Sign for grandchildren

Estrangement needs to be debated openly. We all have a opinion so voice it*Peasblossom*.

Yes that's right Iam but as far as I'm aware that only applies if one parent is moving away from the other parent, not a GP.

This petition isn't about "enshrining grandparents rights in law" it's about the law as it stands, in which GP's have no rights, being more effective and pro active in ensuring that a child's right to know extended family members is acted upon.

You're so rightIam64 its life changing for all concered im sure . Thank you for that acknowledgement.

In order for grandparents to have automatic leave to apply for contact then the children's act would need to be ammended in at least 3 places I know of to state "parents and grandparents" instead of just parents.

The children's act already clearly outlines that children have a right to contact with both parents unless doing so would be harmful to them.

I really don't understand, when we already know that some parents aren't suitable, why anyone thinks it's a good idea to amend the act to include more relatives and more risk and more possibly unsuitable people.

So many children are fought over in court already and I've seen first hand the impact that has on them. If instead of grandparents the children's act were ammended to include "family members" just how many pieces are we willing to cut children's lives into?

What would prevent family members who haven't had a falling out but are simply unhappy with the time they spend with children from going to court for access?

It's a can of worms and so many reasons have been given why. When those reasons are ignored I have to ask again, whose interests would really be served by this?

Why is extending the family that children are able see being equated with them being put at more risk with possibly more unsuitable people FGS?

Reasons are not being ignored, they're being disagreed with, and I vehemently disagree with the fact that every time this issue is discussed, and the EGP's who are entering into the discussion are not abusers, that abuse is constantly brought in.

When children are not at risk of abuse from the GP's they know and love, exactly whose interests are being served by destroying that relationship? Not the children's and not the GP's.

So many children are fought over in court already and I've seen first hand the impact that has on them. If instead of grandparents the children's act were ammended to include "family members" just how many pieces are we willing to cut children's lives into?

It seems to me that as long as the person gets “their time” with the child, they don’t really care, as it’s brought up time and time again and no one ever answers the question.

Why should grandparents be singled out for access when there are other people/relatives who have an equal or more significant role in a child’s life?

You absolutely cannot have a discussion about what is best for children without acknowledging that some children would be placed at risk by what is being discussed. That's short sighted, especially when children like Arthur and Baby Star are mentioned.

Also as hard is it is to hear, times are changing in many ways.

One example of that, my husband and I are both estranged from our mother's but for very different reasons. My husbands mother suffers from addiction and mental health issues. The outcome is that we were both abused but his is more obvious and evidenced as he was removed from her care.

Yet we have given her chances because we understand why she is how she is and we know that she was a young parent in an age where there wasn't a lot of help and support for mental health and there was a huge social stigma attached to getting that help. Eventually we had to accept that without those interventions she has become who she is and is entrenched and cannot see the problems in herself and so cannot seek help to change. So we don't have a relationship with her.

There is no guilt attached to my mother as her abuse and neglect were emotional, deliberate and unprovable. My husband will happily tell you that my mother is worse than his even though I find that hard given I know what he has been through.

Yet, I had huge mental health issues and went off the rails for a time with drinking. The difference is there was help and support available and I felt empowered to take it when I became a parent so the outcome for me and my children is vastly different.

So no, I won't ever stop fighting against the idea that childrens lives can be chopped into pieces the same way I won't stop talking about the importance of mental health, especially for children like me in order that they do not go on to repeat those past patterns and become what hurt them.

I care about the welfare of children too, I'm just seeing it from all angles.

It's heartbreaking that children lose access to good grandparents but the right to decide what constitutes a good grandparent needs to be in the hands of the parent. If the parents are unsuitable to make the right decision, access won't help those children. Mental health awareness, promotion of parenting skills, organisations around safeguarding all need proper funding and training as the first priority.

That's more important.

I'd rather know children are happy and safe from afar than have access to them.

GG65

*So many children are fought over in court already and I've seen first hand the impact that has on them. If instead of grandparents the children's act were ammended to include "family members" just how many pieces are we willing to cut children's lives into?*

It seems to me that as long as the person gets “their time” with the child, they don’t really care, as it’s brought up time and time again and no one ever answers the question.

Why should grandparents be singled out for access when there are other people/relatives who have an equal or more significant role in a child’s life?

It's a big can with many worms isn't it

I think abuse needs to be separated from this petition, as those young children, recently murdered, all had contact with GPs and other relatives. They were let down by a combination of lockdowns, restrictions and failures of schools, doctors, police and Social Services.

Most would agree abusers should not be near children, whether it’s the parents, the GPs or anyone else. I worked in Child Protection, and abusers come in all classes, ages and types.

So, taking the petition as it is, and not including any situation with abuse, I wouldn’t sign it.

Grandparents don’t have “rights” nor should they. Parental Responsibility is for parents, and they need to make the decisions, until the children are old enough to make their own. Two sets of relatives, scrapping over access would not, in my view, improve a child’s life.

Courts can intervene, in exceptional circumstances, to overrule this, if it is felt in the child’s best interests for them to see their GCs.

But, I do think parents should do what is in the best interests of their children, and encourage access, unless there is a very good reason not to do so.

If the adults could put their own angst with each other to one side, then the GPs and GC could still have a good relationship.

Myself and my ex estranged his mother, but it was genuinely in the best interests of our children. It’s a long saga, but we didn’t budge from that.

On the other hand, my parents were a different ballgame. My Dad was lovely, but my mother was an extremely difficult woman. She was like it with most people, including me. She was only interested in my younger brother, and put me down constantly as a child, forever trying to wreck my self worth. However, my Dad and I were close, I grew up in a large East End community, with extended family, so I got on with it, as you did then. I was well cared for, practically, and there was no physical or sexual abuse. But, it was wearing, knowing you were a disappointment.

I got married, too young at 18, to get away from her, and was reducing contact as far as I could, without causing any dramas.

Then I became pregnant…she morphed into the mother I wished I’d always had. Supportive and loving. I was pretty startled.

I had my daughter, then a son 18 months later. Although she sort of reverted to being negative with me, she was the best grandmother I could have, for in respect of my kids. I would have chosen her if I could lol

My dad was great, as I knew he would be. The children stayed weekends with them, went on holidays, and I trusted them 100%.

My children adored them, and were heartbroken when they died.

When I saw how loving she was, with them, I made the decision then, that whatever my relationship with her, I would never take those children out of her orbit, and I never did.

My mother and I sort of reached a truce of sorts - we were cordial, polite and respectful to each other, although there was no real affection on either side. It worked. I gritted my teeth with her at times, but the kids came first.

That, I think, I’d, ideally the best way - although I know it can’t always be like that.

Great Post DL

Diamondlily I do agree and I think it's wonderful you could achieve that. I was willing to allow a relationship for my children thinking my mothers issues were solely with me but in our case that wasn't so and I am glad they came to me with their concerns.

That could have been very different if they were all much younger though which, as much as I regret not walking away sooner, I think it happened at the right time for my my family to make informed choices together.

Good for you DSL not allowing your personal relationship with your mother to deprive your children of their GM.

apologies DL getting your name wrong.

If I didn’t want my children to see someone, family or otherwise, they wouldn’t see them. There’s a chance something like this might pass under the shitshow of a government we currently have, but I’d oppose it at every turn.

AmberSpyglass

If I didn’t want my children to see someone, family or otherwise, they wouldn’t see them. There’s a chance something like this might pass under the shitshow of a government we currently have, but I’d oppose it at every turn.

There would be mass opposition to it.

Not just from parents, but from individuals who value their right to live their lives free from state interference.

Where it would lead is my concern.

Granniesunite

Responsible parents aways check children's phones...

This subject needs to be looked at. It could be one day an adult grandchild who will start the process.

An adult grandchild won’t need court ordered access. They can choose a relationship or not.

….we’re all adult grandchildren, summer love.

AmberSpyglass

….we’re all adult grandchildren, summer love.

True enough.

I don’t think going to court would get me access to my grandparents though!!

Oh dear

I just got your point.

It’s been a day

Great post DiamondLily. Thanks for sharing your own experience. It chimes with many I’ve heard and nudges this discussion in a broader direction.
Smilesless again points out, rightly, that many estranged grandparents weren’t abusive towards their own children. Getting it wrong sometimes is normal parenting.

GG65 take away a parents rights now, give them to family members, and abusive children gaining POA more easily over a vulnerable parent is just one possibility.

It could leq in so many awful directions

How can a discussion about grandparents rights morph into abusive adult children gaining POA?

Because it logically opens up possibilities.

Another example, if this went through and an emotionally abusive grandparent was awarded grandparents rights, some parents wouldn't allow their children to go. A scenario which could brand parents as abusive and even lead to a jail sentence all because emotional abuse is very difficult to prove.

Children could lose time with their actual parents and be subjected to huge trauma but we should allow that?

How can a discussion about grandparents rights morph into abusive adult children gaining POA

Because it always has to Iam64.

Or what about a future where a grandparent objects to her daughters plan to end a pregnancy.

We already know things are going down hill in the US in regards to women's choices over their own bodies and futures.