Struggling

RAS

And because the rules mean about temporary changes mean that the child can live elsewhere for up to 13 weeks before the parent is required to report that the child has left home and someone else can claim benefits for them.

Otherwise we would see the parent who had just lost contactwith the child/had to go into hospital lose their home immediately and lose any chance of the child ever returning.

mealone

Mrs.W wrote: »

Right, so your posts reflect your personal bitterness. Caused by a situation that left you feeling helpless and alone?

Ah, another woman scorned.

I believe that both parents are equal where as the op and other scorned women believe that the kids are theirs and theirs because a man left them, the man may have left them but that dosnt mean he has left his children and he has the right to parent his children just as the mother does. This country is laggin behind other civilised countries where joint parenting orders are routiely made, in theis country unless the mother is an alkie etc. courts always favor the mothers.

And often the residency isnt about the kids but about the very generous benefits having children bring into the household as in this case. And the benefits system wont allow the benefits to be split and the rational solution in cases where ther are two or four kids etc. where each parent claims for a child or two each dosnt happen very often either because even with a 50/50 share of the nights a child spends with each parent the mother normally has the trump card of where the child is registed with schools, doctors etc.

floss2

mealone wrote: »

Ah, another woman scorned.

I believe that both parents are equal where as the op and other scorned women believe that the kids are theirs and theirs because a man left them, the man may have left them but that dosnt mean he has left his children and he has the right to parent his children just as the mother does. This country is laggin behind other civilised countries where joint parenting orders are routiely made, in theis country unless the mother is an alkie etc. courts always favor the mothers.

And often the residency isnt about the kids but about the very generous benefits having children bring into the household as in this case. And the benefits system wont allow the benefits to be split and the rational solution in cases where ther are two or four kids etc. where each parent claims for a child or two each dosnt happen very often either because even with a 50/50 share of the nights a child spends with each parent the mother normally has the trump card of where the child is registed with schools, doctors etc.

I take it you have never been the victim of any form of domestic abuse, whether physical, mental emotional or financial then? I guess you probably don't believe that any of those forms of abuse really exist either do you?

RainbowDreamer

It isn't about the benefits. If he were a good father I'd happily have the same contact he does, to be able to discuss schools and so on.
This is above him damaging the children emotionally, showing abuse and confusing them.
I would be far happier him claiming all the benefits and not working and being a good father, than the opposite.

mealone

floss2 wrote: »

I take it you have never been the victim of any form of domestic abuse, whether physical, mental emotional or financial then? I guess you probably don't believe that any of those forms of abuse really exist either do you?

Correct on all counts, has rainbowdremera being the vicim of anything apart from her setting her ex up by "changing" the contact deails then phoning the police when he turned up fo the prearranged contact.

Have you read her pevious now deleated posts as soon as they were written? I have and she's a piece of work who engineers situations to suit heself and her position which makesit hrder for women with genuine problems.

I may hve not been a victim of relationship abuse but my sister was and she would never do the tricks rainbow dreamer has done as they inflame the stuation,people who ae genuinely afraid dont poke the lion in the eye.