Time for Biological father to pay the bill

[hopi watcher]

I don't know I can make this any simpler. You are quite right that "once an access has has been obtained". But that presupposes quite a lot.

First of all, there is no problem blocking access BEFORE it is obtained. And if it is not obtained (as your own figures show happens to 1 in 4 men) then once again a mother can block access.

I have already shown, numerous times that I am not confusing anything. Previous statements by Mr. McKeown a policy consultant quite clearly showed that. In addition the LRC also made simiilar statements, which you duly sought to ignore.

[COLOR=Red]And moreover you continue to ignore the question I put to you regarding your own request - that I do your donkeywork for you - and that I ring the people whose details you provided - the question being whether you will accept what they say if I do ring them and report it here?[/COLOR]

Wrong, it does not pre-suppose anything. The default position of the court is to grant access orders. Do you understand why that is the case or do I need to explain that too? Nowhere have you cited a source that claims that a mother has the power to deny a father access, nowhere, for the simple reasson that she cannot, that is a function of a court and a court alone.
Have you ever seen an Access Order?
I am not ignoring any question, I have suggested that you ring before. That is why I posted the numbers.

"Q8: What can happen if the custodial parent refuses to allow the non-custodial parent access to the child?
A8: Once an access order is obtained from the Court then any failure or refusal by the custodial parent to comply with such an order (i.e. allow access) is deemed to be in contempt of court and can result in a term of imprisonment and/or fine."

Are you seriously deducing from the above that a custodial parent can deny access to the non-custodial parent.???

[Foghorn]

[COLOR=Red]You continue to ignore the question I put to you regarding your own request - that I do your donkeywork for you - and that I ring the people whose details you provided - the question being whether you will accept what they say if I do ring them and report it here?[/COLOR]

[hopi watcher]

[COLOR=Red]You continue to ignore the question I put to you regarding your own request - that I do your donkeywork for you - and that I ring the people whose details you provided - the question being whether you will accept what they say if I do ring them and report it here?[/COLOR]

I posted the numbers so that you might ring to help you to stop making an ass of yourself, you plonker
You still haven't answered the simple question at the core of the discussion. I'll repeat it,

"Q8: What can happen if the custodial parent refuses to allow the non-custodial parent access to the child?
A8: Once an access order is obtained from the Court then any failure or refusal by the custodial parent to comply with such an order (i.e. allow access) is deemed to be in contempt of court and can result in a term of imprisonment and/or fine."

Are you seriously deducing from the above that a custodial parent can deny access to the non-custodial parent.???

[Foghorn]

I posted the numbers so that you might ring to help you to stop making an ass of yourself, you plonker
You still haven't answered the simple question at the core of the discussion. I'll repeat it,

So, basically the answer is "No". Afraid that your own source won't back up your position? The irony!

[Foghorn]

"Q8: What can happen if the custodial parent refuses to allow the non-custodial parent access to the child?
A8: Once an access order is obtained from the Court then any failure or refusal by the custodial parent to comply with such an order (i.e. allow access) is deemed to be in contempt of court and can result in a term of imprisonment and/or fine."

Are you seriously deducing from the above that a custodial parent can deny access to the non-custodial parent.???

If he has to apply his rights are secondary and sub-standard. His rights can probably be as easily taken away by the same court.

[hopi watcher]

If he has to apply his rights are secondary and sub-standard. His rights can probably be as easily taken away by the same court.

Swerve attempt. The court can take away 'custody' , 'access' etc from either or both parents, but neither parent can deny the other access, only the court can do that.

[hopi watcher]

So, basically the answer is "No". Afraid that your own source won't back up your position? The irony!

Ring the numbers you dolt, knowledge awaits. Do you now think that I posted them so that you wouldn't ring them?????

And again the question,
"Q8: What can happen if the custodial parent refuses to allow the non-custodial parent access to the child?
A8: Once an access order is obtained from the Court then any failure or refusal by the custodial parent to comply with such an order (i.e. allow access) is deemed to be in contempt of court and can result in a term of imprisonment and/or fine."

Are you seriously deducing from the above that a custodial parent can deny access to the non-custodial parent.???

[Boggle]

Again you are confusing the issues. This conversation, such as it is, is not about 'custody' it is about foggies incorrect contention that a mother can deny a father 'ACCESS' to his children. She cannot, that is a function only of the courts. And it really is that simple.

Technically you are correct and incorrect both at the same time.
She cannot lawfully deny access once a court has allocated a dad some time. However she can make life difficult if she so wishes by "getting held up", alleging concerns or, based on this thread, deciding that she wants more maintenance. While technically these cases would go to court and SHOULD result in ramifications for the mum, I do not recall a single case or story where this happened and where this may have happened it is certainly the exception rather than the rule.

None of this counters the natural weighting against fathers which mean that you agree to whatever she wants rather than going to court to have court approved access (meaning a mum most certainly can stop a dad seeing his kid) as the latter option means you have a 1 in 4 chance of never seeing your kids again. Even if the court does approve access, it appears that he'll be lucky to see the kid on a Saturday afternoon and never get to wake up to the sound of his kids. The system, as it is, encourages men just to walk away altogether and give up on their kids which, I'm sure anyone wold agree, is not in the child's best interest.

I'm no genius, but I can see when a system is intrinsically flawed - how to go about fixing it is something which would need to be thrashed out in detail but that does not alter the fact that the system is flawed and excessively weighted in favour of the mother.

[Foghorn]

Swerve attempt. The court can take away 'custody' , 'access' etc from either or both parents, but neither parent can deny the other access, only the court can do that.

I could say "I learned from the best"...............but I learned it from you, so that wouldn't be true!

[Foghorn]

Ring the numbers you dolt, knowledge awaits. Do you now think that I posted them so that you wouldn't ring them????

No, but as you are such an arrogant ass, and you expect me to do your donkeywork for you and you so habitually ignore the evidence I produce, and sink to untold depths of accusing me of mis-quoting my sources (which I most certainly have not), it occured to me that even if I rang these folks and they did not back up your claim that you would still not accept the outcome...................even from your own sources!

So, the question arises as to whether I believe you capable of accepting impartial advice.....................and I have no reason to believe you will...........nor have you answered my question in this regard.

That explain it in sufficiently clear terms?