Press Releases

Manifesto for Family Justice 2017

ELECTION MANIFESTO
FOR FAMILY JUSTICE 2017 

 

IN 2016 - 48,244 applications made in private law - up by 11% on 2015 (i)

165,000 children were involved in private law orders made (i)

£112 million was STILL being spent on the cost of Private Law Legal Aid (ii)

One million children have no real contact with their fathers (iii)

37% of women claim they’ve been assaulted IN the Family Court (iv)

33% of Private Law cases neither side had a lawyer (i)

 

(i)                   MoJ Family Court Statistics 2016

(ii)                 Legal Aid Statistics in England and Wales October to December 2016

(iii)                Centre for Social Justice – Fractured Families 2013

(iv)                Women’s Aid 2016

 

THIS CANNOT GO ON!

 

Families Need Fathers and FNF Both Parents Matter Cymru
have collaborated to produce a

4 point plan for the 2017 General Election:

 

·       REDUCE AND RESOLVE CONFLICT

·       PROMOTE RESPONSIBLE SHARED PARENTING

·       ENCOURAGE BEST OUTCOMES FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES

·       REDUCE THE BURDEN ON THE TAXPAYER & FAMILIES

 
 

We call on candidates to pledge their support for this plan if they are elected

 Downloadable version:

FNF Manifesto for Family Justice

REDUCE AND RESOLVE CONFLICT

Some victims and survivors of domestic abuse have raised concerns that their former partners continue their abuse by making applications to the Family Court.[i]  We want to ensure that abuse cannot be perpetuated by removing the requirement to make application to the Court simply to be able to see your own children and grandchildren.

HOW TO DO IT

Improve education about Parental Responsibility – to parents, children & professionals.  Children have a right to maintain their relationship and have direct contact with both parents on a regular basis (UNCRC Article 9).  Interference with, or restriction of, this right of the child requires a Court Order. 

Introduce ‘Standing Temporary Orders’ granted automatically on application and without the need for a Court hearing.   Standing Temporary Orders set a minimum level of contact PLUS a ban on either parent moving home more than 10 miles without consent of the other parent OR the permission of the Court.

All breaches of Court Orders must be properly enforced by the Court.  Currently just ONE PERCENT of applications for enforcement are granted.

 

PROMOTE RESPONSIBLE SHARED PARENTING

The Child Maintenance and Benefit systems incentivise a ‘winner and loser’ attitude towards shared care. This can trap one parent (usually the mother) in a childcare role and allows the other (usually the father) to walk away from their responsibilities.  Fathers can only acquire Parental Responsibility if married to the mother at the time of a child’s birth OR by the explicit agreement of the mother to be named on the birth certificate. Academic evidence shows that non -resident fathers who see their children several times a week are almost 3 times more likely to contribute financially to their upbringing [ii]

HOW TO DO IT

·         Share the financial aspects of parenting fairly – reflecting a culture in which shared parenting, including responsibility for childcare and finances, is the norm.

·         Enact the provisions of the Welfare Reform Act 2009 to require the compulsory joint birth registration of children.

 

ENCOURAGE BEST OUTCOMES FOR CHILDREN & FAMILIES

Conflict and an adversarial approach currently dominate the post-separation legal landscape.  Government, charities and parents want to avoid hugely damaging courtroom conflicts over children.  The ‘best interests of the child’ need to be clearly defined in terms that parents and children can understand. 

HOW TO DO IT

·         Define the ‘Paramountcy Principle’ in simple clear and objective terms so that parents and children can understand

·         Replace the adversarial system of Family Justice with an inquisitorial one as advocated by the President of the Family Division  

·         Recognise and act to prevent Parental Alienation and other forms of abuse

·         Legislate to incorporate the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child into UK law as it already is to a limited extent in Wales.

 

REDUCE THE BURDEN ON THE TAXPAYER & FAMILIES

The costs of Family Law are unknown [iii] However in addition to the emotional toll on children and parents the cost of Private Law Legal Aid alone is £117m a year [iv] even after Legal Aid was supposedly stopped in 2014.  District Judges in the Family Division are paid more than £107,000 per year [v]  to work out issues that are often as complex as the length of a child’s hair or whether their father can pick them up at 4pm or 5pm on a Friday. This has to stop.  Cafcass England cost more than £123 million pounds in 2013/14 and Cafcass Cymru has an annual budget in excess of £10.4 million. This makes no sense.

HOW TO DO IT

·         Cut the financial cost of Family Justice by  implementing online processes  in the Family Court with ‘Standing Temporary Orders’ as the default position

·         Reduce the cost of Cafcass / Cafcass Cymru by reducing the need for reports in most Private Law cases.


[iii] MoJ statement to FNF BPM Cymru – April 2017 – in response to request for the annual cost to taxpayers of Private Law “I'm afraid there is no information available to answer this question at present. Whilst we hold financial information at a more aggregate level we do not separate out private family law system costs.”

Leave your feedback!

What do you think?

Send us feedback!

Captcha

FNF Annual Conference and AGM - Took place: 18th March 2017

FNF Conference on the Future of Family Justice – Key Issues for Litigants

Location: Engineers' House, The Promenade, Clifton Down, Bristol, BS8 3NB

This will be an all-day event including lunch - with entrance by ticket only.

Speakers include

Sir James Munby * Dr Sue Whitcombe * Lori Busch & Paul Apreda * Sarah Phillimore

You will find details below of workshops, presentations and discussions which are taking place.

Some of the workshops will be run twice so that all attendees may take part in each.

There will be question and answer opportunities. We have received a number of questions from the public and these are being processed and summarised for putting to the President at the event.

There is a charge for attendees of the conference of just £36 for the day, inclusive of a good buffet lunch and refreshments.  Register now and obtain tickets here to attend the conference.

Lunch will comprise a selection of 4 - 5 hot main courses (including vegetarian, vegan and gluten-free options) complete with an extensive salad & buffet bar, fresh fruit, cheeses and dessert selection. For further details of the venue and nearby accommodation as well as to book tickets click here.

Hotel accommodation is available in the area, as well as parking, See link to the venue for more details of how to get there and where to stay.
The venue's comprehensive travel guide can also be downloaded here.


Note: Discounts may be available from some hotels - Please contact them directly for details.

There is also a Members-only AGM meeting taking place at 13.45. This is free to Members but all attendees wishing to come to the AGM must obtain their free ticket in advance.
Attendees for the main Conference event must purchase tickets in advance as well.


Further details and speaker biographies are below.

 

Keynote Speaker:

The Rt. Hon Sir James Munby President of the Family Division

Sir James Munby

Sir James (Lawrence) Munby, Hon., Kt 2000; President of the Family Division since January 2013.  Hon LL.D University of Bolton, July 2014. Lord Justice of Appeal 2009-2013, Chairman, Law Commission 2009-2012 (on secondment) & judge of Family Division 2000–09.  Called to the bar, Middle Temple, 1971 (Bencher 2000); QC 1988.

Sir James spoke at Families Need Fathers conference on 16th November 2014 and he promises to update FNF on progress since then and to be held to account for developments since then in a question and answer session after his talk.

We have received a number of questions from the public and these are being processed and summarised for putting to the President at the event.

end faq

Key participants running workshops, presentations and discussions will include:

Parental Alienation

Dr Sue Whitcombe (Leading Practitioner in the Field of Parental Alienation)

Dr Sue Whitcombe is a Counselling Psychologist in the UK.  She is a Chartered member and Associate Fellow of the British Psychological Society (BPS), Deputy Chair of the Training Committee for Counselling Psychology and sits on the BPS Expert Witness Advisory Group.  Sue has 20 years’ experience working with children and families and is Principal Psychologist at Family Psychology Solutions, a not-for-profit social enterprise, which she founded with the support of Teesside University.  Sue works with children, adults and families who experience life and mental health difficulties as a result of relationship issues.  In particular, Sue provides affordable, targeted and tailored evidence informed interventions where there are entrenched and hostile relationship difficulties and parental alienation.  In addition to her therapeutic work, Sue also delivers training and consultancy to the legal, mental health and social work professions on implacable hostility and parental alienation.  She also provides expert assessments for family court proceedings.

Sue will provide run workshops on Parental Alienation with a focus on what works and early intervention.

end faq

Domestic Violence

Lori Busch (ManKind) and Paul Apreda (FNF - BPM)

Paul ApredaLori Busch and Paul Apreda will jointly run workshops on dealing with Domestic Violence Allegations, with a focus on practical steps that can be taken by those who have false or unfounded allegations made against them.

Lori is a trustee of The ManKind Initiative which was the first charity in Great Britain to support male victims of domestic abuse (registered in 2001). For over 15 years they have been at the forefront of providing services and support for male victims and campaigning to ensure that male victims receive the support they need from other organisations.

Paul has for many years been the National Manager for our sister charity in Wales, FNF Both Parents Matter Cymru. He is also a trustee of our UK charity. Paul has a depth of hands-on experience of assisting with hundreds of family disputes, both easy and difficult.

end faq

Getting Help for Litigants In Person

Sarah Phillimore (Barrister)

Sarah Phillimore is a barrister at St John’s Chambers in Bristol. She was called to the Bar in 1994 and is a member of the Family Law Bar Association and Association of Lawyers for Children. Sarah has received a number awards including the A C Thomas Bar Scholarship (UCL), Lincoln’s Inn Shelford Major Scholarship, Lincoln’s Inn Hardwicke Scholarship. Sarah specialises in family law and has considerable experience in dealing with cases with complicated and long running histories. She will talk about initiatives in Bristol to assist litigants in person and the issues around intractable disputes.

end faq

There will be an AGM currently planned for 13:45. This will take approximately 45 minutes and will only be open to members of FNF and trustees. An agenda for this meeting is sent separately to those eligible to attend. Attending the AGM is free and does not include lunch.  Members must obtain (free) tickets in order to attend the AGM.
 
Leave your feedback!

What do you think?

Send us feedback!

Captcha

Guide to Making Complaints to the Authorities

Here is some information provided by one of our Volunteer Branch Chairs which is designed to help with making complaints to public bodies. 

We do not necessarily agree with all the views expressed, but Vincent McGovern's track record speaks for itself. We hope you find it useful.

Introduction

The following template has resulted in over twenty complaint inquiries and 5 Ombudsman investigations, 1 Local Government, 2 Legal Services Ombudsman, and Parliamentary and Health Services Ombudsman (PHSO) three times. There was also an investigation under Special Amendments 2006 of the Children Act 1989 as advised by the Local Government Ombudsman. This led to a sincere apology in writing from the Director of Social Services and the Regional Director of Children and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). It also resulted in revision of Social Services in the Borough concerned which had been examined by Lord Laming in 2001, and found seriously failing.

There was also a General Medical Council investigation which resulted in a warning letter to a GP. Further malpractice by the Local Primary Care Trust resulted in 3 investigations culminating in a Parliamentary and Health Services Ombudsman. These complaints were focused on the Child Endangering Gender Discrimination policies and practices of personnel in the above agencies.

The Parliamentary & Health Services Ombudsman ordered the local Primary Care Trust to acknowledge wrongdoing, full written apology, pay compensation of £250 and instigate a 90 day action plan to demonstrate change in procedure and future verification by NHS London, Health Service Ombudsman, Care Quality Commission, and myself. He found their standard so bad it amounted to maladministration and injustice, causing frustration and distress.

There were 3 investigations into malpractice by the petitioner’s solicitors as a result of their actions. These were Legal Complaints Service, Solicitors Regulatory Authority and the Legal Services Ombudsman. This led to the Solicitors Regulatory Authority being formally criticized in writing for inaction on the malpractice of the Solicitor by the Legal Services Ombudsman.

There was also a PHSO assisted investigation into CAFCASS Guardian malpractice and the protection of such by CAFCASS management. This led to 5 apologies, 3 sorrys from CAFCASS's CEO, and a separate complaints department being set up within CAFCASS to properly address complaints in 2011. In 2015 due to CAFCASS repeat failings there was a 2nd PHSO Investigation leading to financial compensation and recommendations forced upon CAFCASS by the PHSO.

On the 19th March 2014 and 11th December 2014 I was allowed to briefly address the Petitions Commission of the European Parliament in Brussels because of my then four successful Ombudsman Investigations. This and other petitions led to an investigation into ‘systemic failings’ in UK Family Courts but only on Public Law by the EU.

The author of this article is trying hard to have the Domestic Violence Agencies which act on behalf of the Local Authority forced to comply with The Gender Equality Act of April 2007 and 1st October 2010, and most importantly Children Act 1989. Their current constitution and practice is to accept evidence from females only and if serious enough, to process this through their Multi Agency Risk Assessment Process (MARAC). This is done in secret without the father having any notice. The verdict (only) on this evidence is then brought before the Case Conference via Social Services and, surprise, surprise, the father is then deemed a risk to his children and with this choreographed discrimination he is then booted ex-parte from the family home. The fact that he may have been the children’s primary carer and a victim of risible false allegations e.g. falsely accused of kicking and killing a non-existent family dog is totally ignored. He can then be deemed a danger to his children and the non-resident parent and CAFCASS apparently endorse this.

In the not-so-hypothetical case under consideration, at a following 3 day ‘Finding of Fact’ hearing (8 months later) the District Judge declared, “I cannot see why this father was ever deemed a risk to his children.” The father later acquired Shared Residence of his 3 children as he could demonstrate to a Court that the local services were so compromised they represented a risk to his children.

The reason for this lengthy description is to demonstrate the potential effectiveness of the following template. Please bear in mind that where CAFCASS are concerned their complaints process will only deal with the Conduct of the officer and not the Content.

Also, according to the Ministry for Justice, there are no records of a judge recommending that a deceitful or disingenuous CAFCASS/Social Services official be retrained or sacked. One does wonder - Where is the welfare of the child paramount here?

Social services are since 2014 regulated by the Health and Care Professional Council (HCPC) address at, 184 Kennington Park Road, London, SE11 4BU. The previous regulator General Social Care Council had a policy of routinely refusing to deal with complaints. I brought this to the attention of 4 government departments. You can only approach the Ombudsman after exhausting the local complaints process. 

Editor's note: It is worth noting that some services are coming up with new terms for a complaint. So if they tell you they no longer accept complaints - persevere and ask them what the alternatives are.

The Complaints Template is as follows:

1)    Conduct  
2)    Requirement
3)    Consequences
4)    Remedy

(In short: C.R.C.R)

Procedure for complaint re Social Services (The ‘3 stages’).

The Local Authority are the employers of Social Services so all complaints have to be processed locally first. The words of utmost importance are “I wish to formally lodge a Stage 1 Complaint about.” Without these words your complaint will just gather dust.

The Local Authority has 10 working days to deal with your stage 1 complaint under statutory guidelines. Make your complaint absolutely precise and brief, less than 2 typed pages if at all possible. Any loose language will be seized upon and used against you.

If unsatisfied with Stage 1 then do a Stage 2 with the formal wording as in Stage 1 except now use the words ‘Stage 2’. They have 15 working days to respond. If unsatisfied then do a Stage 3 using the formal wording including the words ‘Stage 3’. They have 20 working days to respond here. If still unsatisfied you may only then approach the Local Government Ombudsman.

Very Important Points
Sadly, the skill and willingness of SOME local authorities and agencies to deceive, manipulate, procrastinate, inveigle and lie can be astonishing. For reference, read Lord Laming’s (Victoria Climbie) investigation into Brent and Haringey 2001. He was lied to so often by so many e.g. Social Services, Police, NSPCC, Local Authorities, that in the end they were reduced to accusing each other of lying. He had to threaten several with imprisonment before they would even attend. I believe they brought lying into disrepute.

At all times have evidence of document delivery and keep hard copies. Never engage in telephone conversation unless recorded and/or notes taken.  Bring a note-taking friend or McKenzie to any meeting.                                                        

Above all protect yourself and never ever raise your voice, no matter what the provocation. Remain purely child focused.

Conduct
Your complaint has to show that the conduct of the Social Worker was not up to their required standard.

Requirement
Look up the HCPC Codes of Practice for Social Service workers and Employers. Also check the Gender Equality Duty Act April 2007 and Equality Act 1/10/2010. Bear in mind that apart from Article 8 of European Court of Human Rights (Right to Family Life) human rights acts are subservient to the Children Act 1989. The rights are with the children: you and technically, the mother have almost none. You both however have duties as parents which the Local Authorities have to consider. Article 6 of the ECHR also applies.

Consequences
Your complaint will go nowhere unless you can show that the children suffered as a consequence, or were put at increased risk of harm due to Social Services/Local Authority action/malpractice. This is absolutely pivotal.

Remedy
What is the solution which you are seeking here? Retraining, referral to the HCPC, Local Government  Ombudsman investigation, possibly using Special Amendments 2006 of the Children Act 1989, written apology, acknowledgement of wrongdoing, verifiable change in procedure and work practice, financial compensation are among the options.

Your complaint has to be based on Conduct – Requirement – Consequences - Remedy.

At all stages copy in:
Leader of the Council
Chief Executive of the Council
Councillor responsible for Social Services
Director of Social Services.

Letters only! Proof of postage, which is free, will do.
Otherwise deliver by hand, if necessary at night-time, with photographic evidence e.g that day’s newspaper, to their letter box at Town Hall etc.
At Stage 3 you should also copy your MP. Only bring specific questions to him/her to deal with, not the kitchen sink and all emotional baggage.                                                         

Date and keep copies of everything. Your future relationship with your children might depend on this.

CAFCASS - Children and Families Court Advisory and Support Service

If it makes you feel any better the Government’s own regulatory body OFSTED has been very critical of CAFCASS. I quote OFSTED’s beautiful description of CAFCASS – “their conclusions are not reasoned.” A House of Commons committee in January 2011 was equally scathing about CAFCASS.

CAFCASS’s own complaints procedure is clear - only complain about Conduct and not Content.

First of all, during Court proceedings discredit the report if inaccurate or unprofessional, not the official who is presenting it. If necessary to do a formal complaint, link dishonest/unprofessional content to conduct. Once again expect to be rebuffed, dismissed and fobbed off. Persevere using the Conduct Requirement Consequences Remedy template.

Once again, keep all copies of letters or if telephoned request that it be followed with a letter when the complaint is in process. Take notes during the call surreptitiously and write them accurately immediately afterwards before filing. Of great importance here is the fact that malpractice by CAFCASS/Guardian ad-litem can now be referred by your MP to The Parliamentary & Health Services Ombudsman. CAFCASS revised Complaints Policy since 2014 is to respond once to a complaint and then suggest if still dissatisfied you complain to the PHSO via your MP. Be very precise in language when bringing matters to your MP, above all you have to prove wrongdoing to him/her for a referral to be made on your behalf.

Domestic Violence Agencies

Let us be crystal clear here, there is no justification in a modern society for gender vigilantes of either "persuasion", who are usually unregulated and unaccountable, getting control of local authority guidelines and practice. Many of these agencies in constitution and practice demonise men and heavily discriminate against fathers. Many refuse to help fathers at all, fobbing them off with “signposting to a Solicitor”, etc.

Using the Freedom of Information Act, and your MP and/or Councillor, establish whether they offer equal services to both sexes. If not, establish their funding base using FOI requests and what statutory authority the local authority may have conferred upon them. Then hold them to account using the Gender Equality Act 2007 and 2010, and also the Children Act 1989. Pull the rug from beneath any child-endangering gender discrimination.

Also remember that the Councillor with statutory authority for Social Services has extra legal responsibilities here. Reduction/removal of funding focuses their minds very well and is the only method of enforcing gender-neutral impartial professionalism here. Where local services e.g Social Services, Health, Educational, etc, allow the domestic violence agency to take the lead bring this matter to their own regulatory/funding bodies. This particularly applies where false allegations or absurd exaggerations are being facilitated and promoted purely on ideological, gender, or funding grounds (eg lying in order to obtain legal aid).

Once again Conduct – Requirement – Consequences – Remedy.

General Practitioners

The General Medical Council guidelines for GPs is very clear. Paragraph 55 GMC guidelines for 0-18 years states: “divorce or separation does not affect parental responsibility and you should allow both parents reasonable access to their children’s health records”. Sometimes the GP and/or their staff may have a mother-only viewpoint. If necessary a copy of the above and proof of Parental Responsibility plus appropriate ID should suffice. If not, contact the local Primary Care Trust complaints department or the General Medical Council as a last resort. Failing that then bring the matter to your MP and ask for a referral to the PHSO. Once again in writing only if rebuffed.

Remember Conduct – Requirement – Consequences - Remedy.

Schools

Please bear in mind that schools, doctors' surgeries, etc, are usually quite busy places and staff will sometimes take the easy option. Occasionally there will be downright hostility shown towards a father usually where a malevolent mum has falsely portrayed him as abusive, etc. The reverse sadly also applies. The Department of Education guidelines updated 4/1/2011 are very clear here. Look under their definition of Parent, Parental Responsibility and General Principles for Schools.

Effectively, if you are a non-resident parent you are entitled to all correspondence of importance. If sharing residence or overnight contact, particularly at weekends, you should be equally entitled and involved with all relevant matters.

If you absolutely feel that you have to make a complaint because of malpractice by a professional involved in your case always consider the following first:

- In this, all actions will have a consequence, usually unintended.
- The professionals are not responsible for your painful divorce or separation.
- They are however absolutely obliged to act in the children’s interests where they are involved.
- Do not let satellite litigation interfere with your own Family proceedings unless absolutely necessary.
- Do not make a half-hearted complaint just for the sake of it. Only complain if there is malpractice. If your complaint is more than 2 pages it will almost definitely be counter-productive. Only start what you mean to see through to conclusion. Above all, be thorough, honest, calm, sensible, and exercise the highest standards of focus and discipline. At all times Conduct – Requirement – Consequences - Remedy.

I wish you well and hope this also improves you as a parent.

Above all - Never give up on your children, they deserve the best of both parents.

Vincent McGovern

PS: Deepest thanks to Alastair Patterson for incisive contribution to C.R.C.R.
Also thanks to Noel Robinson of North London Branch of Families Need Fathers for editing.

 

Leave your feedback!

What do you think?

Send us feedback!

Captcha

Resident Parents

Resident Mothers and Fathers

Key ideas:

  • Promote child-centred co-operation (the resident parent usually has the most influence)
  • Promote the importance of non-resident fathers and mothers for children’s long-term wellbeing where it is safe to do so
  • Challenge parental alienation and obstruction of contact without very good reason

Around 90% of resident parents are mothers, with 10% being fathers. Resident mothers and resident fathers have many experiences and support needs in common, with some differences. Resident parents live with their children more of the time, but the separation itself may be just as emotionally loaded and painful, perhaps including a strong sense of loss, anger, or resentment. They may be juggling work, childcare and new partners (and their children), and may perceive that their life is made more difficult by the demands or behaviour of the non-resident parent.

While it is more likely that many parents presenting to agencies already will be resident mothers, traditionally separation issues have not been discussed. Practitioners may fear that hard won working relationships may be damaged, but those that have explored separation issues with clients have reported that this is not the case. As resident parents are likely to spend more time with children it is particularly important to take a child-centred approach, rather than just a client-centred one. Occasionally this will involve challenging choices and behaviour where it is clear that children’s best interests are not being served, as well as congratulating resident parents for the good work they are already doing when they are.

Practical support needed may include: 

  • Information on benefits and debt 
  • Help with child support claims 
  • Help with housing issues
  • Signposting to legal advice regarding contact and other court orders

Working with resident parents to reduce conflict and increase co-operation

  • If the children are with the resident parent most of the time it is particularly important where there is conflict to save communication with the other parent for times when the children are not present. Phone calls can be after bed time, or child-centred letters may be more effective in avoiding personal issues. If they want to discuss or comment about the other parent with friends or family, it is also best to wait until children are not present. Hearing unresolved conflict and criticism of the other parent hurts them
  • Help the resident parent to separate issues out, particularly parenting from relationship and money issues (however legitimate). Help them to avoid using children as bargaining weapons – which hurts children, not just the other parent. They can behave well, even if the other parent doesn’t.
  • Is the resident parent being inconsistent with allowing contact, or giving out mixed messages: ‘Be involved, but the kids are mine?’ This is likely to demoralise the other parent and may reduce their long-term help. Explain that children are not owned by either parent but are people in their own right.
  • Encourage the resident parent to offer the non-resident parent time alone with the children (if safe) - identify an appropriate setting if needed, and help them agree a timetable that increases gradually to allow adjustment. Reassure them about the long term benefits of this
  • Encourage the resident parent to acknowledge the non-resident parent when they do something with or for the children, not just criticise what they do ‘wrong’ or don’t do
  • Help the resident parent to acknowledge the resident parent as an equal but different parent – they will do some things differently and that can help the child become resourceful and flexible
  • Minimise the effect of new partners, who are a common trigger for raised conflict. Help the resident parent to prioritise children’s needs. Withholding children to express anger about the non-president parent’s new relationship, or bowing to pressure from their own new partner to exclude the non-resident parent are likely to hurt and confuse children.

Continue to: Issues Related to Contact (NOW BELOW) 

 

Issues Related to Contact:

A change in behaviour on return can a problem:

  • Resident parents can see children as being upset or naughty on their return. Are the children picking up parental anxieties about handovers from either side? Can they be re-assured? Do they need to be allowed a little more time to re-adjust each time? Is this because the non-resident parent sets different boundaries?
  • Agreeing common house rules and routines if possible can help, concentrating on the basics like sleeping, eating and behaviour routines. Children can understand that there are different rules in different places (like school) and can benefit from difference. It is important that children have time to adjust to change-overs.

Reliability and time-keeping. Some resident parents want the other parent to have more contact, but be frustrated by unreliability, which is also very painful for children: see ideas on working with un-motivated non-resident parents

Respite child-care. Resident parents, particularly those with complex difficulties may be tired or isolated and in need of respite – just for a rest, to develop adult relationships and friendships, or to attend training or appointments.

Various options within extended families (grandparents in particular), support networks and services can be explored. However, where safe, this is an opportunity to discuss the value of involving the non-resident parent more. Non-resident parents are a free and more sustainable solution than using professional services, and the child is likely to benefit from more time to make a positive relationship with their other parent.

If there is friction or conflict in the relationship between ex-partners, resident parents may need help to think through the long-term benefits of this to the child and themselves - weighed against negatives. For example a perceived loss of position or fear of giving ammunition for the non-resident parent to paint them as not coping, or setting a precedent from which the non-resident parent may ask for more contact, weighed against free, relatively flexible childcare.

Should the children need long-term care, positive family members like fathers are a better option than care, and agencies need to build these relationships before an emergency arises.

It is worth differentiating between different kinds of resident parents, who may vary widely. Ideas include:

Lone parents where the other parent has chosen not to be involved or is excluded for child safety reasons

  • Respite child care, practical help with benefits, child support, help in developing support networks (introductions to peer groups etc)

Resident parents who are excluding a willing parent and may be attempting to alienate the child from them:

  • Go through the child-centred checklist, emphasising the effect on the child and their long-term wellbeing, and probable damage to their own future relationship with the child

‘Lone parents’ where the other parent is around but hidden in order to increase benefits

  • Arrange a confidential benefits calculation through Citizens Advice or similar for living alone with a partner.

Lone parents living with children from one or more different parents and engaging in serial relationships involving successive temporary changes for children

  • Go through why this is happening and possible effects on children. Explore ways of maximising stability for children
  • Explore ways of managing how new (and possibly temporary) partners impact on children, for example keeping them separate initially, not asking children to accept them too quickly or see them as a parent figure, assessing any risks a new partner may pose carefully   

Resident parents in stable new relationships with a partner who takes on a parenting role and supports the household practically (who themselves may have children from previous relationships)

  • Many of their needs may be met from within the family, with occasional needs in times of transition or of disagreement with the non-resident parent

Resident fathers

Resident fathers are likely to have many of the same support needs as resident mothers, but are less likely to be known to services and are more likely to be isolated. Men have historically been engaged with less, typically reporting that this is because services are delivered during working hours, because they find all-female workforces harder to identify with, are worried about being the only man there (for example at a Stay and Play group), and because of wanting to keep a low profile regarding children because of media campaigns about paedophilia. They may need reassurance that they are welcome, and a personal invitation to attend. Where possible arrange for another male to be present in group settings. 

Resident mothers

Culturally resident mothers may feel a lot of pressure to provide ‘perfect’ parenting and home-making for their children, as well more contemporary roles like breadwinner. This can be particularly hard if combined with a feeling of abandonment and loneliness. If they are insecure or had a difficult upbringing the ‘mother’ element of their identity can feel threatened if fathers want to be involved post separation. Peer or family attitudes encouraging her to exclude the father can sometimes add to this. They may need reassurance that father involvement does not make mothers less important, it simply means more parental love for children, and a welcome break, along with all our normal approaches to supporting mothers.

Leave your feedback!

What do you think?

Send us feedback!

Captcha

Home Page Feature-CMS

 

International Conference on Shared Parenting - Boston

May 29-30 - Check it out - Book Now!

The National Parents Organization and the International Council on Shared Parenting (ICSP) are running a conference in Boston. This conference is widely considered to include almost all of the leading currently active scholars in the world on the subject of optimal post-divorce parenting arrangements. Under the theme “Shared Parenting Research: A Watershed in Understanding Children’s Best Interest?”, these experts will present their research results and practical experience at this international and interdisciplinary conference. To view the preliminary scientific programme and speaker details click here.

Full details here!

Check out our latest Newsletters here!

Leave your feedback!

What do you think?

Send us feedback!

Captcha

More Articles ...

  1. Separated Families Matter
  2. Formal Contact Sessions
  3. Families Need Fathers 2016 AGM and Workshop Event
  4. Work with The Former President
  5. A Guide to leaving a Legacy to FNF in your Will
  6. Splitting Up
  7. Annual Reports
Page 52 of 66
 
 
 
 
Registered charity number: 276899