Divorce Safety Question

[JumbleDuck]

We don't know the full story behind the marriage break-down and there's no reason why we should .... but those Forumites who feel that the OP has a good case to reject the Mother's demands or that the OP should call her bluff and front it out etc. need to consider that it might be that the OP is "responsible" for the break-down and the Mother is the "innocent" party (please note that those two words are in quotation marks), in which case the Mother holds all the aces and calling her bluff etc is always going to end badly for the OP.

If the OP has been abusive then he is unlikely to get any residency and any contact will be under strict conditions and possibly supervision. If neither he nor his soon-to-be-ex wife have been abusive then there are - as far as I am aware - very unlikely to be any conditions.

However, I think he should talk it through with a solicitor.

 

[Achillesheel]

+1 for getting new partner to DS level. This would fulfil the Ex's (not unreasonable, frankly) request. Also, I suspect that she thought she was being clever, making life difficult for her ex, and so will be well pissed off that she has so easily been bested.

 

[Laysula]

More likely that the ops exs solicitor has recommended it in the hope of an extra court appearance and some extra fees. Better and cheaper to pay for new partner to do a D/S course and just get on with your life. If your not careful in a divorce case, the solicitors will bleed you dry.

 

[RichardS]

If the OP has been abusive then he is unlikely to get any residency and any contact will be under strict conditions and possibly supervision. If neither he nor his soon-to-be-ex wife have been abusive then there are - as far as I am aware - very unlikely to be any conditions.

However, I think he should talk it through with a solicitor.

+1 for getting new partner to DS level. This would fulfil the Ex's (not unreasonable, frankly) request. Also, I suspect that she thought she was being clever, making life difficult for her ex, and so will be well pissed off that she has so easily been bested.

It depends what you mean by "abusive". If the OP started a relationship with his partner whilst still married and then left the Mother for the new partner, then she holds all the aces and gets to prescribe the access conditions. Not in law .... but in reality!

In this situation, pissing her off or besting her is only ever going to end badly for the OP.

Richard

 

[JumbleDuck]

It depends what you mean by "abusive". If the OP started a relationship with his partner whilst still married and then left the Mother for the new partner, then she holds all the aces and gets to prescribe the access conditions.

From everything I read, it doesn't work like that any more.

 

[RichardS]

From everything I read, it doesn't work like that any more.

In this hypothetical case ..... two girls, 5 and 7, a proven philandering, lying and cheating husband and an innocent, caring and aggrieved Mother. The Family Court judge's fundamental consideration will be the upbringing and safety of the children and he/she will want to hear representations from both parties. It's not difficult to join the dots and see where the real power lies.

Richard

 

[pandroid]

Blimey. Getting divorced AND getting to keep the boat!

 

[CLB]

In this hypothetical case ..... two girls, 5 and 7, a proven philandering, lying and cheating husband and an innocent, caring and aggrieved Mother. The Family Court judge's fundamental consideration will be the upbringing and safety of the children and he/she will want to hear representations from both parties. It's not difficult to join the dots and see where the real power lies.

Richard

It didn't make any difference as to where the power lay when I was getting a divirce from my philandering, lying, cheating wife. When kids are involved, all men are worthless and all woman are saints. So much for equality.

 

[JumbleDuck]

In this hypothetical case ..... two girls, 5 and 7, a proven philandering, lying and cheating husband and an innocent, caring and aggrieved Mother. The Family Court judge's fundamental consideration will be the upbringing and safety of the children and he/she will want to hear representations from both parties. It's not difficult to join the dots and see where the real power lies.

I think the OP should consult a solicitor. Meanwhile

From "Exploring the Myths about Divorce and Separation"

I am sure that family court judges have heard enough overblown claims from divorcing adults to see through them.

 

[dunedin]

In this case wouldn't an ICC be the quick and easy way of showing DS level competence with the minimum of hassle

+1. With a bit of swatting up on the theory bits an ICC test can be done in a day on your own boat for an experienced person and more than meets the competence & legalistic aspects, without any of the formulaic parts of the equivalent RYA 5 day course and pre-req's (fine though the RYA courses are if you want one)

 

[snooks]

If the OP started a relationship with his partner whilst still married and then left the Mother for the new partner, then she holds all the aces and gets to prescribe the access conditions. Not in law .... but in reality!

Richard

That, I would hazard a guess, is more likely because the UK courts always favour the mother for custody of the children. The courts don't give a stuff about how the marriage broke down (unless it was as you correctly say it was abusive), they don't care whose 'fault' it was, they only care about what they consider is best for the kids. Even then they don't know all the details.

 

[JumbleDuck]

That, I would hazard a guess, is more likely because the UK courts always favour the mother for custody of the children. The courts don't give a stuff about how the marriage broke down (unless it was as you correctly say it was abusive), they don't care whose 'fault' it was, they only care about what they consider is best for the kids. Even then they don't know all the details.

True, and they tend to favour the mother not because of her chromosomes but because she is generally the principal caregiver. Even so, 50:50 residence is very common.

 

[snooks]

True, and they tend to favour the mother not because of her chromosomes but because she is generally the principal caregiver. Even so, 50:50 residence is very common.

But even when they are not the principle carer they'll still be given custody, almost as a matter of course, unless she was abusive to the children – and it can be proven.

Very rarely (like in only 2% of cases IIRC) will the decision be made in favour of the dad.

 

[JumbleDuck]

Very rarely (like in only 2% of cases IIRC) will the decision be made in favour of the dad.

It's currently about 50% sole residency (the term "custody" is no longer used") with the mother, 20% full residency with the father and 20% joint residency. Full residence doesn't mean not seeing the other parent, just not living with them. From what I read, the starting point for the non resident parent is normally every other weekend and a night a week.

 

[lw395]

I will just comment that looking after a yacht under way at the same time as looking aftter two under-tens seems quite a lot to be doing at once.

 

[RichardS]

That, I would hazard a guess, is more likely because the UK courts always favour the mother for custody of the children. The courts don't give a stuff about how the marriage broke down (unless it was as you correctly say it was abusive), they don't care whose 'fault' it was, they only care about what they consider is best for the kids. Even then they don't know all the details.

This "no fault" thing is a myth .... that's just not how it happens in real life. In the hypothetical case under consideration, in real life the Court would have to decide who is likely to provide the best care and welfare for the young children ..... the philandering, cheating, lying Father or the innocent, caring, aggrieved Mother.

Whatever the Father says is going to be viewed through the lens of his disreputable behaviour and vice-versa for Mother's claims.

I'm not being judgemental .... that's just the way it is. JD's stats in his post #54 reflect the reality.

Richard

 

[NormanB]

Lots of people judging the OP and giving legal advice. I do not believe he asked for either.

He did ask a straightforward question about his ex's demand for another crew member to have Day Skipper ticket if the kids were onboard.

Personally, I would disregard any legal advice I received from this forum.

 

[RichardS]

Lots of people judging the OP and giving legal advice. I do not believe he asked for either.

He did ask a straightforward question about his ex's demand for another crew member to have Day Skipper ticket if the kids were onboard.

Personally, I would disregard any legal advice I received from this forum.

The OP said "Unfortunately I have had to divorce my crew / wife ..,.. are there any useful sources of information that I could use to bolster my case?"

If that doesn't sound like a legal matter, I don't know what does.

Richard

 

[Cloona]

probably more important to spend time with the kids than go sailing

 

[johnalison]

probably more important to spend time with the kids than go sailing

There is surely no better way of getting to know your children than going sailing with them, and especially vice versa.

I think the demand for a second competent person is not unreasonable, not knowing the people involved myself of course, but what signifies competence is very much a matter of argument. If it were me, I think I would contest the significance of a piece of paper, but offer a set of specific competences as an alternative, which might include basic navigation, and the ability to operate the engine and the yacht's main equipment.