Ex sent to prison and wants his wife to continue with our contact order!

Morglin

GeorgiaXo wrote: »

OMFG!!!!!! What were the chances that I found this! I had to make an account and write a post..

I am in fact the wife of Elizabeth's ex and fathers son, I'm absolutely astonished that i have found this online! Of course liz is well within her rights to seek advice but perhaps you should have contacted me and had an adult discussion about this instead of once again bouncing my name off every wall possible!!

I'm lost for words! But I'm not surprised! How you have even written a post to say you don't want my husband in his sons life ever again is shocking! Everybody makes mistakes and deserves a second chance.

Right now Im absolutely greatfull for the British justice and courts system because no matter how bitter you are, it will not be your final word that has a say in wether T sees his son again. I'm in so much shock right now!

Drug dealing is not a 'mistake' - it is a conscious decision to peddle stuff that can kill kids and adults.:mad:

Not everyone would want their small child exposed to the type of people that supply, deal and take drugs - I certainly wouldn't.

And, of course, virtually every convicted dealer says that they were 'forced' to do it......:whistle:

But, even without the drugs and prison scenario, you really need to step back - their child is not your business, and they need to sort it out between the pair of them (and I say this as a step mum and step granny!)

Leave it be, and let your husband sort it out, when he is released from prison, and at the same time, he can show that he will have nothing further to do with drugs.

Lin

duchy

Alchemilla wrote: »

I am astonished that this is the first poster to comment on the childs safety.
An ex colleague whose husband was dealing got her house torched with her three year old in it...

I would doubt your son's safety at this address, especially since intimidation has already been mentioned.

Not read all the posts then I assume

I would be really concerned for the safety of BOTH children -and the fact the second wife appears to have no concerns about this is somewhat confusing-either she knows there are good reasons why it won't happen again (yet not shared that reassurance with the OP) or perhaps this "intimidation" wasn't quite what it seemed. Or maybe she is just burying her head in the sand and ignoring the risks?
As I said earlier in the thread over my dead body would I allow my son to stay anywhere there was a risk from the sort of people the husband is supposed to be a victim of...or equally if there was any suggestion he was involved with the drug trade in any form. These women know this man and know if he is so "easy going" as to be a pushover or easily influenced or intimidated.

I'm not so sure the OP is looking for excuses to break contact or if she is motivated solely by these kind of concerns but either way it appears the husband has made no acknowledgement of his responsibility to his son. Most responsible parents won't do things that may lead to them losing their kids (or their access) and have the backbone to say No to stuff that puts them at risk for the sake of their children. The fact his wife was already pregnant or he got her pregnant knowing he might be jailed doesn't exactly shout responsibility either. What kind of man chooses to leave his wife and unborn schild unprotected when they live in an environment of intimidation ?

I do think if the wife can acknowledge there are legitimate concerns rather than claim it's all about her and if the OP for the sake of her son can look for reassurance rather than assume the worst -even if it is by email to start with perhaps the best thing to come from this man getting locked up is it gave these women a chance to communicate one to one without any feelings real or imagined about the father getting in the way and making it about the child (and future child) not the adults.

Alchemilla

duchy wrote: »

Not read all the posts

What? Did I miss something?

duchy

I posted about safety concerns way back - guess you missed it

The more I think about it the more worries me that wife 2 made no mention of why the situation couldn't happen again. If I was pregnant it'd be my number one concern I think.

I had a sort of similar situation -my then husband hadn't seen his Dad since he was 7 -entirely Dad's choice -one day he didn't turn up for access and never came again with no explanation. He knew my husband (his only child) had got married and he'd had a grandchild but still nothing not even a card. when our son was six we got a phone call out of the blue. He'd been shot late at night in a reasonably nice part of London and was in hospital and wanted to see my husband.
He went to see him and came back saying his Dad claimed he had no idea why he was shot -that some man had come up to him and shot him at point blank range and then walked off. He had a police guard on his hospital room. He wanted my then husband to bring our son to see him. I refused point blank.
I'm a Londoner by birth and I know darn well that kind of shooting doesn't happen in that sort of area without cause and I was not prepared to put our son into that kind of situation. (He did meet him later once everything had calmed down ).
My husband didn't like it -and said "But it's my Dad" but I pointed out we really didn't know why it had happened and without knowing that we couldn't realistically assess the risk to our son and it wasn't a risk worth taking. Had his Dad been a bit more honest about why it happened (my own feeling is as he's a bit gobby he'd upset the wrong type of person and it was a lesson in respect but we never found out-it could have been something else like an unpaid loan shark debt he's a bit shady ) we could have made a balanced decision -but with him refusing to tell us -it had to be a no for the sake of my son's safety. He comes first.

So I realise I'm bringing my own experience to the table but regardless of whether the OP has other agendas going on I do think safety of the child is a legitimate concern and I wouldn't be sending my son off to the father's home with the situation as presented.

FatVonD

FBaby wrote: »

The way I see it, if it matters a lot to HER (and not your ex) that she keeps in touch with your son, I would expect HER to make contact with you and discuss how to arrange it and be prepared to do quite some travelling if not all (yes even pregnant, at least to start with). In your shoes, that would show to me that she is committed to a relationship with your son and would find this reassuring.

This ^

I wouldn't be objecting to the step mum seeing your son, she's been around for most of his life, but I wouldn't expect him to be going for whole weekends. Maybe Georgia and the paternal grandparents can visit your town and take him out for the day instead.

FatVonD

duchy wrote: »

I do think as Dad seems to think he'll only be serving six months agreeing to concoct a story that he's working away and keeping the relationship going with calls and letters might be a better way.

This is what I was told when my uncle went to prison when I was a child, I was an adult before I finally worked it out and we used to visit once a month! (Though my dad would take me blackberry picking while my mum went in.)

msb5262

Is it just me who thinks this thread is made up from start to finish, with a puppet being brought in to liven things up when people were losing interest?

duchy

I'm not sure it really matters as it has brought up some interesting points (although my feeling is the OP was genuine)

shoe*diva79

My thoughts are that I would stop contact - which in real terms the father has already done as the son cannot stay every other weekend in prison. The contact order is between father and son and as harsh as it sounds, the step mother has no rights.

Given the nature of the crime committed I would be concerned over the safety of the son with possible repercussions from other criminals attacking the fathers home etc.

There is no reason that the mum cannot take this case back to court and have the order changed to reflect the new circumstances, which could mean supervised contact upon the fathers release.

duchy

I do think it isn't so much a case of stopping contact but modifying it to fit the change in circumstances.

If the father was unable to travel to see his son due to hospitialization it would be a very different matter but this father is unable to travel as a consequence of the choices he made (and I don't buy he had no choice-we all have choices and sometimes make bad ones) but this demanding that everyone changes things to facilitate the new circumstances like it is an entitlement is a bit odd. Everything we do has consequences one way or another. He chose to do something knowing it could lead to imprisonment but did it anyway and apparently the thought it might affect his access arrangements wasn't a consideration or at least not enough of one for him to refuse. Time to own his own decisions maybe ?

Contact can be maintained without taking the child to a prison or telling him his Dad is locked up for doing something bad. He isn't old enough to understand that good people sometimes make mistakes and may decide his Dad is a "bad man" as he got sent to prison. Four year olds don't do shades of grey after all. Adding visits to Dad's home with no Dad in it would probably confuse him further.

All three adults need to stop worrying about "rights" and start talking about what is best for the boy long and short term.