brokenfather says:

Giving your children back to you!

Since when were you the sole owner of them?

You should think yourself lucky that the resident parent considers your costs in maintaining contact with your children is adequate contribution towards their financial wellbeing, especially as you imposed those costs upon yourself when you moves away. Most resident parents dont, even if they are the one that moves away.

Anyway, liability for Child Maintenance payments via the CSA cannot be backdated beyond the date they first make contact with you. So his threat are worthless.

Lee Hughes says:

They ain't YOUR children!!!!! I'm not going to bother commenting further….

Juliet-Amber Jolliffe says:

Lee is right – they are both of your children and I would suggest getting legal advice in an attempt to draw up a contact order. If the children are settled and have been living with their father for x amount of time with your consent – then you are in the same position that most fathers find themselves in and I suspect a court will keep things as they are and you will be the non resident parent. You should be pleased that he is on good money – this means he is able to give his children a good life. You need to make sure you push for regular contact. Good luck.

Bish Shaha says:

hi you should go and visit the families need fathers website, they have regular meetings prob in your area, where they can give you advice and even help represent you in court for free.. dont worry about being female.. The real fight is to resolve the injustice in family law and the csa.. it is not a gender war !

Peter Anderson says:

Thx Lee. Will check.

Amanda Halford says:

Brokenfather – it was our original agreement that he would be giving my children back to me. I never claimed I was the sole owner, nor do I believe that children actually have owners, It can’t be denied though that I they are actually MY children just the same as they are HIS children. In future, when somebody posts asking for advice, you should probably bear in mind that this is a worried and already very upset person before you go on your character assassination. You are not accquainted with my situation, I moved away because he is in the forces, am I to be expected to move house to be near him every time he moves? I had to go where I had somewhere to live. I would happily take the children and ‘their financial wellbeing’ on. If it’s okay with you I’ll continue to think myself unlucky and find a constructive means by which to change it.

Graeme – I am being honest, no I wouldn’t do any of those things. I had every opportunity to nail him to the wall during our split and I didn’t take those opportunities because we were supposedly keeping it amicable. I truly wish I had now. Thanks for your kind intentions and I appreciate your help, I haven’t contacted the CSA but there’s no guarantee that he won’t, after all, he holds all the cards.

Unfortunately I’ve found the only responses I’ve had from this website and my request for advice to be full of accusations that I would do the same, that I’ve brought it on myself and bitterness. I think I might get a loan and take my concerns somewhere more objective where hurt fathers don’t look at mothers (who are, incidentally, just as hurt) as the enemy.

I hope that both of your situations also improve. I’m taking the view that my children will one day be adults and all of this pain will be history.

Lisa Hunter says:

that's right Lee go to the original posting and the writer does get emailed should any of us wish to comment!

haq says:

Brokenfather your name says it all. You are so filled up with bitterness that you fail to see that Amanda has posted here in the hope that she will get some relief because she has a shared experience -she has suffered what you all have suffered as NRP -seperation from your children. And instead of offering her some words of comfort all you can do is gloat and judge her. If she had no sense of the father having an involvement in the children’s life she would have hardly trusted leaving them behind with him as she did. At least Graeme had some advice to give. We need to avoid falling into the trap of mothers vs fathers.

Infact while men have been complaing its only them that are hard done by , Amanda’s living proof of the opposite. Men too , lie deceive manipulate the system to gain custody of the child and all the perks that go with the ‘resident’ parent status.Its a total myth that only women get residence because the fact is that the Judges are just plain crazy, arbitrary and whimsical -they’re only concerned with their own reputations and intoxicated with their own power.One day they’ll favour the mother and the next the father -from peoples own stories- thats how they operate , its a game-eeny , meeny miny mo.And they like to be unpredictable – it gives them a reason for living and creating the false impression that they are not biased.
It not simply the case that the majority of mothers get residence and its discrimantory towards men – Judges and law courts are hardly expert centres at who misbehaved, who lied and cheated and who was really to blame.When you have just one person just another ordinary falliable human i.e a Judge who cannot in practical terms be challenged -rather than a panel of relevant people in a constructive problem solving exercise; When there is only assumption,whims & prejudice rather than proper professional investigation ;When there is no norm , no reference point , no moral framework as to what is the right model for the human child and family life then ofcourse you are going to get miscarriages of justice and inhuman outcomes.
Far too often men forget that for centuries and centuries ,children by law were considered the property of the fathers(so were wives) and mothers had no say at all .Consider that for a moment .Its only in the late 19th century after the womens movement that they were even considered as human beings with any rights. It only now when the womens lib movement has lost its purpose and direction so that in their desire to have the same rights and equality as men, they’ve given up what supposedly was unique to them- being the primary carer of the child.
Has it occurred to anyone that this division of the’ resident parent ‘and ‘non-resident parent ‘has been created by the legal system and goverment without any consultation with the public?
Its so designed so that its convenient for the authorities to decide who has the all the rights and some of the responsibilities and who has none of the rights and some of the responsibilities. Which means that this has one parent pitted against the other and creates a state of perpetual tussle and more money going into the pockets of the legal fraternity as it fosters conflict. Its also intended to replace the terms ‘Mother and ‘Father’ because in this modern society of ours where the family is a dinosaur they have lost any meaning or respect. When the system actively encourages break up rather than make up then what do you expect? The courts are just a breeding ground for broken families . The parents are expected to be put to work , the state institutions will bring them up i.e. the nurseries , schools etc so that those children will grow up to serve the state . The state and some mothers and fathers included do not want mothers to stay at home to bring up children because that is seen as ‘unproductive’. Institutions can do the job that mothers once did and so where once the family was an institution itself which provided values and moral guidance for the growing child- now you have teachers in schools doing the parenting and assuming a greater authority on ‘whats best for the child’.

If you were to think about the concept of the Mother and the Father rationally for a moment and why Nature gave women wombs and equipped them for child bearing and rearing and men not , cannot you not see how a very unnatural state of affairs has arisen? And how this function is linked to the rights and responsibilities of each?
There has to be a reason why humans are dual sex society and not a unisex one ! Men and women are different for a reason. So how can we have sex ‘neutral’ laws when it comes to family law? How can that possibly work for us? In order for a dual sex human society to function successfully and happily(dare I say it?) we need to work WITH the unique qualities that nature has given us and not AGAINST them .
Mothers are the primary carers of children not only because they children grow and develop in their wombs but because they are the first contact the child has with outside world when it is delivered .This is the first human to human bond that is created through which that child makes sense of the world. SO why are these’ liberated’ women so misguided and ignorant and why do they reject this very fundamental truth and want to be like men??
Why can’t they respect this unique and special quality instead of treating it as a burden and a nuisance? It makes me wonder that its these type of women that have negatively influenced our laws that have backfired and led to the detriment for the well being of women and children.
Surely nature determined an arrangement was also in the best interests of the child as well? Studies have shown that the mother- child bond is crucial to that childs sense of security and it lasts well into adolesence and its through that that it learns to cope with the stress. AND this is no way diminishes or replaces the role of the father , the father protects, supports and sustains the family unit while the mother nurtures the child, each using their natural unique biological, physiological & emotional qualities . These roles and duties are not intended to be one superior or inferior to the other but clearly to be complimentary .This natural division of labour in the exhausting enterprise of raising a child and growing a family also means that one party does not become so overburdened , that they are not able to live a balanced life.
But if you have a situation where one party feels undervalued or unappreciated and one party is trying to take advangage of their position over the other for financial gain or status then you get to where we are today. BOTH the role of mothers needs to be respected and fathers too; there are common features and unique features and they need to be understood if we want what is best for our children. And this does not mean that mothers or fathers cannot achieve their potential in other areas of life but it takes mutual respect and a certain amount of wisdom. What is the greater good?
When there is relationship breakdown for whatever reason , and their are children involved , every attempt should be made to resolve it in an amicable , civilised way and the law itself should provide for an environment and a means for that to happen.There should not be an immediate recourse to the battlefield i.e the court. Parents need to be reminded that they are setting an example for the child at all stages. If it proves impossible then the natural roles of the parents should not be compromised unless there is a real risk to the well being child and criminal behaviour has occurred.
Does any of that make sense? It said speak your mind so that’s just what I did. No offence intended.
As far as the issue of the CSA is concerned, it ‘s not fit for purpose, we need to get rid of it. Period.

Brokenfather says:

haq, you are inciting child abduction which is against the law.

There is nothing in Amandas post to suggest that her children are being alienated against her, or will be in the future. In fact, she appears to see them every other week which is the bog standard contact for many non resident parent.

The father is the sole resident parent and has been for almost 2 years. He is unwilling to relinquish that so Amanda is just going to have to live with that fact as no Court will change it now.