Sign for grandchildren

But that is how they are used, sometimes.
How many threads on here are there about walking on eggshells, so as to be allowed to stay in the grandchildren lives?
Plenty.

MissAdventure

Not really, violet, because a lot of grandparents ate simply cut off.
Letters returned, apologies not accepted (though money is often ok, strangely)
How would you propose someone would heal that situation?
If any grandparents dare post on here about sending a letter, they are met with cries of "harassment" and "abuse".

There must be a point where it is possible.

Those letters always seem to come on special days that they may blight in some way.

Rainy day, right words, it would have worked for me.

I read the messages that came through for years, they were just too full of guilt trips and what a horrible person I was so obviously that's not going to help

No they are not weapons or pawns. They are our babies.

Not anyone else's. And again when threatened many parents will do anything to protect them.

When my mum first said "you are using your children as weapons" my first thought was that it was her mknd that views them that way.

It may not be the case in any estrangement they may not be using children as weapons, just deciding a relationship is over

They may, they may not.
Every single case is different.

MissAdventure

They may, they may not.
Every single case is different.

I think this is fair

Not really. Parents fit - they decide
Parents unfit - Social workers need to be involve

Never a case for GRP. Ever.

What a shame for the little tots tortured to death by their "parents", then, Bibbity.

MissAdventure

What a shame for the little tots tortured to death by their "parents", then, Bibbity.

How would access prevent this?

MissAdventure

What a shame for the little tots tortured to death by their "parents", then, Bibbity.

Thanks for backing me up.

Unfit parents - social services.

And how heartbreaking for their GP's MissA who tried to protect them but were unable too.

It would have allowed the grandparents access, which the parents had denied.
They never got to see their grandchild once they had shone a light on possible abuse.

MissAdventure

I don't suppose a court would give a second thought to the parents, and who they were vindictive to.
Again, though, I would expect the court to disregard that and act in a child's best interests.

The courts do act in a child’s best interests. But they are about as interested in whether a grandparent feels the parents are being “vindictive” than they are about whether a spouse was unfaithful in divorce proceedings.

It is not about the grandparents being vindicated.

Who would contact social services if it’s the parents that are abusing?

Sadly, social services didn't do the best job of protecting a child who was hobbling along in her leg, which had been broken by twisting it, Bibbity.
I think it's fair to say they were lax.

MissAdventure

But that is how they are used, sometimes.
How many threads on here are there about walking on eggshells, so as to be allowed to stay in the grandchildren lives?
Plenty.

1. One sided stories
2. If people struggle to follow other boundaries that's on them and not the concern of anyone else.

GG65
Its bugger all to do with un hurting the "poor" grandparents feelings!
The point (again!) is to do what's best for the children.

The child died in the parents care. The GPs would not have gained custody the child was still in their care.
In the UK visitation with grandparents is often decided in months or indirect contact.

Only professionals would've saved those children. They are who failed them and a very very small instance should not dictate and entire country.

Because for even dead toddler GPs can throw at parents parents have a lot more stories of abusive Grandparents.

If you say so.

It was also lockdown for one of them at least I believe. So they would not have been seeing the GPs anyway.

Most grandparents kept in touch by zoom and facetime.

It was definitely a failing by social services. Didn't grandparents in both recent cases raise the alarm?

Yes, and then had access cut, as far as I know.

Missadventure my first memories are my mum physically abusing me. There are all sorts of stories about how I got my scars but I remember. She was a single mum and resented me. The physical stuff stopped when she met my stepdad. I was also being abused by grand father.

My Dad had court awarded access every other weekend. Other family members saw me regularly. I went to 7 different primary schools.

None of the adults picked up on what was going on.

Trust me, I hate parents like this, I count myself lucky that I survived. It could have all changed in a single moment for me. I'm not saying what I am saying to win an argument, I am saying it because gaining access to children does not stop abuse. The abuser may punish the victim for that access though an I know that all too well.

MissAdventure

Yes, and then had access cut, as far as I know.

But they did raise the alarm
Ss made mistakes

None of that has anything to do with fit parents who make decisions for their families.

It’s not even what the petition is about (though it’s shoehorned in there for attention).

In an argument about childrens rights somehow posters are saying that grandparents can disrupt a family unit, “on a child’s behalf”, but to suggest that a parent sues a grandparent on a child’s behalf for access is a ludicrous idea.

If it were truly about the child knowing extended family, this would be a welcomed addition.

Sadly I feel the fact that people argue against this makes it seem as though it’s not about children and simply the gratification of grandparents,