School fine withdrawn!

stir_crazy

fluffnutter wrote: »

It's not about whether or not they pay the fine. Perhaps the OP's ex will give him £60. That's not relevant. What I'm arguing is that the parents are still responsible regardless of who the child is currently with.

The important thing is that the parent is fined, not the grandparents. They're deemed legally responsible. So are you saying that a child's father is responsible for the child when the child is with its grandparents but isn't responsible when the child is with its mother?

That's the crux of my argument and no doubt it's one that could be debated either way. I personally believe, as a parent with parental responsibility, that that duty is ever present. It doesn't stop because your child pops to the shops, or stays with his grandparents, or is currently with your ex. I suspect that's the way the law sees it too which is why they've decided to fine both parents if a child misses school. Some people may argue for a different definition of parental responsibility. Which is great, and the whole point of debate really.

No, I'm not saying that at all. If the OP had stated that he knew the mother was taking the child out of school but still had a moan that he got fined then I would agree that he should pay it. I think now that the mother should cover the cost of the whole fine since she didnt let him know that she was taking the child out of school.

supersaver2

fluffnutter wrote: »

You ask what's going on in your child's life. You keep asking. You make sure you're directly and regularly involved. Of course things are difficult but why aren't you living that close? Did you make the decision to move away from your child? Why? Could you not have stayed closer? Perhaps you left for work? Was that the only job you could have possibly taken? Perhaps you left because of a new relationship? Well, you've prioritised that over your child so perhaps you've got no right to then complain it's not easy to know what's going on in your child's life.

You have choices. When you have children, every decision you make should consider them. It's not easy, I'm not saying that. But people are quick to say 'I can't, I'm not around' when if you examine why they're not around it becomes pretty clear that's because they've chosen to be not around. You can't have it both ways. If you're not as involved as you'd like to be, then you need to look at the effort you've made.

No doubt this will be countered with 'but she took my kids away!'. So why didn't you go to court and argue that this wasn't in the child's interests? Did you just stand by and watch her move to the other end of the country or did you fight for better access?

If you don't know what's going on in your child's life, you need to look at your own behaviour first before deciding you're hard done by.

Could you really argue and stop the other parent from moving your children across country, I understand to another country but I've never heard a case where a parent has been told they can't move around the country.

You do come across as extremely naive.

Seems simple to me that the parent who has care on the day of absence should be the parent that is fined. Also even if the PWC said I'm taking our child out of school for a week and going to Butlins, what can the NRP really do about it?

Guest101

supersaver2 wrote: »

Could you really argue and stop the other parent from moving your children across country, I understand to another country but I've never heard a case where a parent has been told they can't move around the country.

You do come across as extremely naive.

Seems simple to me that the parent who has care on the day of absence should be the parent that is fined. Also even if the PWC said I'm taking our child out of school for a week and going to Butlins, what can the NRP really do about it?

In this case the NRP should report to the school, explaining it's being done without consent.

But the OP didn't know about it.

missprice

stir_crazy wrote: »

No, I'm not saying that at all. If the OP had stated that he knew the mother was taking the child out of school but still had a moan that he got fined then I would agree that he should pay it. I think now that the mother should cover the cost of the whole fine since she didnt let him know that she was taking the child out of school.

Even if she called him and told him she was taking child out of school for a day or a month, what is it he can do?

FN can say oh well he should travel to wherever, and take the child to school. All well and good if your job allows random time off, you don't live 50 miles away and you can be certain that the mother will allow you into the house in time to stop her going out for the day with child. And that she calls you either the night before or at 6 am.

And as for people moving around the country, that's just life. If I had parents and had wanted the help they may have afforded me when my marriage broke down, I would have moved closer to them. <<<< just one reason to move hundreds of miles away from absent parent.

And this naive thing about fighting for better access, have seen time after time that PWC says yes OK to the court, then denies access, so NRP goes back to court. PWC says yeah course absent parent can see kid, then denies access. Etc etc

Better_Days

Marisco wrote: »

Neither did I LE, neither did I. Until I came across oh's ex. And TBH if someone had told me prior to this, that there were people like this around, I don't think I would have believed that anyone could act this way either!! Looking back (this is 20 odd years ago now) it's still seems unbelievable.

Last year my brother and SIL went through hell with her ex regarding contact. It cost them over £10k in legal fees (ex got his paid as he is unemployed) and put enormous emotional and financial stress on the family.

Ex was completely unreasonable. But he used the child as a weapon to try and hurt my SIL emotionally and financially. He had no interest whatsoever in what the child wanted. No amount of reasonableness, involvement of CAFCASS, Social Services, the courts, attempts at communication, love for the child would change ex's behaviour.

In the end after over a year of assessments, court hearings etc ex said 'If I can't get what I want I don't want to see the child at all'. Judge replied (thank goodness) - 'Be my guest'. As LE said it is hell on earth to go through this.

The reality of a child being involved doesn't magically make a parent want to put that child's needs first. Some parents are reasonable, yes, and work things out with their ex so that all benefit, but some are bitter, some have a tenuous grip on reality, some have mental health issues, some have personality disorders. It seems to me that for some parents the misuse of power to punish their ex over rides any concern over the needs of their child. At the end of the day one person cannot change the behaviour of another however much we may wish things were otherwise.

Marisco

There's no need for that mind. Everyone is entitled to air their opinions on here, whether you agree with them or not. So far the discussion has been amicable, lets try and keep it like that

Marisco

Better_Days wrote: »

Last year my brother and SIL went through hell with her ex regarding contact. It cost them over £10k in legal fees (ex got his paid as he is unemployed) and put enormous emotional and financial stress on the family.

Ex was completely unreasonable. But he used the child as a weapon to try and hurt my SIL emotionally and financially. He had no interest whatsoever in what the child wanted. No amount of reasonableness, involvement of CAFCASS, Social Services, the courts, attempts at communication, love for the child would change ex's behaviour.

In the end after over a year of assessments, court hearings etc ex said 'If I can't get what I want I don't want to see the child at all'. Judge replied (thank goodness) - 'Be my guest'. As LE said it is hell on earth to go through this.

The reality of a child being involved doesn't magically make a parent want to put that child's needs first. Some parents are reasonable, yes, and work things out with their ex so that all benefit, but some are bitter, some have a tenuous grip on reality, some have mental health issues, some have personality disorders. It seems to me that for some parents the misuse of power to punish their ex over rides any concern over the needs of their child. At the end of the day one person cannot change the behaviour of another however much we may wish things were otherwise.

I think oh's ex had all three! TBH she's not that much better now, only she hasn't got the kids to hold over oh any more, so can now be totally ignored.

Homeownertobe

Marisco wrote: »

How is he responsible?

Herein lies the problem. The OP is responsible for his child's education, even in these times of 'rights not responsibilities'.

tight_scotsman

Marisco wrote: »

There's no need for that mind. Everyone is entitled to air their opinions on here, whether you agree with them or not. So far the discussion has been amicable, lets try and keep it like that

Yes exactly and thats my opinion.
I respect fluffynutters opinion dont mean to say i agree with it.

She still seems to be living on another planet though .

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

I'm unable to understand exactly how one parent is able to dictate to another what they do - if, for example, my ex decided to go on holiday and didnt tell me, I'd have no idea it happened in the first place. I don't stalk his girlfriend's Facebook page, I don't bug his phone or sit outside his flat of an evening, waiting to see what time/whether he comes in or not.

If I did find out he was leaving on holiday in an hour, what exactly could I do about it? Try phoning (assuming he would answer) and order him to stay at home? Catch three buses to get the five miles to his flat and tell him, all six foot five of barely contained rage, hatred, contempt and aggression, to go to his bedroom?

What would be my means of making sure he doesn't do it again? 'If you go on holiday without my permission, I'll be vewy, vewy cwoss with you'?

Should a PWC be able to say 'as you didn't ask permission from me, even though the law says you don't have to get my ok to take your own child anywhere) I'm going to punish you by withholding contact for seven weeks to make sure you learn your lesson'? Would it be appropriate to report them to the police for coming back from holiday a day late but still within the period of contact?


It would be horrendous if one person could dictate whether Another left the house - it's simply wrong and contradictory to suggest that it should be able to happen in relation to holidays.