Divorced/Separated Parents, access.

[Kthebean]

Sorry but if you're a mum and your kids dad lives near you, you owe it to your child to stay in that area. No matter how much better your income/lifestyle is going to be elsewhere, you dont have the same 'right' to move as everyone else. You have a responsibility to your child and their father to do what you can to maintain contact. Unless the father is some kind of unfit parent. After your child is 18, do what you like.

 

I have a lot of sympathy with non resident parents in these cases.

[Cyclone]

I think you mean you shouldn't have the same 'right'.

 

As it stands you most definitely do have the same right. Why the quotes by the way?

 

I disagree for the reasons already stated though, there are many good reasons to move, a better income/lifestyle is probably of more benefit to the child than contact with an absent parent, and there are still better reasons, such as an established support network.

 

There's a poster on SF who moved south with her husband, had a child, divorced, found herself in a city she didn't know, hundreds of miles from her family and friends.

You're saying that she should have stayed there instead of moving back to her home town where she is supported by her parents and friends... How would it be in the best interests of anyone except the father (in that example) that she stay near him.

[scoop]

Sorry but if you're a mum and your kids dad lives near you, you owe it to your child to stay in that area. No matter how much better your income/lifestyle is going to be elsewhere, you dont have the same 'right' to move as everyone else. You have a responsibility to your child and their father to do what you can to maintain contact. Unless the father is some kind of unfit parent. After your child is 18, do what you like.

 

I have a lot of sympathy with non resident parents in these cases.

 

Sorry but you're wrong.

 

Sometimes best thing for a parent and their child and any other mambers of the family (where there are step parents and step siblings involved) may not be the best thing for the non resident parent, and in that case then the family make the best of a bad situation.

 

Dragon seems to be suggesting that in this circumstance the resident parent should always be the person to sacrifice their freedom.

 

Sad for many, many non resident parents, but you can't please all of the people all of the time.

[tezza86]

I think you mean you shouldn't have the same 'right'.

 

As it stands you most definitely do have the same right. Why the quotes by the way?

 

I disagree for the reasons already stated though, there are many good reasons to move, a better income/lifestyle is probably of more benefit to the child than contact with an absent parent, and there are still better reasons, such as an established support network.

 

There's a poster on SF who moved south with her husband, had a child, divorced, found herself in a city she didn't know, hundreds of miles from her family and friends.

You're saying that she should have stayed there instead of moving back to her home town where she is supported by her parents and friends... How would it be in the best interests of anyone except the father (in that example) that she stay near him.

 

 

I agree that in that situation then why shouldnt the mother move to be nearer a support network as if she isn't happy then surely the child won't be happy either, However i live in sheffield my little girls dad lives in another city (as far as im aware hes had no contact with our daughter since she was 3 months old shes now 16months old) if he had contact with our daughter then even if i was to move away which unless i was put in a situation like that i can't say what i would or wouldn't do,wherever we lived he would always have it made easy for him to see her i would by no means make it difficult for him to see her even if it meant me getting her to him i would do it as my childs welfare and happiness is of the utmost importance to me as it is he isn't bothered about her so if i wanted to i wouldnt think twice about moving if i had the chance she has no relationship whatsoever with him so it wouldnt be hurting her.

[DragonofAna]

How is it reasonable for the resident parent to be expected to live near to the non resident parent?

 

What if the resident parent has children with different parents who live in different places? I have an aquaintence who has children who's fathers live in sheffield and australia respectivly. Where do you think she should live?

 

Now you are just being plain silly.

 

Dragon seems to be suggesting that in this circumstance the resident parent should always be the person to sacrifice their freedom.

 

Amazing what DoA can say without moving his lips.

 

Sometimes best thing for a parent and their child and any other mambers of the family

 

And moving the child(ren) away from ALL members of his/her family?

 

But of course - how selfish of me - we must accept that anything the mother does is right. Hades! What a fool I am.

 

And what you do not seem to realise is that children are moved away not only from fathers, but from siblings, aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents and so on. But as long as the mother gets a job that's all that matters really isn't it.

[scoop]

Now you are just being plain silly.

 

 

 

 

Why is it silly? Someone I know has two children.

 

One of her children has a Dad who lives in Sheffield. The other Child has a Dad who lives in Australia. Where do you think that family should live?

[DragonofAna]

Why is it silly? Someone I know has two children.

 

One of her children has a Dad who lives in Sheffield. The other Child has a Dad who lives in Sheffield. Where do you think that family should live?

 

Er - Sheffield perhaps.

[scoop]

 

And moving the child(ren) away from ALL members of his/her family?

 

But of course - how selfish of me - we must accept that anything the mother does is right. Hades! What a fool I am.

 

And what you do not seem to realise is that children are moved away not only from fathers, but from siblings, aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents and so on. But as long as the mother gets a job that's all that matters really isn't it.

 

Moving a child away may not mean moving them away from all members of the family, it may even mean moving them closer to all members of the extended family. It's not always about work, it might be about a million other things. But in your opinion none of these circumstances should be taken into account, just the interests of the Dad, who in the majority of cases has probably got himself to blame for the situation he finds himself in.

[scoop]

Er - Sheffield perhaps.

 

Of course I mis typed, as well you know.

 

In the case where a family has one dad in sheffield and another in australia, where should that family live?

[DragonofAna]

Of course I mis typed, as well you know.

 

In the case where a family has one dad in sheffield and another in australia, where should that family live?

 

That's a tough one - which is why I think each case should be treated on an individual basis rather than saying all should have one rule to go by.

Did the dad move over to Australia? If this was the case then the father is moving an unreasonable distance for contact.

Did the woman take the Sheffield dad's child to Australia without his consent - I think that's illegal without it going through court.

 

I suppose it would help to have more information concerning the case.

 

And I love how you ignore all the other comments I made and stick to this one. Hey ho! Each to their own. We will probably never agree on this so why continue the chirade of discussing it with the intent of seeing the others point of view?