Martina Devlin: Separated parents must put children's rights first

Klingon Hamlet

Irish Independent Article:

By Martina Devlin

Thursday March 18 2010



It was all I could do not to tap her on the shoulder and remonstrate with her. The woman queuing ahead of me was describing to a companion how she brought her ex-husband to heel.


"I wouldn't let him see his son until he paid up -- the washing machine was broken and I was fed up waiting for the money to buy a new one," she said. "He's supposed to have him on Saturdays. But every week for a month I found ways of putting him off. I said the boy was sick, or he'd been invited to a birthday party.


"Eventually my ex got the message and brought his maintenance payments up to date. I got my washing machine and he got to spend time with his child. The trouble with him is he wants all the rights but none of the responsibilities."


It was a classic example of 'two wrongs make a right' logic. Some women have no compunction about using a child to punish its father -- even if the child is injured in the process.


Sometimes their ex doesn't meet his obligations regularly, or they feel he's paying an inadequate amount towards upkeep. Sometimes those he said/she said landmines in their emotional landscape still have the power to madden them.


They may claim they're acting out of desperation. They'd never admit retaliation as a motive. But the end generally justifies the means, in their eyes.


Unfortunately, children can become pawns when couples split up. Custody, access and child support are all pressed into service as weapons in the vengeance wars.


Today, the issue is caught up in gender politics, when really it should turn on what's best for the child. But there's precious little evidence of respect for the child's right to two parents in its life when a woman withholds access. Equally, a man delaying or downsizing maintenance payments because he thinks his ex is a 'meal-ticket mum' causes hardship at worst and provokes grievances at best.


Couples who break up frequently squabble about money. Women say it is difficult getting men to pay up. Even when the court sets a figure, men occasionally fall behind or pay less on the grounds they can't afford it that month.


In turn, women get even by putting limits on visits, and children end up as tug-of-war trophies. Whatever a court decrees, access tends to revolve round the mother's goodwill.


This can't go on. Regardless of the complexities of each individual case, a father's ability to have a relationship with his child should never be the mother's gift. It ought to be a right, ring-fenced against any problems arising between the couple.


It is extremely rare for custody not to be awarded automatically to the mother. In two cases I've encountered recently, fathers bucked the trend only because both mothers had serious personal problems.


One man's ex-wife was an alcoholic and the children were visibly neglected. Their aunt told me about bringing them to her home for a visit, and the seven-year-old asked whether it would be all right if he had a bath. The poor boy was filthy and he knew it.


Even then, the presumption was they'd be better off with their mother. Eventually, the case swung in the father's favour when two members of her family broke ranks to give evidence on his side.


There is an automatic assumption that women are better parents than men, whether married or unmarried, by sole virtue of their gender. This is blatant sex discrimination.


I know another divorced father, closely involved in his five-year-old's life, who is distraught because his ex-wife has decided to move home to Canada with their Irish-born son. His legal advice is that he cannot stop the move -- challenging the mother will delay their departure but not prevent it, and might aggravate the situation. Better to stay on friendly terms and hope they can come to a civilised agreement about holidays.



We're back to goodwill again.


But goodwill should not be the premise on which fathers see their children. It should not be a boon that mothers can bestow or deny. It should be no more than their due, because it is in the child's best interests.


An unmarried or divorced father's rights remain minimal, however. The Labour Party's private members' bill published this week, which proposes automatic legal guardianship for unmarried fathers, is a small step towards improving the situation. The Equality Authority has urged similar changes to the Law Reform Commission. But we need to go further to protect fathers' rights.


A study at Arizona State University, published in the 'Journal of Family Psychology', found that children of divorced parents suffered less inner turmoil and distress if both parents remained close by. It advised fathers to protest against moves. They can object, all right, but they're whistling in the wind.


A father-of-one in my circle, divorced from his wife but paying maintenance and spending time with his daughter every week, regarded it as a huge advance when he won the right to see her school reports and medical records. It recognised he had a consultative role in her upbringing.


But in some ways it amounted to no more than window dressing -- he cannot help to choose the school, and can only hope to influence the mother's choice.


Irish law does not respect a child's right to know both parents, and often excludes the father from key decisions in its life. No wonder men have become bitter.

mdevlin@independent.ie
- Martina Devlin
Irish Independent

Just thought I'd highlight this as it seems things are finally changing for the better for Ireland's children. No more petty gender discrimination or assumption that one parent is better than the other. Maybe now the courts will empty out and laws will catch up with reality for our children's benefit.:)

Sleepy

I don't see much catching up beyond the author herself realising that the status quo is a nightmare.

Klingon Hamlet

Sleepy wrote: »

I don't see much catching up beyond the author* herself realising that the status quo is a nightmare.

*...and readership. Many people out there haven't a clue.

james finn

I went to court to get access to my child and its unreal cause i was made feel so low like dirt for no reason, if it happened again i dont think id go to court cause i found the courts look down on fathers.

i did noting wrong and came forward and the courts treated me very bad, and then they talk about bad fathers who dont want anything to do with their kids, and when a good father comes forward they abuse him.