Mother reducing overnight stays

babsand16

The child is saying that it was his decision not to bring clothes...
The whole situation is ridiculous, she is using the child!

shirlgirl2004

Go to the charity shop and spend £5 on some clothes. A 6 year old won't know they aren't new. Children don't need fancy things they need loving, relaxed parents. The NRP should spend time enjoying his child and not playing games with the PWC.

If the NRP isn't able to commit to regular overnight stays I'm not sure how this is the fault of the PWC. As the child is at school it is understandable the PWC would like to see him at the weekends too. Why should the PWC get the child tired from school and none of the relaxed weekend hours?

babsand16

shirlgirl2004 wrote: »

Go to the charity shop and spend £5 on some clothes. A 6 year old won't know they aren't new. Children don't need fancy things they need loving, relaxed parents. The NRP should spend time enjoying his child and not playing games with the PWC.

If the NRP isn't able to commit to regular overnight stays I'm not sure how this is the fault of the PWC. As the child is at school it is understandable the PWC would like to see him at the weekends too. Why should the PWC get the child tired from school and none of the relaxed weekend hours?

Have you even read this thread? I don't think so... too many assumptions made. Just to fill you in the PWC is playing the games not the NRP and the PWC has the child booked into 2-3 afterschool activities per night, meaning he doesnt actually get in until 8-8:30 on a night time, then he is straight to bed. The times he doesnt have activities he usually spends at her sisters house.
I'm not answering your questions because they're not relevant.

shirlgirl2004

babsand16 wrote: »

Have you even read this thread? I don't think so... too many assumptions made. Just to fill you in the PWC is playing the games not the NRP and the PWC has the child booked into 2-3 afterschool activities per night, meaning he doesnt actually get in until 8-8:30 on a night time, then he is straight to bed. The times he doesnt have activities he usually spends at her sisters house.
I'm not answering your questions because they're not relevant.

Afterschool activities cost money. Certainly schools do not provide activities for children going on until that sort of time so they must be private activitites. No wonder the PWC needs the NRP to buy some clothes. Presumably the PWC is ferrying the child between these activities so it isn't as if she's got her feet up watching TV whilst someone else i looking after him. She's either waitng around watching him, walking to and fro or spending a fortune in petrol going back and forth between activities. Even more reason to want to spend time with her child at the weekend.

babsand16

No wrong. The pwc gets either the nrp to take him to the clubs or her mum or sister. I don't understand what your point is?? What you're talking about is not even anything we've discussed in this thread as its not an issue!

shirlgirl2004

babsand16 wrote: »

No wrong. The pwc gets either the nrp to take him to the clubs or her mum or sister. I don't understand what your point is?? What you're talking about is not even anything we've discussed in this thread as its not an issue!

You mean it isn't an issue to the NRP, you don't know it isn't an issue to the PWC. She is still paying for the clubs and 15% contribution isn't going to help much as the NRP is presumably on a low salary. She is using maintenance to pay towards clubs and maybe sports kit etc for the clubs. This is relevant to where she is spending the maintenace and therefore not wanting to buy lots of clothes for weekends when he clearly doesn't need them during the week.

It is relevant beause she isn't getting to spend a great deal of time with her son during the week so why is she unjustified wanting to be with him at the weekend? I think you have a one sided view of the issues. I'm trying to make you see there are two sides to every story.

babsand16

shirlgirl2004 wrote: »

You mean it isn't an issue to the NRP, you don't know it isn't an issue to the PWC. She is still paying for the clubs and 15% contribution isn't going to help much as the NRP is presumably on a low salary. She is using maintenance to pay towards clubs and maybe sports kit etc for the clubs. This is relevant to where she is spending the maintenace and therefore not wanting to buy lots of clothes for weekends when he clearly doesn't need them during the week.

It is relevant beause she isn't getting to spend a great deal of time with her son during the week so why is she unjustified wanting to be with him at the weekend? I think you have a one sided view of the issues. I'm trying to make you see there are two sides to every story.

what are you talking about? Are you getting confused with another thread? I've never said that she has him too much. There are no issues with the amount of time the nrp currently has the child. Read the thread because you clearly haven't or you're confusing the issues.

shirlgirl2004

babsand16 wrote: »

what are you talking about? Are you getting confused with another thread? I've never said that she has him too much. There are no issues with the amount of time the nrp currently has the child. Read the thread because you clearly haven't or you're confusing the issues.

The thread title is "mother reducing overnight stays", you stated the NRP couldn't have the child regularly during the week due to shifts which then leave the weekends which is when I stated the mother might quite like to see her child. No confusion on my part.

babsand16

shirlgirl2004 wrote: »

The thread title is "mother reducing overnight stays", you stated the NRP couldn't have the child regularly during the week due to shifts which then leave the weekends which is when I stated the mother might quite like to see her child. No confusion on my part.

The nrp has the child every other weekend and during the week except cant gave him over night during the week due to shifts. This was the basis if the thread originally as the pwc is trying to convince the child that he doesn't want to stay overnight on weekends now...thus reducing the total amount of overnight stays which impacts on the CSA payment. The pwc sees the child significantly more than the nrp. What you're trying to imply is that the pwc wants to see the child more... If she does then all she had to do is stop palming the child off the relatives when she is supposed to have him and reduce the amount of out if school activities so that the child is not complaining of being too tired when he goes to school the next day!

shirlgirl2004

babsand16 wrote: »

The nrp has the child every other weekend and during the week except cant gave him over night during the week due to shifts. This was the basis if the thread originally as the pwc is trying to convince the child that he doesn't want to stay overnight on weekends now...thus reducing the total amount of overnight stays which impacts on the CSA payment. The pwc sees the child significantly more than the nrp. What you're trying to imply is that the pwc wants to see the child more... If she does then all she had to do is stop palming the child off the relatives when she is supposed to have him and reduce the amount of out if school activities so that the child is not complaining of being too tired when he goes to school the next day!

If she really wasn't bothered about him she'd have him in bed by 7 so she wouldn't have the cost of all those clubs and she wouldn't have to organise people running the child around.

The NRP is seeing him during the week and presumably by the time the PWC sees him at 8pm he's going to bed so I'm not sure when the PWC sees him during the week. Some children like lots of clubs, I know mine do, they do they do 7 activities each. I like them to do it because it's better than being stuck in front of a TV. Yes some do too many but that's a decision to be made between parent and child.

The more you say the facts the more it sounds as if the NRPs gripe is the CM will go up because he isn't having the child overnight as often. I hope it's just coming across badly in the written word.