Son dumped on

marisco_2

moneysaymoneydo wrote: »

Mothers put their kids first, men themselves!

That may be your own personal experience but it certainly isn't representative of society as a whole. There are good and bad mums and dads. You only have to read the papers or listen to the news to educate yourself about that.

It is a strange statement to make full stop. Especially so on a thread where the mum of a child is doing anything but putting her sons needs and well being first, whilst the dad is supporting him as best he can on limited funds and fighting for access so he can be there and take an interest in his child.

neverdespairgirl

Valli wrote: »

Excellent post.

Legal Aid; when it was introduced, was intended to give those without the means to pay access to the legal sytem and remedy in Law.

And now those of us who cannot afford it do not have that access. As an example, there are threads a-plenty about those (highly paid) solicitors and barristers who can get lawbreakers (motoring offences spring to mind) off on technicalities. But boy do they charge.

There are fewer threads about those solicitors and barristers who spend a decent part of their working lives doing pro bono work. I'm doing a pro bono case this afternoon, and my OH is in a conference for a pro bono case as I type.

I agree, though, that the significant recent reductions in legal aid will have an adverse effect on the rule of law, and access to justice.

clearingout wrote: »

law students are exactly that...students. They're not qualified to give legal advice, let alone partake in pro bono work. Do I bang my head against a well now or later?!!! :rotfl:

Lots of universities, law schools and bar vocational course providers do indeed run pro bono clinics.

Valli

clearingout wrote: »

law students are exactly that...students. They're not qualified to give legal advice, let alone partake in pro bono work. Do I bang my head against a well now or later?!!! :rotfl:

As I said in the post where I suggested it, they are supervised by their tutors; of the universites I know that offer drop in/pro bono it's never first years, they are supervised and it gives them practice and those who use it advice.

When I was at Uni as a mature student the pro bono clinics offered by the Law School were actually advertised within the University in case any students wished to use them!

Much like going to a 'model' day at college or to a university for dental work, again by students.

Do you think they just roll out of Uni after 3/4 years as experts ready to be unleashed on the unsuspecting public without having gained any experience at all?

So instead of banging your head against the wall at my apparently idiotic comment perhaps you'd like to apologise as I have actually suggested to the OP a route by which her son may be able to get the legal advice he needs but cannot afford which, in fact, was her whole reason for starting this thread in the first place?

clearingout

Valli wrote: »

As I said in the post where I suggested it, they are supervised by their tutors; of the universites I know that offer drop in/pro bono it's never first years, they are supervised and it gives them practice and those who use it advice.

When I was at Uni as a mature student the pro bono clinics offered by the Law School were actually advertised within the University in case any students wished to use them!

Much like going to a 'model' day at college or to a university for dental work, again by students.

Do you think they just roll out of Uni after 3/4 years as experts ready to be unleashed on the unsuspecting public without having gained any experience at all?

So instead of banging your head against the wall at my apparently idiotic comment perhaps you'd like to apologise as I have actually suggested to the OP a route by which her son may be able to get the legal advice he needs but cannot afford which, in fact, was her whole reason for starting this thread in the first place?

a supervised student giving supervised advice is NOT a qualified solicitor doing pro bono work. And yes, I do think that the university system unleashes students on the world without experience as that's pretty much par for the course in most professions. You learn the theory for a few years and out you go to practice and learn and specialize in a particular field once you've seen how it all works. With the exception of sandwich courses/years out in industry, that's pretty much how it works. Thousands of graduates released annually with qualifications coming out of their ears which need work experience to put the learning into context. Nothing wrong with that. But please don't pretend that I can go to my local university today and get qualified legal advice which would support me through to the courts if I needed it because I couldn't.

OP - may I recommend both Families Need Fathers and wikivorce as sources of generally reliable information that are free and supportive in these situations.

Valli

clearingout wrote: »

But please don't pretend that I can go to my local university today and get qualified legal advice which would support me through to the courts if I needed it because I couldn't.

There you go again twisting my words!

At no point did I say it was advice from qualified solicitors. It doesn't make it any less relevant or pertinent or accurate though. The university system is building experience into the degree course, so they're not unleashed onto the world completely inexperienced.

Do you have a problem with apologising?

RAS

A second or third year law student has a lot more knowledge than many CAB advisors and often more time to research the problem, and offering an clinic ensures that they understand the realities as well as the theory.

In the US law students fight death sentences (under supervision) - and win.

Voyager2002

lindsaygalaxy wrote: »

Ok, what your son needs to do is go to his local court house or google it and download an application form for a contact order. He doesn't need a solicitor. There is a fee to pay but only this fee. They will both be sent a date to attand a family court anf the judge will try get them to see mediators. Hopefully it will be sorted at this stage and what is decided can be put into a court order. They are not money focused, they are child focused. He will then get regular access that she can not stop or control. It is very unlikely they would stop his contact or make him have it at her place unless there are things about him you have not said. If it goes to the next stage then the court will decide (though this takes several hearings).
He can talk for himself, most people do now because of no legal fees.

Good advice. Note that if he receives income-based JSA (or certain other benefits) then he does not have to pay court fees.

neverdespairgirl

You don't leave university clutching your shiny new LLB certificate and start to practise law. You firstly go to law school or bar school for a year, and get your professional qualification, and then do a year's pupillage (to be a barrister) or a 2 year training contract (to be a solicitor) and that's a minimum. It's longer for most people, if they do a non-law degree they have to do a conversion course, and a lot of barristers at least also do a masters or relevant work experience before pupillage.

Edited to add - I did quite a lot of pro bono work on benefits cases when I was at Bar School through the Free Representation Unit. Including representing people at tribunals. OH did the same in employment law.

**professor~yaffle**

**professor~yaffle** wrote: »

Please don't go to Fathers For Justice, they are loonies (to put it frankly). Citizens Advice would be a far better bet, and they are free.

Sorry for quoting myself (!) but regarding F4J this recent item in the news just reminded me of this thread:
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/man-charged-constable-painting-attacked-103127672.html#s6IKNx8

Show what a responsible, grown-up person you are by attacking and defacing a masterpiece so that other people don't get to see it. Part of me hopes he gets a hefty sentence and has to foot the bill for the reparation, but on the other hand that'd only make him a martyr in the eyes of his fellow F4J imbeciles.

:mad:

Rottensocks

Wilma33 wrote: »

If she has a new man and baby and she wants to play happy families then it seems very odd that she insists your ex's contact is in her home. Are you sure you know the full picture?

Hmm, this seems entirely understandable to me: the ex has already said she wants baby's dad to vanish.... so what better way to wear him down than to constantly force him to see his kid while her boyfriend sits there watching it all.

I would be very concerned that the ex (who has probably always been unpleasant) is now being additionally controlled by a jealous, insecure boyfriend, who would like the existence of baby's dad obliterated for his own selfish little reasons.... the evidence suggests this is probably true if the boyfriend is enough of a gutter dweller to tell the toddler that his real dad doesn't care.

OP, you said that there had been some legal work in relation to visittation in the past? Did that result in any court orders, or written agreements?


PS: Why is everyone so fascinated by the £8 and who pays what? The main issue here is that this guy wants to see his kid, which is a good thing, so lets not cast nasturtiums !