maintenance and access for unmarried dad

hshortt

OP, this might sound rather silly, but could you write your EX a letter and just ask her for more time with your son. Writing down your thoughts and organising them in a letter will prevent snap reactions to comments that might come up in a face to face.

As for giving up the court route, why not also put that in writing to your EX and suggest that you are willing to stop the process?

Don't give up.

There are many in similar circumstances and there is an unmarried fathers association that would be able to listen, share experiences and offer ideas and suggestions for improving your situation.

Some links
http://www.usfi.ie/
http://www.treoir.ie/

Best of luck,
Howard

Deliverance

The Corinthian wrote:

Your original statement was based upon the basic assumption that woman are natural parents and men are not. This is horseshít.

The truth of the matter is some people are natural parents, some are not and many more start off not and learn to become so. Most mothers do not take to parenting naturally, they only appear to do so because, as primary custodian, they are forced to learn fast or sink.

Other than historical prejudice, the reason that we don't notice as many mothers who are not 'natural parents' is because they simply don't keep the child, leaving us with those who make a conscience decision to do so and thus more likely to be a 'natural parent'.

For similar reasons Society tends to become more forgiving of fathers who walk simply because it is the only other avenue open to them. Fathers don't have a 'right to choose', so we will tend to demonize them but turn a blind eye to their abdication. On the other hand, if a woman has an abortion or gives a child up for adoption, we are supposed to feel sympathy.

In short, a father who walks away from three children is no worse a parent than a mother who has three discrete abortions - you just never hear about the latter.

As a result of the two, you get a false and pretty offensive prejudice that there is a correlation between good parenting and a lack of Y-chromosomes - one which you mooted. To add injury onto insult, it is precisely this prejudice that the law is presently based upon and so perpetuating it simply reinforces the injustice that presently exists.

This is the view you expressed, and unless you want to do a complete U-turn on it, your subsequent apology is meaningless and my response stands.

My statement as it stands is being over used, understandably so. I have experience of all that you have mentioned, and I understand where you are coming from. I do not wish to give out personal details based on previous experience, but from what you have said I have been through the same thing.

Sorry about that, I know what it feels like. I base my opinion on real issues and folks that I have come across. I'm relitavely intelligent, and have seen lunatic Moms and Dads in different situations, far to complex to address here.

But the opinion, I formed was and is from real experience based on them, and more recently myself. It is only my opinion, and as such should be taken aboard as such, from given experience. I hope you can realise this and move past the ridiculousness of the argument which I feel is obsolete really.

nesf

Deliverance wrote:

Sorry about that, I know what it feels like. I base my opinion on real issues and folks that I have come across. I'm relitavely intelligent, and have seen lunatic Moms and Dads in different situations, far to complex to address here.

But the opinion, I formed was and is from real experience based on them, and more recently myself. It is only my opinion, and as such should be taken aboard as such, from given experience. I hope you can realise this and move past the ridiculousness of the argument which I feel is obsolete really.

As far as I can see, you implied the status quo was "natural" which was going to get under a lot of people's skins and are now calling the argument against the implication ridiculous and obsolete which is just reinforcing your original statement which got you into this argument in the first place.

That, and calling something your opinion doesn't make it immune to criticism nor counter argument. Just because I respect your right to your own opinion doesn't mean I won't rake it over the coals and poke holes in it and so on.

K-9

Deliverance wrote:

My statement as it stands is being over used, understandably so. I have experience of all that you have mentioned, and I understand where you are coming from. I do not wish to give out personal details based on previous experience, but from what you have said I have been through the same thing.

Sorry about that, I know what it feels like. I base my opinion on real issues and folks that I have come across. I'm relitavely intelligent, and have seen lunatic Moms and Dads in different situations, far to complex to address here.

But the opinion, I formed was and is from real experience based on them, and more recently myself. It is only my opinion, and as such should be taken aboard as such, from given experience. I hope you can realise this and move past the ridiculousness of the argument which I feel is obsolete really.

That's fine deliverance, that's fine. You made a statement IYHO. That statement is wrong.

My ex was the natural parent for the first 2 years when my wee boy was born. Then she wanted to do nursing, with the studying,placements and college time involved. Fair play to her, but then I was the "natural parent".

She wasn't back to 9/10 or was away in the morning at 8. I became the so called "natural parent" because somebody had to. I was/am in no way an "unnatural parent".

Many other men do this, so that the mother can train or advance her career, "in the interests of the child." Your statement is based on a 50/60's idea of men and women and you've apologised.

It's outdated and suggests the man involved in the G case was not "natural". It's 2007. Plenty of fathers are denied the right of being parents, never mind "natural parents". Me, being the "natural parent" for 3 years, is part of the reason me and him will always be close, despite interference from the ex, denial of access for months, etc.

The time being the "natural parent" was worth it, knowing that he knows now, and will remember, that I was always there for him.

I know you've apologised and this may seem a personal attack,but you've also suggested that fathers being main carers are in some way "unnatural" . May not have been your intention, but that's what your post implied! Part of the reason we got defensive!

Deliverance, you should post some details of your circumstances and why you came to this opinion. You will find that there are male and indeed female posters on here, who will understand and defend you and maybe suggest new opinions as well!

Kildrought

If you quote the full sentence it might help:

Doesn't help in the slightest - it is still a generalised statement with no evidence based research to back it up.

The Corinthian

Kildrought wrote:

Doesn't help in the slightest - it is still a generalised statement with no evidence based research to back it up.

So what? As far as generalized statements go it was so qualified as to render its generalization meaningless.

As for evidence and research? One hardly need either to point out that women do have the right to choose and men do not and so it's a valid contention which I have put forward. If you disagree, feel free to argue your case.

MMKC1

Hi guys, wow see the story on the Mr G case. Maybe this is contraversial to say but if a man did what she did he would be locked up straight away. How can some one get away with this. Perhaps things will begin to change although i would nt hold my breath given the Supreme courts past decisions on a similar situation. You will find the states mentality is as bad as an unwilling mother to be sensible about access.

there has been much said in previous mails regarding natural parents.... guys as we all know there is no guide book on how to be a good parent and what makes a good parent is being there for the child through all their formative and developing years amongst other things. But if the state wont get its act together and let me be a good parent how does this help my little fella.

Hopefully the g case will push the doors open in the conservative supreme court and ask these guys not to continue to have state assisted discrimanation against unmarried dads. Saw my son today and he seems to of accepted that he sees dad for a couple of hours every other week. Thats sad really as i have so much more to offer him but the state or his mother wont allow it.

K-9

In the G case the judges basically recognised the mother abducted the children from the main carer. They seen it was immoral.

Now if the unmarried father had some basic rights here, the mother would have been guilty of child abduction and imprisonment, like fathers who abduct their children.

I don't agree with imprisoning parents for family law issues, but if the father would have been imprisoned in the same circumstances, why not the mother? Equal rights and all that! :rolleyes:

The Corinthian

Seanies32 wrote:

Equal rights and all that! :rolleyes:

Never existed. The situation that used to exist typically favoured men, however it did not mean that women did not have social privileges either.

To pick a silly example, if a man and woman went out on a date, the man was expected to pick up the bill. What the twentieth century saw was where the social privileges that men had were rolled back, in favour of equality, however as this movement was centered around womens' rights, the social privileges that women had were left largely untouched. This is what, returning to the above example, give us the situation whereby a woman can be earning as much as a man, but the man is still expected to pay the bill.

It is only now, that this situation has become so blatantly obvious that it is beginning to be addressed.

Kildrought

So you are unable to show evidence based, peer reviewed research to support your statement....

Most mothers do not take to parenting naturally

I don't need to say anymore.

The Corinthian

Kildrought wrote:

So you are unable to show evidence based, peer reviewed research to support your statement....

And has been already pointed out you took the statement out of context. The full statement has quite a different meaning, in that mothers appear to be 'natural' parents because of their situation. I further expanded on that comment in the rest of my post.

You on the other hand, have managed to add little more than sniping, not proffering any real rebuttal to speak of. If you did so I might take your objection seriously.

I don't need to say anymore.

We can but hope.

bored and tired

my heart goes out to any man who is being given the run around by vicous ex in the courts. i had a man do it to me for 2 years, he finally decided to go to england rather than go to the court recommended classes or pay €50pw maintenance. i have to say though that i hate the fathers groups that plague the media in a circus of christmas and fathers day stunts. climbing a tall building with no supports really shows good parenting skills.

My advice from being through the courts system, is first apply for legal aid. my legal aid solicitor actually cared more about my case than the solicitor i was paying originanlly did. you would be surprised by how much of your wage they discount ie rent, maintenance, travel to work costs in ariving at your eligability criteria.

secondly, address your ex's concerns - regardless of how ridiculus they are, if it is drink or drugs tell the judge you would be willing to pay for weekly urine analysis at docs. if it is anger management issues, get doctor to sign you up for course.
Sign yourself up for parenting classes, first aid course, neuro lingusitic programming classes. fetac child care course, anything that will show how much you are interested in learning and improving yourself so you will be a better dad.

thirdly, pay maintenance, but also tell your ex that you would be willing to pay for extras, shoes, clothes if you could go shopping with her and your son. you said it was her friends who supervise visitation, is she present at all??, try and get her to be their during visitation with the friends, so she sees first hand how you interact with your son,

best wishes to all the good dads - there is plenty of you, i have the best in the world now, but the bad lot tend to tar the rest with the same brush as they say.

Kildrought

a. There is no 'out of context'; you still can't provide any research to back up your statement. There is nothing more to be said on that point.

b. On most boards it is considered contrary to the rules of the board to make personal or derogatory remarks on another poster. I would have expected better from a moderator.

Nevyn

Kildrought if you have an isseu with any post use the report post function,
there have been no posted reported in this thread at all.

All mods are just posters outside of the forums they mod and can and will be banned.

Deliverance

I think that Corinthian has a very good view and sharp opinion which I have a lot of respect for as a consequence. A very good moderator methinks. I myself fired off conclusions based on my own vast experience and was called up for it as such. Fair play (based on the overall current view).

It is good to see that, Corinthian has given views and replies very inteligently, to a point besides the horse**** thing, but I can see I was let off lightly in a way through that view. I was kind of annoyed about the insult but in hindsight it was horse**** in part at least, in my defence I fired off an opinion to fast without thinking about others as well. So fair play Corinthian and here is my real apology. Sorry, and thanks for not promoting real idiots jumping on the band wagon. I was a bit worried that it would decay this way, thanks for not making it so.

The Corinthian

Shucks

gcgirl

MMKC1 wrote:

Hi guys, thanks for the replies. My god the situ is so difficult. Firstly i guess i should mention that i left the relationship on the basis that i felt i was no longer in love with my ex and this was three months after the birth of our son. She was previously married with 3 kids and on the date of the birth of our little fella her ex told me he would not mind his own kids while we were in hosptial. this was the vain all through our relationship and there was a lot of unresolved crap from her last relationship. That being said i left cause i felt i no longer loved my ex.

Our relationship was difficult and i found it hard to be a sub dad to three other kids. times it was absolute mayhem and i found it very very hard.

I decided to leave and it was not easy for anyone at all. I told my ex that i was leaving the relationship but would never abandon my son and would be responsible in meeting any need for our son. When i left i was cut off and told i would have to go through the legal route if i wanted to see him. I called up to her house a few weeks after i left and she called the gaurds to say she was afraid of me and she was terrified. I got some shock. Few days later i had a protection order delivered to my place of work.

You know it seems that these things can be granted on a whim and i had to go to court to get the allegations withdrawn as they where.

Time has gone on and while ive tried to keep my emotions in check it has been extremely difficult to maintain any sense of dignity. The truth is always somewhere in the middle and not to the left or right of any situation.

Family law is terribly draconion and if you are an unmarried father you are considered not part of the family and therefore no rights.

I have supervised access as i agreed to it at the start as it was the only way i could get to see our son and it really has taken a life of its own and continued like so for two years.

anyway i have been through the courts for two years now and i feel i am going nowhere in fact its getting worse as i seem to be getting less and less access. I am now considering giving up the legal process as it seems to be a breeding ground for resentment and bitterness. my fear of doing this is that if i do i really put the whole situation in her hands and it could be some time before i see my son again. I would appreciate replies to this suggestion. someone said to me recently that taking her to court is trying to control the situation and to accept that she holds the cards and not me.

In relation to maintemance i was paying 800 quid a month and i always said to her that if we could work our stuff out together it could be good alround. But she does not want to know and will not speak to me at all. I at the moment pay 500 per month as it is what i can afford, but i have to say i am bitter and yes i will have to deal with that.

the answer i think is coming to me and perhaps its to give up the fight and lay the matter back with my ex

you can not get a protection order on a whim there has to be some kind of prior reason (mental or pysical abuse) for it i know because i had to get one in my own case i took 7 and a half years of **** off a guy i had 3 kids for, he was not much of a hands on dad just lets say he works 6 days and on his day off he plays golf, constantly put me down, went off with several women, hit me, at least with a bruse you have something to show, but with mental abuse you don't have anything to show, my ex now see his kids twice a week supervised visits supervised by my mum (whom is impartal super really considering what he done to me and to a certain extent the kids) 3 hours and 45 mins in total he is also seeking guardingship which is really only getting back at me because i found out bout he sleeping with some young one(same night he refused to come home after his son had an accident and was nearly addmitted to hospital) a week after i had had enough in which we spilt