View Single Post
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 04-17-2006, 05:15 PM
sasha1 sasha1 is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 205
sasha1 is on a distinguished road

It may not be right. I don't know how old your child is, but if she doesn't want to see him and is forced to, there's a problem. Now, what the problem actually is could be a different matter. I've got a niece and nephew who're living through a divorce of their parents; they're 7 and 8. Many times when they're supposed to be spending time with their Dad, one of them will decide they don't want to go for that visit. Because of things both of the kids have said to me, I'm sure it's because their Mother is telling them to 'keep secrets' about her own activities, and telling them BS about the father's family. In that situation, I think the kids don't 'rule the roost'; they always have a good time with their father, and I believe they only object to going because their mother has made them feel they are being disloyal to her if they do. I'm sure you're telling the truth about your keeping your opinions to yourself, simply because people who care only about their own agenda don't actively look for sites like this and ask the kinds of questions you are. However, children are so much more perceptive than we give them credit for; is there a chance the child has a 'deep-down' desire to know the father? If there's even a chance of that, it must be provided; it could be the child is telling you there's no desire to see him because she's feeling the stress and chaos of the situation, and wanting to show her loyalty to you.

That said, let me jump right in and say that there is NEVER a circumstance that warrants a child's safety being put in jeopardy! Yes, it is the child's right to have a relationship with the other parent, and that right should supercede anything the parents have to say if they are "mud-slinging", but I disagree with LV's stance of:

"A custodial parent has no right whatsoever to determine the extent of the relationship between the child and the other parent."

Even though he follows with, "Many attempt to sway the courts opinion by citing bad character, criminal, drug dealer etc. This is mudslinging. It only questions ones own character and motives especially if the allegations are unfounded. This strategy often fails."

If a custodial parent cites "bad character, criminal, drug dealer, etc", I think that falls under the category of relevant. Not proof, mind you, but something worthy of investigating. Bad character is tough to prove, and at times, probably isn't even relevant. But if you've got one parent who's got criminal charges and/or is a known drug dealer (proved by charges), that MUST be considered! The defining factor is that you HAVE to have some evidence of sorts, even if it's only several witnesses willing to testify or sign affidavits. Just like everything else, accusations are useless without corroboration.

Last edited by sasha1; 04-17-2006 at 05:43 PM.