My husbands ex is exacty the same. She stopped him seeing his son for almost 2 years, and told him his daddy was working away, or that his daddy didn't want to see him.
Do you know what my husband did?
He didn't give up. It's no wonder the boy won't speak to you, you just gave up because it was too hard for you. Poor you. Poor grown up daddy, who understands it all, and can't cope.
My husband would have fought for all of those 13 years and would still be fighting now. Luckily, he fought hard enough that he won.

Imagine it from your sons point of view, you just gave up on him, but your daughters get it all. I don't blame him for being mad at you.

I have a 2 year old daughter of my own (my stepson is almost 11) and I would walk to the ends of the earth to spend just 5 minutes with her if she was taken away. I would fight 24/7, fight to the death to get her back. I would NEVER give up on her.

You are a weak excuse for a father and you have no sympathy from me.
( user_names_suck, Fri 30 Apr 2010, 14:22, 2 replies)

Not letting your ignorance get in the way of a strong opinion?
You seem to have taken the OP's extremely limited set of facts and decided that because your husband managed to win his victory every father must be capable of the same. They're not. Every family and their fucked up scenario is unique - let's not forget we're talking about people here. Your misconception that your husband "fought hard enough that he won" implies a misplaced belief that you can always fight "hard enough". Victory isn't always possible. Frequently, even when it is, that victory will come at a cost that's not worth the grief that children are subjected to. A child brought up in an environment constantly fraught with conflict is no better off than a well adjusted and happy one with a single parent. To argue that your husband would do anything to get his child back without having considered the child's interests is selfish in the extreme.

My experience working as a family lawyer has proven time and time again that parents that put their own interests ("I want my boy back") ahead of their child's ("I want what's best for my boy") often try to reconcile the two by thinking "I know what's best for my child, and the other parent doesn't".

Sometimes one parent is so bent on alienating the other that giving up is actually in the best interests of the child, heartbreaking though it is. Having the courage to put that child first is a demonstration of courage and self-sacrifice, not weakness.

Don't let such a limited set of facts vaguely similar to your own scenario justify your vitriol towards the OP. There's always much, much more to the story.
(thecurriedavenger, Sat 1 May 2010, 23:39, closed)

Quote: This is just one anecdote in a whole series of nightmares that stopped when I just gave up contact when he was five and a half. It was either that or I'd have leapt from the nearest railway bridge in front of a speeding train

May I point out this section of that quote "I just gave up contact when he was five and a half"

Do you have children of your own?

I understand if the parent being denied access is a drug addict or child molester, but this guy seems like a decent enough guy. He COULD have won his case had he just FOUGHT for long enough. Even an hour a week would have been enough to let his son know he cared and was trying.

To "Just give up" on a child is truly despicable........

EDIT: The mother of my stepson is a drug addict, that farms her son out to her mother about 5 days a week, he's with us the other 2 days a week, and we are the only ones who take him on daytrips, on holidays etc.
How can it be selfish to fight for your child when you are a good, if not better parent. My stepson is upstairs, asleep, right now, with his baby sister in the cot next to him, and tomorrow we will be taking him to a local attraction, and next month we're all off on holiday.
He only ever eats vegetables here, and he only showers/baths here. Tomorrow evening he will beg not to be sent home, beg to stay with us, and we have to send him home as she won't allow him to stay here as her benefits will be stopped. It's the only reason she keeps him. That and he's a useful tool to get my husband to do as she likes. "Do it or you won't see the boy any more"
My husband has got so much to put up with and he will NEVER "just give up" and it makes me sick when people damage their kids with their bullshit.
Phew, rant over, it just makes me so cross that people fuck with the little ones heads so much. PUT THEM FIRST FOR FUCKSAKES.....
That is all.
( user_names_suck, Sun 2 May 2010, 1:14, closed)

You're proving my point for me, but at least we agree.
At least we agree that the child should come first. I can't agree that it would have been wise for the OP to keep fighting. Let me explain.

You repeatedly cite your own situation, which is fair enough. It involves a single mother that couldn't reasonably be seen as the best option. Your mistake would be in assuming that the OP had the same situation - we don't know what the mother was like, aside from having poisoned the child against the father. We have an example of her being negligent in terms of the athsma, but that isn't enough to assume an altogether unfit parent - she may have been an otherwise caring, excellent parent. If this was the case then it wouldn't be in the child's interests to begin a battle over their care, especially if the outcome is most likely going to be unsuccessful - all that conflict with no positive result is actually likely to damage any potential relationship between child and alienated parent. Reality is a bitch.

Quoting the OP's words doesn't really help. If you read it again it is clear that the OP was going through a difficult time, as expected. Giving up on something after a nightmarish, fruitless endeavour is hardly a crime, though I can certainly agree that involving a decent lawyer would have been wise. We don't actually know what the final straw was - it may be entirely justifiable for the father to have stopped for the time being. The mistake was not picking up on it again shortly afterward.

Also, don't assume that the child will ever know that the parent was trying to get contact if that parent fails in doing so. The parent in custody of the child is not inclined to pass that kind of information on, especially if that parent is already trying to manipulate the child (as in the OP).

You seem to have taken an emotion response to the particular words "I just gave up contact", which is understandable. But that doesn't justify you judging the OP - you don't know him, or the specifics of the surrounding circumstances.

Do I have children of my own? It doesn't matter. What does matter is my hands on experience having dealt with over a dozen similar cases in the past two years alone - I know how reality works and what to expect from parents. Don't expect to have a more valid opinion just because you're a parent yourself.

Well done on your husband, though. He should be proud - the world needs more parents like him (and you). But that doesn't give you reason to attempt making the OP feel ashamed.
(thecurriedavenger, Sun 2 May 2010, 2:09, closed)

Ok.

Let's take this one step at a time..

I took your comments about your current husband on board with regards to access to his children.,,

I value the opinions of people on here because of
the fact that over the last six years I've had a good laugh and have empathised where appropriate with people over various issues and topics...

However, Your current husband's tenacity with regards his children is very noble, and I appreciate any opinion posted on here as long as it's a valid argument and relevevant...

I take on board any valid comments because I value the feedback I get from my fellow posters. but the moment you labelled me an unfit father the all bets were off the table.
To be frank..given the comments you leave ,,and yes I've checked all of them..You need a serious refresher course in inter personal skills chum..given the other replies to this post you are in a minority.
(frightfullybored, Mon 3 May 2010, 18:38, closed)