Child contact - aka "pass the parcel"

LannieDuck

I agree she needs to get contact orders sorted. I think he needs to settle on a fixed day a week (or a couple of days depending on preferences) so your daughter isn't messed around every week waiting to hear about his schedule.

Both sides should be able to nominate a third party to help facilitate hand-overs (these people should be agreed by both sides) - the OP would be the daughter's, and ex should also be allowed one (but just one) person. It should be someone that the daughter and the LO both know. That limits the pass-the-parcel aspect, and means the LO isn't being given to lots of people they don't know.

Errata

What on earth is your daughter thinking about letting a toddler stay with someone who is violent when they choose to be (and the circumstances of who wound who up don't matter).
The most sensible way forward until everyone starts behaving like sensible mature adults instead of something out of a James Bond film is for the father to see the child at a contact centre.

lazer

OP - I think you only have one side of the story.

Is it possible your daughter attacked him first? (Violence isn't always by men, but as the men are normally stronger, them defending themselves usually means the woman comes off worse).

It seems unusal that if the father attacked the OP's daughter, that he is now afraid to contact her, or to collect his own child?

Regardless of the situation re: the violence if your daughter still thinks the father is capable of looking after the baby, and the baby is safe with him, i think his approach is very mature, it is a workable solution, and he refrained for calling names, blame etc. The interests of the child come first!

I see no problem with his arrangement, if your daughter is allowed to use you as a go between why is the father not also allowed a go between? The times when the child is in her fathers care, he is responsible for her wellbeing, if your daughter organised a babysitter for the baby, would you think it was reasonable if he said she couldn't because he didn;t know the babysitter?

tooldle

I think this is a very common arrangement. A friend of mine was in a similar situation. The kids went to the ex every other weekend. Handover took place away from their residences. On occasions I was the chaperone. In that case, a secure place was chosen, mum and kids would be behind a locked door. Dad would park outside. Chaperone would take kids out to dad, leaving mum behind locked door. Dad was not to get out of car. Chaperone passed written messages to Dad, re number to call if going to be late, details of medicines etc. When returning kids, the reverse would happen. OP could you come up with a similar arrangement.
Over time, my friend got comfortable with the arrangement, and a little bit of trust grew. The kids also go older and wiser. Now, chaperones are not needed, but the basic arrangement is still in place. Each knows the process, and neither breaches it.

System

The OP's daughter could always get to know these 'go betweens'. For her own peace of mind at least.

NewKittenHelp

Errata wrote: »

What on earth is your daughter thinking about letting a toddler stay with someone who is violent when they choose to be (and the circumstances of who wound who up don't matter).
The most sensible way forward until everyone starts behaving like sensible mature adults instead of something out of a James Bond film is for the father to see the child at a contact centre.

On the other hand, what on earth is the father thinking allowing a toddler to stay with someone who thinks false imprisonment is acceptable? If that's what happened, as seems to be the case.

Errata

NewKittenHelp wrote: »

On the other hand, what on earth is the father thinking allowing a toddler to stay with someone who thinks false imprisonment is acceptable? If that's what happened, as seems to be the case.

What on earth are you talking about?

HurdyGurdy

Do you know what? I am so wary of posting on these boards, due to all the keyboard detectives that will take anything you say, twist it, and put their own spin on things, before condemning everyone involved.

However, I will answer the points raised, and try not to be biased. I know only too well that there are two sides to every story.

And thank you to everyone who has taken time to respond.

Tiglath wrote: »

I'd say she'd be within her rights not to accept this as a parent, but that might just add fuel to the fire. Only she will know if the ex is doing this because he wants to comply with the police advice or whether he's just being bloodyminded. Going for a formal contact arrangement via a solicitor seems the best solution, but obviously doesn't help the arrangements for this week. Can she speak to the flatmate directly? I'm taking it that the Facebook contact isn't the flatmate?

IMO, and from having spoken to him about his past when things were ok between him and my daughter, I’d say more bloody mindedness than compliance. And no, the FB contact is not the flatmate.

podperson wrote: »

It does seem a bit like overkill but obviously things are very tense/volatile between them at the moment so maybe it would be best to have a go-between for access at least for a week or two while they can both calm down a bit to the stage where they can perhaps discuss some guidelines for pick ups/drop offs in future to try and avoid something like this happening. At least he is still wanting to see the child, even if in a rather roundabout way. Would you be free at that time to drop off the child if your daughter is uncomfortable leaving them with the ex's friend? It could be suggested to the ex if so.

There is no doubt that he loves the baby and is an excellent father. He can be a bit hit-and-miss at times as to when he will have contact. It depends on what gym/swimming sessions he has planned that week. But my daughter without hesitation when asked by the police, told them that she has no concerns at all as to the level of care he gives her when he has her.

I am more than willing to help out with handovers if he is accepting of that.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

Why isn't she pressing charges?

He assaulted her.

That's against the law.

What happens next time she says something he doesn't like - does she come downstairs to collect the little one and find him there waiting to smack her one?

Unless, of course, he's actually being prosecuted by the police as a result of admitting his violent crime and he's been ordered not to go within x number of yards. Which is tough luck on him, IMO.

The police are just treating it as a “verbal only”. I don’t know why. So there is no option for prosecution. I would say that this isn’t the first time he’s “got in her face” and been physical with her. The last time he “just” grabbed her finger and bent it back. She didn’t report that to the police, as she said at the time that it could have been an accidental grab and not an actual attempt to hurt her.

I was there with her when the police were completing their paperwork and she definitely told them that she had hurt her hand and head when he pushed her.

Lexxi wrote: »

This isn't just his decision! It is your daughters too and if she is not happy with playing pass the parcel with her child with a bunch of people she doesn't know she needs to tell either the ex or one of the others involved and come up with a better solution.
I expect he doesn't want to see you because he is ashamed and if he isn't he should be!
Could the daughter bring the child to you and you and the ex meet between your work and his?

My daughter does accept that, certainly at the moment, there is a need for a go-between. She’s just not keen on there being so many people involved. I am more than happy for my daughter to bring the baby to my office, then leave. And then the father (who could wait around the corner while the drop off took place) could come and collect the baby from me.

The police said that when they spoke to him, he seemed to have been shocked by his own actions, so maybe he is ashamed (as indeed, he should be). I am as mad as hell at him, of course, but I would hope that he would know me well enough by now to know that I only ever put the baby’s needs first (I had to act as a go-between when they first split up – and my goodness, it was acrimonious) and would not have an argument with him at pick up/drop off time.

cheepskate wrote: »

OP , you only have one side of the story about the argument/police,,,i assume.

It looks like the Ex wants to protect himself from further trouble, so is using a go -between.

As for 5 people involved, Why would it be ok for your daughter to have a go -between but not the ex, considering she is now calling the police on him(rightly or wrongly, ).

I actually think this is a good idea, if they cannot get on. It not only safeguards your daughter, but safeguards the ex. The ex obviously trusts the go-between as does your daughter to you.

The police told my daughter that his version of events was more or less the same as her version, so I think we probably do have both sides of the story.

No one has said that he can’t have a go-between. I just don’t understand why he needs two go-betweens. One friend to contact my daughter to arrange the contact times and another to facilitate it. But no doubt he has his reasons.

And please do not question the rights and wrongs of my daughter calling the police. He was physically aggressive with her. There is NO excuse for that.

NewKittenHelp wrote: »

Why did he kick the door if the child was already outside? It seems like you've been told one side and you're taking it as gospel. But it sounds to me as if he was trying to leave/get to his daughter and your daughter tried to stop him. And then for her to phone the police! I can't say I'm surprised that he doesn't want any direct contact with your daughter.

The baby was outside waiting to leave. The father went back into the flat to collect her bag, and my daughter wanted to go back outside with him to say bye bye to the baby and give her a kiss. His view was that she’d already said bye bye in the flat, and “lost it”.

CH27 wrote: »

I wouldn't be happy with so many go betweens.
I would suggest the EX waits until you have finished work & then you could hand over the child to him & then collect the next day.
That way the child is always with someone they know well.

He doesn’t even really have to wait until I finish work. I have spoken to my manager who would be quite happy for me to pop downstairs for five minutes to facilitate the handover at any time during the day.

valkirn wrote: »

Personally i'd be saying no to a compleat stranger collecting my child to hand over to the dad especially if they are not speaking how would she know he had the child?
has it ever occurred to you that as they were arguing he could have threatened not to bring the child home again!! (which is the usual threat used on both sides) If my ex had threatened that i would have tried to stop him taking my child anywhere too, and since his attack resulted in the ex girlfriend being hurt she is more than with in her rights to call the police on him,

For me the meer fact that he has been violent infront of the child would have me saying no to him having the child at all untill the solicitors had sorted the residency order and formalised contact, they could then look into the child being droped off and collected at a contact centre.

He didn’t threaten it on that occasion. But he has mentioned going for custody in the past. Not quite the same thing, but not taken as an empty threat.

cheepskate wrote: »

this is all well and fine , BUT parents are never unbiased..

So OP has already got him down as hitting/pushing their daughter, shouting in front of kid etc.
Now parent is complaining that the ex hasn't contacted their daughter since the argument to see how child is......its been 4 days, feelings are running high on both sides and another argument (with whoever at fault) is just waiting to happen.

Out of all of them the ex is being the most mature at the moment , to distance himself from arguments .If parents cant be civil to each other, then it's not just a case of the NRP calling to have a nice chat about said child.

If there are any debates going on with the daughter and ex, its all too easy for this to spill over to the passover with the Op getting involved.


Edit: See above post how things go, and this is from someone not even involved in it. Looks like the daughters word is gospel and ex is causing all the trouble- life is never a one sided story

OK. I do not “have him down” as hitting/pushing. IT HAPPENED. He confirmed this with the police when they went to do the welfare check on the baby.

I am not “complaining” that he hadn’t made contact. I STATED A FACT.

My daughter has shown me texts that he has sent her in which he has called her “a moron”, “a tool”, and one where he said that he was unable to talk to her as he has not been trained in communicating with primates. Those are FACTS. I have seen the texts myself.

The response texts from my daughter have not used name calling. She has said on two occasions that what he wanted to do (with some aspects of parenting) are silly. But she has not called HIM any names.

I am not wearing rose tinted spectacles where my daughter is concerned. But on this occasion, I am not going to try and defend him.

valkirn wrote: »

Im not taking the daughters side.. im suggesting the ex may have threatened in the heat of an argument not to bring the child back resulting in the mother trying to take the child back.

It could also be that her went for her because she also in the heat of the argument said that this would be the last time he would have the child.

Maybe i should have changed it to the meer suggestion that he may have been violent towards the mother would have me personally sorting things out formally before any thing else takes place

On this occasion, my daughter said to the baby “have a nice time with daddy. But don’t worry about being good for him”. Stupid thing to say, yes. Provocative, even. But definitely not a reason or an excuse for him to behave the way he did.

dancingfairy wrote: »

Surely the best thing would be for it all to go through you (if you're happy to do that for the meantime). Your daughter could bring the child to you when you finish work which would be what 5ish/5.30 and you could take the child to the ex. This would eliminate the other person and the baby would be with someone who knows him/her. I'd also probably say to the other person that could the 2 parents at least contact each other (via facebook if necessary ) regarding arrangements. SUrely the less people involved the better and surely the adults can be reasonable in writing (if it doesn't involve them actually coming face to face with each other?)You'd also have a paper trail of who said what. Also you do not know the motives of this other party so even if they are acting in good faith you don't need more people involved.
Best of Luck
df

My view also, dancing fairy. As I have said above, I am more than happy to facilitate the handover/pick up, and my manager has said they are quite happy for me to pop downstairs and allow this to take place. Maybe once my daughter has seen the solicitor on Friday, this will be a solution put forward to him. I suspect he thinks I will turn into a shrieking fishwife when I see him, and have a go at him. (I may feel like doing this, but would never do so (a) in front of the baby and (b) anywhere near my work!)

londonsurrey wrote: »

Just to make it clear that I think he should be prosecuted for the violence.

However, I respect the fact that he's come up with a workable plan that will enable him to continue contact with his daughter whilst taking into account that he is well advised to avoid contact with your daughter.

As for the friend, bear in mind that during the time he is the parent in charge of the child, he is entitled to use his judgement as to who he trusts with the child. Additionally, he's not proposing that the child is left alone with this friend for half a day - he's waiting down the road for the friend to bring the child.

It sounds like a level headed working solution in a very difficult situation, and for all we know, it's this friend who is counselling him to do the sensible thing and focus on what's important, i.e. ensuring that the child has both parents. I respect the fact that the message refrained from name calling, accusations, etc, and was simply very clear and to the point.

I agree to a point with you. The friend who returned the baby to my daughter’s flat the day after the incident, is someone that my daughter can’t stand, as she says that he swears around, and smacks, his own children, and my daughter doesn’t like that. She has always said she doesn’t want this person anywhere near the baby. I have told her, however, that unless she honestly believes that this person is a danger to her baby, or could cause her harm, then she cannot dictate who the father sees, while he has the baby. I suspect that is why the father sent that particular friend to deliver the baby back to my daughter – but I may just be being overly cynical.

Re name calling – yes, that message (from the friend) didn’t resort to name calling, but see my response above to cheepskate, where I have said that he has in the past called her names. Those are the ones I have seen in writing – my daughter has told me there have been many more said to her that no one has been around to witness (apart from the baby)

LannieDuck wrote: »

I agree she needs to get contact orders sorted. I think he needs to settle on a fixed day a week (or a couple of days depending on preferences) so your daughter isn't messed around every week waiting to hear about his schedule.

Both sides should be able to nominate a third party to help facilitate hand-overs (these people should be agreed by both sides) - the OP would be the daughter's, and ex should also be allowed one (but just one) person. It should be someone that the daughter and the LO both know. That limits the pass-the-parcel aspect, and means the LO isn't being given to lots of people they don't know.

This is the ideal solution, and hopefully once my daughter has seen the solicitor on Friday, this will be the outcome.

lazer wrote: »

OP - I think you only have one side of the story.

Is it possible your daughter attacked him first? (Violence isn't always by men, but as the men are normally stronger, them defending themselves usually means the woman comes off worse).

It seems unusal that if the father attacked the OP's daughter, that he is now afraid to contact her, or to collect his own child?

Regardless of the situation re: the violence if your daughter still thinks the father is capable of looking after the baby, and the baby is safe with him, i think his approach is very mature, it is a workable solution, and he refrained for calling names, blame etc. The interests of the child come first!

I see no problem with his arrangement, if your daughter is allowed to use you as a go between why is the father not also allowed a go between? The times when the child is in her fathers care, he is responsible for her wellbeing, if your daughter organised a babysitter for the baby, would you think it was reasonable if he said she couldn't because he didn;t know the babysitter?

No. I really don’t think my daughter would have hit him. I can’t be 100% certain – of course not. I wasn’t there. But I am better than 99% certain that she didn’t. I have a Facebook message from him from when they first broke up saying that he couldn’t trust himself to be around my daughter due to “the anger built up inside”. So he knows he has the capacity to be aggressive.

I have had the “you cannot dictate who he sees” conversation with my daughter. Several times.

NewKittenHelp wrote: »

On the other hand, what on earth is the father thinking allowing a toddler to stay with someone who thinks false imprisonment is acceptable? If that's what happened, as seems to be the case.

Nope. I can’t see it. I have re-read this thread from start to finish. Twice. And I cannot see ANYTHING about false imprisonment. Are you sure you are posting on the right thread?

Tiglath

HurdyGurdy wrote: »

Do you know what? I am so wary of posting on these boards, due to all the keyboard detectives that will take anything you say, twist it, and put their own spin on things, before condemning everyone involved.

Yep - know exactly what you mean, in my own experience. It reduced me to tears last week and I'll never ask for family-type advice on this forum again; I've decided to stick strictly to money-type questions.

minimoneysaver

What an awful situation for your daughter to be in. I think you are doing the right thing where she is concerned. As someone who has experienced the hands of a volatile ex, she needs to be very careful how she decides to deal with future meetings. I agree that a go between is needed and yes, it is going to be a bit like pass the parcel but if it keeps your daughter safe, it is worthwhile.

As for the posters who have come across as mean and antagonistic...ignore them. I have quite a few on my block list and wasn't surprised that they popped up on this thread. It's not helpful and I know of someone who was suicidal after some of these posters were involved on a thread she had posted. They are a disgrace.