Breakup envolving a child.

fluffnutter

Williamf1989 wrote: »

I had no idea the system was this unfair towards fathers and it is a great injustice.

If you spend your life thinking this it won't help you or your child.

Guest101

Williamf1989 wrote: »

Tomorrow im "allowed" to see her at her aunts because my partner is going out.

What can they do if i turn up and say ok, Im taking her for the day, and ill be back at 7oclock? Can i get in trouble? Can i be arrested for kidnap or whatever?

No you cannot kidnap your own child, unless there is a court order, that during the prescribed time she is to be in the custody of another person.

You will want a solicitor on speed dial, because yes the police will come to question you, but they have absolutely no right to take your child from you. The police can lie and tell you they do.

But no, you should not do this. You will make the situation worse for when it does get to court.

Guest101

Williamf1989 wrote: »

Thanks for all your response guys.

I have recieved some legal advice.. he pretty much said that because i agreed to leave the home because she wanted me to that im now a nrp and have pretty much no rights.


Basically he told me i just have to visit her whenever i can, and hope access improves from supervised contact.

I had no idea the system was this unfair towards fathers and it is a great injustice.

Hopefully my partner will come around and realise she is being ott as there is no good reason to stop me seeing my child alone.

Whoever gave you that advice (and i would question who it was??!!) is wrong. You have rights. You left the home voluntarily, as a short term measure, as you had a row. Even if they want to play the card that you decided to leave the home permanetly, which would be hard to prove.

That still in no way impacts on your rights (and obligations) as a father!

You and your ex have EXACTLY THE SAME rights currently. That may change, but at this precise moment you are both equal.

So you need to prove to the court that you are a sensible, level headed chap. That means no funny business and no messing about.

What it also means is going to get PROPER advice, petitioning the court to give you reasonable access or custody.

Be prepared that your ex may, and probably will, make up stories, which although cannot be proved, will be taken as 'evidence'. Behave like that now and it'll look even worse.

Instead - Pay CSA, See your daughter, behave yourself.

thorsoak

Williamf1989 wrote: »

Thanks for all your response guys.

I have recieved some legal advice.. he pretty much said that because i agreed to leave the home because she wanted me to that im now a nrp and have pretty much no rights.


Basically he told me i just have to visit her whenever i can, and hope access improves from supervised contact.

I had no idea the system was this unfair towards fathers and it is a great injustice.

Hopefully my partner will come around and realise she is being ott as there is no good reason to stop me seeing my child alone.

However if your name is on the birth certificate, you will have parental responsibility. I assume that you are already paying maintenance towards your child?

This website may be of some help to you :- https://www.gov.uk/parental-rights-responsibilities/who-has-parental-responsibility

Gigglepig

William, i see from your other thread that you have been unemployed for a while. In light of this, were you the main carer for the child, who looked after the child more than your partner? If so then you should be in a good position to get lots of contact. If you were a good dad it will pay out.

If however the mum was usually the person to feed, look after, bath, take care of clothes, organise medical appointments... Well then why should "the system" hand this over to you just because you split up...

fluffnutter

Couldn't agree more, Gigglepig. I understand why fathers feel angry and sad that they can't be with their children but I think that's no reason to believe that the system is unjust. If a mother has been the main carer of the child and dad's gone out to work, then why would it benefit the child to decide that dad, rather than mum, should take over that role? The system is as it is simply because, in the majority of cases, this is what works best. That's not 'unjust', that's practical. Men can't have it both ways. They can't enjoy the benefits of a woman who gives up her career, who stays at home to provide childcare for their child, who no doubt tries to create a loving and warm home for the whole family, who takes care of all those dull chores and enables the man to concentrate on his job knowing that his child is well cared for and then moan if that woman continues to look after the child if they split up.

That doesn't mean that access should be denied. If you have an ex who's preventing access to your child then it's either because you're a wanker, she's a wanker, or you're both wankers. In which case, how about stop being wankers and put your child first.

Williamf1989

When i was employed, my partner obviously looked after her more but sorry, we share the responsibility, we both bath her, we both feed her, we both adore and cherish her. The only department she has me beat in was the breastfeeding.

Williamf1989

fluffnutter wrote: »

Couldn't agree more, Gigglepig. I understand why fathers feel angry and sad that they can't be with their children but I think that's no reason to believe that the system is unjust. If a mother has been the main carer of the child and dad's gone out to work, then why would it benefit the child to decide that dad, rather than mum, should take over that role? The system is as it is simply because, in the majority of cases, this is what works best. That's not 'unjust', that's practical. Men can't have it both ways. They can't enjoy the benefits of a woman who gives up her career, who stays at home to provide childcare for their child, who no doubt tries to create a loving and warm home for the whole family, who takes care of all those dull chores and enables the man to concentrate on his job knowing that his child is well cared for and then moan if that woman continues to look after the child if they split up.

That doesn't mean that access should be denied. If you have an ex who's preventing access to your child then it's either because you're a wanker, she's a wanker, or you're both wankers. In which case, how about stop being wankers and put your child first.

And in no way shape or form have i wrote anywhere that i want to take over the main role... She is a wonderful and loving mother, who in there right mind would want to take there child away from that? All im saying is the restricted access, under supervision is ridiculous. I would understand if i was a violent person, or if i took drugs, or i was a big drinker, but im not. There is no justification to it.


As for the legal advice, i spoke to this guy, http://www.cyriax.co.uk/advice.htm

He seemed to know what he is talking about.
Have a read through the first page and you shall see what i mean by losing most rights.

thorsoak

So are you paying any maintenance? Yes or no?

Williamf1989

thorsoak wrote: »

So are you paying any maintenance? Yes or no?

You call it maintenance, its not been a week since the split. But i guess yes, i pay for all babies nappies, wipes, breakfast, clothes if she needs them, also gas and electric and the rent. her mum also chips in with the little money she gets,