We have consent orders, made final in 2014. My son at this time was 7 and his mother had withheld him for nearly 2 years by the time we negotiated these current orders. My question is regarding communication. Right now I can speak to him on the alternate Sunday. This is one call in 11 days and now no longer sufficient time being that he is now 13. My son has a mobile (provided by mother) and would like my number however his mother has said no as it’s not in our orders (I have offered to pay half of mobile costs) and we are only permitted the one phone call as per orders. Is there anything I can do about this?? Would it qualify as a reasonable reason to bring the matter back to court if this was my only option? Thanks
No .... You need to satisfy a certain level of criteria to bring orders back to court to set aside or vary... Basically has to be change of circumstances of major importance ...
First of all, how does the boy feel about contacting you when HE wishes?
One point .... The orders are there to compel the PARENTS to abide by ..... If the boy has a phone & wants to call you, a dozen times a day, so be it ... No orders are being contravened by anybody . Persaonlly, I would just discreetly give him the number, or maybe a pre paid separate mobile
Thanks for your reply, my son wants to the opportunity to freely contact me whenever it suits, mother does not want him to be able to do this.
The mother controls his phone so giving him my number discreetly unfortunately won’t work.
I don’t think providing him with a phone would be an option either, he is not allowed to bring anything between homes.
The mother controls his phone so giving him my number discreetly unfortunately won’t work.
I don’t think providing him with a phone would be an option either, he is not allowed to bring anything between homes.
Yes! A very difficult customer to say the least.
Nope Skype not an option either unfortunately, my son is very well behaved and wouldn’t know how to be untruthful or rebellious (good qualities except in there situations).
Looking at this situation from the child’s point of view is he not being subjected to some sort of DV by his mother, coercive control etc?? Surely it’s a child’s right to have “free” communication with both parents, especially at his age!!
Nope Skype not an option either unfortunately, my son is very well behaved and wouldn’t know how to be untruthful or rebellious (good qualities except in there situations).
Looking at this situation from the child’s point of view is he not being subjected to some sort of DV by his mother, coercive control etc?? Surely it’s a child’s right to have “free” communication with both parents, especially at his age!!
There is something in the expanded family violence definitions that talks about >>> "preventing the family member from making or keeping connections with his or her family, friends or culture" <<< Unfortunately it doesn't seem to apply to a parent controlling or prohibiting a kids relationship with the other parent for some reason ....
Look, yes at his age (a teenager) the law gives increasingly more weight to the child's wishes as they mature. BUT ... Mum .... & admirably, he wants to keep the peace. Until such time as he decides that she is indeed being stupid & unreasonable, & just calls you when he wishes, then there isn't much you can do...
What you can do is call an accredited mediation service to discuss the issue. They will then call mum & invite her along to help mediate a solution if possible.... Even If you were able to take this back to court, mediation would be a mandatory pre filing procedure anyway. She may refuse to attend.. If that happens, you're back to waiting until your boy decides for himself how ridiculous it is .... I'm guessing it will be sometime well before he's 18
When the roles are reversed seems to be much harder to prove DV, especially against a mother.
Sadly we had mediation late last year, this was one of the points discussed. Didn’t get anywhere. A Mother who chooses to withhold a child isn’t a person who is thinking a great deal about what is best for their child.....
I did ask in mediation to have an additional night in the week to call my son, this was rejected also.
Court was my next option....sounds like this isn’t an option either. Very sad that my son doesn’t have a voice in this, his rights aren’t being observed or respected.
Sadly we had mediation late last year, this was one of the points discussed. Didn’t get anywhere. A Mother who chooses to withhold a child isn’t a person who is thinking a great deal about what is best for their child.....
I did ask in mediation to have an additional night in the week to call my son, this was rejected also.
Court was my next option....sounds like this isn’t an option either. Very sad that my son doesn’t have a voice in this, his rights aren’t being observed or respected.
I'd love to see the exact wording of the orders...
But - Something you wrote I found interesting... "My son has a mobile (provided by mother) and would like my number however his mother has said no as it’s not in our orders".
I reckon mummy is right. The orders don't say that your son can have your number, or he can call you.... But it doesn't say he can't. (take a pause to absorb that) Like I said, I wanna see the wording of the orders. It just seems to me that if it says something like 'the father be at liberty to call the kid on sunday' THEN the kid can call you when ever. Unless the orders say that dad is restrained from talking to the kid unless.... See what I mean. So it is all in the wording of the orders.
Forget doing it descreetly. Be blatant...
Dear ex
Please be advised that i have provided (kids name) with my number. I intend to contact him occasionally and recieve communication from him. This seem appropriate as he is now 13. The orders were written when he was 7 - these things need to be revised occasionally. I'm thinking of setting up a facebook page with messenger. Maybe we can find a way for us all to be involved in the communication.
The best thing about being blatant is that it is ALL YOUR FAULT. MUMMY will blame you for this act of rebellion. GOOD. Let you take the fall for it rather than your kid. But the end result is still the same.
But - Something you wrote I found interesting... "My son has a mobile (provided by mother) and would like my number however his mother has said no as it’s not in our orders".
I reckon mummy is right. The orders don't say that your son can have your number, or he can call you.... But it doesn't say he can't. (take a pause to absorb that) Like I said, I wanna see the wording of the orders. It just seems to me that if it says something like 'the father be at liberty to call the kid on sunday' THEN the kid can call you when ever. Unless the orders say that dad is restrained from talking to the kid unless.... See what I mean. So it is all in the wording of the orders.
Forget doing it descreetly. Be blatant...
Dear ex
Please be advised that i have provided (kids name) with my number. I intend to contact him occasionally and recieve communication from him. This seem appropriate as he is now 13. The orders were written when he was 7 - these things need to be revised occasionally. I'm thinking of setting up a facebook page with messenger. Maybe we can find a way for us all to be involved in the communication.
The best thing about being blatant is that it is ALL YOUR FAULT. MUMMY will blame you for this act of rebellion. GOOD. Let you take the fall for it rather than your kid. But the end result is still the same.
Similar threads
