Conference quokka::non_custodial_parents

     [.0 re-wrapped for 80 columns -- Brian]

   <<< SSAG::DISK$ARCH2:[NOTES$LIBRARY.QUOKKA]NON_CUSTODIAL_PARENTS.NOTE;2 >>>
              -< Welcome to the Non-Custodial Parents Conference >-
================================================================================
Note 414.0  Divorced Husband v deceased wife's parents for child cus  No replies
WOTVAX::jeagle.olo.dec.com::WOTVAX::gleadellj "Jean" 32 lines  29-JAN-1997 09:46
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basic background story. 

My brother was divorced fron his wife.  After the divorce she accused him of
many things which he didn't do and on two occasions she had him arrested after
accusing him of beating her up.  On the first occasion he was found guilty, on
the second occastion he was with independent witnesses who said that they would
testify in court on his behalf that he was with them at the time. 

The wife died suddenly before the case came to court, the two children aged 5
and 9 were at the maternal grandparents at the time of the wifes death.  Brother
had them vey other weekend.  On the first weekend that my brother had the
children to stay after her death we refused to take them back to the maternal
grandparents. Both Social services and police said that we were quite within our
rights to do this. 

For the record, a neighbour told a private detective that my brother hired to
question the neighbours ( He had an injuction keeping him away from the road
where she lived) on his behalf that he saw my brothers wife with bruises two
days before my brother was alleged to have hit her, but this neighbour would not
go to court because he still lived next to Julie. 

Question. 

My brother has now has the children on probation for three months under the
supervision of the social services.  Both my brother and his wife's parents have
put in for residency orders. The case to decide who will get the kids will come
to court in two weeks time and I was wondering what my brothers chances are of
keeping the girls because of his alleged record of violence against his wife. 
The relationship between brother and inlaws is very bitter. 

This is in the UK, I don't know if anybody in ths UK reads this file but I would
be interested in other peoples experiances in similar situations. 

    
    A lot of it will depend on the luck of the draw of the judge. If the 
    father has no charge of any kind of violence against the children,
    and has a good record of support and involvement in the children's
    lives, most judges will take that into account.  Judges usually weigh 
    heavily in favor of the parent.  

    On the other hand, if he gets one of those judges that has the attitude
    that he doesn't want to take the chance that the charges against the
    father even _might_ be true.......

    fred();

    Well obviously this is not clear. There are always 2 sides to every
    story.
    
    If the father has maintained a good relationship with the children, 
    demonstrated his involvement in their lives, supported them, including 
    financially, does not pose a risk to them, i.e. he's normal, then he
    would get custody.
    
    It would help his position NOT to go to war with the children's other
    relatives. Whatever they might say about him, the court will want to
    hear him say how he supports the kids continued relationships with
    their dead mother's family.
    
    But it appears, by virtue of prior conviction and a case in process, that
    he was hitting the ex and, whether he did or did not, it changes how
    people will judge him as a fit parent.
    
    I assume this is why his custody is under probation and supervised by 
    social services. However that may be a double edged sword. The grand 
    parents are, in effect, challenging the social services decision to allow 
    dad to have the kids for a 3 month trial period. IMO, if he is careful he 
    ought to get through it. 
    
    Martin
                            
     
    
    
    
    
    

Thank you for your replies, they give me a glimmer of hope.

My brother has no war with the grandparent, it is the grandparents
who blame by brother for all that has happend. He want them to have
as much access as they want and has told the court this.

A quick glimps into the background of the grandparents family.
The grandmother has been admitted to hospital twice with nervous 
breakdowns, one son has served seven years in prison for arson,
and the other son has also been arrested on various occasions
for various offences.

My broter has spent thousands of pounds in court fees fighting to 
keep access to the children every time his wife went against the 
court order to let him see them, he has alway paid maintenance over
and above what he was ordered to do. 

I am totaly disgusted at the way men are treated when it comes to 
divorce and custody and access.  I did not believe what men are having 
to go through to to try and keep access to their children, it is totaly
wrong.   No matter how good a man is if the wife says he isn't then
everbody believes the wife.   The sooner the law can be changed the better.
Just my twopence worth.

I will keep my fingers crossed that he gets a good judge Fred.

Regards

Jean

    EEGADDS!!! This looks rather suspisious too! Ex dies, suddenly? What
    does the crime lab say is the cause of death? If there isn't any foul
    play chances are that his custody is better than norm. But, if there is
    the wee bit of foul play, such as posioning or such, then of course the
    brother becomes the scape goat and will burn in hell for it even if he
    didn't do it. 

The night my S-I-L died my brother happen to be at my house,
the CID came and toook him away for questioning and kept 
him in overnight, after the post mortem next morning I was 
asked to go and collect him from the police sation, there
were no suspicious circumstances.  No death cetificate has 
yet been issued so I assume they are still investigating 
cause of death.

Jean

    I have a cronie whose ex would call the cops and make claim that he,
    Norm, was in violation of his restraining order. And the local police
    would show up, cuff him, and hall him off. Three times Norm had an
    aliby(sp). Three times he got off. No false charges were put upon the
    ex. And when Norms truck was suspiciously set afire, the police said
    they didn't want to get involved because it was a marrital matter, even
    though Norm had been legally divorce for some 3 years! Re-take 'War of
    the Roses'!!