Help Please - Ex partner slipping under the radar again!!!

DUTR

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

I'm sorry but I don't know what you mean by that.

What I find sad (hurts? eh? catch yourself on...) is that there is a little person (like many many others) who's Dad chooses not to have anything to do with them.

But what makes you particularly loathesome is that you are proud of this and tell people at every opportunity. I would have thought that would have been an embarrasing thing in life and not something to tell all and sundry.

Not proud, just not ashamed , so I don't have to bottle it up (as in there is no point people pretending/promising to the children that daddy will show up one day), there are plenty of people that do that as you know, how are they any different to contact (without good cause) blockers?

Loopy_Girl

DUTR wrote: »

(as in there is no point people pretending/promising to the children that daddy will show up one day), there are plenty of people that do that as you know,

Sorry I don't know anyone that does that. Not one person. The people I know are always honest with their kids.

Interesting that you don't see you as a contact blocker though - do they always have to be female in your eyes?

gratefulforhelp_2

I don't know if you are in this category or not, dutr but I believe there are some parents (of both sexes) who actually the child/ren may well be better off without knowing or seeing.

This "one size fits all" of the child must know it's parents is not always (though admittedly it is usually) right.

Loopy_Girl

gratefulforhelp wrote: »

This "one size fits all" of the child must know it's parents is not always (though admittedly it is usually) right.

I agree however DUTR is not in this category.

I can't remember his reason for abandoning his child but I'm pretty sure the PWC got the blame somewhere in the reason.

DUTR

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

You know fine well that I am talking about your parting comment. No need.

Sometimes claiming CS is not always a case of financial gain.

So if I know full and well what you are talking about and you know full and well what I'm talking about then why is this 'debate' going on?

Indeed claiming CS is not always about financial gain, there will be a host of reasons (one includes spite) , just as there will be a host of reasons that CS avoiders do so (which could include spite) .
It is a case of one hat does not fit all for both PWCs NRPs contact blockers or contact avoiders .
the internet is a place where all those characters come together the rest we all know.

DUTR

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

Sorry I don't know anyone that does that. Not one person. The people I know are always honest with their kids.

Interesting that you don't see you as a contact blocker though - do they always have to be female in your eyes?

Perhaps you do, but were not aware?

No, there could be a male PWC who blocks contact, there was a case (well almost) more local to you where had the father had won custody, sadly for the children, their mum made sure no one would ever see them alive again.

Marisco

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

Sorry I don't know anyone that does that. Not one person. The people I know are always honest with their kids.

Interesting that you don't see you as a contact blocker though - do they always have to be female in your eyes?

Hi Loopy, then you are very lucky not to know people like that!! My ex son in law did exactly that, and had the kids in bits:mad: My daughter did her best to allow contact, but he didn't want to know. The last time he saw his eldest daughter she was 9 - she is now 19 and no one knows where he is. He was a "ducker and diver" where CSA was concerned, as soon as they caught up with him he would change jobs and the whole sorry saga would start over again!! I think it's far better to be honest up front, and if anyone does not want to acknowledge their kids, then far better they say so and stay away. The damage done to kids by people like my loathsome ex SIL lasts a long time:mad:

Loopy_Girl

DUTR wrote: »

Perhaps you do, but were not aware?

I'm not stupid. I already said that no I didn't.
No, there could be a male PWC who blocks contact, there was a case (well almost) more local to you where had the father had won custody, sadly for the children, their mum made sure no one would ever see them alive again.

Local to me? Scotland is a big place I'm afraid.

And that wicked Mother will get her punishment. Good to see you mentioned it though. Again.

Loopy_Girl

Marisco wrote: »

Hi Loopy, then you are very lucky not to know people like that!! My ex son in law did exactly that, and had the kids in bits:mad: My daughter did her best to allow contact, but he didn't want to know. The last time he saw his eldest daughter she was 9 - she is now 19 and no one knows where he is. He was a "ducker and diver" where CSA was concerned, as soon as they caught up with him he would change jobs and the whole sorry saga would start over again!! I think it's far better to be honest up front, and if anyone does not want to acknowledge their kids, then far better they say so and stay away. The damage done to kids by people like my loathsome ex SIL lasts a long time:mad:

So did your daughter give false hope to the kids then?

Marisco

I'm not sure I understand your question???? My daughter did not say "daddy is coming" if that is what you mean!! He would do that himself and not turn up. This happened all the time till he did a complete runner when the eldest was 9. My daughter did not want to block access, although the rest of the family advised her to tell him to sod off, as it was upsetting the kids, but she kept giving him the benefit of the doubt.