[northernsoul]

Last year my daughter died of Leukaemia. She was first diagnosed with this in 2006 and her two young children live with us the grandparents as they have done since 2006. Both children have separate Dads and one of the Dads who has had his child every weekend since the age of 3, now has applied for a Residency Order which will separate the children. Not only have the children lost their Mother but will soon become the only children in each household. The law states that Fathers have a right over grandparents but the only real blood link between these two children is us the Grandparents. The children are now classed as half brother and sister. We are due to go to Court and I am still looking for some loophole that will not separate these children. Surely the Law should think of the interests of the children and the long term affect this will have. These children are 5 and 8 and have only known one another all their lives. Any ideas

[0rphan]

Hello northernsoul,

Firstly let me say I am deeply sorry for your loss, I will remember you all in my prayers.

I understand what you are saying, whilst I can understand the father wanting residency of his child, I can totally see what you are saying, I agree whole heartedly on your point.

The law may state that the child should reside with one or the other of it's parents but it's priority will be without doubt the welfare of the child.

They will consider all of the facts surrounding this case, decide what would be in the bests interests for the child.

Whether or not it would be of advantage to remove them, from what now seems like the only stability they have had since the loss of their mother.

I cannot see that this would happen, as you say the children have each other, which is what they need right now.

Maybe as they come to terms with their loss and become older, more stable etc.. perhaps the case might then be reviewed, but for now in my opinion the courts main priority will be the child's happiness and welfare.

I would be extremely surprised if it was otherwise.

This is only my opinion, I am not a lawyer. Perhaps a good idea would be to speak to a legal adviser to set your mind at rest.

I wish you all luck.

Godbless

[Justwantfair]

The benefit of the children will be considered and the fact that they have been living in the household together for the last three years and their's lives are stable and happy will play a role.

My idea, make sure you have counsel present when you go into court and fight for your grandchildren's best interest.

[ScottGem]

I have to remind people that this is the legal forum and that answers here have to deal with prevailing law. While the courts do have to consider the best interests of the child I fear that the law will not view separating them as not in their best interests.

That these children should probably not have gone into your care in the first place. When their mother got too sick to care for them the fathers should have been given custody.

Its my guess (and it is a guess, though an educated one) that the courts will rule for the fathers. I think the courts will provide for liberla visitation with the you and make sure that the children can keep in contact. If that can be done, I don't think there will be any long term effect on them.

I do strongly advise you to get an attorney. An attoney will know the local courts and give you the best chance of retaining guardianship.

[Justwantfair]

Factors Considered for Grandparent Visitation and Custody - Divorce & Family Law Center

I guess I was assuming that this is true. That considering the factors of the case and the fact that the grandparents have been raising the children for the last three years without interference, they will by the courts be granted some factors allowing a 'best interest of child'.

An attorney needs to be consulted.

[ScottGem]

I guess I was assuming that this is true. That considering the factors of the case and the fact that the grandparents have been raising the children for the last three years without interference, they will by the courts be granted some factors allowing a 'best interest of child'.

While I believe that generally the Family Courts get it right, sometimes, they are hamstrung by prevailing law. I think that may be the case here. I hope not, but I'm afraid it may be.

I do think that the ages of the children are such that they can deal with the separation without permanent harm. If the family is kept in contact that issue can be dealt with.

[Fr_Chuck]

Yes, please don't answer if you are just wanting to make the poster feel good or better,

It is obvious that most people don't know the law in these answers.

While they will, look at what is good, the real issue at the death of the mother, both fathers were then the legal parent and then is when you had a obligation to go to court and become the legal guardian or get some legal status.

The real fact is unless this was done, they have just been living without legal standing.

So unless you can prove the father unfit or a danger the child will go with them.