I have a 4 year old son and a 5 year old daughter. There father was around for the first 2 years of there life and he was abusive. He left state for 2 years and told me he had changed. I told him that he had alot to do before he earned my trust back. It's been a year since he's been back and seems to be doing well with his anger. But I feel that he is messing with my kids heads because he only sees them 1 time a week. My daughter asks about him all the time but my son doesn't want anything to do with him. He now wants to leave state again and have the kids go with him. I said no way are my kids leaving state with you. Should I let him see the kids even though I think he is going to screw them up in the long run...or am I just being stubborn?
2007-04-07 12:49:34 · 9 answers · asked by Gellibene 1 in Family & Relationships ➔ Other - Family & Relationships
You don't have the right to deny them THEIR right to visit him. Perhaps you should have thought about what a screw up is when you were opening up to him to MAKE those babies.
He has a right to visit them. And if you screw around too much, he could take you court and take'em.
No way would I let him take them out of state. But he has a right to see them. Supervised, of course, but you have to let him see them. It is THEIR right, and not yours to take away.
2007-04-07 12:56:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Strange situation here. I suspect that neither of you actually have legal custody of the kids. You have custody by possession only, and probably because he took off (abandonment) and left you to raise the kids alone without any help. You have no legal paperwork for those kids so there is no legal way for dad to take off with them across state lines if he so desires. You would have a hell of a time proving custody in court and couldnt get him charged with parental kidnapping like you could if this were legal. Id let him see them only with the close supervision of you like at McDonalds or so. Hes not stable enough to challenge you in court for custody so he probably wont go that route, but dont trust him because once hes headed down the highway youre going to have a lot of trouble getting them back.
2007-04-07 13:09:40 · answer #2 · answered by Arthur W 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would say go with your instincts in NOT letting him take the kids...maybe supervised visits would be ok, but talk to a lawyer first. I work at a domestic violence shelter, and I see a lot of these same situations. Typically, it takes A LOT for these men to change, and for the most part, a lot of them don't change at all. Also, if you knowingly place your kids in a situation where there is potential they may be harmed, you could lose custody of them. This harm includes the kids WITNESSING violence. Please be careful and seek professional help.
2007-04-07 13:24:06 · answer #3 · answered by jenlazdel 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If he was abusive to the kids he should not see them but if he is good with kids let him see them. As far as leaving the state w/them do you trust him, how is your relationship with him now? I dont think your being stubborn just cautious which a mother should be but if he is good with the kids let them see him, kids need a father figure in their life.
2007-04-11 11:48:21 · answer #4 · answered by mike gulf 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you have custody and he doesn't do not let him have your kids !!!!! With him talking about taking them out of state I wouldn't let him take them without supervision of some kind. He might take them and run and be on the next America's most wanted !!! Hope your state has an Amber alert !!!!! You are not being selfish !!!!!!!!!
2007-04-07 12:58:27 · answer #5 · answered by Diana 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You really need to talk to a lawyer. Were you married, is there a custody agreement, does he pay child support. I would feel the same way you do, especially with his history. DO NOT LET HIM TAKE THEM OUT OF STATE. I would have supervised visitation at most. If he does not stick to his schedule, then he loses the next time.
2007-04-07 12:55:25 · answer #6 · answered by eharrah1 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
it incredibly is not in simple terms "feminists" who approve of adoption. classic conservatives exceptionally choose adoption to abortion. A father won't be able to unilaterally (it incredibly is, through himself) place a baby for adoption, nor can a mom. The regulation calls for the consent of the two beginning dad and mom, different than in situations the place one be certain is ineffective or one be certain's parental rights have been terminated for some reason. the place beginning fathers could experience that the regulation is bigoted is they won't be able to provide up a mom from retaining a baby, and if she does, they could desire to pay baby help. on condition that the approach of being pregnant and beginning, gone through basically through females, could bring about a sort of bonding that men won't be able to adventure, it is a few thing that men in simple terms could desire to settle for. Forcing a woman to place a baby for adoption with out her consent because of the fact the father does not desire to pay baby help could be an action roundly condemned through anybody on ethical and ethical grounds, no count what the political or religious persuasions of the observers occurred to be. yet through the comparable token, if a beginning father desires to maintain and raise his baby himself, the mummy won't be able to tension HIM to place the youngster for adoption because of the fact SHE does not desire to pay baby help.
2016-12-08 21:05:04 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
get a lawyer and if you think he is messing with them that he probably is, a mother's duty is to protect
2007-04-07 15:18:00 · answer #8 · answered by ponitail 55 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no not without your supervision
2007-04-07 12:53:42 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋