Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

How can a child be disciplined when he has two primary caregivers?

Add Topic
I am the friend and support of a woman whose ex wants the kids so that he can get the pension and not have to go to work. He has openly told her this. The seven year old was taken by his father from the school he was attending and moved to live with the father and grandmother on the other side of town, without the mothers knowledge or agreement. The child is not regularly at school, is not always clean and his behaviour has deteriorated dramatically in the past year since this happened. The Family Court is insisting that it is not in the child's interests to move him back to his old school again although he was doing well there. The problem now is that when his mother has him for the weekend once a fortnight he is naughty and refuses to do anything he is told, for example she can't make him go to bed because he doesn't have a set bedtime at his dad's. If she insists he asks to go back to his dad and calls her a meany.  The mother loves her child and was devasted when the father took him without her knowledge, she is now watching the boy turn into a little feral and because of the Family Court order is helpless to do anything about it. It is harder for a person to get a job than to get the care of a child. Someone should check the background, experience and ethics of anyone going through the Family Court for access to a child.  
I'd suggest doing a search for parallel parenting, although basically the same issue of parents having different attitudes toward rules and discipline exists in many, perhaps even the majority, intact families e.g. the very often heard "Wait till the other parent gets home".

Perhaps the parent who you are supporting could participate in a parenting course or parenting courses as such courses may provide some answers as to how to discipline a child, that is often the advice given to the "spends time with parent".

The local library may well also have some useful books on the subject.
summerbird said
I amthe friend and support of a woman whose ex wants the kids so that he can get the pension and not have to go to work.He has openly told her this. The seven year old was taken by his father from the school he was attending and moved to live with the father and grandmother on the other side of town, without the mothers knowledge or agreement. The child is not regularly at school, is not always clean and his behaviour has deteriorated dramatically in the past year since this happened. The Family Court is insisting that it is not in the child's interests to move him back to his old school again although he was doing well there.The problem now is that when his mother has him for the weekendonce a fortnight he is naughty and refuses to do anything he is told, for example she can't make him go to bed because he doesn't have a set bedtime at his dad's. If she insists he asks to go back to his dad and calls her a meany. The mother loves her child and was devasted when the father took him without her knowledge, she is now watching the boy turn into a little feral andbecause of the Family Court order is helpless to do anything about it. It is harder for a person to get a job than to get the care of a child. Someone should check the background, experience and ethics of anyone going through the Family Court for access to a child.
Summerbird I think your post is misleading or you are a troll.
Father grabs the child to live him and the Family Court just says its OK and the Mother then gets alternate weekends, what are you not telling us?

Connan when there are no court orders a parent can grab a child and then the other parent must take court action to try to gain the childs return. Most times this leads to court and takes a long time to get to a final hearing and yes then most often the child stays with the person who is the residential parent at the time.
Usually it is a mother who holds the child and the father who has to fight, but in the case of summerbird it looks like the father was the first to snatch and then refuse the mother.
Snatching is very common and in my sons case like most others it was the mother who snatched first and now he has to fight to see his child.
kalimnadancer said
Connan when there are no court orders a parent can grab a child and then the other parent must take court action to try to gain the childs return. Most times this leads to court and takes a long time to get to a final hearing and yes then most often the child stays with the person who is the residential parent at the time.
Usually it is a mother who holds the child and the father who has to fight, but in the case of summerbird it looks like the father was the first to snatch and then refuse the mother.
Incorrect, this child was attending school so presumably had a settled environment and then the Father grabbed the child and also swapped schools. Orders or no orders this would have been dealt with in days as a recovery in the FMC. There is much unsaid in the original post.
kalimnadancer said
Snatching is very common and in my sons case like most others it was the mother who snatched first and now he has to fight to see his child.
Your Sons case is not applicable, the child was less than 6 months old and the child was not snatched.
Conan said
kalimnadancer said
Connan when there are no court orders a parent can grab a child and then the other parent must take court action to try to gain the childs return. Most times this leads to court and takes a long time to get to a final hearing and yes then most often the child stays with the person who is the residential parent at the time.
Usually it is a mother who holds the child and the father who has to fight, but in the case of summerbird it looks like the father was the first to snatch and then refuse the mother.
Incorrect, this child was attending school so presumably had a settled environment and then the Father grabbed the child and also swapped schools. Orders or no orders this would have been dealt with in days as a recovery in the FMC. There is much unsaid in the original post.
kalimnadancer said
Snatching is very common and in my sons case like most others it was the mother who snatched first and now he has to fight to see his child.
 Your Sons case is not applicable, the child was less than 6 months old and the child was not snatched.
  Is it any wonder noone posts on here anyore when pigs like Conan spout their barking rubbish

as head of security on this site Conan what is your qualification to make judgements on peoples lives

NONE, so why not shut up and let people talk
To clarify: Tthe child was attending school, father lived nearby with his brother. There was no Court Order in place because mother thought they were coping well, father had regular time with child and child was happily settled at school. Father moved two hours away and took the child without telling the mother. She didn't even know where he was. When she first went to the Family Court, the judge said the child could spend two weeks at each school. Can you believe that? but when she took the child back to his original school after about three months the child became hysterical. She thinks the father threatened him, and as the child was so distressed she let him go back to his father on that occasion. When she went back to the Family Court a different judge said the child should go back to his original school from the beginning of the next term but the father never brought him back, and as she doesn't have a car and the father had moved again she was unable to do anything about it. This has dragged on for over a year now. Different judges keep giving father another chance because they don't want to uproot the child, then she got a new lawyer and everything had to start all over again, anything that had happened in the court previously was disregarded and so it continues. Meanwhile the child is living and going to a school in rough area, she doesn't have a problem with disciplining him but he has learnt from his peers how to misbehave and while she doesn't have him permanently under her roof she has very little control over him. Just one more example of how the Family Court can mess up kids lives.

summerbird

I would like to add to my previous posting. This child was not snatched by his mother, but by his father. The police advised her that the father has the same rights as the mother so they wouldn't help her get him back, and the Family Court hearing was several weeks later by which time the child was at his new school. Then the father didn't show up for hearings or didn't have a lawyer, and you would think that that would be enough to turn the court against him, but no, they just keep giving him more chances. Recently the child had no shoes and father wouldn't buy him any, also he misses at least one day a week of school because the father is drinking the night before and doesn't get up, but they still gave him another chance. Justice? What justice? And what about the child?  
The Family court makes decisions based on " The Child's Best Interests" In Just about every scenario  played out in family court it is obvious the best interest of the child is which parent physically  takes the child first and after that the NON resident parent has buckleys as the Resident parent merely gets slaps on the wrists from court but a whole lot of support from CSA and other  Taxpayer funded govt departments.

Eg if a man walks into centrelink with his children and seeks single parenting payment he is advised he must have a court order or signed documents from the mother to state children are in his care…. on the flipside a mother can walk into centrelink and say i want to leave my husband what are my rights and what will i get paid and they will give all the details and give numbers to support groups for women.



as in this particular example the parent who acted first in taking the child was and is continually rewarded as apparently the best interests of the child include moving regularly not going to school everyday and from the sounds of it being emotionally abused….. and yes  if a child is too scared to say anything about the lives with parent as they are punished everytime the visits parent does a new affidavit for court stating the child has said  this or expressed that wish or  contains anything the lives with parent does not like. When a child hears everyday so n so  did this or that to me  or cheated  or whatever and then when they get there once every 6 months court allowed time with the child  and the visits parent spends the  entire day of contact answering the  childrens questions  like why did you cheat on lives with parent , why did you bash live withs parent, why dont you send lives with parent money because we are poor, why do you spend all your money on  new child and none on us…. all of money includes living expenses , new child is not  my real sibling because they are not mum's child and only mum's children are my real brother or sister, youre not a real parent because we dont live with you, lives with new partner is our real dad because he lives with us, real dads would do anything  for us , mum cried when she told us she had to force  you to spend time with us and talk to us, (father is initiating applicant and mother seeks father to have no contact with children and mother has moved interstate without consent and children are saying they are going to move to a place 6 hrs from  a major city when court is finished).



hope some of that makes sense

You can fool some of the people some of the time but you cant fool all of the people all of  the time unless they work for CSA and youre a Payee:)
Hey summerbird,

I've read your posts and realise that as the support person you have tried to provide as much information as possible without identifying any of the parties.  However, at the risk of suffering a similar fate (response) to Conan, I'm afraid it doesn't really add up to me either.  Reason being - if you research judgements involving a similar circumstance of a child being removed from their current school and residential address the Courts will usually order for the child to be returned and re-enrolled in their former school.  The only judgements I have seen to date where this has not happen is where there are safety concerns for the child in being returned.   

While certainly more fathers are now being granted primary care than in previous times, if you consider the amount of fathers who have raised legitimate concerns about the risk of harm to their child continuing to reside in the mothers primary care then balance this against any allegations made by the mother, in the absense of risk being proven there is still a higher proportion of outcomes in the mothers favour. 

As such, the odds of a child who has previously been living with their mother in a settled environment and attending the same school for the past couple of years (in the absense of risk), not being ordered to return to the mother care would seem unlikely.  But hey I'm no law professional or legal wizz here, so maybe I am wrong!?!

But yes…I am thinking there is more to this also.  Perhaps as the support person you are unaware of these "additional" details?

Cheers   

"Never, "for the sake of peace and quiet," deny your own experience or convictions". Dag Hammarskjold
I needed help with my case and couldn't afford a lawyer and found these guys invaluable  srl-resources.org
As another victim of this snatch and accuse and delay strategy I have some thoughts.

The shared parenting amendments relegate status quo to a secondary consideration. The Full Court in Goode found that abysmal Cowling precedent, namely, that the court should not disturb existent arrangements unless there was damned good reason, no longer applied. The child's best interests are the primary consideration and must always be paramount. The court is not supposed to have regard for the interim parenting arrangements particularly if not by consent. How then does parental abduction remain the single most effective strategy for obtaining final custody?

In my view the presumption that both parents are good enough and that maximum practical time is in the best interests of the child must be applied at interim level, unless there is definitive evidence, not just allegation that the child has been harmed either by abuse or family violence. This default application of the existent presumption at interim immediately reduces the abduction and adversarial incentive.  

Some judges recognise this. In the case of Skelton & Donaldson the Mother was ordered to return from another city for the child to spend equal interim time with her former heroin addict and convicted armed robber husband. At least he was given the benefit of the doubt in the interim.

Once the maximum practical parenting time has been implemented (as the interim presumption) the Mother can make all the usual allegations of fear, non-communication, family violence she wants but unless there is clear evidence that the child has been adversely affected at trial they wont matter, in fact pursuing such allegations risks the unfriendly parent perception and reduced time and costs. It is likely most cases wont even proceed to final in such circumstances.

I cite the case of Bliss & Bliss. Father admitted he had assaulted the Mother previously in fact had broken her collarbone. Alternate weeks in interim. Finding of high conflict and acrimony at trial but more importantly that there was no adverse effect of this on the children. Alternate weeks continue.

The former government gave us the legislation that can overcome this generational abuse by the family court system. The judiciary knows what is going on and that shared parenting is in the best interests of the child in the vast majority of cases but still it is rare that shared parenting is ordered.

What can we do? I am not advocating financial counter-terrorism or non-compliance with a judiciary legislating from the bench or rolling strikes on child support payments. However skyrocketing expenses of family court and CSA and welfare administration got the financial attention of the politicians providing the genesis of the 2006 amendments.
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets