He's 8 years old.

Luckily as I have never been married to the father and have never received any financial contribution from him, he has no legally recognised right to access, although I think this rule is now changed for children born since a certain date. If the father pays maintenance which he can prove, he has a legal right even if the parents were never married.

Answer 6

i know of someone who was in a violent relationship and a child was born into that relationship. she found the strength to leave him taking the child with! it has gone through the courts and she is saying how violent he was to her and there child, but because of family's splitting and using the children the courts are trying to give both parents a chance even if one is violent, (surely this will do that child more harm), the end result is she is now happily married in a none violent relationship and her child as taking on the step fathers name has he revers to him has daddy, but every couple of weeks he has to see his natural father through supported contact, but when the supported contact runs out the chances are it is going to be un supervised there for any thing bad can happen to that child. it is un fair how little ones get to be piggy in the middle but in this case it is best for that child to not have contact has he is in a much loving stable home with a mother and father (not by blood) who love him dearly. anyone can be a dad but it takes a real man to be a father. it also goe`s to show that step-parents can love someone Else's child as there own. they also have a sibling together and they are both treated the same i say respect the fact that sometimes it is better for the natural father to have no contact especially if that child is in such a loving family without the violence.

Answer 7

If you know your ex is a normal man then give him lots of contact with the kids. The time will come when you will meet someone else. Think about it, no worries where to leave the kids when you want a holiday etc. Dont worry if he finds another women, if you trust in your ex's love for his kids he wont let anyone hurt them, just as you won't The kids will always love you before another women. This is what I did about 30 years ago and it worked well, I went on to have a happy divorce without the stress of bringing up 3 small kids on my own. Good Luck and be happy.

Answer 8

Children are not possessions that one person or the other person gets after a divorce. Both parents should be equally responsible in raising the children and providing financial support. Just cause she gave birth doesn't make her the better parent by default.

It is wrong for either parent to deny access without justifiable reasons.

Answer 9

in my case the court sided with the father. Being with me would have meant new schools and moving away from their friends. i agreed that i wanted what ever made them happier with the situation. Had a rough year with courts etc and it did put a strain on the kids. But now its all over and i have a regular contact order that all are happy with, things are happier. The kids look forward to staying with me and there is never any arguments with the ex.

Answer 10

It is the right of a parent to go to the courts to gain access to their children and the right of the other to explain why it should not be the case.
There has been a lot of publicity for "The fathers for justice" campaign recently but those dads are neglecting their own children so they can fight for the rights of others.
In my case I would prefer never to see the father of my children ever again, but I encourage the children to see their dad and speak on the phone but it is he who has put off seeing them till Christmas, not me. I am the one who has to explain why daddy cannot see them after all.