# Striking back in relationships, (no not physically obviously)



## grahamg (Apr 30, 2021)

An odd thread title for a relationship thread, BUT, (there's always a but!  ), if your experience in whatever relationship it might be, is one of being ignored or shunned, and as far as I'm aware being treated in that way denies you the interaction all human beings need, ("No man is an island" I was told at school, and all that stuff, was it said by John Dunne?), then we're being denied life aren't we(?).

We're now in an age where we can spout our views to folks across the world with ease, (as we've been able to do for maybe twenty years or so), and yet at the same time so many seem to have difficulties in interpersonal relationships, maybe more so than in previous generations, so what if anything may be done about it we might agree upon?

Here is my idea, for those of you totally shunned in circumstances where you feel you couldn't have done much differently in the past, leading to your becoming shunned and estranged, my idea is to find a way to "strike back"!!!!!

You don't think you wish to strike back against someone you love, (or should live, like maybe your own child), but if all trying to behave as though you'll always be there for them gets you disrespect, being shunned more completely, what then can you do, carry on failing as you have for over twenty years, or try something else?

Folks here on the forum don't seem to agree with the idea of calling for respecting elders, and giving legal rights to decent parents sometimes beyond the child's interests, so that ideas out as a way of "striking back", so what's left?

All I can think of is returning the negative behaviour shown towards you to your own child, so that in that way they get some idea what being shunned feels like, (should you live long enough for the opportunity to shun them appear, when they condescendingly allow you a modicum of attention).

Sorry, that's the best I can come up with, strike back at those denying your humanity, and try to assist others similarly shunned.


----------



## Pepper (Apr 30, 2021)

Love cannot be forced no matter how deserving of it you are.


----------



## cdestroyer (Apr 30, 2021)

love is a four letter word..........sometimes


----------



## Judycat (Apr 30, 2021)

Why not just show up at the kid's place once a month just to ask how he's doing? Don't stay long. Just listen and leave. Maybe say it's good seeing you or something similar before you step off. Of course if the kid is still immature and abusive make it once every six months.


----------



## Knight (Apr 30, 2021)

This paragraph I'm guessing is directed towards striking back at an adult child that shows negative behavior towards you. 

Quote
"All I can think of is returning the negative behavior shown towards you to your own child, so that in that way they get some idea what being shunned feels like, (should you live long enough for the opportunity to shun them appear, when they condescendingly allow you a modicum of attention)." 

As difficult as it might be as the parent [you]. A simple thank you for whatever that attention is/was will be taking the higher road. Leave it at that and continue to live your best life free of what you can't control. 

Do you think striking back reaffirms whatever caused the animosity?


----------



## Murrmurr (Apr 30, 2021)

"All I can think of is returning the negative behaviour shown towards you to your own child, so that in that way they get some idea what being shunned feels like"

That's not going to work. Your child will only know how you've made _her_ feel, and she certainly won't feel loved. She'll feel like you don't even want to be around her.


----------



## Gaer (Apr 30, 2021)

Forgive and get over it.  "Getting back at someone" is rather childish, don't you think?


----------



## grahamg (Apr 30, 2021)

Gaer said:


> Forgive and get over it.  "Getting back at someone" is rather childish, don't you think?


In a world where the interests of one (the offspring) always trumps the interests the other, (the parent), then we're dealing with a "dog eat dog" situation aren't we, childish or not, (Vanessa Pupavac has written a paper about "Infantilised Citizenship" in the UK, where she describes the lack of any legal "statuary" rights in the UK contravening human rights, so if shes to be believed this backs up my argument I believe).


----------



## grahamg (Apr 30, 2021)

Murrmurr said:


> "All I can think of is returning the negative behaviour shown towards you to your own child, so that in that way they get some idea what being shunned feels like"
> 
> That's not going to work. Your child will only know how you've made _her_ feel, and she certainly won't feel loved. She'll feel like you don't even want to be around her.


Nothing works though, in a legal framework such as currently in place, "someone else" gets to decide your worth as a parent, and once you surrender the right to say what you wish or decide needs to be said to your own child. Even as a decent loving parent, you've surrendered your relationship with your child by doing this, as they have maybe done due to pressures exerted upon them, telling them "the child's (i.e. their) interests always come before the interests of others", that message is not benign in my view.
"Its a cruel world" when you encounter family law post divorce or separation, hence my suggestions may be all there is.
 I doubt all the policies being promoted by so many fathers rights groups will improve matters eithrr, because "Equal Parenting" in my view means two people/parents trying to fulfill the same role, and shared parenting with someone you can no longer live with, and knows exactly how to make your life a nightmare or create difficulties, isn't a recipe for a peaceful, sustainable situation in my view.


----------



## grahamg (Apr 30, 2021)

Knight said:


> This paragraph I'm guessing is directed towards striking back at an adult child that shows negative behavior towards you. Quote "All I can think of is returning the negative behavior shown towards you to your own child, so that in that way they get some idea what being shunned feels like, (should you live long enough for the opportunity to shun them appear, when they condescendingly allow you a modicum of attention)." As difficult as it might be as the parent [you]. A simple thank you for whatever that attention is/was will be taking the higher road. Leave it at that and continue to live your best life free of what you can't control.
> Do you think striking back reaffirms whatever caused the animosity?


I think there is a lot in what you say, and striking back may do as you say. Some fathers do nonetheless choose to shun those who have shunned them, and I'd say its unfortunate, but in the situation I've faced and not done till now, (twenty five years on from being forced out and failed due to lack of support), maybe I'm the fool(?).
Some do manage to act as you suggest I'd guess, (in fact I've met those who have come through the family law system, overcome the difficulties etc., and some even attended meetings and protests about family law with their now grown up children they've got together with again).
However the role of parent you're putting forward isn't the "loving role" some of us choose for ourselves and our child, even should it be doomed to fail if not supported by those in authority, and "social norms" mean your freedom to behave as you see fit isn't supported either, (I accept those doing as you suggest may be loving in their own way though).


----------



## Nathan (Apr 30, 2021)

grahamg said:


> Folks here on the forum don't seem to agree with the idea of calling for respecting elders, and giving legal rights to decent parents sometimes beyond the child's interests, so that ideas out as a way of "striking back", so what's left?


Really ?  I guess I missed the poll.


----------



## grahamg (Apr 30, 2021)

Nathan said:


> Really ?  I guess I missed the poll.


There hasn't been a poll, (of course), but if you're suggesting you do support my call for parental rights sometimes beyond the child's interests, I believe you are unique on this forum in the years I've been posting about these issues, (about four years!).


----------



## grahamg (May 1, 2021)

Some of these I found taken after I searched, "Our parents sayings" may amuse and interest you:


----------



## grahamg (May 1, 2021)




----------



## grahamg (May 1, 2021)

The funniest and maybe most poignant of them all:


----------



## Nathan (May 1, 2021)

grahamg said:


> There hasn't been a poll, (of course), but if you're suggesting you do support my call for parental rights sometimes beyond the child's interests, I believe you are unique on this forum in the years I've been posting about these issues, (about four years!).


Well, when you said:


grahamg said:


> Folks here on the forum don't seem to agree with the idea of calling for respecting elders, and giving legal rights to decent parents sometimes beyond the child's interests, so that ideas out as a way of "striking back", so what's left?



...it sounds to me that you're implying that people on this forum are *against* respecting elders and giving legal rights to decent parents. Regarding "giving legal rights to decent parents":  what does that mean?  Legal rights to do _what _exactly?  
Parents already a full range of rights and responsibilities regarding the raising of their children.


----------



## HoneyNut (May 1, 2021)

grahamg said:


> You don't think you wish to strike back against someone you love, (or should live, like maybe your own child), but if all trying to behave as though you'll always be there for them gets you disrespect, being shunned more completely, what then can you do, carry on failing as you have for over twenty years, or try something else?



You sound like you are hurting and feeling melancholy.  But, any kind of revenge is not okay and I don't think would make you feel better.  If its been over twenty years, and you have not come to an acceptance, it might be worth pursuing some technique that helps a person come to a peaceful acceptance.  I'm not sure what that would be, maybe some sort of meditation thing.


----------



## grahamg (May 1, 2021)

Nathan said:


> ...it sounds to me that you're implying that people on this forum are *against* respecting elders and giving legal rights to decent parents. Regarding "giving legal rights to decent parents":  what does that mean?  Legal rights to do _what _exactly? Parents already a full range of rights and responsibilities regarding the raising of their children.


In the UK there are no legal, (/statuary i.e. written down) rights for any parents, decent or not, so differing situations in some western countries (obviously).
I say people here don't support my views with good reason, someone could check I suppose, but maybe its not necessary because all the fathers rights groups I know of in any country can't seem to call for a "rebuttable presumption in favour of contact", based upon treating decent parents in the manner I'm trying to describe or explain, (meaning the law framed so sometimes there is a requirement to support the parents interests over some government appointed officials view of what's best for the child).


----------



## grahamg (May 1, 2021)

HoneyNut said:


> You sound like you are hurting and feeling melancholy.  But, any kind of revenge is not okay and I don't think would make you feel better.  If its been over twenty years, and you have not come to an acceptance, it might be worth pursuing some technique that helps a person come to a peaceful acceptance.  I'm not sure what that would be, maybe some sort of meditation thing.


I've met two fathers (at least), who have enough hurt you might say, or pride certainly, and a feeling of their own self worth, who stated that if their child rejected them in the manner so many children do choose to reject one or other parent, that so far as they were concerned, that would be the end so far as their children ever seeing them again!!!

They just wouldn't put up with being treated in that way, (see the last placard above headed "My promise to my children" about children telling parents they hate them as a reference point). One of those fathers rejected all four of his children because he'd been shunned by them when his marriage split up, and years later when as adults those children tried to make amends he would have none of it.

So when I said in an earlier post "the family court system is a cruel world" I do mean just that, with all kinds of decent parents and grandparents getting a very rough deal, "because their interests do not count" (do they!?).


----------



## Nathan (May 1, 2021)

grahamg said:


> I've met two fathers (at least), who have enough hurt you might say, or pride certainly, and a feeling of their own self worth, who stated that if their child rejected them in the manner so many children do choose to reject one or other parent, that so far as they were concerned, that would be the end so far as their children ever seeing them again!!!
> 
> They just wouldn't put up with being treated in that way, (see the last placard above headed "My promise to my children" about children telling parents they hate them as a reference point). One of those fathers rejected all four of his children because he'd been shunned by them when his marriage split up, and years later when as adults those children tried to make amends he would have none of it.
> 
> So when I said in an earlier post "the family court system is a cruel world" I do mean just that, with all kinds of decent parents and grandparents getting a very rough deal, "because their interests do not count" (do they!?).


So is the thrust of this thread have to do with coping with being rejected by one's children, resulting from a divorce action?   If so, then that is something I can relate to.  My ex-wife did her level best to turn the kids against me.  It did work, for a while, but eventually my daughter and son figured out what their mother had done.      I think we are all pretty much "over" all of that now.


----------



## grahamg (May 1, 2021)

Nathan said:


> So is the thrust of this thread have to do with coping with being rejected by one's children, resulting from a divorce action?   If so, then that is something I can relate to.  My ex-wife did her level best to turn the kids against me.  It did work, for a while, but eventually my daughter and son figured out what their mother had done.      I think we are all pretty much "over" all of that now.


I think my intention is to suggest its no use being walked all over, even when its your own children doing it, (for whatever reason, and you and I can certainly agree on the main one I think).


----------



## Judycat (May 1, 2021)

Keeping the family intact, no divorce, doesn't guarantee togetherness. Sons especially when they marry, the wife comes first and her family calls the shots.  Let go, but keep the door open. Cutting them off could mean a permanent goodbye. Is that what you want?


----------



## Murrmurr (May 1, 2021)

Graham, if you fault the court then why would you "strike back" at your child? Even if your child was in any way complicit in the court's decision, I urge you to keep the two issues; 1) law, and 2) your relationship with your child; separate.


----------



## Lethe200 (May 1, 2021)

I had a hard time figuring out what the OP was about. I got that he was unhappy, I just wasn't sure if he was unhappy with the kids, the ex, the courts - or maybe all three?

I don't know if this fits into this discussion, but it's an interesting anecdote on how different generations view divorce.

I thought it was a shame when my sister wanted a divorce in 1987 after 10 yrs of marriage. But they worked it out amicably. In CA it's automatic joint custody - you have to fight if you want sole custody. They bought houses nearby one another - the kids went to elementary/jr high in one school district and to HS in the district next to it. 

Our mother huffed and said, "Well, I don't intend on seeing John (the ex) again," since as far as she was concerned, once a family member got divorced the ex was "out of sight, out of mind". Absolutely no longer part of our family. It wasn't that she didn't like him - she liked him just fine. He just didn't "count" any more, to her way of thinking.

I replied, "On the contrary, you're going to see him at every family get-together. He is, after all, the father of my grand-niece and grand-nephew, and happens to be one of our best friends!"

We have a wonderful photo from 2007 of my 80-yr old mother merrily dancing with John at his son/her grandson's wedding.

John and my sister are still friendly, even now that the kids are grown and have kids of their own. His girlfriends are always welcomed as part of our extended family. My sister's more solitary; she fills her life with charitable work and hasn't dated in decades.


----------



## grahamg (May 1, 2021)

Murrmurr said:


> Graham, if you fault the court then why would you "strike back" at your child? Even if your child was in any way complicit in the court's decision, I urge you to keep the two issues; 1) law, and 2) your relationship with your child; separate.


I've met people in a similar situation to mine who found everything changed when the ex passed away, BUT, (there's always a "but"!), at some stage you have to accept you are being wilfully shunned, and taken to a fairly extreme level, and as I said in an earlier post I've met fathers who just don't tolerate this kind of thing. Yes I would like to see courts, and family law make the change I've suggested, though how such a change might occur when even fathers groups don't ask for it I believe, (well it isn't likely!).


----------



## SetWave (May 1, 2021)

Gaer said:


> Forgive and get over it.  "Getting back at someone" is rather childish, don't you think?


You took the words right out of my mouth. Could not agree more.


----------



## grahamg (May 1, 2021)

SetWave said:


> You took the words right out of my mouth. Could not agree more.


No matter whether it is childish or not, try putting up with being shunned for twenty five years, then false acknowledgements or token recognition to mislead you, I doubt the Dalai Lama himself would remain a peacemaker, (okay maybe not him, I'm just being childish again  ).
By suggesting its time to strike back I believe its maybe the only logical response, "when all else fails, or is bound to fail", but go ahead and criticise, " we all think we know better what other people should do in their private lives very often",(and that in a sense is the nub of the problem!  ).


----------



## SetWave (May 1, 2021)

We can be better than that.


----------



## grahamg (May 1, 2021)

SetWave said:


> We can be better than that.


We can yes, but live my life, (or "walk in my shoes for a day" as they say), and you may understand things a little differently.

I've witnessed so many decent parents and grandparents being treated badly, very badly, I've read and believe understood the views of experts dissenting from the family law policies predominating in western societies, (Professor Akira Morita being one), that I would argue "you can be better than" being another person promoting the same policies causing the oppression of those decent parents, but I'm not expecting you to!


----------



## SetWave (May 1, 2021)

I have walked many a rotten mile within and without my own shoes to have learned to let things go. Just walk away and keep walking.


----------



## grahamg (May 1, 2021)

SetWave said:


> I have walked many a rotten mile within and without my own shoes to have learned to let things go. Just walk away and keep walking.


We've both walked a few rotten miles then, BUT, (there's always a "but"), not in each others shoes have we(?) 
Its not necessary for everyone to learn to respond in a similar fashion to the one we've preferred and some people I respect have chosen not to move on when others have urged them to do so in their lives, or private lives, " regardless"!


----------



## SetWave (May 1, 2021)

BUT, we share the human experience and I have learned that striking back is never the correct path.


----------



## grahamg (May 1, 2021)

SetWave said:


> BUT, we share the human experience and I have learned that striking back is never the correct path.


Confuscion thinking?
(surely not, even towards those bullying you?)


----------



## SetWave (May 1, 2021)

Call it what you will. It is simply the correct way to deal with bullies who are just scared, insecure cowards.

"And if they stare
Just let them burn their eyes
On you moving.
And if they shout
Don't let it change a thing
That you're doing.
Hold your head up, oh
Hold your head up, oh
Hold your head up, oh
Hold your head high."


----------



## Knight (May 1, 2021)

grahamg said:


> I think there is a lot in what you say, and striking back may do as you say. Some fathers do nonetheless choose to shun those who have shunned them, and I'd say its unfortunate, but in the situation I've faced and not done till now, (twenty five years on from being forced out and failed due to lack of support), maybe I'm the fool(?).
> Some do manage to act as you suggest I'd guess, (in fact I've met those who have come through the family law system, overcome the difficulties etc., and some even attended meetings and protests about family law with their now grown up children they've got together with again).
> However the role of parent you're putting forward isn't the "loving role" some of us choose for ourselves and our child, even should it be doomed to fail if not supported by those in authority, and "social norms" mean your freedom to behave as you see fit isn't supported either, (I accept those doing as you suggest may be loving in their own way though).


I don't think you understood my post.

I quoted what you wrote 

Wanting to strike back sounds to me like you may be the root cause of the hostility you post about your daughter 's attitude towards you.


----------



## grahamg (May 1, 2021)

Knight said:


> I don't think you understood my post.
> I quoted what you wrote
> Wanting to strike back sounds to me like you may be the root cause of the hostility you post about your daughter 's attitude towards you.


No I'm not, though even if I were I would still demand to be the kind of parent I believe I should be, (once again refer to the last placard I posted about a parent having failed if your child hasn't told you "they hate you" at least once!).
Apologies for not interpreting your post as the criticism you wished to impart, and of course putting forth ones own life story in any way on any forum is setting yourself up to be pilloried or "trolled".
Never mind, for those so wedded to the idea everyone should "move on" in whatever situation life has thrown at them, I want to point out twenty five years of essentially putting up with being shunned, trying to be tolerant and understand my child, I'm now "moving on" to at least a different approach by suggesting I might shun her back, should the opportunity arise!


----------



## C'est Moi (May 2, 2021)

Deleted.


----------



## Zone (May 2, 2021)

Life is short.
We’re living our second half of it, or maybe our last quarter.
Our children are only on loan to us.
Each person in our relationship at any juncture of our life is only temporary.
They can leave us in many ways; by divorce, disown, death...
We gave our all, our best because at that point of time, that was correct to us. We would not feel comfortable doing it any other way. So we need to realize that it was our choice to give... and give...
I may be wrong, perhaps you’re thinking “what do I get after all I’ve done...”
Nothing.
We cannot expect anything in return. Technically. 
We chose to give.
They can choose not to give.
There may be laws governing that, but even if they gave because it’s lawful, I believe the heart is unhappy.
The life, starting today...
Do I want to be happy?
What is my baggage?
Is it possible to discard?
What can I do by myself, for myself to achieve a happy state of mind?

If you can’t walk away physically..
You can do that in your mind, create a distance...
You need to have the courage to let it go, it’s for your own good. No one can help remove your baggage.
We can only suggest...

Peace


----------



## grahamg (May 2, 2021)

Zone said:


> Life is short.
> We’re living our second half of it, or maybe our last quarter.
> Our children are only on loan to us.
> Each person in our relationship at any juncture of our life is only temporary.
> ...


I do appreciate your post and your thinking to, and having said that, (whilst disagreeing obviously in some ways, I think it is churlish to complain when you've laid out what is in your heart), I must just say you cannot say "NO" to your heredity completely, the DNA you've had passed to you by both your parents, and as is known by those who study these things, the recessive genes only finding expression in your grandparents may come to the fore in the child. Without getting too deep, inheritable diseases cannot be denied simply because someone asserts, "I'm not your child", or "You're not my real father", (two statements my daughter never made btw, and she still uses her maiden name in her professional life, which I assume means she has some pride in it!).  
Still, thank you for your thoughts and the trouble you've taken in posting them.


----------



## grahamg (May 2, 2021)

The aims of the fathers rights movement groups:

http://www.separateddads.co.uk/what...text=Its aim is to keep,and a great deal more.

Quote:
"....., men can seem left out in the cold. If they feel a sense of injustice in the way the courts have treated them, over access or other issues, they might feel quite isolated.

But there are a number of different groups that work on behalf of men. In most instances they’ve been formed by men themselves from a sense of outrage. Some – for better or worse – have received a fair amount of media coverage, but most operate largely under the radar of publicity.

They do share a lot of common goals, especially fighting for the rights of fathers, which some of them believe have been trampled by the rights of mothers, and that fathers often never receive a fair deal in court."

(there are a whole lot of heartrending stories to be found at the bottom of the page showing just how those going through our UK family law system are suffering too)


----------



## Dana (May 2, 2021)

_What is really the problem mate? You don't seem to be getting on top of this situation._


----------



## Pepper (May 2, 2021)

grahamg said:


> I want to point out twenty five years of essentially putting up with being shunned, trying to be tolerant and understand my child, I'm now "moving on" to at least a different approach by suggesting *I might shun her back*, should the opportunity arise!


Do your daughter a favor, if you're able.  Shun her back.  She either needs the rest or hasn't noticed.


----------



## grahamg (May 2, 2021)

Bob Geldof's views, quote:
"Relatively recently, Bob Geldof, organiser of the Live Aid and the Live 8 projects, has become involved in the British fathers' rights movement. Geldof claims to be an iconoclast, calling his arguments rants which express his feelings towards British family law, as well as towards issues of a more personal matter.

Bob Geldof, and others, argue that without substantial changes, the application of current British custody law will lead to a generation of feral children. Geldof has written:



> The law must know it is contributing to the problem. It is creating vast wells of misery, massive discontent, an unstable society of feral children and reckless adolescents who have no understanding of authority or ultimate sanction, no knowledge of a man’s love and how it is different but equal to a woman’s, irresponsible mothers, drifting, hopeless fathers, problem and violent ill-educated sons and daughters, a disconnect from the extended family and society at large, vast swathes of cynicism and repeat pattern behaviour in subsequent adult relationships.


Fathers' rights campaigners question the assumption that it can ever be legitimate for the state to collude in disrupting a loving and natural relationship between a father and his children. Bob Geldof has written evocatively on this subject:



> I cannot even say the words. A huge emptiness would well in my stomach, a deep loathing for those who would deign to tell me they would ALLOW me ACCESS to my children — those I loved above all, those I created, those who gave meaning to everything I did, those that were the very best of us two and the absolute physical manifestation of our once blinding love. Who the f**k are they that they should ALLOW anything? REASONABLE CONTACT!!! Is the law mad? Am I a criminal? An ABSENT parent. A RESIDENT/NON-RESIDENT parent. This Lawspeak which you all speak so fluently, so unthinkingly, so hurtfully, must go.


----------



## grahamg (May 2, 2021)

Dana said:


> _What is really the problem mate? You don't seem to be getting on top of this situation._


See Bob Geldof's views just posted to give your some idea "mate", (you wont believe who used to call me "mate", the man my ex ran off with, "are you related perhaps"?).


----------



## Dana (May 2, 2021)

grahamg said:


> See Bob Geldof's views just posted to give your some idea "mate", (you wont believe who used to call me "mate", the man my ex ran off with, "are you related perhaps"?).



Is the man Aussie? Over here we call both male and female "mate" if we know them well and I feel I know you oh so well


----------



## grahamg (May 2, 2021)

Pepper said:


> Do your daughter a favor, if you're able.  Shun her back.  She either needs the rest or hasn't noticed.


Thanks for the advice, whatever would I do without people who know absolutely nothing pitching in with their pithy comments!!

In my mind the predilection for assuming fathers/parents must have done something "wrong", makes my case the law needs to include a presumption in favour of contact for decent parents.

Just to boast for a while, so you get where I'm coming from without any room for doubt, my daughter is someone any father would be proud of their part in bring her into this world, and assisting her over all the years of contact I fought for, and whatever row you wish to fuel, or any others wish to fuel, or blame upon me, means nothing. In reality the row is between my daughter up to the age of twelve, when no matter how many times she said she hated me, she quickly added, "Keep coming daddy", till it came to the point whereby at the end of a fairly normal contact visit, (with her mother unusually waiting in front of her house for our child to return, as a reminder of what our daughter should be saying to stop any contact I believe), and my daughter thereafter when my daughter has shunned me, if you see what I mean(?).  

I am here to stir things up, and if you bother to read the comments of all those fathers and their supporters posted above, and her again, you get some idea of the size of this travesty being perpetrated upon so many decent people.

http://www.separateddads.co.uk/what...text=Its aim is to keep,and a great deal more.


----------



## grahamg (May 2, 2021)

Dana said:


> Is the man Aussie? Over here we call both male and female "mate" if we know them well and I feel I know you oh so well


No he's a four times married Englishman who gave up his son aged two years old when his first marriage failed for adoption by the mother (so he didn't have to pay towards him I'd perhaps fairly suggest).

You know me you say, "how quaint"!


----------



## Dana (May 2, 2021)

grahamg said:


> No he's a four times married Englishman who gave up his son aged two years old when his first marriage failed for adoption by the mother (so he didn't have to pay towards him I'd perhaps fairly suggest).
> 
> You know me you say, "how quaint"!



_I'm English, so of course I'm "quaint." Look Graham, no one can know exactly what you are feeling, but I suspect your heart is breaking, mine would too. I am aware too that a lot is being fought for regarding changes in family law in the UK. My opinion is, good fathers have every right to feel the way you do. Hang in there...all you can do right now, is have  uncluttered visits with your daughter. Do fun things, so that when she goes back home, she remembers and thinks of you. _


----------



## Paco Dennis (May 2, 2021)

In July of 1917 when the news that scientists agreed ( mostly ) that a 6th mass extinction was happening. I contacted my 2 children, Nathan 41 and Tamara 43 to talk to them about it. They both didn't seem to care. So I got angry at them. Tamara and I talked through it after months, but Nathan would not respond. He stopped talking to me for 3 years. That is a very short time compared to over 20 years, but I share the feelings you all have discussed. I finally got an idea in early Feb. this year to beark the ice and wrote to him. Telling him how sorry I was for saying the things I did. I told him I would love to hear some of his families music they make. That did it. He send me a couple of vidoes, and now we are on loving ground again. This was a family fight more than estangement. The second would drive me nuts. I would have to try to move on until/if they decide to contct me. But, sometimes the magic works, but sometimes it doesn't. I would still try occasionally to contact them, maybe behaving as we did before the estrangement and start from there. The rest of the time I would stop dwelling on it, and involve myself with getting on with the remaining days of my life.


----------



## SetWave (May 2, 2021)

grahamg said:


> I'm now "moving on" to at least a different approach by suggesting I might shun her back, should the opportunity arise!


Now, that's just childish.


----------



## grahamg (May 2, 2021)

SetWave said:


> Now, that's just childish.


As I've said already, BUT, (there's always a "but"), if you insist I'll repeat myself, it matters not to me whether it's childish or not, or whether anyone else thinks its childish, it doesn't matter if it is. If you're dealing with someone you've loved as well as you possibly could who is shunning you, and you know if you'd have let anyone else tell you how to behave as a parent you'd have been denying her and yourself the loving relationship she once needed, well I've nothing to apologise to anyone for I believe!
My father wished to hold my ex's behaviour against my daughter, even though as a child she was clearly innocent, however he clearly believed in "striking back", or at least not putting up with anyone treating him badly, (or in this case his son badly, he felt I was to be protected from those taking advantage of me, even holding it against the next generation!).
The funny thing is, in my view, those who do get on the front foot, and make it clear to anyone, "absolutely anyone" who might try to take advantage of them they won't stand for it, those people then don't try it on, or not so often anyway!
I hope you're following my logic, but if not, "no worries", (or " no worries mate/cobber" for any antipodean members!  ).


----------



## Pepper (May 2, 2021)

My sympathies are with your poor, put upon daughter to find liberation.


----------



## Jules (May 2, 2021)

How old is your daughter now?


----------



## grahamg (May 2, 2021)

Pepper said:


> My sympathies are with your poor, put upon daughter to find liberation.


Well, lets agree and let you have the last word so far as my "put upon daughter" (who you've never met) goes!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## grahamg (May 2, 2021)

Jules said:


> How old is your daughter now?


Well, I haven't had regular contact with her for twenty five years, and she was twelve when she stopped the contact, (saying I'd ruined he first twelve years of her life, so much so she was absolutely the top at her school and has gone on to become not just a doctor, or no, that's not enough achievement for my girl, she's a surgeon and head of a department in a very prestigious city centre hospital no less,  so my goodness, how much she must have suffered as I answered the call to "Keep coming daddy"!), so thirty seven years old, happily married with kids etc., (anyone beat that in terms of achievement by their kids, whatever they might think of you or me  ?).


----------



## grahamg (May 2, 2021)

On the subject of who someone might call their "mate" in the UK, I found this comment online:

An English term used to address someone who is a friend. Can also be used in a passive aggressive manner to address someone you dislike."

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Mate


----------



## grahamg (May 2, 2021)

Someone might relate to one of these placards I've just found by searching: "Fun things said about absent parents", (oddly enough).


----------



## grahamg (May 2, 2021)

More in the same vein:


----------



## SetWave (May 2, 2021)

Don't know if I've seen anything about therapy. I highly recommend it if you are open.  BUT . . . this is a broken record. Damn, man, let it go.
I realize it hurts and i'ts not easy. I and many other have been through hell in our lives. Many of us are able to keep moving forward and leave things be. Eyes front, buddy. Unless, of course, you like wallowing in a whoa-is-me hole of self pity. Am I being tough on you? Yes I am. Be glad I'm not barking.
Believe me I do care. BUT . . . I can only stand so much sniveling.


----------



## Judycat (May 2, 2021)

Someone tell him he's right.


----------



## grahamg (May 2, 2021)

SetWave said:


> Don't know if I've seen anything about therapy. I highly recommend it if you are open.  BUT . . . this is a broken record. Damn, man, let it go.
> I realize it hurts and i'ts not easy. I and many other have been through hell in our lives. Many of us are able to keep moving forward and leave things be. Eyes front, buddy. Unless, of course, you like wallowing in a whoa-is-me hole of self pity. Am I being tough on you? Yes I am. Be glad I'm not barking.
> Believe me I do care. BUT . . . I can only stand so much sniveling.


Please yourself, you dont have to read my views (do you?).

This thread isn't about my needs but my suggestions as to appropriate actions as I see them, so there you go, and my boasts about my daughter are not sniveling in anyone's language are they, (but if it makes you feel better to think or say so carry on!).


----------



## grahamg (May 2, 2021)

Judycat said:


> Someone tell him he's right.


"Ad a girl"!!

(didn't someone do that already?)


----------



## Judycat (May 2, 2021)

grahamg said:


> "Ad a girl"!!
> 
> (didn't someone do that already?)


I dunno.


----------



## Dana (May 2, 2021)

_Last word on this saga... I had no idea your daughter is now 37 years old, married with children!! I must have missed something way back because I thought you were talking about a 12 year old.

Well...that throws a different light on my perspective. You have to let go...that does not mean you "shun" her...just leave things be and structure your own life in a positive way. I mean this most sincerely...if you have not done this in the past, you need to see a therapist...you really do, however I think you will respond with an insulting comment. So be it. You are not in good shape "mate" so stop whingeing and do something about it. You stand a very good chance of never seeing your grandchildren, if you do not act now. Good luck._


----------



## grahamg (May 2, 2021)

Dana said:


> _Last word on this saga... I had no idea your daughter is now 37 years old, married with children!! I must have missed something way back because I thought you were talking about a 12 year old.
> Well...that throws a different light on my perspective. You have to let go...that does not mean you "shun" her...just leave things be and structure your own life in a positive way. I mean this most sincerely...if you have not done this in the past, you need to see a therapist...you really do, however I think you will respond with an insulting comment. So be it. You are not in good shape "mate" so stop whingeing and do something about it. You stand a very good chance of never seeing your grandchildren, if you do not act now. Good luck._


So be it indeed, I'm blessed with a surfeit of forum members telling me to move on, get therapy, don't shun anyone, and so on,..."NO DICE", (why you think I should listen to such "self opinionated people", oh that's why of course, to get my insult in as expected, " why be anything other than predictable hey"!).
One very useful thing is "even without a poll" I've gauged the mood of forum members across continents, (or the Western world at least), so my erstwhile sympathiser in seeking a decent deal for decent mums and dads, might be satisfied on that point.


----------



## AnnieA (May 2, 2021)

grahamg said:


> Well, I haven't had regular contact with her for twenty five years, and she was twelve when she stopped the contact, (saying I'd ruined he first twelve years of her life, so much so she was absolutely the top at her school and has gone on to become not just a doctor, or no, that's not enough achievement for my girl, she's a surgeon and head of a department in a very prestigious city centre hospital no less,  so my goodness, how much she must have suffered as I answered the call to "Keep coming daddy"!), so thirty seven years old, happily married with kids etc., (anyone beat that in terms of achievement by their kids, whatever they might think of you or me  ?).



I can't figure out the parantheses...


----------



## grahamg (May 3, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> I can't figure out the parantheses...


Okay, I'll assist you,..


grahamg said:


> Break,....she was absolutely the top at her school and has gone on to become not just a doctor, or no, that's not enough achievement for my girl, she's a surgeon and head of a department in a very prestigious city centre hospital no less,  so my goodness, how much she must have suffered as I answered the call to "Keep coming daddy"!), so thirty seven years old, happily married with kids etc., (anyone beat that in terms of achievement by their kids, whatever they might think of you or me  ?).


Take another look at the words in parentheses, " Keep coming daddy".
My daughter would say those exact words moments after telling me, "I hate you", and " You are horrible", (up to the age of twelve)!

She was seemingly unaware of the contradictions in her statements, (who would want someone they hate to keep coming, but the logic behind it in my view is she thereby got off her chest her frustrations etc., as kids do need to do very often, (look back to the comments on one of those placards about a parent hunting their child down and having failed if the children don't tell them they hate them), but at the same time I was important to her in those years, as I did all I could to show her love, and build her self esteem. .

Five years on from the contact breaking down I read an article in a magazine, it featured the experiences of a few fathers, one whose wife had taken herself and the two children off to live with Will Carling, (the England rugby captain, whose first marriage to Lisa Carling failed when he reputedly had an affair with Princess Diana).

The fathers highlighted in the article said their children were telling them they hated them in exactly the same words my daughter used, "exactly the same", i. e. condemning them without equivocation.
The lack of any equivocation in the children's condemnation of their father/parent is an aspect or characteristic feature it is reported, and mentioned in the magazine article.

At the end of the article there were contact telephone numbers listed, and I discovered by calling Tony Coe of the Equal Parenting Party/Council that a demonstration was being held outside the home of a top family court judge who lived in a village near to me, so I joined about twenty people protesting peacefully. I was interviewed on local radio before the action started outside the judges home, and then the BBC West tv crew present interviewed me briefly outside the house, and a very short clip of my telling the reporter how my child spoke to me was used in the news clip shown on local television that evening, (I still have the video of the demonstration/protest, and the sympathetic tv coverage).

This event started my involvement in fathers rights protests, though I chose not to break the law whilst trying to change the law, but I marched with and supported the fathers and fathers groups who took non violent direct actions or protests as you will remember going on, culminating in purple flour being thrown in parliament at our prime minister, and the man dressed as Batman getting on to the ledge near to the Buckingham Palace balcony.


----------



## AnnieA (May 3, 2021)

grahamg said:


> Okay, I'll assist you,..
> 
> Take another look at the words in parentheses, " Keep coming daddy".
> My daughter would say those exact words moments after telling me, "I hate you", and " You are horrible", (up to the age of twelve)!
> ...



You gave a TV interview about private matters involving your estranged daughter when she was seventeenish?  Please tell me no...


----------



## Pepper (May 3, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> You gave a TV interview about private matters involving your estranged daughter when she was seventeenish?  Please tell me no...


You're surprised Annie?  Why?


----------



## grahamg (May 3, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> You gave a TV interview about private matters involving your estranged daughter when she was seventeenish?  Please tell me no...


No, all anonymised, no connection with my daughter in any event because she lived in a different area of the country, and I wasn't identified, I just helped the BBC West news programme explain why fathers/parents were protesting, so I'm afraid its a case of "NO FIRE HERE", (but just look how quickly someone else has jumped to the wrong conclusion!).


----------



## grahamg (May 3, 2021)

Pepper said:


> You're surprised Annie?  Why?


I'm not surprised at the lack of understanding shown by so many, not concerning myself, or my daughter but the lack of concern shown towards what I've been told is 70% of fathers losing contact with their children, (and all this within two years of being separated from the mothers they say!).


----------



## AnnieA (May 3, 2021)

grahamg said:


> I'm not surprised at the lack of understanding shown by so many, not concerning myself, or my daughter but the lack of concern shown towards what I've been told is 70% of fathers losing contact with their children, (and all this within two years of being separated from the mothers they say!).



That's a suspiciously high stat even if it includes deadbeat dads.

Regardless, it's a deflection from your disturbing OP.


----------



## grahamg (May 3, 2021)

Grahamg wrote: _"I'm not surprised at the lack of understanding shown by so many, not concerning myself, or my daughter but the lack of concern shown towards what I've been told is 70% of fathers losing contact with their children, (and all this within two years of being separated from the mothers they say!)."_ 


AnnieA said:


> That's a suspiciously high stat even if it includes deadbeat dads.
> Regardless, it's a deflection from your disturbing OP.


Is it, lets see, (I think the last line covers assisting other dads/parents doesn't it?):

"An odd thread title for a relationship thread, BUT, (there's always a but!  ), if your experience in whatever relationship it might be, is one of being ignored or shunned, and as far as I'm aware being treated in that way denies you the interaction all human beings need, ("No man is an island" I was told at school, and all that stuff, was it said by John Dunne?), then we're being denied life aren't we(?).

We're now in an age where we can spout our views to folks across the world with ease, (as we've been able to do for maybe twenty years or so), and yet at the same time so many seem to have difficulties in interpersonal relationships, maybe more so than in previous generations, so what if anything may be done about it we might agree upon?

Here is my idea, for those of you totally shunned in circumstances where you feel you couldn't have done much differently in the past, leading to your becoming shunned and estranged, my idea is to find a way to "strike back"!!!!!

You don't think you wish to strike back against someone you love, (or should live, like maybe your own child), but if all trying to behave as though you'll always be there for them gets you disrespect, being shunned more completely, what then can you do, carry on failing as you have for over twenty years, or try something else?

Folks here on the forum don't seem to agree with the idea of calling for respecting elders, and giving legal rights to decent parents sometimes beyond the child's interests, so that ideas out as a way of "striking back", so what's left?

All I can think of is returning the negative behaviour shown towards you to your own child, so that in that way they get some idea what being shunned feels like, (should you live long enough for the opportunity to shun them appear, when they condescendingly allow you a modicum of attention).

Sorry, that's the best I can come up with, strike back at those denying your humanity, and try to assist others similarly shunned.


----------



## grahamg (May 4, 2021)

Matt O'Connor, founder of Fathers 4 Justice being interviewed on the radio about troubles in the UK family law system now, (rather long!):

https://www.guildofdads.com/matt-oconnor-men-in-the-dock-the-fathers-for-justice-story/


----------



## Knight (May 4, 2021)

From your post # 73

Quote
"All I can think of is returning the negative behaviour shown towards you to your own child, so that in that way they get some idea what being shunned feels like, (should you live long enough for the opportunity to shun them appear, when they condescendingly allow you a modicum of attention)."

Obviously this has been going on for a long time. Once you learn to dismiss what you can't control your life becomes easier. Striking Back does what? Might make you feel like you have accomplished something but the reality is, you accomplish nothing. You still have no control.


----------



## Pepper (May 4, 2021)

Knight said:


> From your post # 73
> 
> Quote
> "All I can think of is returning the negative behaviour shown towards you to your own child, so that in that way they get some idea what being shunned feels like, (should you live long enough for the opportunity to shun them appear, when they condescendingly allow you a modicum of attention)."
> ...


That's what I told him.  She may not even notice she is being "shunned" or if she does is busy thanking her lucky stars for it!  Give the girl a break.  Shun away.


----------



## grahamg (May 4, 2021)

Knight said:


> From your post # 73
> Quote
> "All I can think of is returning the negative behaviour shown towards you to your own child, so that in that way they get some idea what being shunned feels like, (should you live long enough for the opportunity to shun them appear, when they condescendingly allow you a modicum of attention)."
> Knight wrote:
> Obviously this has been going on for a long time. Once you learn to dismiss what you can't control your life becomes easier. Striking Back does what? Might make you feel like you have accomplished something but the reality is, you accomplish nothing. You still have no control.


Look you may well be right, and in truth I'm such a softie, particularly when it comes to my own child, I won't do what I'm suggesting anyway, (she won't/can't fully appreciate how her life has enriched mine, in spite of the troubles).
The point of my OP though is to "try to get on the front foot psychologically", and I must admit if you choose to follow the link to the radio interview I posted you'll find the most high profile fathers rights campaigner in the UK agreeing with your views not mine, (whilst very bluntly pointing out the pitfalls in our family law system).


----------



## grahamg (May 4, 2021)

Pepper said:


> That's what I told him.  She may not even notice she is being "shunned" or if she does is busy thanking her lucky stars for it!  Give the girl a break.  Shun away.


Now you've said that I may well do, just so I can live up to your expectations of me, (just as our forum friend had weakened my arguments too!  ).


----------



## Knight (May 4, 2021)

grahamg said:


> Look you may well be right, and in truth I'm such a sooftie, particularly when it comes to my own child, I won't do what I'm suggesting anyway, (she won't/can't fully appreciate how her life has enriched mine, in spite of the troubles).
> The point of my OP though is to "try to get on the front foot psychologically", and I must admit if you choose to follow the link to the radio interview I posted you'll find the most high profile fathers rights campaigner in the UK agreeing with your views not mine, (whilst very bluntly pointing out the pitfalls in our family law system).


The reference you gave focuses on legal matters. You haven't expressed any legal problems with your daughter. Your posts focus on her "hating" you as a child & ignoring you as an adult.  So to "win" is it your idea is to ignore her ?  If so do you really think that will work?


----------



## grahamg (May 4, 2021)

Knight said:


> The reference you gave focuses on legal matters. You haven't expressed any legal problems with your daughter. Your posts focus on her "hating" you as a child & ignoring you as an adult.  So to "win" is it your idea is to ignore her ?  If so do you really think that will work?


Yes, my reference relates to legal matters, but I hope someone is interested enough in hearing the forthright views provided by someone steeped in the UK family law debacle(?).
No, I don't have any legal troubles with my daughter, and can't really understand why you came up with that interpretation from anything I've said, and furthermore, though I could try using our family law system in order to achieve contact with my grandchildren I won't be putting my daughter through that under any circumstances either, (clear enough now?).
Btw I did mean it when I said you'd argued your points well!


----------



## Knight (May 4, 2021)

grahamg said:


> Yes, my reference relates to legal matters, but I hope someone is interested enough in hearing the forth rights views provided by someone steeped in the UK family law debacle(?).
> No, I don't have any legal troubles with my daughter, and can't really understand why you came up with that interpretation from anything I've said, and furthermore, though I could try using our family law system in order to achieve contact with my grandchildren I won't be putting my daughter through that under any circumstances either, (clear enough now?).
> Btw I did mean it when I said you'd argued your points well!


Why would you post about being vindictive as in "striking back", then toss in reference to legal issues that males face in the UK? Maybe not mixing the two [ your relationship with your daughter] & the hope to generate interest in the problems males have with parental rights & the laws in the UK. 

Now you add something about your grandchildren? This new addition of grandchildren generates curiosity. Is your daughter denying you that privilege ?


----------



## Chris21E (May 4, 2021)

Trying hard to have a relationship does  not always work the way one envisions.

 A person I knew grew up full family no break up in   the family structure and yet for some reason they walked away never looked back. 

I ask why not reach out? The response they feel grown up and no need to connect.

Some connect to one or both some do not. My my parents died when I was a young child so not something I deal with. 

A child is raised to be on their own and you hope for the best. 

As a teacher 4th to 7th graders I found they were more connected to me then their parents at times, being a parent I'm guessing is not a popular career.  

 I found that Not trying to gain their approval worked a lot better, I got my shares of I hate you, in the end, was there to make sure that they did not get hurt, this was a college for kids Electronics course, I ended up being the most loved and respected teacher. 

How...try not to be popular be yourself


----------



## grahamg (May 4, 2021)

Knight said:


> Why would you post about being vindictive as in "striking back", then toss in reference to legal issues that males face in the UK?


The reason I do so is the same as stated earlier and in the OP, to assist others being similarly marginalised for no good reason, (by the way my "striking back" by shunning a daughter who has shunned me, following years of forbearance of the treatment I've received whilst doing my level best isn't vindictiveness in my view).


Knight said:


> Maybe not mixing the two [ your relationship with your daughter] & the hope to generate interest in the problems males have with parental rights & the laws in the UK.
> Now you add something about your grandchildren? This new addition of grandchildren generates curiosity. Is your daughter denying you that privilege?


If you were to listen to Matt O'Connor explaining his views on family law, and the advice he and F4J dole out daily to so many dads, (or grandparents I'd guess), you will hear him saying it becomes an argument about the behaviour of the father if they try to answer or respond to unjust comments when going through the court system, just as I'd say you are doing when I mentioned my grandchildren, (so if you don't mind I won't enlighten you further on that aspect?).


----------



## grahamg (May 4, 2021)

Chris21E said:


> Trying hard to have a relationship does  not always work the way one envisions.
> A person I knew grew up full family no break up in   the family structure and yet for some reason they walked away never looked back. I ask why not reach out? The response they feel grown up and no need to connect.
> Some connect to one or both some do not. My my parents died when I was a young child so not something I deal with. A child is raised to be on their own and you hope for the best.
> As a teacher 4th to 7th graders I found they were more connected to me then their parents at times, being a parent I'm guessing is not a popular career.
> I found that Not trying to gain their approval worked a lot better, I got my shares of I hate you, in the end, was there to make sure that they did not get hurt, this was a college for kids Electronics course, I ended up being the most loved and respected teacher. How...try not to be popular be yourself


You make many good points.
Are you a parent too?


----------



## Chris21E (May 4, 2021)

grahamg said:


> You make many good points.
> Are you a parent too?



In a way... Parents rejection hurts, can't take it to heart


----------



## grahamg (May 4, 2021)

Chris21E said:


> In a way... Parents rejection hurts, can't take it to heart


Great, I think I understand, and your stance about not taking things to heart mirrors Matt O'Connors views, or advice to other dads I believe, (though he's honest enough he couldn't manage to follow it himself!).


----------



## Leonie (May 5, 2021)

I like this one gramahg.

Sometimes this is the only way. I don't see it as striking back, more of putting oneself first, maybe for the first time. 
Whatever you decide to do will be the right thing for you. No one else can really understand your particular situation no matter how much they might imagine they do. Whatever you decide to do I hope it works for you - mate. 

And I agree with you that fathers often get a bad deal in family law situations, as do paternal grandparents. In the case of grandparents, I heard it explained in these terms by one of those talk-back radio lawyers here ... Children have the right to know their grandparents, the grandparents don't necessarily have the right to know their grandchildren.


----------



## Chris21E (May 5, 2021)

grahamg said:


> Great, I think I understand, and your stance about not taking things to heart mirrors Matt O'Connors views, or advice to other dads I believe, (though he's honest enough he couldn't manage to follow it himself!).



I'm just trying not to go there,  not being evasive. Fully get how laws and other issues make things worse...wishing you we'll and peace I understand more than one can say...


----------



## Chris21E (May 5, 2021)

I'm reminded of the Vietnam War photo of a child running after being hit by a chemical that burned them. One can feel that way at times,


----------



## grahamg (May 5, 2021)

Chris21E said:


> I'm reminded of the Vietnam War photo of a child running after being hit by a chemical that burned them. One can feel that way at times,


A very stark photo of course, and thankfully the child grew up into a very articulate woman didn't she, in spite of everything she'd been through.


----------



## grahamg (May 5, 2021)

Leonie said:


> View attachment 163402
> I like this one grahamg.
> Sometimes this is the only way. I don't see it as striking back, more of putting oneself first, maybe for the first time.
> Whatever you decide to do will be the right thing for you. No one else can really understand your particular situation no matter how much they might imagine they do. Whatever you decide to do I hope it works for you - mate.
> And I agree with you that fathers often get a bad deal in family law situations, as do paternal grandparents. In the case of grandparents, I heard it explained in these terms by one of those talk-back radio lawyers here ... Children have the right to know their grandparents, the grandparents don't necessarily have the right to know their grandchildren.


That placard does seem to sum up what goes on in many cases doesn't it, and thank you for your kind words.
Perhaps I've used this forum enough to express my views on father's rights, because fairly obviously there will always be a range of views, different people's experiences etc. and there are other forums where they specifically deal with these situations such as the F4J website and forum, though it sounds pretty depressing what is still going on from the comments Matt O'Connor has made about it all nowadays).


----------



## Chris21E (May 5, 2021)

grahamg said:


> A very stark photo of course, and thankfully the child grew up into a very articulate woman didn't she, in spite of everything she'd been through.



Yes...so very true


----------



## Knight (May 5, 2021)

grahamg said:


> The reason I do so is the same as stated earlier and in the OP, to assist others being similarly marginalised for no good reason, (by the way my "striking back" by shunning a daughter who has shunned me, following years of forbearance of the treatment I've received whilst doing my level best isn't vindictiveness in my view).
> 
> If you were to listen to Matt O'Connor explaining his views on family law, and the advice he and F4J dole out daily to so many dads, (or grandparents I'd guess), you will hear him saying it becomes an argument about the behaviour of the father if they try to answer or respond to unjust comments when going through the court system, just as I'd say you are doing when I mentioned my grandchildren, (so if you don't mind I won't enlighten you further on that aspect?).


Now you add something about your grandchildren? This new addition of grandchildren generates curiosity. Is your daughter denying you that privilege ?

I don't mind since it seems to be a question you aren't comfortable answering. 

As for the legal issues parents face IMO that is another topic entirely.


----------



## grahamg (May 5, 2021)

Knight said:


> Now you add something about your grandchildren? This new addition of grandchildren generates curiosity. Is your daughter denying you that privilege? I don't mind since it seems to be a question you aren't comfortable answering. As for the legal issues parents face IMO that is another topic entirely.


I'm not on trial here, but you jump to conclusions that are not warranted when you suggest I'm not comfortable answering any questions. I am not uncomfortable in any way concerning my grandchildren, nor my decision never to involve my daughter in any litigation so far as contact with them, and yet you've continued to pursue the issue.

I'm suggesting in other posts I've raised issues about fathers too often here, (obviously uncomfortable issues for other forum members on this thread, and many other thread concerning fathers/parents rights).

Your "bloodhound" tendencies, (as I'm fairly sure they are), a strong desire you seem to wish to foster and develop, to promote the idea I'm responsible for any breakdown in my interpersonal relationships, (perhaps solely respinsible), is evidence in my view why decent parents should have a rebuttable presumption in favour of contact with their children, (note "decent parents" only, not where there are any issues of abuse, and I can categorically state there were never any such accusations made by my ex. against me, nor vice versa!).

Finally although you seem to think differently I don't think I've abandoned the right to claim my OP has elements contained within it relating to family law, (or at least comments saying I wish to help other parents/fathers in similar circumstances).


----------



## Knight (May 5, 2021)

grahamg said:


> I'm not on trial here, but you jump to conclusions that are not warranted when you suggest I'm not comfortable answering any questions. I am not uncomfortable in any way concerning my grandchildren, nor my decision never to involve my daughter in any litigation so far as contact with them, and yet you've continued to pursue the issue.
> 
> I'm suggesting in other posts I've raised issues about fathers too often here, (obviously uncomfortable issues for other forum members on this thread, and many other thread concerning fathers/parents rights).
> 
> ...


Asking question trying to discover why you thought about striking back at a 37 year old daughter & apparently not having a good enough relationship with that daughter that you inject something about not using the legal system to force visitation rights with your grandchildren.

No you aren't on trial, but when you brought something up then not wanting to explain I was OK with that.  This latest reply of yours IMO is less than civil and leads me to think your communication with your daughter early on may have been the same.

As for parental rights I think most here are past raising children so while well intentioned various threads about what is bothering you about parental rights don't interest me. Others may well be interested, maybe several will respond asking you to start a thread about that as a singular topic.


----------



## Dana (May 5, 2021)

*On Children by Kahlil Gibran*

Your children are not your children.
They are the sons and daughters of Life’s longing for itself.
They come through you but not from you,
And though they are with you yet they belong not to you.

You may give them your love but not your thoughts,
For they have their own thoughts.
You may house their bodies but not their souls,
For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow,
which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.
You may strive to be like them,
but seek not to make them like you.
For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.

You are the bows from which your children
as living arrows are sent forth.
The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite,
and He bends you with His might
that His arrows may go swift and far.
Let your bending in the archer’s hand be for gladness;
For even as He loves the arrow that flies,
so He loves also the bow that is stable.

*Kahlil Gibran

*


----------



## grahamg (May 5, 2021)

Knight said:


> Asking question trying to discover why you thought about striking back at a 37 year old daughter & apparently not having a good enough relationship with that daughter that you inject something about not using the legal system to force visitation rights with your grandchildren.
> No you aren't on trial, but when you brought something up then not wanting to explain I was OK with that.  This latest reply of yours IMO is less than civil and leads me to think your communication with your daughter early on may have been the same.
> As for parental rights I think most here are past raising children so while well intentioned various threads about what is bothering you about parental rights don't interest me. Others may well be interested, maybe several will respond asking you to start a thread about that as a singular topic.


Okay, apologies for any uncivility shown, but again dont jump to conclusions that I behaved badly so far as my daughter is concerned, and even if I had I demand the right for decent parents to behave in the manner they believe is appropriate in relation to their children, (in fact a Canadian lawyer called Goldwater, stated her views on the importance of privacy in close interpersonal relationships, so I'm interpreting that to mean its really no one else's business where there are no issues of child abuse to concern the courts). 

I hope you noticed this first couple of lines in the post following yours, taken from a poem, (and put forward by a professional in family relations perhaps?), because it is exactly this I'm objecting to, and will never accept, quote:
"
*On Children by Kahlil Gibran*

"Your children are not your children."

My comments are:
"If your children are/were not *your* children as Kahlil Gibran suggests then you're arguing in favour of mixing children or babies up when the mother leaves hospital, (because the biological link means nothing is the idea behind this kind of thinking I believe)." 

Finally as I said earlier on the thread, "maybe I've brought up the subject of fathers/parental rights often enough on this forum, and should cease"!


----------



## grahamg (May 6, 2021)

Dana said:


> *On Children by Kahlil Gibran*
> 
> Your children are not your children.
> They are the sons and daughters of Life’s longing for itself.
> ...


Quote, (in no particular order):
"You are the bows from which your children as living arrows are sent forth" break "Let your bending in the archer's hand be for gladness".....

My responses, "Have we no choice as parents, to do or not do as Kahlil Gibran suggests"?
My parents had differing views on education for example, my mother believing "education is the answer", whilst my father did not really believe in formal education beyond the need to read, write and do maths, preferring instead " the learning you gained in life, through and along the back country roads", (my mother won that battle largely though). Which one was bending in the right direction, or were either of them bending at all, just doing what they believed was best, "without interference"?

Quote:
"You may give them your love but not your thoughts",....

My comments, (though where to start on this one!):
I "may" give my child love according to Kahlil Gibran, suggest to me they think love is something you just turn on like a tap, (and presumably can turn off likewise), plus it condescending in my view, and telling patents what to think whilst telling us at the same not to try to guide our own children, (oh sorry, they're not "our children" of course, my mistake"!).

What else to say, well I suppose you can jettison all religious thought, like "do unto other as you would be done unto", (telling kids that would be wrong, because Kahlil says they've already got their own thoughts on the matter). My ex. was atheist, and yet at the same time told my daughter "she knew everything our daughter was going to do or say before our daughter thought of it herself", (shat would Kahlil make of her as a patent, and yet I told her after she'd left me she was the better parent would you believe!?).

Finally I know from my fathers rights campaigning days that none resident dads are told not to tell their children in letters etc., that they love their children, "because it upsets them to hear it", (as I'd guess it does). They can't live their children at least not as they'd wish, only maybe as the likes of Kahlil Gibran decide is the message here isn't it.

You couldn't make it up could you, what these control freaks who tell themselves and anyone else foolish enough to believe them, they know what is best for OUR children, yes "YOURS AND MINE"!!!


----------



## Tish (May 6, 2021)

Move on, as the old saying goes "You win some you learn some."
The best revenge is to grow and survive, lose the toxicity, not the lesson.


----------



## Dana (May 6, 2021)

_Madman _

By Kahlil Gibran

You ask me how I became a madman. It happened thus:

One day, long before many gods were born, I woke from a deep sleep and found all my masks were stolen,—the seven masks I have fashioned and worn in seven lives,—I ran maskless through the crowded streets shouting, “Thieves, thieves, the cursed thieves.”

Men and women laughed at me and some ran to their houses in fear of me.

And when I reached the market place, a youth standing on a house-top cried, “He is a madman.” I looked up to behold him; the sun kissed my own naked face for the first time. For the first time the sun kissed my own naked face and my soul was inflamed with love for the sun, and I wanted my masks no more. And as if in a trance I cried, “Blessed, blessed are the thieves who stole my masks.”

Thus I became a madman.

And I have found both freedom and safety in my madness; the freedom of loneliness and the safety from being understood, for those who understand us enslave something in us.


----------



## grahamg (May 6, 2021)

Tish said:


> Move on, as the old saying goes "You win some you learn some."
> The best revenge is to grow and survive, lose the toxicity, not the lesson.


As we seem to have moved on to swapping quotes on this thread somewhat, here is what the great rugby union commentator, the late Bill McLaren had to say when told to move on over the death of his daughter at an early age, (he said he'd never accept it or move on):

"Just before the start of the 2002 Wales v Scotland match in Cardiff, the stadium announcer asked people to stand and acknowledge Bill McLaren's great contribution to the sport. The whole ground rose, leaving McLaren choking back the tears. Then came a voice in his ear: 'Cue, Bill...'

Coping with his emotions on that day was obviously not straightforward, even for a commentator of Bill McLaren's experience, used to being caught up in some of the most dramatic moments rugby has ever seen. But Bill also talks frankly about the greatest tragedy of his life: the death of his younger daughter from cancer at 46, the three years of agony and the trauma of her final day. Bill wanted to stay at her bedside but she insisted he go and carry out a commentating duty in Edinburgh on the Saturday afternoon. He did so, rushed back to the hospital, but she had died that afternoon while he was on air. 

McLaren, himself, had almost died of TB in his youth and he tells of the days and nights when he hid under the sheets in bed at the Scottish hospital where he was kept for 19 months, 'crying myself to sleep each night as they took away my friends who had died that day. I was certain I would be next'."


----------



## Knight (May 6, 2021)

I don't think this was about winning. I view it more as reading what another poster writes about & questioning parts of the content. In one of my posts I made it clear I was curious. That was met with "none of your business" & what can only be described as suspicion by the thread OP that I had dark thoughts about what may have caused the situation as it unfolded. 

I didn't!


----------



## grahamg (May 6, 2021)

Knight said:


> I don't think this was about winning. I view it more as reading what another poster writes about & questioning parts of the content. In one of my posts I made it clear I was curious. That was met with "none of your business" & what can only be described as suspicion by the thread OP that I had dark thoughts about what may have caused the situation as it unfolded.
> I didn't!


"We'll move on from that aspect of our discussion maybe", (or we can do if you like ?)?


----------



## grahamg (May 6, 2021)

Dana said:


> _Madman _
> By Kahlil Gibran
> You ask me how I became a madman. It happened thus:
> One day, long before many gods were born, I woke from a deep sleep and found all my masks were stolen,—the seven masks I have fashioned and worn in seven lives,—I ran maskless through the crowded streets shouting, “Thieves, thieves, the cursed thieves.”
> ...


It doesn't quite scan so well as the last one in my humble opinion, and as to the contents, mmmm...., not sure, nor care!, ("has it made the best seller list yet"?)


----------



## Knight (May 6, 2021)

grahamg said:


> "We'll move on from that aspect of our discussion maybe", (or we can do if you like ?)?


Moving on is best.


----------



## grahamg (May 6, 2021)

Knight said:


> Moving on is best.


Though according to Bill McLaren there were instances in his great and full life, when he refused all those who urged him to move on the satisfaction of agreeing with them, (on a matter very dear to his heart), but so far as the trivia we're discussing "you've got a deal"!


----------



## grahamg (May 6, 2021)

*Because I breathed*

Because I breathed you can breathe,
Because I walked you can walk too,
Because I spoke, you too can speak,
Because I saw with my eyes you can see,

Because I felt you can feel as well,
Because I hurt you can feel pain,
Because I made mistakes you too can make them,
Because I may have done some good so can you,

Because I learnt you were taught,
Because I loved, and believed in love you are here,
Because I laughed you laughed too,
Because I cried, you too can cry,

Because I am misunderstood you misunderstand too,
Because I spoke the truth you can better understand truth and lies,
Because I would not be told what to say, you heard what I wanted to say,
Because I will not be told to move on, you may choose not to move on

Because I am unique, I am unique to you,
Because of all the above, I may even be the most unique to you,
Because I am not acknowledged, none of the above is changed,
Because I bequeath all this to you, I give more than genes alone,

Because I was given all this too, you may pass this on one day.

Brian K.G. Halli


----------



## Dana (May 6, 2021)

grahamg said:


> It doesn't quite scan so well as the last one in my humble opinion, and as to the contents, mmmm...., not sure, nor care!, ("has it made the best seller list yet"?)



_Not only has he made the "best seller list" but he is one of the most respected poets in the US, England andthe rest of the world. He died in 1931.
You may gain a lot from reading his works.
_


----------



## grahamg (May 6, 2021)

Dana said:


> _Not only has he made the "best seller list" but he is one of the most respected poets in the US, England andthe rest of the world. He died in 1931.
> You may gain a lot from reading his works.
> _


"Excuse my ignorance", (now what's your,.....!).


----------



## Dana (May 6, 2021)

_*Defeat by Kahlil Gibran*_

Defeat, my Defeat, my solitude and my aloofness;

You are dearer to me than a thousand triumphs,

And sweeter to my heart than all world-glory.


Defeat, my Defeat, my self-knowledge and my defiance,

Through you I know that I am yet young and swift of foot

And not to be trapped by withering laurels.

And in you I have found aloneness

And the joy of being shunned and scorned.


Defeat, my Defeat, my shining sword and shield,

In your eyes I have read

That to be enthroned is to be enslaved,

And to be understood is to be leveled down,

And to be grasped is but to reach one's fullness

And like a ripe fruit to fall and be consumed.


Defeat, my Defeat, my bold companion,

You shall hear my songs and my cries and my silences,

And none but you shall speak to me of the beating of wings,

And urging of seas,

And of mountains that burn in the night,

And you alone shall climb my steep and rocky soul.


Defeat, my Defeat, my deathless courage,

You and I shall laugh together with the storm,

And together we shall dig graves for all that die in us,

And we shall stand in the sun with a will,

And we shall be dangerous.


----------



## grahamg (May 6, 2021)

Dana said:


> _*Defeat by Kahlil Gibran*_
> 
> Defeat, my Defeat, my solitude and my aloofness;
> You are dearer to me than a thousand triumphs,
> ...


Anymore, (having nothing to do with the thread topic), what about one of your own?


----------



## Dana (May 6, 2021)

grahamg said:


> *Because I breathed*
> 
> Because I breathed you can breathe,
> Because I walked you can walk too,
> ...


*Oh...I thought you had changed the topic when you posted this!!
.*


----------



## AnnieA (May 6, 2021)

grahamg said:


> ...
> 
> Your "bloodhound" tendencies, (as I'm fairly sure they are), a strong desire you seem to wish to foster and develop, to promote the idea I'm responsible for any breakdown in my interpersonal relationships...



In defense of @Knight's observations. I think you're more responsible than you're owning up to.  You've told us before in other threads that you had contact with her when your parent(s) were still alive, but now you obviously don't. Even posted a pic of you, your father, your daughter and her first child.  You've also told us that your ex BIL was afraid he would get in trouble for telling you when your daughter's second child was born.  Those facts point to issues far deeper and more recent than custody rulings when she was a child.


----------



## grahamg (May 6, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> In defense of @Knight's observations. I think you're more responsible than you're owning up to.  You've told us before in other threads that you had contact with her when your parent(s) were still alive, but now you obviously don't. Even posted a pic of you, your father, your daughter and her first child.  You've also told us that your ex BIL was afraid he would get in trouble for telling you when your daughter's second child was born.  Those facts point to issues far deeper and more recent than custody rulings when she was a child.


Dear me, "no I'm sorry you're wrong, barking up the wrong tree and so on"!
Aged twenty one my daughter told both my parents the reason why she'd shunned me for ten years, and it had nothing whatever to do with anything I'd done, and since then the circumstances or reasons for her declining contact have not changed.
However, I'm glad you remember earlier posts threads and arguments, and this one has run into the sand pretty much as they did. I should not be so surprised that a majority here are wedded to "the best interests of the child paramount legal principle", as experts examining this same phenomenon have stated it has an almost mystical hold over the public in western countries.


----------



## AnnieA (May 7, 2021)

> Aged twenty one my daughter told both my parents the reason why she'd shunned me for ten years, and it had nothing whatever to do with anything I'd done, and since then the circumstances or reasons for her declining contact have not changed.



You can't heal what you refuse to own.  No well-adjusted adult (which you've stated numerous times that your daughter is) shuns another adult...especially a parent...for no fault on the 'shunee's' part. Interpersonal conflict takes two.



grahamg said:


> I should not be so surprised that a majority here are wedded to "the best interests of the child paramount legal principle", as experts examining this same phenomenon have stated it has an almost mystical hold over the public in western countries.




My brother has had full custody of his daughter for almost a year due to "the best interests of the child."  She left her mom's (traditional arrangement of Friday after school to Monday morning, 50/50 holidays and summer break), had a friend drive her to my brother's house and told my brother he could take her back to her mom's but she would just leave again.   The court appointed an ad litem attorney for my niece and also ordered counseling sessions for my niece, brother, and the mom.   Following the meetings with the ad litem and the counselor and the parents' attorneys, the court awarded my brother full custody.  My niece has the option to visit her mother when she chooses and it's not been much.  She'll go over for family events for a few hours but that's so far been all she's wanted to do.

The courts often try very hard to determine and act for the best interests of the child.


----------



## grahamg (May 7, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> You can't heal what you refuse to own.  No well-adjusted adult (which you've stated numerous times that your daughter is) shuns another adult...especially a parent...for no fault on the 'shunee's' part. Interpersonal conflict takes two.
> Grahamg wrote: We disagree, I have met many who have done exactly that, but if your knowledge of life/human nature, trumps my first hand experience, then there is no room left for arguing is there!!!!!





AnnieA said:


> My brother has had full custody of his daughter for almost a year due to "the best interests of the child."  She left her mom's (traditional arrangement of Friday after school to Monday morning, 50/50 holidays and summer break), had a friend drive her to my brother's house and told my brother he could take her back to her mom's but she would just leave again.   The court appointed an ad litem attorney for my niece and also ordered counseling sessions for my niece, brother, and the mom.   Following the meetings with the ad litem and the counselor, the court awarded my brother full custody.  My niece has the option to visit her mother when she chooses and it's not been much.  She'll go over for family events for a few hours but that's so far been all she's wanted to do.
> 
> So, yes, the courts often try very hard to determine and act in the best interests of the child.


Well done to your brother, but for you and he to be right, Matt O'Connor and all his F4J members have to be wrong, and not only that but the late Sir Geoffrey How's, (the late Lord Howe), told Dame Vera Baird for Tony Blair's government twenty years ago that "the best interests of the child paramount legal principle wasn't working!


----------



## AnnieA (May 7, 2021)

grahamg said:


> Well done to your brother, but for you and he to be right, Matt O'Connor and all his F4J members have to be wrong, and not only that but the late Sir Geoffrey How's, (the late Lord Howe), told Dame Vera Baird for Tony Blair's government twenty years ago that "the best interests of the child paramount legal principle wasn't working!



It's what happened.  No 'expert' debate involved.



> Grahamg wrote: We disagree, I have met many who have done exactly that, but if your knowledge of life/human nature, trumps my first hand experience, then there is no room left for arguing is there!!!!!



Well-adjusted people (and you've touted your daughter as exactly that time after time after time) don't sever contact with another person without a good reason for doing so based, in part, by the behavior of the shunned person.   If it feels like 'arguing', it may be stepping on your toes or you may just like to argue.  Regardless, I'm not surprised by your answer.   Knew when I posted it that the chances of getting through to you were pretty much slim to none given your repeated defensive responses to people, but thought I'd give it one last try. 

If it makes you feel better to fantasize about paying your daughter back by shunning her should she ever try to reconcile, go for it.


----------



## grahamg (May 7, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> It's what happened.  No 'expert' debate involved.


Grahamg wrote:
There is you know, (or even if don't know!).


AnnieA said:


> Well-adjusted people (and you've touted your daughter as exactly that time after time after time) don't sever contact with another person without a good reason for doing so based, in part, by the behavior of the shunned person.   If it feels like 'arguing', it may be stepping on your toes or you may just like to argue.  Regardless, I'm not surprised by your answer.   Knew when I posted it that the chances of getting through to you were pretty much slim to none given your repeated defensive responses to people, but thought I'd give it one last try.
> 
> If it makes you feel better to fantasize about paying your daughter back by shunning her should she ever try to reconcile, go for it.


Yes they do, and thanks for the profuse advice, that I'm never going to take, and don't believe in at all, "you're part of the problem not the solution in my view", (but I'm content with that, and knew when starting the thread to expect this treatment).


----------



## grahamg (May 7, 2021)

Leonie said:


> View attachment 163402
> I like this one grahamg.
> Sometimes this is the only way. I don't see it as striking back, more of putting oneself first, maybe for the first time.
> Whatever you decide to do will be the right thing for you. No one else can really understand your particular situation no matter how much they might imagine they do. Whatever you decide to do I hope it works for you - mate.
> ...


We seem to have lost you from the fray, (wise move!), but thank you again for your comments, (makes a change!)


----------



## grahamg (May 7, 2021)

Quote:
"It may be argued that the paramountcy principle casts such an individualistic and ‘bossy’ image of the child as to suppose that nothing matters except that child’s best interests. First, the paramountcy principle (if not its interpretation) is unduly narrowly individualistic and fails to reconcile the rights of children and those of parents. Those who argue for children’s liberation tend to construe human rights protection as a zero-sum game in which children’s gains are adults’ losses,....."

https://www.researchgate.net/profil...uction-of-the-best-interests-of-the-child.pdf

Here is an explanation why those in charge wish to use the best interests of the child paramount principle to curtail parental rights, (there being no statuary parental rights in the UK):

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmjust/518/51807.htm

"Stephen Cobb, of the Family Law Bar Association, said it was difficult to see how the paramountcy principle could be bettered or enhanced by the addition of a presumption of contact, (_with the parents_)."

"If we introduce a presumption, we would then have to incorporate a range of situations in which one would say that the presumption wouldn't apply,...."


----------



## Knight (May 7, 2021)

grahamg said:


> Quote:
> "It may be argued that the paramountcy principle casts such an individualistic and ‘bossy’ image of the child as to suppose that nothing matters except that child’s best interests. First, the paramountcy principle (if not its interpretation) is unduly narrowly individualistic and fails to reconcile the rights of children and those of parents. Those who argue for children’s liberation tend to construe human rights protection as a zero-sum game in which children’s gains are adults’ losses,....."
> 
> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Admark-Moyo-2/publication/317450437_Reconceptualising_the_'paramountcy_principle'_Beyond_the_individualistic_construction_of_the_best_interests_of_the_child/links/5d0ced1092851cf4403ebc4b/Reconceptualising-the-paramountcy-principle-Beyond-the-individualistic-construction-of-the-best-interests-of-the-child.pdf
> ...


Are you planning of having sex & expecting a child to be born from that? Or fostering a minor child that may cause you problems that you would need the legal system to adjudicate some problem?


----------



## grahamg (May 7, 2021)

Knight said:


> Are you planning of having sex & expecting a child to be born from that? Or fostering a minor child that may cause you problems that you would need the legal system to adjudicate some problem?


Nope!


----------



## Knight (May 7, 2021)

grahamg said:


> Nope!


Great!  Wouldn't want you  to post about additional problems that have no explanation.


----------



## grahamg (May 7, 2021)

Knight said:


> Great!  Wouldn't want you  to post about additional problems that have no explanation.


Yes, great, I agree with you, (what else could I do?).
Now back to a discussion about those decent dads/parents getting a raw deal, (if you believe such a situation exists?).


----------



## grahamg (May 7, 2021)

Pepper said:


> View attachment 162625
> Love cannot be forced no matter how deserving of it you are.


I've just gone back to look at one or two posts arising immediately after the OP, and this one, plus at least one other, deserve more responses I believe than they received first time around.

"Love cannot be forced" you say,...., well yes, something to agree upon there, and importantly, (if agreed generally), it goes some way towards defining what love might be, or what we mean when we use the word "love"(?).

Its been said that "love" means simply to be "happy with someone", and nothing more, (I think I'm right in saying that, though I'm not sure I agree with the definition?), and moving on to the second half of the sentence above, it is suggested "no matter how deserving of it (/love) you are", this makes no difference as to whether someone does or does not love you, or at least doesn't guarantee they will.

Thus the worst parent might be loved by their child, and the best patent not loved or hated even, (that's the logic of the statement above isn't it?).

I believe so far as my own parents are concerned, that I did not understand the extent to which they loved me until after they had died, hence probably did not treat them as fairly, or lovingly as I should have done, (not that I'd have ever shunned either of them under any circumstances though!).


----------



## grahamg (May 7, 2021)

cdestroyer said:


> love is a four letter word..........sometimes


This early response to the OP has me baffled, though that's not altogether a bad thing, especially as a definition of the word "love" is difficult to arrive at (or one all can agree upon is, hence our UK family courts shy away from ever using the word during their proceedings and it doesn't appear in statutes of families/divorce etc., or rules associated with them, though some US states do use the word love in their guidance on the operation of their family law systems).


----------



## grahamg (May 7, 2021)

I thought it might assist some people to understand the background to "everything" to put these factors out there for consideration as they must have some bearing I believe, albeit it all happened a long time ago, (and if everyone moved on as advised, I suppose they wouldn't be remembered or repeated).

Whilst my child told me to "keep coming daddy", (and "I hate you, you are horrible", as already covered), these things were also going on:

My daughter hugged me as she got in my car for a contact visit, the contact visits were cut in half on my returning her home, with no explanation given.

My large family each gave my daughter an Easter egg, so she ended up with about seven chocolate Easter eggs to try to eat. She was told I'd eaten her Easter eggs, and was very relieved when she found all seven waiting for her at my home, (a minor incident I know, but bear with me).

My large family gave my daughter birthday and Christmas presents, my daughter refused to take them into her home, when I returned her.

My daughter was clothed in secondhand gear when I picked her up, and on her returning home she was changed and showered so that any smells associated with myself and my parents farm were dispelled, (my ex was a farmers daughter as well doing this).

I bought my daughter expensive party dresses on three occasions, and had a professional photographer take some wonderful shots of her, (this occurred over about four years). She would never wear the dresses again, and I was told by my ex they were in a "clothes archive" so they were all eventually returned to me, (and I passed them on to my neices who were very pleased to wear them).

If I arrived a few minutes early to collect my child, she never appeared around the front door of her home until the exact time arranged. My daughter worried when I returned her home, for example from a trip to the seaside, that she would not arrive home at exactly the right time, (at one minute to the appointed time she told me to "hurry up daddy" as I turned into the street where she lived).

During some contact visits my daughter told me of the treats, or trips that had been arranged by her mother and new daddy while she was away and she'd be missing.

My daughter worried about her surname being different than her half sisters.

When my contact with my daughter broke down she'd just returned from a week long trip to Euro Disney with her mother and "new daddy" etc., and behaved differently from the start of the contact visit, (telling me shortly after I picked her up that her mother and new daddy didn't want her to see me). When I returned my daughter home her mother did something she'd never done before, waited in the street outside their home for our arrival, and when my daughter saw her mother waiting she said "don't come again daddy"!). I believe my daughter had been worked upon by her mother and new daddy during the week at Euro Disney, so she would know exactly what was expected of her.

Dismiss all this if you wish as ancient history, not worth repeating and so on, but my mother used to talk of my ex saying she behaved like a "steel hand in a velvet glove", (and my mother quite liked or admired her perhaps, certainly she never fell out with her). In my opinion all my ex's actions were designed to protect her own position in our daughters life, and my daughter loving anyone else other than her, or as much as her, was seen as a direct threat, (my ex. was a very controlling person, and as I may have said before, told our daughter "she knew what our daughter was going to think, say and do, before she did herself"!).

There you go for what its worth, and if you can be bothered to check some of the links I've provided to fathers rights websites you'll learn what happened over my daughter_ and the manipulation she was subjected to is a very familiar picture to them, (whatever would Kahlil Gibran think  ).


----------



## Leonie (May 7, 2021)

Aaah, it's often the little things that do the most damage.  It's like unravelling a piece of fabric, say a rug.  The first couple of threads, we don't even notice.  By the time we do notice, there is a tiny little hole, which we repair.  Over time other small holes appear which become harder and harder to repair until the fabric becomes threadbare and we realise it can no longer be repaired. Then we either learn to live with it as it is or throw away the rug.  It's a tough choice, and sadly not always our own.


----------



## Rosemarie (May 8, 2021)

grahamg, I think when you were told to 'move on', it was meant with the best intentions.  You really need to accept that it's history now and what's done is done.


----------



## grahamg (May 8, 2021)

Rosemarie said:


> grahamg, I think when you were told to 'move on', it was meant with the best intentions.  You really need to accept that it's history now and what's done is done.


I know your words are well meant, and I'll accept them as that, or even agree with you, BUT, (there's always s "but", - sorry joke wearing thin I know), if you read the post immediately prior to your own you'll get an idea why I continue to have a very remote amount of faith in there being some understanding out there. It may one day make a difference to someone else, another decent or " okay" father. Judge Wilson, the former head of the UK family law division in the old Lord Chancellors department, referred to some of us as okay dads, in an address he gave before standing down, (lamenting how many okay dads no longer raised their "own" kids). He used the term "love" in his speech too, one of only six references on the whole of the government website dealing with the family!.


----------



## Knight (May 8, 2021)

Quote from a really long post about what you think took place.

"My daughter hugged me as she got in my car for a contact visit," 

There are reasons for contact visits. It's only one side, to bad your ex doesn't post to explain her side.


----------



## Colleen (May 8, 2021)

Maybe it's just me but I don't understand the point of the OP's original post. There is so much division in families, friends, and the world today that "striking back" doesn't seem logical to me. Why would you do that? No good can come from it.

I've posted in the past about my difficult relationship with my son. He's 45 years old so I have left him alone to live with his decisions. Striking back at his incorrect assumptions about things that happened in his childhood would serve no useful purpose. It would only alienate him more. 

I'm guessing I'm missing the whole point of the OP's posting.

We've had a situation in my husband's family this last week that we could have opted to make a big deal (or "strike back") out of not being notified about the death of our brother-in-law, but we chose to let it alone and get on with our lives. That was his sister's decision to keep us out of the loop. So be it.


----------



## grahamg (May 8, 2021)

Colleen said:


> Maybe it's just me but I don't understand the point of the OP's original post. There is so much division in families, friends, and the world today that "striking back" doesn't seem logical to me. Why would you do that? No good can come from it.
> I've posted in the past about my difficult relationship with my son. He's 45 years old so I have left him alone to live with his decisions. Striking back at his incorrect assumptions about things that happened in his childhood would serve no useful purpose. It would only alienate him more.
> I'm guessing I'm missing the whole point of the OP's posting.
> We've had a situation in my husband's family this last week that we could have opted to make a big deal (or "strike back") out of not being notified about the death of our brother-in-law, but we chose to let it alone and get on with our lives. That was his sister's decision to keep us out of the loop. So be it.


In all truth there is not much sense to my OP I agree, and if there is any at all it is about a change of attitude someone who feels they've been walked all over might try, so as to get on to the front foot psychologically.
If you were to trouble yourself and read all the posts on the thread you will notice some support for the idea you can't ultimately allow yourself to be treated as a doormat, even by your own child.
The rests of the arguments I've engaged in here on the forum before, and it proved equally unproductive, though its an open question whether that's my fault, and I'm wrong, and so many members of fathers rights groups have it all wrong, or the system is flawed. Lawyers believe they are wise to refuse to bend to calls for statuary rights for decent parents in the UK, because they claim the family law system know better what is good for your child than those who love them do, and so many here take the lawyers view too.


----------



## grahamg (May 8, 2021)

Knight said:


> Quote from a really long post about what you think took place.
> "My daughter hugged me as she got in my car for a contact visit,"
> There are reasons for contact visits. It's only one side, to bad your ex doesn't post to explain her side.


Haven't we quit our arguments and I've come to the conclusion my only way forward is to do what Matt O'Connor from Fathers 4 Justice says non resident dads should do, accept unjustifiable comments for the sakes of avoiding protracted arguments, obscuring any goal you might have(?).


----------



## AnnieA (May 8, 2021)

grahamg said:


> I thought it might assist some people to understand the background to "everything" to put these factors out there for consideration as they must have some bearing I believe, albeit it all happened a long time ago, (and if everyone moved on as advised, I suppose they wouldn't be remembered or repeated).
> 
> Whilst my child told me to "keep coming daddy", (and "I hate you, you are horrible", as already covered), these things were also going on:
> 
> ...



Your ex sounds like as much of a narcissistic, controlling bitch as my brother's ex is.  What's your daughter's relationship with her currently.?


----------



## Murrmurr (May 8, 2021)

grahamg said:


> I thought it might assist some people to understand the background to "everything" to put these factors out there for consideration as they must have some bearing I believe, albeit it all happened a long time ago, (and if everyone moved on as advised, I suppose they wouldn't be remembered or repeated).
> 
> Whilst my child told me to "keep coming daddy", (and "I hate you, you are horrible", as already covered), these things were also going on:
> 
> ...


Graham, for me, this post finally spells it out clearly. I haven't kept up very well because, frankly, I don't understand you very well (your writing, that is). No fault on either of us, just is what it is.

Obviously your daughter has been manipulated. Try to imagine the conversation that goes (or went) on in her mother's home between her mother and step-dad, and realize your daughter has had to listen to it before and after every single visit with you. I'll wager that when she said "Don't come again, Daddy" it was because she doesn't (or didn't) want to hear those conversations anymore. I'll wager they are (or were) extremely upsetting for her. And exhausting.

I gather she's an adult now? In which case: She must be tired of the drama; had enough of it (for 3 lifetimes, probably). Keep her out of it now. Shield her from any further drama. And by all means, don't strike back - none of this was her fault, and it's not her responsibility to make you (or her mother) feel better about any of it. Her only responsibility is to try and sort it out so that SHE can feel better, mainly about herself and her life.

It's awful that the courts and father's rights groups and everyone else involved let you down, and therefore let your daughter down as well. I can tell you it happens a LOT. Keep fighting for justice if you want, it's a good cause, I'll go so far as to say it's crucial, but keep your daughter out of it entirely. She's been adversely effected by the whole experience. The effects may always be there, but she needs to put that history to rest as best she can.


----------



## Colleen (May 8, 2021)

grahamg said:


> If you were to trouble yourself and read all the posts on the thread you will notice some support for the idea you can't ultimately allow yourself to be treated as a doormat, even by your own child.



I allowed the "doormat" treatment for years and punished myself for life decisions that were not mine to make at the time but allowed them to happen so my son blamed me for "abandoning" him...at the age of 23, BTW. I made a new life for myself but I guess he thought I should stay around forever to pay all the bills (he was living with me and I was divorced) when I made $5.50 part-time while he had a good job that paid $17/hour right out of school. This was in 1992-1997. I had lots of work experience but no one wanted to hire an "older" person like me so I took whatever I could get. He was selfish and irresponsible with his money and when I had an accident that totaled my car (I was hit head-on) and had to find my own way to work, he didn't even offer to help me. 

This toxic relationship continued for many years. Finally, for my own sanity, I cut off all communications with him. I no longer allow him to treat me disrespectfully or make me feel guilty or use me for a doormat for anything. Sometimes, you just have to let it go.


----------



## grahamg (May 8, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> Your ex sounds like as much of a narcissistic, controlling bitch as my brother's ex is.  What's your daughter's relationship with her currently.?


I hope and believe my daughter has a good relationship with her mum, not least because as I did state earlier on this thread, my ex was "the best parent", (she was "caring", my daughter acknowledged that at an early age, though on a slight negative my daughter called her mum " moody"!).
A very odd thing happened once when I telephoned my ex to tell her I wouldn't be seeking "staying access" one summer, (a short four or five days holiday, such as I'd been permitted the year before). My ex chose to confide in me that the two daughters she had with the man from her work she left me for, "were not like our daughter", (I'd have thought my ex would not confide in me at all, so some surprise that, but my daughter was exceptional, of that there was/is no doubt).
There's much more I could say about my ex., right back to before we married, and having known her a few months she told me she wanted my child, (obviously I learnt the hard way that was all she wanted!).


----------



## Colleen (May 8, 2021)

Murrmurr said:


> I haven't kept up very well because, frankly, I don't understand you very well (your writing, that is). No fault on either of us, just is what it is.


Me, too. I had a hard time understanding him so I just skimmed through and probably misunderstood the whole thing.  He sounds like a very bitter man and maybe should seek counseling for his own sake.


----------



## Murrmurr (May 8, 2021)

Colleen said:


> Me, too. I had a hard time understanding him so I just skimmed through and probably misunderstood the whole thing.


Kind of hilarious that both sides of the pond speak English but we still have a hard time understanding each other.


----------



## grahamg (May 8, 2021)

Colleen said:


> Me, too. I had a hard time understanding him so I just skimmed through and probably misunderstood the whole thing.  He sounds like a very bitter man and maybe should seek counseling for his own sake.


"Stop talking about me as though I'm not here you pair, honestly"!!
(actually its been said so often before you must be right, and my then wife used to say I spoke in riddles!   ).


----------



## AnnieA (May 8, 2021)

grahamg said:


> I hope and believe my daughter has a good relationship with her mum, not least because as I did state earlier on this thread, my ex was "the best parent", (she was "caring", my daughter acknowledged that at an early age, though on a slight negative my daughter called her mum " moody"!).


Playing the kind of head games with a child that you described in post 127 was NOT caring.  She engaged in deliberate parental alienation and that is emotional abuse.


----------



## Elsie (May 8, 2021)

I believe that respect is earned,


grahamg said:


> An odd thread title for a relationship thread, BUT, (there's always a but!  ), if your experience in whatever relationship it might be, is one of being ignored or shunned, and as far as I'm aware being treated in that way denies you the interaction all human beings need, ("No man is an island" I was told at school, and all that stuff, was it said by John Dunne?), then we're being denied life aren't we(?).
> 
> We're now in an age where we can spout our views to folks across the world with ease, (as we've been able to do for maybe twenty years or so), and yet at the same time so many seem to have difficulties in interpersonal relationships, maybe more so than in previous generations, so what if anything may be done about it we might agree upon?
> 
> ...


Being unjustifiably shunned would anger me, but “striking back” at the shunner might (mistakenly) give them the idea they have a legitimate reason for doing shunning me.

Letting a child know you’ll always be there for them (whenever you possibly can), and they disrespectfully show they don’t believe you, let go your hurt, hang in there) because in time they probably will turn to you for help with whatever because they know you are an honorable man.

I respected my parents (mother and step-father) for providing my basic needs, but I did not respect them for verbally tearing away at my self-esteem. My mother never said a bad word to me about my biological father. (I had wanted to know him, but for years he was an alcoholic who never came into my life, until he’d been sober for 12 years when I was 21 & he visited me. We got along fine. I never brought up his not being around as I grew up. That was in the past, I was just happy to meet my biological father. 

Thank goodness (my mother) and the woman he was married to had no objection to his getting to meet with me (and my sister).


----------



## Murrmurr (May 8, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> Playing the kind of head games with a child that you described in post 127 was NOT caring.  She engaged in deliberate parental alienation and that is emotional abuse.


I agree. And that type of abuse is next to impossible to prove, which is why family court lawyers don't even want to hear about it.


----------



## grahamg (May 8, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> Playing the kind of head games with a child that you described in post 127 was NOT caring.  She engaged in deliberate parental alienation and that is emotional abuse.


I'm afraid you're jumping to too many conclusions, (again).

When I said my ex was the better parent I meant it, and I told her she was the better parent shortly after she left me. My own father, who believe you me, wanted to hold a grudge against my ex, and even extended it to include my daughter for a while, (but couldn't keep it up). My dads farming mates told him it was better that my ex was raising my child, and this caused him to moderate his views, and then after my contact with my daughter ceased, my father behaved reasonably towards my ex.
At the start of the difficulties I had over contact my ex tried telling a court welfare officer how much our daughter hated me, and how she had to force our child to come with her dad on a contact visit, but the experienced court welfare officer had heard it all before, took absolutely no notice, and lectured my ex to permit contact, (all under previous legislation where dads were maybe more strongly supported).

So no, no use pathologising what happened so far as my daughter goes, I won't have it, obviously my ex won't, and my daughter has come through it all too well, regardless of anything else.


----------



## Jules (May 8, 2021)

OP, I still can‘t fathom what you expect to happen if you strike back at your daughter.  

It’s been 25 years since you had regular parental contact.  She’s 37, a very well-educated doctor and obviously can make up her own mind.  

You can’t go back and redo history.  Maybe it wasn’t fair.  Life isn’t always fair.  What do expect should happen?


----------



## AnnieA (May 8, 2021)

grahamg said:


> I'm afraid you're jumping to too many conclusions, (again).
> 
> When I said my ex was the better parent I meant it, and I told her she was the better parent shortly after she left me. My own father, who believe you me, wanted to hold a grudge against my ex, and even extended it to include my daughter for a while, (but couldn't keep it up). My dads farming mates told him it was better that my ex was raising my child, and this caused him to moderate his views, and then after my contact with my daughter ceased, my father behaved reasonably towards my ex.
> At the start of the difficulties I had over contact my ex tried telling a court welfare officer how much our daughter hated me, and how she had to force our child to come with her dad on a contact visit, but the experienced court welfare officer had heard it all before, took absolutely no notice, and lectured my ex to permit contact, (all under previous legislation where dads were maybe more strongly supported).
> ...


Post 127 details classic parental alienation which is emotional child abuse.  That's not jumping to a conclusion; it has been recognized in child psychology for years.

I'm interested in why you deny that...


----------



## grahamg (May 8, 2021)

Jules said:


> OP, I still can‘t fathom what you expect to happen if you strike back at your daughter.
> It’s been 25 years since you had regular parental contact.  She’s 37, a very well-educated doctor and obviously can make up her own mind.
> You can’t go back and redo history.  Maybe it wasn’t fair.  Life isn’t always fair.  What do expect should happen?


"Life isn't fair", BUT, (there's always a but!), do you think the law, and those administering it should be fair though? My point number one!

Point two, yes very well educated daughter, yes very capable of making up her own mind though/whilst I myself at the same age wasn't so much able to make up my mind, or at least force my mind to stop loving my ex., even twp years on after she left me, (fortunately I was able by then to love someone else as much, and that was a milestone!). 
My daughters relationship with her mother is different, though those experts examining situations like this one suggest its when the source of the problem disappears, things change, (I once spoke to a lady similarly estranged from her father, who came around, or changed her attitude towards her father just as described she said).

I must accept my daughter is very like her mother, and has steel inside her, so any pride I might feel in her achievements and many personal qualities, I have to try to appreciate treating me like a pariah, deceiving me somewhat, " rubbing my nose in it" to an extent, all these things are part of the package. A female friend reading a letter my daughter sent to me twenty or so years ago, (as a teenager), had a point who told me I "hadn't got a daughter", so shocked was she by reading my daughter declare I "ruined the first twelve years of her life").


----------



## grahamg (May 8, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> Post 127 details classic parental alienation which is emotional child abuse.  That's not jumping to a conclusion; it has been recognized in child psychology for years.
> I'm interested in why you deny that...


I'm interested in why you're unable to accept anyone telling you their daughter does not suffer from an illness, and it is the family law system that is at fault nowadays.
If my daughter was ill, or ever showed symptoms of any illness/abuse I would have known, or I feel I would, because she would have lost confidence and become withdrawn in my view, if she had a problem.
She was always open, confident/bossy, friendly and made friends easily, smart, up to the minute, a deep thinker, and she was very sweet according to my own mother, with whom she had a very positive relationship, (even when mums health waivered, or she exhibited paranoia this didn't phase my daughter or stop the relationship).

To finish my comments, your propensity to believe what you want, and not accept or respect the views of a parent, who at the very least witnessed what went on, says a lot to me, (and you're not alone, and there is the rub!).


----------



## AnnieA (May 8, 2021)

grahamg said:


> I'm interested in why you're unable to accept anyone telling you their daughter does not suffer from an illness, and it is the family law system that is at fault nowadays.
> If my daughter was ill, or ever showed symptoms of any illness/abuse I would have known, or I feel I would, because she would have lost confidence and become withdrawn in my view, if she had a problem.
> She was always open, confident/bossy, friendly and made friends easily, smart, up to the minute, a deep thinker, and she was very sweet according to my own mother, with whom she had a very positive relationship, (even when mums health waivered, or she exhibited paranoia this didn't phase my daughter or stop the relationship).
> 
> To finish my comments, your propensity to believe what you want, and not accept or respect the views of a parent, who at the very least witnessed what went on, says a lot to me, (and you're not alone, and there is the rub!).


How does 'illness' come into it?


----------



## grahamg (May 8, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> How does 'illness' come into it?


If you follow any of the links provided to fathers rights websites you'll find explanations there, but if you don't mind I feel I'll have to follow Matt O'Connors advice again here, and choose to agree to what I might truly believe are unwarranted comments, in order to prevent my arguing with the comments obscuring whatever goals I might have, hence "I'll agree with you from now on whatever you say"!


----------



## AnnieA (May 8, 2021)

grahamg said:


> If you follow any of the links provided to fathers rights websites you'll find explanations there, but if you don't mind I feel I'll have to follow Matt O'Connors advice again here, and choose to agree to what I might truly believe are unwarranted comments, in order to prevent my arguing with the comments obscuring whatever goals I might have, hence "I'll agree with you from now on whatever you say"!



Okay.  I think "Come back, Daddy" meant both that your daughter loved you and also that she wanted you somehow to stop her mother from subjecting her to extreme emotional manipulation concerning you.  Parental alienation wasn't recognized all those years ago as it is now so your only recourse was the courts which did, in fact, fail you.

Since you did not (couldn't,  I realize at the time) stop the turmoil, your daughter protected herself by removing you as the source though it was her mother causing most of her pain.  Though....having once been a little girl...I know small daughters think their daddies strong, invincible and capable of fighting off anything that threatens them.  So there's naturally negative emotions in the little girl towards Daddy when he doesn't do it; she wouldn't understand at that age that the courts wouldn't let him.

Refusing to acknowledge that your ex emotionally abused your daughter by systematically alienating you (post 127 again) is really hard to understand though...  Could be several things such as internalized anger.  That's speculation based on what I've felt seeing parental alienation up close and personal. Pure rage is what I've felt seeing children I love emotionally manipulated.  I cannot imagine being the other parent.   Could be that you feel regret and  responsible in that that you couldn't go to court and slay all your little girl's monsters ...alleviate her pain.

I've felt sorry for your pain through all the numerous threads and posts about your estrangement from your daughter. Estrangement is incredibly sad and your pain is all the more stark and raw due to your attempts to intellectualize it and make it only about the court system.  But the fact that the emotional abuse has obviously been pointed out to you before and your response has likely been all along to dismiss "unwarranted comments" in denial, then I think you'll carry it to the grave.  You don't have to though; you can work through it with a good therapist.


----------



## grahamg (May 8, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> Okay.  I think "Come back, Daddy" meant both that your daughter loved you and also that she wanted you somehow to stop her mother from subjecting her to extreme emotional manipulation concerning you.  Parental alienation wasn't recognized all those years ago as it is now so your only recourse was the courts which did, in fact, fail you.
> 
> Since you did not (couldn't,  I realize at the time) stop the turmoil, your daughter protected herself by removing you as the source though it was her mother causing most of her pain.  Though....having once been a little girl...I know small daughters think their daddies strong, invincible and capable of fighting off anything that threatens them.  So there's naturally negative emotions in the little girl towards Daddy when he doesn't do it; she wouldn't understand at that age that the courts wouldn't let him.
> 
> ...


Dear "A",
" I agree with you",(you know I don't really, and one day I hope you become able to read everything I've said again on this or other threads and accept where the truth lies, rather than where you assume it lies, oh and to repeat my comment I think it fair to suggest my ex would agree with, "she was the better parent". She was "manipulative" yes, "into mind control" yes, but loving towards our daughter, caring towards her and with a strong impulse to act as the first Kahlil Gibran poem posted on the thread stated, "like the bow bent to project the metaphorical arrow (our daughter) as high as possible.


----------



## Rosemarie (May 8, 2021)

Murrmurr said:


> Kind of hilarious that both sides of the pond speak English but we still have a hard time understanding each other.


I'm sorry to say it, but grahamg isn't the most articulate of writers. I'm also confused by some of the things he says, and I'm English.


----------



## grahamg (May 9, 2021)

Rosemarie said:


> I'm sorry to say it, but grahamg isn't the most articulate of writers. I'm also confused by some of the things he says, and I'm English.


Haven't I already confessed to this fact, why the need to rub it in, (are you inadequate in some way, or lack understanding, because as they say, "I can explain things for you but I cannot understand things for you"!?)?

"Its every man for himself in this world" my father used to say very often, and how often that thoughts occurs to me, and maybe even occurred to my daughter too, more than once.


----------



## Rosemarie (May 9, 2021)

grahamg said:


> Haven't I already confessed to this fact, why the need to rub it in, (are you inadequate in some way, or lack understanding, because as they say, "I can explain things for you but I cannot understand things for you"!?)?
> 
> "Its every man for himself in this world" my father used to say very often, and how often that thoughts occurs to me, and maybe even occurred to my daughter too, more than once.


Calm down! I was just trying to explain that being American shouldn't mean you can't understand what the British say. It can be difficult to put your feelings into words, I struggle myself much of the time.
I sympathise with you more than you realise. I had a difficult childhood because of my mothers attitude towards me. It has surely affected me and the choices I have made. I dwell on it for much of the time, just as you dwell on the situation with your daughter.
However, I can't change the past, so constantly discussing it just keeps the wounds raw and is pointless.


----------



## grahamg (May 9, 2021)

Rosemarie said:


> Calm down! I was just trying to explain that being American shouldn't mean you can't understand what the British say. It can be difficult to put your feelings into words, I struggle myself much of the time. I sympathise with you more than you realise. I had a difficult childhood because of my mothers attitude towards me. It has surely affected me and the choices I have made. I dwell on it for much of the time, just as you dwell on the situation with your daughter.
> However, I can't change the past, so constantly discussing it just keeps the wounds raw and is pointless.


Who is American do you think, (or are you referring to other forum members?)?
Although I'm told often enough "move on, its pointless, etc.,etc., etc.," I still assert, and will do till my dying day, that there are times when "moving on" is not appropriate in my view, and when you only have one child, and only ever wanted one child, all the circumstances surrounding your exclusion and estrangement should be aired, and at the very least does no one any harm (except myself according to you, though that's more my business than yours, especially bearing in mind my father's saying about it being "Every man for himself in this world").
I'm not completely incapable of moving on, when I can do so, or wish to do so sometimes, as I've mentioned somewhere back on this thread concerning my ex-wife, and yes that was a good thing, I dont go on about her all the time, and obviously no one would be interested if I did, (notice someone else on the forum leaping to her defence btw?). However, please leave me be so far as advising me to "move on" will you, I'm not listening, and will only respond now by quoting Matt O'Connor at you and pretending to agree with you, (as he suggests fathers should do in similar circumstances).


----------



## Dana (May 9, 2021)

*If you love somebody, let them go, for if they return, they were always yours. If they don’t, they never were…Kahlil Gibran.*


----------



## grahamg (May 9, 2021)

Dana said:


> *If you love somebody, let them go, for if they return, they were always yours. If they don’t, they never were…Kahlil Gibran.*


Glad to see you're still following the discourse, for what its worth, and I hope you noticed my mention of Kahlil Gibran in a previous post relating to my ex.(?).


----------



## Dana (May 9, 2021)

grahamg said:


> Glad to see you're still following the discourse, for what its worth, and I hope you noticed my mention of Kahlil Gibran in a previous post relating to my ex.(?).


_But it's not really a "discourse" is it?  It's a case of people trying to understand you and possibly help you and you respond by insulting them, hmm._


----------



## grahamg (May 9, 2021)

Dana said:


> _But it's not really a "discourse" is it?  It's a case of people trying to understand you and possibly help you and you respond by insulting them, hmm._


Some haven't taken it that way of course, (you don't need me to quote them do you?), and whilst I praise my ex as "the best parent" I'm told there must be another side to things when I put forward any negatives, (where could a discourse possibly go when obviously my ex isn't ever going to confirm those expressing suspicions, hence its a dead end, just as Matt O'Connor tries to explain to so many fathers getting unfairly pilloried).
I don't think your mind is open to the possibility you may have things wrong about family law, hence I might as well kid on I agree with you, as engage with you.
However, on a positive note, my provocatively titled thread has achieved over 2k views, so in my very limited campaigning efforts, I feel satisfied by that fact. I know the criticisms poured upon me during the argy bargy was part of the price to be paid, (unwarranted criticism I believe, when at the end of the day my daughter is the success she really is, and its a level of success few parents here will be able to claim that their child has surpassed).


----------



## AnnieA (May 9, 2021)

grahamg said:


> ... She was "manipulative" yes, "into mind control" yes, but loving towards our daughter, caring towards her and with a strong impulse to act as the first Kahlil Gibran poem posted on the thread stated, "like the bow bent to project the metaphorical arrow (our daughter) as high as possible.



Have you ever come across in your reading that a manipulative, controlling parent pushes her (in this case) child to succeed for reflected glory in the child's achievements?    It's pretty common considering that a manipulative, controlling parent needs to be seen as "in the right" in part to validate her behavior.  What better way to 'prove' she was a good mother than to produce a successful child?

Your daughter obviously has the gifts and inclination to succeed;  I wonder how it would've gone with her mom if she hadn't?


----------



## AnnieA (May 9, 2021)

grahamg said:


> However, on a positive note, my provocatively titled thread has achieved over 2k views, so in my very limited campaigning efforts, I feel satisfied by that fact.



Why can't your campaigning include helping alienated fathers (or mothers) recognize the damage alienation causes to those alienated and often to the children  ...maybe not yours specifically, but many others?  Wouldn't doing so help them communicate their legal needs better to get improved rulings from child courts?


----------



## grahamg (May 9, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> Have you ever come across in your reading that a manipulative, controlling parent pushes her (in this case) child to succeed for reflected glory in the child's achievements?    It's pretty common considering that a manipulative, controlling parent needs to be seen as "in the right" in part to validate her behavior.  What better way to 'prove' she was a good mother than to produce a successful child?
> Your daughter obviously has the gifts and inclination to succeed;  I wonder how it would've gone with her mom if she hadn't?


Stop analysing me "A", not least because I'm agreeing with everything you say from now on, so "I agree with you", "You are right", (what else could you be?).


----------



## grahamg (May 9, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> Why can't your campaigning include helping alienated fathers (or mothers) recognize the damage alienation causes to those alienated and often to the children  ...maybe not yours specifically, but many others?  Wouldn't doing so help them communicate their legal needs better to get improved rulings from child courts?


It might seem a very odd argument to make someone might think, to suggest to another forum member to start a campaign you believe in, and they don't agree with, whilst ignoring what they believe they know is wrong, BUT, (there's always a but), I of course totally agree with you, and doubt anyone will be able to find any flaws in your arguments, either here, in courts, or across the globe, (satisfied?)!


----------



## grahamg (May 9, 2021)

Leonie said:


> Aaah, it's often the little things that do the most damage.  It's like unravelling a piece of fabric, say a rug.  The first couple of threads, we don't even notice.  By the time we do notice, there is a tiny little hole, which we repair.  Over time other small holes appear which become harder and harder to repair until the fabric becomes threadbare and we realise it can no longer be repaired. Then we either learn to live with it as it is or throw away the rug.  It's a tough choice, and sadly not always our own.


Your supportive post was in danger of being swamped, hence my bumping it up the thread!


----------



## AnnieA (May 9, 2021)

> Post 162:
> Have you ever come across in your reading that a manipulative, controlling parent pushes her (in this case) child to succeed for reflected glory in the child's achievements?    It's pretty common considering that a manipulative, controlling parent needs to be seen as "in the right" in part to validate her behavior.  What better way to 'prove' she was a good mother than to produce a successful child?
> 
> Your daughter obviously has the gifts and inclination to succeed;  I wonder how it would've gone with her mom if she hadn't?





grahamg said:


> Stop analysing me "A", not least because I'm agreeing with everything you say from now on, so "I agree with you", "You are right", (what else could you be?).



Post 162 wasn't meant to analyze you.  It actually was an attempt to ask questions that lead to meaningful dialogue.   But as @Dana pointed out, that hasn't happened much from your end, and  staying in "Nana, nana, boo boo" mode with your fingers figuratively stuck in your ears isn't going to lead to dialogue.    It isn't going to lead to your effecting much change either.  Thread views may be high--not because people are interested in the OP mission of: "...strike back at those denying your humanity, and try to assist others similarly shunned."--but  because of that weird quirk humans have that keeps us watching train wrecks.


----------



## grahamg (May 9, 2021)

Murrmurr said:


> Graham, for me, this post finally spells it out clearly. I haven't kept up very well because, frankly, I don't understand you very well (your writing, that is). No fault on either of us, just is what it is.
> Obviously your daughter has been manipulated. Try to imagine the conversation that goes (or went) on in her mother's home between her mother and step-dad, and realize your daughter has had to listen to it before and after every single visit with you. I'll wager that when she said "Don't come again, Daddy" it was because she doesn't (or didn't) want to hear those conversations anymore. I'll wager they are (or were) extremely upsetting for her. And exhausting.
> I gather she's an adult now? In which case: She must be tired of the drama; had enough of it (for 3 lifetimes, probably). Keep her out of it now. Shield her from any further drama. And by all means, don't strike back - none of this was her fault, and it's not her responsibility to make you (or her mother) feel better about any of it. Her only responsibility is to try and sort it out so that SHE can feel better, mainly about herself and her life.
> It's awful that the courts and father's rights groups and everyone else involved let you down, and therefore let your daughter down as well. I can tell you it happens a LOT. Keep fighting for justice if you want, it's a good cause, I'll go so far as to say it's crucial, but keep your daughter out of it entirely. She's been adversely effected by the whole experience. The effects may always be there, but she needs to put that history to rest as best she can.


The above post didn't get the attention it deserved either earlier so I've reposted it again in full below:

Quote:
"Graham, for me, this post finally spells it out clearly. I haven't kept up very well because, frankly, I don't understand you very well (your writing, that is). No fault on either of us, just is what it is.

Obviously your daughter has been manipulated. Try to imagine the conversation that goes (or went) on in her mother's home between her mother and step-dad, and realize your daughter has had to listen to it before and after every single visit with you. I'll wager that when she said "Don't come again, Daddy" it was because she doesn't (or didn't) want to hear those conversations anymore. I'll wager they are (or were) extremely upsetting for her. And exhausting.

I gather she's an adult now? In which case: She must be tired of the drama; had enough of it (for 3 lifetimes, probably). Keep her out of it now. Shield her from any further drama. And by all means, don't strike back - none of this was her fault, and it's not her responsibility to make you (or her mother) feel better about any of it. Her only responsibility is to try and sort it out so that SHE can feel better, mainly about herself and her life.

It's awful that the courts and father's rights groups and everyone else involved let you down, and therefore let your daughter down as well. I can tell you it happens a LOT. Keep fighting for justice if you want, it's a good cause, I'll go so far as to say it's crucial, but keep your daughter out of it entirely. She's been adversely effected by the whole experience. The effects may always be there, but she needs to put that history to rest as best she can."

My comments:
I think I understand the "divided loyalties" I'd guess most children of divorced parents experience, and I believe I witnessed this in my child very early on in the aftermath of her mother and I parting, (so within the first year, (maybe the first six to nine months?).

I dont think I was let down by courts in the beginning, quite the reverse, (under legislation in place in the late 1980s in the UK), nor was I| let down by father's rights groups, (I'd never come across any fathers rights groups until at least four years after my contact with my daughter broke down in any event).

Putting what happened to me to one side I wish to make some broader comments, and relate some other stories for you now.

I know a man who has children from three relationships in his life, (so far, he's only seventy now, and has a girlfriend half his age, so there may be more to come!). He wasn't married to the mother of his first son, and didn't see so much of him whilst he grew up, though he carries his first name, and he probably sees more of this son than the son and daughter from his second relationship. He does not see his daughter from his third marriage/relationship at all now, and is totally estranged from her you'd have to say. All these children are doing very well in their lives, all are incredibly hard working like their father, so what is my point here? Well, I suppose you could argue he's been "good at moving on" to start with, and he is involved in family gatherings sometimes with the next generation occasionally, though I dont know how close they all are really. He was damned in relation to the daughter he never sees by the mother stating, "he'll only let her down again if he were allowed contact", (and this mother kidded herself she could keep from her daughter who the child's dad with, even though she's unmistakably the child of this man, and is like him in mannerisms, and every which way!). I dont envy him at all, but I do admire him in some ways for the strength of character of his children, and in many ways he is a very strong character, (though he'd have preferred a successful relationship with the daughter he never sees).

Obviously that's just one case I'm relating, but if you've ever attended any father's rights meetings in the UK you will get some understanding just how widespread the problems I'm describing really are.

Now a comment about the way this discussion deteriorated. 
During my campaigning days I attended a couple of meetings, at Westminster, (so very close to our seat of government). At one meeting, attended by spokespeople for all three major UK political parties, one father who had custody of his two children, chose to insult all those of us there being denied any contact by declaring the law as it stands now isn't in need of change, and he went on and on for about half an hour denying others the opportunity to speak. One lady walked out of the meeting when this boring started to speak, (her name is Penny Cross, and I feel it is okay to mention her because she has a fairly high profile in the UK, and has set up a group for excluded mothers, plus written a book about the way she became totally estranged from all four of her children). Whatever reason this boring man had for inflicting his opinions upon the group of people gathered together, my opinion of him is that he was completely insensitive, ungrateful for the lucky position he found himself in, and I feel sorry for his ex., having married such a man. I mention all this because I wish to show the difficulties experienced by those parents groups trying to make positive changes, the way some try to derail everything because of their foolishness and insensitivity, and the difficulties those spokespeople for our major parties must have had witnessing the spectacle, this one man caused, undermining the rest of the people/parents/grandparents there, all calling for change.


----------



## Murrmurr (May 9, 2021)

I'm still unsure what specific issue(s) you're trying to work through, Graham, so I'll ask a couple of questions.

What sort of changes were you campaigning for, or is that moot at this point?
Whatever the issue is now, do you feel you've got a handle on it?


----------



## Leonie (May 9, 2021)

Hey Grahamg, have you noticed the irony in the way this thread has evolved.   Some, actually probably most, are saying you should just move on - BUT- (and there's always a but ) in the same breath we are all coming back to this thread time and time again to have another shot at figuring you out when _we_ could just 'move on'.  

I guess it goes to show that sometimes moving on is easier said than done.  Maybe I'm on a slightly different wavelength because I am the mother of men who are almost old enough to be members of this forum.  

I think I've shared my story on here before, but at the risk of repeating myself, here I go again.  About two years ago I lost all real-life contact with my son and my very young grandchildren after an altercation with my daughter-in-law.  The final breakdown of our relationship was definitely my fault.  I freely admit to that but (there it is again ) she had been whittling away at me every chance she got for years until eventually, I snapped.  She cut off all contact totally, after going on Facebook and publically doing a number on me personally and the rest of the family as well.  My son's father is an ex-husband, and his brother is married and doesn't live with me, neither had any involvement or even knowledge of the final altercation between her and me, but she threw in criticism of them as well.  She then very quickly blocked me, not that I would have retaliated, but I guess she didn't know that.  

There hadn't really been all that much contact previously anyway.  It was always me instigating the contact, and me travelling an hour and a half to visit them, not the other way around - unless they wanted something and even then it was expected that I would bring it to them.  My final refusal brought on the final breakdown.  

She has her own problems, is estranged on and off from her own family, and obviously has never really cared for me, but she loves those kids and is a good mother to them.  My son is not really happy in the relationship but has chosen to stay with her because he loves his kids too and given her problems, staying is the better choice - long story.  I'm strangely proud of him for that, and for backing her in the final breakdown of the family relationship.  He and I have reconciled to a degree but don't see one another because it would just open up old wounds and make life difficult for him.   We talk occasionally on the phone or on Instagram chat, where incidentally my 10-year-old grandaughter recently tracked me down and sneakily renewed contact.   Something tells me that will not end well either if her mother finds out.   My heart breaks for all of them.   

It is not an ideal situation but there it is.  He has very little contact now with any of his own family.  He and his brother only rarely talk on social media.  I don't think he sees much of his father either.   Living with a manipulative person is difficult, to say the least.  I can only imagine how difficult it would be to co-parent with one whilst living apart.


----------



## grahamg (May 9, 2021)

Murrmurr said:


> I'm still unsure what specific issue(s) Break.., so I'll ask a couple of questions.
> 
> What sort of changes were you campaigning for, or is that moot at this point?
> Whatever the issue is now, do you feel you've got a handle on it?


The only change to family law I seek is a rebuttable presumption in favour of contact for "decent parents", (a decent parent could be defined as one where the family law system would not have interfered in their private lives prior to the break up with the other parent, so where there are no suggestions of child abuse etc.).
"Have I got a handle on things" is a difficult question, not helped perhaps because all the patents groups I've ever come across seemed to believe their role was to tell our government and family law system they knew better what might be in children's interests, hence they fail to make their case on any other grounds.
I agree with professor Akira Morita, who presented a paper to a world congress on children over twenty years ago stating that "what children need is the relationship with their patents and not some notion of children's rights", (respect for elders/parents/grandparents being so much greater in Eastern countries, and this is involved I believe).


----------



## Murrmurr (May 10, 2021)

grahamg said:


> The only change to family law I seek is a rebuttable presumption in favour of contact for "decent parents", (a decent parent could be defined as one where the family law system would not have interfered in their private lives prior to the break up with the other parent, so where there are no suggestions of child abuse etc.).
> "Have I got a handle on things" is a difficult question, not helped perhaps because all the patents groups I've ever come across seemed to believe their role was to tell our government and family law system they knew better what might be in children's interests, hence they fail to make their case on any other grounds.
> I agree with professor Akira Morita, who presented a paper to a world congress on children over twenty years ago stating that "what children need is the relationship with their patents and not some notion of children's rights", (respect for elders/parents/grandparents being so much greater in Eastern countries, and this is involved I believe).


GOT IT! I get it. >whew<

"what children need is the relationship with their patents and not some notion of children's rights"

I agree with that 100% !! Absolutely.

Kind of related - If you laid graphs of the increase in gang related crime, drug-related crime, and violent and domestic crime in America from say, 1950 to the present, they would all line up remarkably with a graph of the increase in single-parent homes over the same period. I've checked it out, and they line up almost perfectly. It's obvious (to me, anyway) that children need both parents; their father's presence, for sure, because I'd wager that over 90% of those single-parent homes are single-mother homes.

Maybe those problems are peculiar to America, but the whole "west" went nuts in the 60s - 70s, when young adults were having babies with their "unlicensed, nothing-on-paper" partners and then went merrily on their way, the girls generally taking the kids with them; a time when young adults proclaimed themselves free from conventional responsibilities and lifestyles. That took us in a direction where we now find large swaths of our society living extremely selfishly, denying basic responsibilities, and perhaps failing to recognize that a toddler's brain is malleable, undecided, extremely impressionable, shaped by their environment and the clowns people in it who are as likely to be selfish, irresponsible people as not.

(That was a bit of a tirade based on my own experience.)


----------



## Pepper (May 10, 2021)

Murrmurr said:


> (That was a bit of a tirade based on my own experience.)


I'll say


----------



## Chet (May 10, 2021)

Rosemarie said:


> Calm down! I was just trying to explain that being American shouldn't mean you can't understand what the British say.* It can be difficult to put your feelings into* *words*, I struggle myself much of the time.
> I sympathise with you more than you realise. I had a difficult childhood because of my mothers attitude towards me. It has surely affected me and the choices I have made. I dwell on it for much of the time, just as you dwell on the situation with your daughter.
> However, I can't change the past, so constantly discussing it just keeps the wounds raw and is pointless.


It's not just difficult to go from feelings to words, but then to put those words to the keyboard is another challenge if your keyboard skills are not up to it. I go back and correct all the time and I'm sure I'm not alone.


----------



## Murrmurr (May 10, 2021)

Chet said:


> It's not just difficult to go from feelings to words, but then to put those words to the keyboard is another challenge if your keyboard skills are not up to it. I go back and correct all the time and I'm sure I'm not alone.


Whenever I write a long post, I copy/paste it on a Word document so all the spelling, punctuation and grammar gets corrected, then I copy/paste the corrected one onto my post. Unless I'm in a rush. Then SF gets the raw version.


----------



## grahamg (May 10, 2021)

Murrmurr said:


> GOT IT! I get it. >whew<
> "what children need is the relationship with their parents and not some notion of children's rights"
> I agree with that 100% !! Absolutely.
> 
> ...


Professor Akira Morita's exact words I'm sure I've only roughly recalled, but his sentiment I'm fairly sure I've accurately conveyed, and its gratifying to read you are so strongly in agreement with the thinking.
I hope I don't end up confusing you again when I add that in my belief Professor Morita was hinting at a dynamic those promoting children's rights over parental rights choose to ignore, "What it is that leads the parents, (particularly the fathers), to give of themselves to their children".
I don't believe that's necessarily an automatic process, for at least some of us dads.

(You'll forgive me I hope for withholding my views on all your other arguments right now, because "I might become overly verbose", and/or be more likely to lose focus on my central arguments on the thread so far)


----------



## grahamg (May 10, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> Post 162 wasn't meant to analyze you.  It actually was an attempt to ask questions that lead to meaningful dialogue.   But as @Dana pointed out, that hasn't happened much from your end, and  staying in "Nana, nana, boo boo" mode with your fingers figuratively stuck in your ears isn't going to lead to dialogue.    It isn't going to lead to your effecting much change either.  Thread views may be high--not because people are interested in the OP mission of: "...strike back at those denying your humanity, and try to assist others similarly shunned."--but  because of that weird quirk humans have that keeps us watching train wrecks.


Perhaps your "train wreck" comment overstated the case (for the prosecution!), and in my defence it ignores some aspects of the arguments, even were it a fair assessment.


----------



## grahamg (May 10, 2021)

Chet said:


> It's not just difficult to go from feelings to words, but then to put those words to the keyboard is another challenge if your keyboard skills are not up to it. I go back and correct all the time and I'm sure I'm not alone.


You are right of course.
I have learnt to try to leave my responses to letters or emails "in real life", (i. e. not online forum discussions), overnight before completing the job. I often find myself feeling very differently about whatever it might be in the morning, after a good nights sleep!


----------



## Elsie (May 11, 2021)

Grahamg, making counterpoints to every post you receive seems to be part of your makeup.   Even those for which you seem to agree.

The first 2 times my eldest daughter came home for Christmas Eve vacation from her schooling in Family Counseling, she chose to bring up particular things that I had done in the past that upset her badly.  (Not terrible things)  I kept my mouth shut as she spoke, (while hurting inside from her words), because I could see she needed to tell me.  I apologized for those things I realized she was right about, but when she started griping about other things for which she was wrong, I brought up some of her misbehavior's.  She disagreed.  (sigh)  I got tired of hearing her complaints, so I went to bed saying, you can dish it out but you can't take it.  Christmas day, we said no more about any of it.  What is ironic is that during her schooling she told me she had learned that many of the other students had been miserably raised, and that she had little to gripe about when it came to me as her parent.


----------



## grahamg (May 11, 2021)

Elsie said:


> Grahamg, making counterpoints to every post you receive seems to be part of your makeup.   Even those for which you seem to agree.
> The first 2 times my eldest daughter came home for Christmas Eve vacation from her schooling in Family Counseling, she chose to bring up particular things that I had done in the past that upset her badly.  (Not terrible things)  I kept my mouth shut as she spoke, (while hurting inside from her words), because I could see she needed to tell me.  I apologized for those things I realized she was right about, but when she started griping about other things for which she was wrong, I brought up some of her misbehavior's.  She disagreed.  (sigh)  I got tired of hearing her complaints, so I went to bed saying, you can dish it out but you can't take it.  Christmas day, we said no more about any of it.  What is ironic is that during her schooling she told me she had learned that many of the other students had been miserably raised, and that she had little to gripe about when it came to me as her parent.


Would it be wrong of me to leave you out then, in terms of a response?
You'll forgive me for taking a bit more time before doing so I'm sure, whilst I just add I appreciate your effort in following the thread and commenting.


----------



## Elsie (May 11, 2021)

grahamg said:


> Would it be wrong of me to leave you out then, in terms of a response?
> You'll forgive me for taking a bit more time before doing so I'm sure, whilst I just add I appreciate your effort in following the thread and commenting.


No.  It's interesting to find out (read) what your next counterpoint is going to be.  BTW, by chance, are you a freelance Writer?


----------



## grahamg (May 11, 2021)

I'm trying to check out Professor Akira's exact words, and will come back when I've found them.

He was mentioned in someone else's paper on issues surrounding children and the law, (called Professor Hafen), I'm going to quote from, because it has some relevance in relation to my posts, and to the discussion points others have raised:
https://www.firstthings.com/article/1995/08/abandoning-children-to-their-rights

"......., the Western liberal tradition has long viewed strong familial authority as a primary check on excessive state power. Nonetheless, the anti-paternalistic flavor of the times helped lead the drafters “in the final phase of deliberations in Geneva” to “defeat an attempted resistance by the representative of West Germany who tried to defend the traditional paternalistic structure of child and family law in Western society.”

It is possible, however, that the willingness of some drafters to link coercive state paternalism with a dark view of parental paternalism resulted not from confusion but from their consciously accepting an ideological critique that, (as Lilian and Oscar Handlin put it), regards the nuclear family as “a microcosm of the fascist state, where the women and children are owned by, and their needs determined by, the needs of men, in a man’s world.”

Break
"Whatever the drafters’ understanding of paternalism, their document resolves too many tough issues by erring on the side of children’s autonomy." Break ......, "the idea that parents and other adults should leave children alone, letting them speak for their own welfare and choose for themselves how their needs should be met"

Summary
"Clearly, in the U.S. as elsewhere, many older adolescents are quite capable of making sound lifestyle choices; far too many parents are dysfunctional; far too many children are ignored and abused; and no investment of human or political resources has greater long-range significance than investments in children. But years of serious struggling with these issues in one of the world’s cultures most friendly to autonomy has not persuaded most American courts and legislatures that-short of actual neglect-state agencies (or children themselves) are better equipped than the nation’s parents to assume parental roles. Despite increasing autonomy rhetoric, the American legal system limits children’s autonomy in the short run in order to maximize their development of actual autonomy in the long run. This approach also encourages development of the personal competence needed to produce an ongoing democratic society comprised of persons capable of autonomous and responsible action. To short-circuit this process by legally granting-rather than actually teaching-autonomy to children ignores the realities of education and child development to the point of abandoning children to a mere illusion of genuine autonomy."


----------



## grahamg (May 11, 2021)

I'm getting closer I feel to uncovering the exact words I'm seeking, as used by Professor Akira Morita, and there is a very scholarly article to be found here for anyone interested, and it contains this quote:

"Opponents argue that the autonomous child perspective effectively serves to drive a wedge in the parent-child relationship by setting parent and child on equal footing with regard to autonomy and rights, while neglecting an understanding of the organic relationship between parents and children"

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/217059613.pdf

And here is the paper I'm looking for (when I've been able to access it, which I cant seem to do right now):
Akira Morita, Beyond the Myth of Children's Rights, Address before World Congress of Families Il (Nov. 15, 1999).


----------



## Elsie (May 11, 2021)

grahamg said:


> I'm trying to check out Professor Akira's exact words, and will come back when I've found them.
> 
> He was mentioned in someone else's paper on issues surrounding children and the law, (called Professor Hafen), I'm going to quote from, because it has some relevance in relation to my posts, and to the discussion points others have raised:
> https://www.firstthings.com/article/1995/08/abandoning-children-to-their-rights
> ...


----------



## grahamg (May 11, 2021)

Elsie said:


> No.  It's interesting to find out (read) what your next counterpoint is going to be.  BTW, by chance, are you a freelance Writer?


Very much appreciate the compliment, and unfortunately no, as of today no one has chosen to publish anything I've ever written, let alone pay me for anything I might write, "but I/we can live in hope cant I/we"!


----------



## Elsie (May 11, 2021)

I managed to get one short story minor sci fi story e-published and 2-40 line minor sci fi poems published years ago.  I don't have the energy to write another, nor the talent.  But you do come across as one who could write an interesting e-blog.(Controversial.  )
Autonomy to a child, imo, makes me think of the story of the boy who lost his parents at a very young age and he was brought up by wolves.  Freedom without human parents' guidance is only freedom to make choices that could leave them derelict.  And as the single parent, mother of my 2 girls and one boy, I've seen at times how they wished they had their father living with them, giving them a man's influence in their lives.


----------



## grahamg (May 11, 2021)

Elsie said:


> The first 2 times my eldest daughter came home for Christmas Eve vacation from her schooling in Family Counseling, she chose to bring up particular things that I had done in the past that upset her badly.  (Not terrible things)  I kept my mouth shut as she spoke, (while hurting inside from her words), because I could see she needed to tell me.  I apologized for those things I realized she was right about, but when she started griping about other things for which she was wrong, I brought up some of her misbehavior's.  She disagreed.  (sigh)  I got tired of hearing her complaints, so I went to bed saying, you can dish it out but you can't take it.  Christmas day, we said no more about any of it.  What is ironic is that during her schooling she told me she had learned that many of the other students had been miserably raised, and that she had little to gripe about when it came to me as her parent.


I said in an earlier post I'd try to come back to make a more thorough response when I'd had more time to think, so here it is, (and please excuse me when I vere off into anecdotes about my own daughter, in an attempt to illuminate my response).
My thoughts may seem to you both uncomfortable and unfair, as they may indeed be, BUT here goes...!
At the end of your post I'm replying to now you tell of your eldest daughter returning from school and saying "she had little to gripe about when it came to me as her parent"!
I believe this is the case, obviously her saying so is sufficient, and it is some achievement to have your child make such an affirmation, and I've no doubt it was deserved, "what then can I be thinking you may not wish to hear"?
Simply and baldly this, the way your whole post I've quoted reads to me is that "you've fulfilled your role as a mother as though someone has been or is looking over your shoulder"!
I can completely understand why anyone might do this I think, and maybe my own mother felt the same pressure, and in my view those experts I've posted links to recently, raising objection to the direction of travel in family law were afraid of this too, but I believe it detracts from close interpersonal relationships to have to feel you are being monitored in any way.
A Canadian lawyer called Goldwater had quite a bit to say on this, and published a paper around 1992 on " The need for privacy in close personal relationships", (she also made a very telling quote on children's rights too, but I'll make that the subject of another post perhaps).
Now for my anecdote, well my own daughter even when her mother and I were together up go the age of two and a half, was not prone to giving many hugs to either of us, (she didn't smile as a baby either, so much so we were both convinced as parents that no baby ever really smiled, and it was only wind if they did!). After the break up of my marriage my daughter remained fairly difficult to obtain a hug from, or give one to, so a similar pattern, with some wonderful exceptions, (but overall you'd have to say she certainly wasn't a clingy child).
 I must throw in here I believe my child was warned at an early age about the dangers of adults hugging her in regard to abuse, and this entered her mind perhaps, but whether it did or not, the way around her not wishing to be hugged was she did love to be carried on my shoulders, and we'd walk a!ong having discussions as we did so, and I think folks in the street found this amusing!
Why mention these things, well I believe I managed, as far as I could, to avoid the feeling everything I said to my child or the way my contact days were spent etc., fallng into this trap of my behaving as though I had someone looking over my shoulder, inhibiting what I might say or do, whilst ironically my ex did no doubt question our child on her return home quite closely. That's all, or my reason for mentioning my own life, and here's the greatest irony, the man without any relationship with his daughter us lecturing on the way to develop close relationships with your child, but I hope you know what I mean anyway.


----------



## grahamg (May 12, 2021)

Elsie said:


> I managed to get one short story minor sci fi story e-published and 2-40 line minor sci fi poems published years ago.  I don't have the energy to write another, nor the talent.  But you do come across as one who could write an interesting e-blog.(Controversial.  )
> Autonomy to a child, imo, makes me think of the story of the boy who lost his parents at a very young age and he was brought up by wolves.  Freedom without human parents' guidance is only freedom to make choices that could leave them derelict.  And as the single parent, mother of my 2 girls and one boy, I've seen at times how they wished they had their father living with them, giving them a man's influence in their lives.


It is hard to define what it is that creates a happy and harmonious family, though sometimes I believe you can witness the signs or characteristics in people you hardly know, when they appear both at ease and having fun, or making harmless fun of each other.
Questioning ourselves isn't always helpful I think, as its likely we'll stop acting naturally etc., though if you've raised kids who have avoided major pitfalls you're really deserving praise overall in my view. 
Lastly, strange as it might seem given my calls for fathers/parents rights, sometimes awarded or granted above a strangers notion of a child's best interests, I'm never happy when I witness overbearing parents, but in my defence, or in defence of my ideas concerning family law, I'm calling for a "rebuttable presumption in favour of contact", thus the legal right can be challenged if a good reason to do so is put forward, (I'm sure you're not overbearing btw, I just wanted to throw that aspect into the mix).


----------



## Elsie (May 13, 2021)

Being overbearing to ones children could break their spirit, or possibly turn them into obnoxious bullies.  
Because of my first stepfather's (sick) treatment of me when I was around 6, I was very watchful of a man I dated when my young daughter sat on his lap.  Thankgoodness he was a decent, normal man & I had nothing to worry about.  Even so, I might have felt very watchful, uncomfortable if he'd put her on his shoulders..........most childhood bad experiences have a way of affecting ones reactions/personality through life. 
But oh what joy and fun I would have had if I had had a father I loved & trusted carry me on his shoulders.  I've been surprised when my children hug me.  In fact it's their hugging that has made me aware that I haven't been a hugger, but I am now.  
Children need a father in their lives, not just a mother.  Good luck in righteously being the father your child needs.   And free of   being 'watched' and judged.


----------



## grahamg (May 15, 2021)

Elsie said:


> Being overbearing to ones children could break their spirit, or possibly turn them into obnoxious bullies.
> Break
> Children need a father in their lives, not just a mother.  Good luck in righteously being the father your child needs.   And free of   being 'watched' and judged.


Thank you for your kind comments.
I've chopped your comments above down for a reason, and I intend to try to allow those who wish to to try to fully discern my purpose by posting the views of others, (who would probably oppose my arguments for a shift in focus):

Quote:

*We support The Parents Promise*"Everyday we hear first hand from all of you who post in our forum that the end of a relationship is heartbreaking. All the research shows though, that if parents separate, *how *they do it can have a huge impact on the mental health of their children.

More than a quarter of a million children every year in the UK are affected by their parents separating, and one in three couples will end up in the family court system, with the children caught in the middle of bitter disputes.

At Dad.info we were inspired to join the Parents Promise campaign, backed by a wide range of charities and invite you to join in too. Sign the pledge whether times are good right now or tough, and promise that should it all fall apart you will work together to not harm your children." https://theparentspromise.org.uk


----------



## grahamg (May 16, 2021)

I want to raise the issue of the need for privacy in close personal relationships.

The first and most obvious question is simply "Is their a need for privacy at all in close personal relationships"?

A Canadian Lawyer called Goldwater asserted in a paper in 1992 (I believe), that she thought there was such a need, and most folks probably assume their private life, or family life either is, or will be protected from undue scrutiny, (else the idea of an "Englishman's home being his castle" seems pretty meaningless doesn't it).

If I can find a link to one of Goldwater's papers I will post it, or other papers on the issue of privacy such as this one:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...0905/darling-should-you-maintain-your-privacy

Quote:
_"We often have to compromise between our need for privacy and our wish to maintain an important close relationship. We cannot be close to someone without revealing some personal and often private information about ourselves. Romantic relationships  mean sharing, and sharing means relinquishing some privacy. (Break)
Living in a society and having close emotional ties implies losing some privacy. By letting emotions play a central role in our lives, we assent to being exposed to a certain extent; we relinquish some privacy in order to be able to live emotionally. Yet this is precisely what our friends may value in our relationships with them—that we show a willingness to be emotionally drawn, to be vulnerable, to lose our privacy and reveal our secrets.

Friendships entails having less privacy. Telling our secrets to someone may establish a friendship, but it also exposes our vulnerability. Those who are close to us can hurt us easily, and we can easily hurt them. Some people actually avoid having friends for this reason."_

The issue of privacy I'm more interested in a sense is not so much whether people confide in those they are close to, or wish to become close with, but how much they would feel free to do so if either or both parties felt everything they might say is likely to be scrutinised by others. This scrutiny may include of course, someone else they might be in a close personal relationship with, and they've perhaps chosen to be indiscrete about them, (or else they are fearful of being indiscrete about because of the potential for their privacy being violated by professionals or others at some stage in the future).


----------



## grahamg (May 18, 2021)

Now I want to raise a question as to whether "truth is on trial" in family law?

Obviously courts of law are about discovering the truth, or should be, (if not "ultimate truth", whatever that might be?). However perhaps because of this obligation placed upon the whole family law system by the law to be all about and based upon the "the best interests of the child being paramount", then what should the court do if there is a conflict between "telling the truth" and the interests of the child?

What examples can I give you to illustrate this?

Well, our UK government started a consultation upon the workings of our family law about twenty years ago, and some fathers rights groups took part, but the majority of the organisations responding were government funded I believe, and one of those was from Leeds, or Leeds University, and two female experts on family law were responsible for their contribution, at least as authors.

One argument they made was this: "Its is offensive for the law to try to force a mother to allow their child to have contact with the father even if the mothers fears about the welfare of the child are irrational"! (note the use of the emotional word " offensive")

Whether you agree with these views of experts working in the field of family law etc., or are surprised by their use of emotional terms in a response to a government lead enquiry, (as I was, and I think the judge leading the enquiry indicated his unease if not incredulity at their views on the law being overruled by irrational thinking), this example raises questions about truth doesn't it(?).

Someone acting irrationally is unable to ascertain the truth. Judges or other family law officers witnessing the irrational behaviour, but being expected to allow their decisions to be based upon this irrationality, (because to do otherwise would be offensive!), are compromising themselves or their judgements here aren't they(?).

Even if the family court judge were to state to an excluded father, "Our refusal to grant an order to allow you contact with your child is based upon the mothers irrational fears about your child's welfare", they are at one and the same time stating something to be true and untrue. That is, the fathers contact with the child is in the child's interests they believe, but any irrational views against this happening by the mother means the truth about the best interests of the child becomes the opposite, and no contact should be granted.

Another point those two female experts from Leeds made was that "If the child were to be aware their mothers were against their fathers having contact with them, then it would be doubly offensive if the family courts were to make orders try to force contact with the father'.

Can I admit here my recollections of the responses by the Leeds experts may be slightly inaccurate, or "enhanced", hence not entirely true, as this post is about truth in family law situations, and whether its important, (but of course their views as stated in a public consultation can all be checked anyway can't they).


----------



## Elsie (May 19, 2021)

grahamg said:


> I want to raise the issue of the need for privacy in close personal relationships.
> 
> The first and most obvious question is simply "Is their a need for privacy at all in close personal relationships"?
> 
> ...


When my eldest daughter told me she would be taking up studying for family counseling, I knew that analyzing the personalities and actions of persons' would play a big part in her studies, so right off I said, "DON'T analyze me (in class)."   She did, of course,......& found that compared to what other students told of their parents she realized I was a pretty good parent.   

If the "secret" is mild, harmless, share if you wish, if not keep it to yourself.  Consider the possible consequences.


----------



## Brookswood (May 19, 2021)

There are logical consequences to our behaviors when in a relationship.   Or as my dad used to say,  "You can't kick the dog every morning, and still expect it to bring your your slippers in the evening.'


----------



## Angelina (May 19, 2021)

If you mean ignore someone who's ignoring you, then yes, I would agree with that....


----------



## grahamg (May 19, 2021)

Brookswood said:


> There are logical consequences to our behaviors when in a relationship.   Or as my dad used to say,  "You can't kick the dog every morning, and still expect it to bring your your slippers in the evening.'


Loved the saying your dad used though whether its directly applicable here in relation to human behaviour I'm less sure of perhaps. A mate of mine once commented, "You can train a dog to do whatever it might be, but I am not a dog and will make my own mind up as to how I should behave", (he had a responsible job, strong ego etc., and obviously wasn't a child who might be more easily manipulated or "trained").


----------



## grahamg (May 19, 2021)

Angelina said:


> If you mean ignore someone who's ignoring you, then yes, I would agree with that....


Very succinct response, thank you!


----------



## grahamg (May 19, 2021)

Elsie said:


> When my eldest daughter told me she would be taking up studying for family counseling, I knew that analyzing the personalities and actions of persons' would play a big part in her studies, so right off I said, "DON'T analyze me (in class)."   She did, of course,......& found that compared to what other students told of their parents she realized I was a pretty good parent.
> If the "secret" is mild, harmless, share if you wish, if not keep it to yourself.  Consider the possible consequences.


Thought provoking comments again, (I need to think more about too).


----------



## grahamg (May 27, 2021)

I recall during my father's rights campaigning days having received a response from a UK government department to a letter I'd sent them asking a rather succinct question, (yes, I once sent someone a succinct question would you believe!).

My question asked whether they agreed with the views of a Canadian lawyer called Goldwater, writing in 1992 about the vulnerability of children to manipulation and control, and whether there was a moral failing in "smugly" asserting children have "legal rights" without taking this into consideration? (I've mentioned her views on this thread somewhere already I seem to remember)

It was not clear to me whether the government department had answered my question or not, (and it still isn't), because they stated "they understood how children in high conflict situations behaved", and they went on to say "they did not accept "Parental Alienation Syndrome" existed", though this is a bit odd as I'd not raised the issue, and still do not overly concern myself with the issue, (and I reject the idea my daughter was ill and in need of treatment too, as stated quite often earlier on the thread).

However, the thing that has crossed my mind so far as the response I received from those officials working for our UK government was they wanted to tell me "they understood children in high conflict situations", (or how they behave when their parents are in conflict about them). 

I've said at the outset of this thread I believe I could only have given myself emotionally to my child as I did, because at the time I started to arrange contact visits after the break up of my marriage because I was told by both my lawyer, (and a friend who was also a trained lawyer), that if I approached the courts for their backing I would not get less than every other weekend visitation. That was the situation under the family law in force in this country in 1987/1988, prior to a new law colloquially called "The Children's Act" coming into force in 1989, which when fully implemented I believe weakened the protection of visitation I'd enjoyed.

Those in authority and working for our government when I wrote to them may have thought, or assumed they understood the situation of children in high conflict divorce cases, but they did not understand the way my mind worked, (or works). I claim, because if my lawyer at the time of my separation and divorce, nor my lawyer friend could have given me with a clear conscience the reassurances they gave me, then it is possible I'd never have managed to develop the loving relationship I had with my daughter at all. Of course, in hindsight, knowing what I know now about the way the law or family legal system failed to at least try to support my contact with my child ten years later, then again I'd never have been able to start forming a relationship with her in the first place. This I believe is the bit of the equation those in authority in the UK cannot fully comprehend, and are oblivious to, or else they do not ultimately care, maybe because in their "smugness", (to use Goldwater's word), they feel they know and understand all our children better than we do as parents.


----------



## WhatInThe (Jun 1, 2021)

Everyone is complaining about the so called 'cancel culture' in politics(not the subject) or business world(boycotts). But relationship 'advisors' frequently recommended one detaches or removes themselves from the relationship and/or situation. And it actually works.

Some things including a relationship are not worth a salvage operation. One can conduct business be civil with them but that's where it ends.

After a certain point a family member, employee or peer group member hits the point of no return. They're done, period. Good Bye!, Adios!, Don't come back. Nor should one spend a lot of time looking back.

One can cancel a relationship anytime they want.


----------



## grahamg (Jun 1, 2021)

I'm not so sure you can cancel feelings of love, certainly not easily, not least because they come from our unconscious brain I believe, hence outside the control of ones will, (that's my experience too).

However your other points are well made.


----------



## grahamg (Jun 13, 2021)

This was written by an Australian friend of mine who used to milk cows for a living, (doing rather well at the job considering he wasn't born to it). The poem is very poignant, even sad, I think you'll agree, (and I'm reposting it here as it didn't receive the attention it deserved elsewhere on the forum):

*The peace of children in their beds

The peace of children in their bed
Denies the fears in a fathers head

He must provide, he must not fail
His children must, through their lives sail

It's up to him to pave the way
His deepest thoughts he can't convey

For deep within a fathers mind
Despite his efforts to be kind

Are doubts and fears beyond compare
For his little children sleeping there

They'll never know how hard it's been
To protect them from the unforeseen

Their lives will leave them unaware
Of the stress involved in a fathers care

Of his sleepless nights, his constant fears
Of his powerful love and joyful tears

As he watched them sleeping safe and sound
With no one to threaten, or their lives confound

As they grow and develop, and each achieves
He carefully informs, but never deceives

These two will remain intact and complete
Their dad won't ever, let evil defeat

The care and protection he's there to provide
No one can push a real father aside

But as they do, his children will grow
And the lives he provides, will never show

How hard he tried, against impossible odds
To spare their backs, from life's painful rods

In their ignorance his children will most likely condemn
The enormous efforts he’s made for them

For how can they know a life different to theirs?
Unless one of them actually, looks and compares

Their father’s pathway, and his life
Before he made their mother his wife

The children came first from then you see
There was no room for selfish, in his family

By hook or by crook, their dreams all came true
Their father kept working, he knew what to do

His children will never be living his life
Trying so hard, with such trouble and strife

Life must be different for his children you see
"I don't want my children living like me"

It must be accepted, sometimes kids fall
That's when a father needs only a call

Always there to lend a hand
Making a cubby or playing with sand

A joyful, carefree, happy life
That's all he wants for his children and wife

Yet here he sits, alone and confused
His efforts all wasted, completely abused

His family aren’t here, though he's done no wrong
What are they thinking, he’s been so strong

Look at their lives’, can’t they all see
Without his efforts, where they might be?

They’ve never cleaned toilets or others muck
They’ve never ever, been down on their luck

All they have known has been only the best
Because their father didn't stop to rest

He just kept going, believing they cared
Now they are hiding or running scared

But scared of what, he wonders aloud
He looks back at his life and can only be proud

He did his best, they can't deny that
Most other people are dipping their hat

To a man who gave more than many others
He put them all first, couldn't have his druthers

They all enjoy the best of lives
Let’s hope their good fortune always survives

That they never experience, such bitterness and hate
After such a great effort, as a dad and a mate

Things taken for granted, not actually seen
No one knows, where his strong back has been

Sometimes the very best of care
Can see a you alone, just standing there

Wondering why, you no longer see
A single member, of your family*


----------

