Family Court Experience (Contact Order)

shoe*diva79

krok wrote: »

Cafcass cannot order anyone to do anything. Their job is only to advise the judge which direction to take.

I think it would be pure ridiculous that the father take a blood test everytime he has his daughter.

Are you sure you are not getting jealous that your x wants to see his child. Perhaps that is why he has taken this issue to court if you are being difficult.

Yes, i am that jealous that I am the one having to make him spend tme with his daughter. Maybe go back and read the thread?

And for your information, CAFCASS wanted to do alcohol testing as my ex refuses to admit he drinks heavily and testing a sample of his hair, so CAFCASS have told me, will indicate roughly how much he drinks. I have been able to tell them what his alcohol consumption was whilst we were together and they see that as excessive and not in the best interests of our daughter.

No where does this thread mention my ex having to take a blood test every time he has our daughter.

shoe*diva79

ValHaller wrote: »

You seem to be looking at this defensively? (eg "I only told them this, I didn't ask for 48 hours")

Whereas the fact that the court have gone beyond what you asked is your opportunity to get the court off your ex's back a bit, making it easier for him to have his daughter - which might ease his outlook on you and store up some credit for you as being a reasonable person with both him and the court.

You need to put something like my diagram in your statement and say that the effect of the order on the ex, combined with a weekday contact and every other weekend is restricting his freedom for 10 days out of every 14, which in turn makes ex resent midweek contact - you would be satisfied with no drinking for 12 or 24 hours prior to contact.

If you agree with my suggestion that the 48 hours might be making this harder and you don't feel that 48 hours is necessary, it is no good expecting the court to interpret what you didn't say ("I didnt say anything about prior to having contact or staying totally off the drink") as a request to ease the situation by cutting down the 48 hours.

I like how you call it restricting his freedom. Bit like mine was restricted when he left me with 2 children all of a sudden one day.

ValHaller

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

I like how you call it restricting his freedom. Bit like mine was restricted when he left me with 2 children all of a sudden one day.

So in a way you are pleased that the court ordered him not to drink? Some element of payback? Even though the court order means that you don't gain a little freedom one evening a week?

shoe*diva79

ValHaller wrote: »

So in a way you are pleased that the court ordered him not to drink? Some element of payback? Even though the court order means that you don't gain a little freedom one evening a week?

I could write a essay on how in the last 5 months he has put stumbling blocks in my way and made everything into a issue when it need not be like that. As I said before, I dont care for his drinking habits. Nothing should be more important to him then time with his daughter. And yes, I am pleased he has been ordered not to drink when he has our DD. At present its only alternate weekends but why would I want him drinking when he has her?

As it happens, whilst he was arguing with the clerk over why he does not agree to the midweek contact, i ended up cutting in and said 'just give him what he wants, if he just wants alternate weekends then gve it to him' but the clerk refused to grant the order.

I am to the point after just 5 short months that I just dont care. See her, dont see her. I know that when she is a adult, Ill be able to show her that I tried to keep their relationship alive and was there for her.

Doubt he will be able to do the same.

ValHaller

Sorry, this is all looking passive-aggressive on your part. You seem actually to be pleased that you got an order which stops him drinking 10 days per fortnight without actually asking for it. If you want him to see your daughter midweek, you really need to do your bit to cut the order down to the minimum necessary to protect your daughter

shoe*diva79

ValHaller wrote: »

Sorry, this is all looking passive-aggressive on your part. You seem actually to be pleased that you got an order which stops him drinking 10 days per fortnight without actually asking for it. If you want him to see your daughter midweek, you really need to do your bit to cut the order down to the minimum necessary to protect your daughter

Thanks for your opinion. However, what I care about is my daughters care, not his drinking. I have already told you that this undertaking isnt something I requested. If the CAFCASS officer thought it was appropriate to safeguard our 2 year old daughter in this recommendation then thats fine by me.

I think I have also mentioned that he has stated due to training for a running event, he is not currently drinking at all. And not one of his reasons for not wanting mid week contact involved his drinking (or lack of).

The next hearing is mid Feb so ill pop back and update on the outcome then.

In the meantime, at least I know that our DD will be safe this weekend and the other weekends he will be due to have her.

Mojisola

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

I dont know why 48 hours. It was the courts decision. All I asked is that he didnt drink excessivley when our DD was in his care.

ValHaller wrote: »

Sorry, this is all looking passive-aggressive on your part. You seem actually to be pleased that you got an order which stops him drinking 10 days per fortnight without actually asking for it. If you want him to see your daughter midweek, you really need to do your bit to cut the order down to the minimum necessary to protect your daughter

It's rather weird to be blaming shoe*diva for something the court imposed.

ValHaller

Mojisola wrote: »

It's rather weird to be blaming shoe*diva for something the court imposed.

It isn't weird. It would be if I was blaming her.

Mojisola

ValHaller wrote: »

Sorry, this is all looking passive-aggressive on your part.

You seem actually to be pleased that you got an order which stops him drinking 10 days per fortnight without actually asking for it. If you want him to see your daughter midweek, you really need to do your bit to cut the order down to the minimum necessary to protect your daughter

ValHaller wrote: »

It isn't weird. It would be if I was blaming her.

Sounds that way.

As the judge imposed the order, could she really have challenged him on it? It's nothing to do with her being passive-aggressive.

ValHaller

Mojisola wrote: »

Sounds that way.

As the judge imposed the order, could she really have challenged him on it? It's nothing to do with her being passive-aggressive.

If the order is actually excessive and has a detrimental effect on ex having child, I believe that she should seek to get the order modified.

And as for highlighting 'got' there are 2 sorts of got-
* I went out and got a birthday present for mother (active)
* I got a box of chocolates for Christmas (passive)
If it isn't clear, I mean got in the passive sense, so no blame implied.