A
female
age
41-50,
anonymous
writes:This isn't a question as such, more to see what other people's opinion on this is.I am all for a dad to have his rights and responsibilities towards his children. But what do people think a mother should do when there was domestic abuse in the relationship?Or the father is in and out of the childrens life?I think sometimes when you are in a situation, its hard to see things from a different perspective.For example, do you let the father see the children, when he has been abusive (to the mother), and he is in and out of the childrens lives. Should there be a point when you say NO, or do you carry on letting him see the children every few months or so? Reply to this Question
Share |
Fancy yourself as an agony aunt? Add your answer to this question! A
reader, anonymous, writes (1 November 2013): This is verified as being by the original poster of the questionTo the female anonymous poster, who seems to think I am using my children to punish him....i am NOT trying to punish him, but I am trying to protect my children. Clearly, you have no children, or never been in a violent relationship (which it was,by the way, I didn't just THINK it, it happen!!), or if you do have children then you are lucky enough to have a supporting partner, and a good father to your children.Do NOT judge me, when all I am trying to do is protect my children!!To everyone else who posted, Thank You all for your comments and advice.
A
female
reader, So_Very_Confused  +, writes (1 November 2013):
 I keep thinking about this one and I totally get what the OP is asking and why she is asking it.
I think that sadly this is going to have to be one of those stupid lessons the kids learn way too young.. that NOT all grown ups behave as grown ups and not all people can be counted on.
Maybe if we help you work on what to say to the kids when daddy disappoints them yet again...
"I know you wanted to see daddy and I am so sorry he let you down let's go watch your favorite tv show instead"
"I'm sorry daddy didn't come to see you, I know how much you wanted to do that. but I'm here, let's go play catch or go for a walk"
eventually what will happen is the kids will learn that daddy is not dependable and as they age they will refuse to see him all by themselves.
It sucks for them to have to be hurt like this and it hurts you to watch your children suffer I understand.. but the truth is he's hurting himself only and the kids in time will see this... I know you want a long term solution but there is not really one.
...............................
A
female
reader, Honeypie + ♥, writes (1 November 2013):
 As a mom, I understand your concern. I wouldn't want a yo-yo "dad" in and out of my kid's lives either.
One thing though is how YOU feel another is the law. The law is there to protect the CHILD first. And serve the child's needs. But life isn't a revolving door where he can just come and go as he pleases just because he provided part of the children's DNA. I am with you there.
The fact that he sucked as a husband/partner doesn't mean he automatically will be a bad influence.
Have you talked to your case worker?
If you are leaning towards giving him a chance, then I suggest you set up the visitation on YOUR terms. If you do not want to be around him, let him have supervised visits with either a caseworker or a 3rd person you trust.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (1 November 2013): Whoever has been acting as the child's primary caretaker -whether it is the mother or grandparents or aunts and uncles or whoever- should have the right to control who is and isnt allowed to wreck havoc in the child's life. If the father is an unhealthy influence then I think the mother has a right to not allow the child to come into contact with the father. I mean, shouldn't the child's right to be protected from unhealthy influences and emotional devastation (like getting close to someone who will then emotionally abandon them then come back then abandon again) trump the father's desire for what he himself wants?The same goes if it is the father who is the primary caretaker and the mother is the unstable or abusive one. Whoever has been assuming all the responsibility for the child should have final say who else is allowed to come into contact with that child.
...............................
A
female
reader, So_Very_Confused +, writes (31 October 2013):
Sadly yes a father's rights to see his kids when he pleases if he's not abusing them do stretch that far.
I do not think you are using the kids to punish him. I do not think you are doing anything other than trying to protect your children from pain. UNFORTUNATELY if you deny him access when he requests it and there is no court order, YOU are the one in trouble.
IF he's not putting the children in danger then I'm afraid you can't really do anything.
...............................
A
male
reader, CaringGuy +, writes (31 October 2013):
I personally don't think that it should be up to the mother. The reason for that, is that if the law allowed the mother to make those decisions, I suspect that there would be a lot of cases where the children could be used more easily as pawns. There are plenty of people who would happily use their children as pawns if they knew they could get away with it, and I don't agree with that.
That said, I do happen to think that the law shockingly appalling when it comes to enforcing the specific rights of children. Far to much emphasis is placed upon the apparent rights of parents, rather then actually what is best for children. Whether it's a father only seeing his kinds for a quarter of the month rather than 50%, or whether it's a mother who has been abused, or is not being paid the child maintenance because of the useless CSA. There should be a total review of the way that children are treated by divorced parents, from non payment of maintenance by parents , to abuse, to visitation rights.
I suppose what I'm saying, is I'd like to see a system where a mother or father doesn't feel the way you do, because they know the law will actually back them and their children's welfare rather than the rights of a failing parent.
From what you'd already said, I've no doubt that he's a failing father. Ideally, a Judge would just tell him to sod off and take a cut of of his pay every month of just jail him. One day, maybe someone in charge will have the brains to change the rubbish system we currently have.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (31 October 2013): This is verified as being by the original poster of the questionHe abused me not them.
Its more the case that he seems to think what he does (walks in and out of their lives) is acceptable, but it isn't, he is emotionally hurting his children.
not looking for justification. Its just upsetting seeing my children go through this coz of him, he is an adult and fully aware of what he is doing.
to me, its far worse for him to put my children through this, than me to say no, when I am just trying to protect my children.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (31 October 2013): You should do this via the courts and social services really.
Yes, of course put your foot down if your children are being abused themselves if when the see their father (and that includes neglect and verbal abuse) Or if they would regularly be witnessing abuse when they saw him (like to dad's new girlfriend or from his violent mates. The way to do that is through the courts.
If you really feel that the children are at risk, contact social services and push for supervised contact.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (31 October 2013): This is verified as being by the original poster of the questionWould YOU let the father of your children just come in and out of their lives, upsetting them, not knowing from one day to the next, or let months go by, before HE decides HE wants to see them. Surely a fathers right don't stretch that far to say when he WANTS to be a dad.
I can't take him to court over his lack of parenting, but he can take me to court if I say no, after trying to calm my children down after their dad has let them down AGAIN.
It should be up to the mothers because they are the one who have to deal the fallout.
Does anyone else agree with this?
...............................
A
female
reader, So_Very_Confused +, writes (31 October 2013):
the only one who should say NO to the father seeing the children other than adult children is the courts.
MOTHERS have no rights to say yes or no.
They do have a responsibility to protect the child and therefore if the father has a history of domestic abuse they need to get a court order concerning visitation.
Either the courts order NO visitation or supervised visitation only.... but it's NOT the mothers call.
and if the father chooses to not exercise his visitation rights, that's his choice and his call. HE's the one that disappoints the children.
Mother has to bite her tongue and not say anything bad about dad when he fails to show up. She can be properly sympathetic to the child's disappointment and if it's chronic she can petition the courts to remove all visitation as the sporadic nature of it is harming the child... but can the mother alone SAY NO..... I don't think she should be the one to bear that burden... leave it up to the courts.
...............................
|
