b3ta.com qotw
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Question of the Week » Off Topic » Post 863468 | Search
This is a question Off Topic

Are you a QOTWer? Do you want to start a thread that isn't a direct answer to the current QOTW? Then this place, gentle poster, is your friend.

(, Sun 1 Apr 2001, 1:00)
Pages: Latest, 837, 836, 835, 834, 833, ... 1

« Go Back | See The Full Thread

I suggested I took my daughter
down to Winchester to see my mother one weekend - 'that will never happen' I was told.

The only way I'm going to get unsupervised access is by order of the court, it seems.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 13:58, 2 replies, latest was 15 years ago)
What happened with the move to Winchester idea?

(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:00, Reply)
Canterbury it was.
Never actually managed to sit down with the bitch to discuss it.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:01, Reply)
If you don't mind me asking...
But why does she insist on supervised access?
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:03, Reply)
Because she's a mental, basically.

(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:04, Reply)
Yes
Why do you need that, if you are the father and you've never done anything wrong with your daughter or against the law (that the law knows about, of course)?
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:04, Reply)
see Davvo's and my responses.
(and Kroney's)
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:06, Reply)
Because his ex knows it hurts him.

(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:06, Reply)
Because she knows that's what I want.
There is no other reason, on my daughter's life, Jeff.

My family hate my ex so much they stay away - if I could have my child on my own they'd be up all the time. My ex doesn't want this - she wants revenge on me for dumping her.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:06, Reply)
Can we find a B3tan to hook up with your ex?
It might help her move on.
(Bert?)
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:08, Reply)
gutted for you Monty, I hope you get what you want eventually.

(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:08, Reply)
It's a shame
FFJ are such a bunch of losers. A united legal front would probably force some law changes.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:08, Reply)
Well, yes, I get that
But how is it possible that she's allowed to do something like that. You love your daughter as much (or more) as her mother, you both have the right to look after her. I understand that it's best for her to live most of the time only at one house, but that you can't be with her without your ex checking on you all the time? That's unfair and stupid.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:09, Reply)
"that's unfair and stupid"
now you understand the legal system in this country as it regards to a father's rights to his children
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:11, Reply)
^^This

(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:13, Reply)
If it didn't hurt so much, I would piss my pants at your naivety.
I am the father so I have no rights - the whole thing hangs on the whims of the mother under English law.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:11, Reply)
And you say it just like that?
And nobody complains? You have no blood, British! I can't believe you don't already have a society (or something similar) and haven't taken a group of cases to court. All together will make a lot more noise than one by one.

You are the fathers. The girl wouldn't be here without you. The mother doesn't have to prove that she's good for the kids, she just gets them, and you have to fight for a few hours on your own with her. FFS! Complain! But not here, complain properly!
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:16, Reply)
Hah
Oh people complain, there are societies.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:17, Reply)
It's just a shame that they spurn legal proceedings in favour of Spiderman costumes...

(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:17, Reply)
I assume the stupid stunts aren't all they do

(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:18, Reply)
They also get together and 'tut' .

(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:36, Reply)
AND TUT LOUDLY, TOO.

(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:38, Reply)
That's not entirely fair
They send angry emails to each other about it, too.

b3ta.com/questions/offtopic/post863503
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:18, Reply)
Read up on Fathers for Justice
edit: although apparently they are useless losers
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:18, Reply)
Families Need Fathers aren't as bad
but are as completely pointless in the real world, apart from as advice-givers.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:29, Reply)
Again your naivety is actually quite endearing.

(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:18, Reply)
^this
it's like the fuel strikes and stuff, and the war protests. People do stuff, no one listens. Everyone goes home mildly disgruntled.

If it were France stuff would be on fire and rocks being hurled and the government might listen.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:19, Reply)
We protested against the war
and we changed president for not listening to us.

You have quite a good system here, as you can talk with your MPs directly, that's why usually you don't need to complaing loudly so much. But sometimes, like this one, seems necessary to make a big mess of it.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:26, Reply)
you can talk to them
but they won't listen

likewise with the protests here. They never amount to anything, and wouldn't even if people did try to make a big noise.

It'd ultimately end up with some knob getting violent, the police having to give him a beating, arrest everyone and they all get tarred with the same brush of being moronic rioters who definitely shouldn't be seeing their kids.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:27, Reply)
So true.

(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:29, Reply)
I don't know what else to say
Just that I'm sorry, and I hope everything improves. I really hope that when your daughter is a bit older she realises what's going on and stop her mum.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:32, Reply)
The last two weekends she's said she wants to go to Daddy's house.
It makes me want to cry, having to just change the subject. I feel a genuine physical pain in my chest just thinking about it.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:35, Reply)
I'm very sad for you too
and for your little one. It's going to be hard for her when she understands what's happening.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:44, Reply)
Again, I agree completely
The people who rule this country, be they MPs or heads of corporations, are untouchable and unaccountable, so why should they listen to the plebs?
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:30, Reply)
I hope you aren't suggesting I'm a pleb, old boy?

(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:34, Reply)
Perish the thought
I was talking about everyone else in the nation.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:39, Reply)
Thank goodness for that.
For a moment there....
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:40, Reply)
But haven't you looked after your daughter when your ex partner has wanted a night out?
How could she possibly argue to the court that you're unworthy of unsupervised access when she's happy for you to care for her on such occasions?
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:49, Reply)
A very salient point.
Thanks a lot
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 15:25, Reply)
Again,
because she's a mentalist.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 15:27, Reply)
The law over here
is strongly biased in favour of the mother. If she gets custody she can pretty much dictate when he sees his daughter. The courts can say "monty is entitled to x amount of contact", but it's up to him to enforce it through the courts if she simply refuses. He has to prove she's doing something wrong.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:13, Reply)
That's so wrong

(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:16, Reply)
Sounds like going to court is your best option.
Although saying that, a mate of mine was in a similar position with his ex and he ended up going to court 4 times to try and get regular access to his son.

Each time he went it cost him over a grand and each time the court agreed that he should have every other weekend, alternate Christmas and New Years with his son and a week in the summer so he could take his lad on holiday.

She still refused him access unless it suited her. The problem was that courts won't take any action against a primary carer or lock up a childs mother for being a cunt.

As he tearfully pointed out to the woman chairing the family court pannel, every visit to court is a thousand quid he could be spending on his son.

I wish you every success with getting proper access agreed. Get some good advice and see what the professionals reckon you should be able to secure.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:11, Reply)
Thanks, old boy.
It's a nightmare from which I fear I shall never awake.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:12, Reply)
One thing my mate was encouraged to do
And it helped massively when he was in court for the second time, was to keep a diary of events.

They were both told to keep one so that any problems could be discussed.

His read, 'Telephoned to enquire as to what time I could pick up my son, was told to fuck off'

Her diary was blank because 'I forgot to fill it in' (not a single entry over 4 months).
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:16, Reply)
All my texts are backed up online

(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:20, Reply)
Well I hope it goes well for you mate.
It can't be doing your daughter any good to have all this shit going on.

If it comes to it, I can lend you a Captain America fancy dress outfit and you can chain yourself to a bridge or something.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:24, Reply)
I already have a Wonder Woman one, but thanks all the same.

(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:27, Reply)
For a grand
I'll accidentally run her over on my bike.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:16, Reply)
If you had a 'fixy' I'd give you the job
(cos you could SPEED AWAY so quickly innit)
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:19, Reply)
So long as there weren't any hills
or long straight roads. :/
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:26, Reply)
I think that your best option
is to find a group of fathers in the same situation, and present your case all together. Not complain each time she breaks the agreement, but make sure that the law includes punishment for her when she does it.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:18, Reply)
The court will never punish the mother
Not if the child is living with her full time.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:19, Reply)
Or dress up as a super hero.

(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:21, Reply)
Not your fault
but you are wildly underestimating the size of the legal hill.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:25, Reply)
Clearly I am
It makes me feel very sad, though, that the law permits this and protects the person who's doing the harm.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:27, Reply)
as far as the court is concerned there is no harm being done
it's all in the best interests of the child
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:28, Reply)
Well
The court is wrong, clearly. The best interest of the child is to have both a mother and a father.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:30, Reply)
And the love of the father's family.

Particularly as in my case the mother's family are bunch of fucking peasants.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:33, Reply)
in principle
but in some cases the parents won't be together, or the father won't have any interest, or will have interest but be a violent bastard. There has to be some kind of law to protect the child in those sorts of instances, but unfortunately the way it is now punishes people like Monty. Or rather, allows his ex to punish him.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:33, Reply)
Yes
But if it's the mother the one that is a bastard, then that doesn't count. She doesn't have to prove anything. She's the mother and that's all that counts.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:46, Reply)
that is fairly unusual though
on the whole, if the child is to live with one parent then most of the time they are better off with the mother, particularly at a very young age.

unfortunately I imagine when the law was written they didn't consider that some people might use it to exact their own petty revenge on a partner who they think has slighted them.
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:48, Reply)
Ok, that's true
But the way your law works here, as I see it, is believing that the mother is good until the opposite is proved, and believing that the father could be a cunt, so just we better don't bother with him too much, just in case, eh?
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:56, Reply)
that's pretty much it
in a lot of cases it works fine, because the mother is willing to give access to the father, either with or without court action.

but in some cases, like that of our unfortunate colleague, the mother is a psycho hosebeast
(, Mon 13 Sep 2010, 14:58, Reply)

« Go Back | See The Full Thread

Pages: Latest, 837, 836, 835, 834, 833, ... 1