Advice needed, ex and child contact :-(

pinkpig08

I wish I were so broke I had to drive an X5.

pinkpig08

Why are you assuming that he wouldn't see his father as the b*****d from hell for not bothering to come and see him?

Flyboy152

pinkpig08 wrote: »

Why are you assuming that he wouldn't see his father as the b*****d from hell for not bothering to come and see him?

He might very well do (and not necessarily unjustified), but who do you think the boy will hate the most, at that particular moment?

Flyboy152

pinkpig08 wrote: »

I wish I were so broke I had to drive an X5.

But he didn't own the X5 when he moved away. He has obviously got very comfortable living back with his parents now, but it couldn't have been an easy choice when the decision had to be made. Now, the situation is different and he is taking the easy way out. He probably assumes, as the PWC has been happy to accept the status quo for so long, he can get away with it forever. That is clearly wrong and he needs to forced to pay up.

shellsuit

Flyboy152 wrote: »

You seriously don't think that would happen. If you don't, you are more naive than I thought.

You really think the OP would tell her son that it was her fault he never saw his Dad, when the fact is that it is the Dad's fault?

Get real! :rotfl:

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Hmm....and how do you think that will be heard in the ears of a teenage boy who sees his mother as the !!!!! from hell (as most thirteen year old boys do when have been told they can't go to a night club/pub/party/football match etc.)? Do you think he is going to be rational or irrational?

Now you're just being daft.

What has saying No to a child got to do with whose fault it is why they never saw their Father when they were younger?

You've already stated the OP has done her best, and that the ex is an arr$ehole, so why do you keep dragging the OP down as if she is entirely at fault for the circumstances?


It's quite simple. If the Father wants to see his son, he has to pull all the stops out to make it possible.

The OP doesn't have to take the child halfway, spending her time doing it and leaving her other child elsewhere. She chooses to do that out of the goodness of her own heart.

candycow

I think in your situation, I would drop the contact to one in 3 weekends as someone suggested. That way you are still maintaining a regular relationship with his Dad, but making it more financially viable one for your side of his family. Personally I think that you can explain that to a 3 year old, he will still see his Dad, but will simply have an extra weekend with you because you haven't got the money to keep doing the journey. I would probably tell the granparents what I was doing and why though, keep things a bit sweeter with them, and they may suggest a compromise in order to see him more often.

Well done for managing so far, it must be exhausting both physically and financially.

shellsuit

Flyboy152 wrote: »

He might very well do (and not necessarily unjustified), but who do you think the boy will hate the most, at that particular moment?

What's that got to do with anything?!

The parent with care always gets the raw deal, as they are the ones bringing up the children and so have to make up the rules because they have the responsibility for the child.

Are you a parent by the way, and if so, with care or without care?

Flyboy152

shellsuit wrote: »

You really think the OP would tell her son that it was her fault he never saw his Dad, when the fact is that it is the Dad's fault?

Get real! :rotfl:



Now you're just being daft.

What has saying No to a child got to do with whose fault it is why they never saw their Father when they were younger?

You've already stated the OP has done her best, and that the ex is an arr$ehole, so why do you keep dragging the OP down as if she is entirely at fault for the circumstances?


It's quite simple. If the Father wants to see his son, he has to pull all the stops out to make it possible.

The OP doesn't have to take the child halfway, spending her time doing it and leaving her other child elsewhere. She chooses to do that out of the goodness of her own heart.

No, the OP is doing it because she demonstrates a commitment to her son's right to have a relationship with his father, she is not doing it as a favour, because that would suggest she has the right to withdraw the facility whenever she feels like it. That, quite frankly, is and insult to her and the the example she shows all PWCs.

elisebutt65

My kids only see their dads in the school holidays because of this. I don't drive so can't do any of the transport and I can't afford the train. One dad gives me £20/week and the other might possibly give me a couple of quid when I've nagged him for 2 months!! I've given up with the CSA tbh.

Both kids (10 & 15) know how low my income is and that I'm happy for them to see their dads whenever they can. One is in Exeter and the other is in Portsmouth so the trainfare would run into hundreds!

The truth is though that their dads just can't be ar€ed to make the journey and both boys have realised that, especially the youngest. I've given up defending them now & trying to be fair for the kids sake.

pinkpig08

What happens if she can't afford a school trip because she is spending so much on the boys' relationship with his father? If he is so concerned for the boys' welfare he should get his finger out and either pay her more money so his son has the things he needs, or make the trip himself. Whilst I think that NRPs can and do get a raw deal sometimes, you have to accept that there are some who don't give a to55, and they should not be justified in their actions.

The OP has gone far enough in trying to maintain the relationship this long. But there are other factors involved. She simply cannot afford it any longer. Her son and her other child and family are losing out which is unfair.