Ex threatening contact centre, any advice?

disneybunny wrote:

My god I knew fathers 4 justice were not the most caring group of people but taking pictures of a childs private areas sounds a hell of a lot like abuse to me. Still as long as these ''men'' get their rights sod the damage THEY do to the children.

The advice given was to photograph the scratch only, and not the genitals of the child - if you had read the post correctly, you would have seen this. The importance of keeping photographic records of any injury, no matter how minor is so that there is an actual pictorial reference to that injury to clear up any allegations of a serious injury when in fact the injury was very minor, ie a scratch or small bruise, which all children get from time to time during the normal course of play and activities.

Please be very careful when accusing an individual or a group of abuse when you have no foundations for making such allegations other than your own misguided and uninformed opinion.

Disneybunny, I think you will find that Fathers For Justice are about the rights of the child. It is the right of the child to see both parents and it is not in the interest of the child for either parent to try and withhold or manipulate that right.

disneybunny wrote:

My god I knew fathers 4 justice were not the most caring group of people but taking pictures of a childs private areas sounds a hell of a lot like abuse to me. Still as long as these ''men'' get their rights sod the damage THEY do to the children.

And there we have it. The situation of a Non resident parent.

If we fight the hostile Resident parent we are abusing the children and if we try to do the right thing and remove ourselves and the conflict from the childrens lives we are also abusers.

Taking pictures of childrens groin areas to win a dispute in court is a depth to which I never hope to have to go

It should be obvious from the context, DB, that I was not advocating taking arbitrary photographs of children''s private parts.

The context of the thread is that an entirely innocent injury is being used to justify denying a child the right to contact with a parent.

In the circumstances a photograph of the injury - with a towel carefully positioned for modesty - becomes a necessary precaution. It is, of course, deeply regrettable that parents are forced to respond in this way, but it can prevent a tragedy later.

For the record I am not on this forum to promote F4J but to offer advice and support which members are free to accept or ignore as they choose, without coercion from other members.

I understand it wasnt aimed at taking indecent photos yet I still find the whole thing abhorent. It comes to a point where you have to choose which you love more the child or the war. Its a fine line between the need for contact with both parents and the need to have a life free from conflict. There are no easy answers.

I think it is down to the parents to minimise conflict for the sake of their children. However, it takes two people to adopt a polite respectful and fair relationship. Unfortunately in many of these high conflict situations one or other of the parents feels the need to be in Absolute control.

I am reading this with a sense of dread. My ''amicable'' divorce has gone the way of many others and regular contact with my kids has all but disappeared. It seems I am just a baby sitter now. Heaven forbid I should want take them on holiday. The stress of situation has caused me to consider "walking away" which seems to be as abhorrent as extreme photographic documentation. We NRPs just can''t win. Seriously, if the RP confounds every effort to be a parent and causes conflict at every opportunity which inevitably involves the children because they involve them directly, is walking away so bad. Ruby mentioned the parent left behind has to pick up the pieces; who broke it in the first place? (Rhetorical question.)