You are lucky I am your father, (drawing attention to fatherlessness)

[grahamg]

Yesterday was a day out for us, otherwise I would have responded then. I believe parents have rights & from your posts you were given those rights.
I Googled this. do parents have statutory rights in the UK There are a lot of sites, this is just one. https://www.gov.uk/parental-rights-responsibilities
Not liking the outcome is what you post about. Me as a reader of your posts I have no way of knowing if you followed your responsibilities. What I do know from your posts is that your daughter in her mid 30's now doesn't want you in her life. The why of that could only be answered by your daughter. And that isn't going to happen.
I think by your posts that you are a good person. Yes I posted I think the system is in place for the child. You haven't posted about how you carried out your responsibilities on a daily basis.

Your argument so far as to whether there are "statutory parental rights" in the UK is not really with whatever I say about this but what Vanessa Pupavac, a professor from Nottingham University has had to say in a paper she published twenty or so years ago about "The Infantilisation of Citizenship in the UK".
We'll just waste each others time if we attempt to argue about this ("obviously") as I know what the professor had to say, and no one will tell me she didn't, and she stated, "The lack of parental rights in the UK contravenes human rights legislation" by way of a confirmation of her view, and every government website I've read "dresses up responsibilities of parents as rights", (such as the "right" to send your child to a school to be educated,,,,,,, if that was a right in the sense I understand the term, and of course Professor Pupavac understands the term, then presumably a parent could freely decide not to educate their child, whist in reality they'd be imprisoned if their child wasn't sent to school, so its an "obligation not a right").

Forum member might wish to feel themselves lucky that my day has improved because I was about to start a thread under the title, "I'm sorry to all excluded fathers/mothers and grandparents have no statutory rights in the UK, (and your fellow forum members are content those in authority deny you statutory parental rights)."

BTW the right "to apply to a court to seek the courts support over contact with your child/grandchild" is not a "real statutory right" for anyone of us, not least because contact with a parent/grandparent is described as "the child's right, not the parent/grandparents right", (so this "load of double talk should take in no one, and certainly not us worldly wise and pertinent observers of family law!").

 

[Pepper]

"Forum member might wish to feel themselves lucky that my day has improved because I was about to start a thread under the title, "I'm sorry to all excluded fathers/mothers and grandparents have no statutory rights in the UK, (and your fellow forum members are content those in authority deny you statutory parental rights)." "

How dare you be so cavalier as to quote forum members as to what was never said? Maybe it's just your rights we couldn't care less about. Only yours. We support everyone else's.

 

[Knight]

What Teenagers Can Tell Us About Divorce and Step-families Capa comum – 29 janeiro 1990
Edição Inglês por Julia Tugendhat (Autor)

In Britain the divorce rate continues to rise. There are one and a half million children living with a separated or divorced parent and over a million living in a stepfamily. The author interviewed 30 teenagers from different backgrounds and learned about their feelings and experiences.

https://www.amazon.com.br/What-Teenagers-About-Divorce-Step-families/dp/0747504768

It's almost to funny. Citing an article from over 32 years ago interviewing 30 teenagers. But if it works for you I think I understand now why you continue.

 

[grahamg]

What Teenagers Can Tell Us About Divorce and Step-families
In Britain the divorce rate continues to rise. There are one and a half million children living with a separated or divorced parent and over a million living in a stepfamily. The author interviewed 30 teenagers from different backgrounds and learned about their feelings and experiences.
https://www.amazon.com.br/What-Teenagers-About-Divorce-Step-families/dp/0747504768
It's almost to funny. Citing an article from over 32 years ago interviewing 30 teenagers. But if it works for you I think I understand now why you continue.

Although you're amused by Julia Tugenhat's work you are in error in a number of regards, (the first of them being describing her work as an article when it was in fact a book).
Secondly the situation in Britain appears to have only got worse in the last thirty years whilst decent parents/grandparents have been denied statutory parental rights, (a policy I'll continue to assert you support, regardless of what anyone else on the forum might think, until you assert otherwise).
Another point to remember about Julia Tugenhat's work is that she was unable to get the cooperation of those in authority to undertake her investigation, (putting it another way, there appears to be suppression of people getting to know what is going on in this country, hence a "paper/book" written thirty years ago may be all that is available).

Moving on, I'm not sure if the author of the book I'm quoting, (who I believe is a qualified barrister/lawyer if memory serves me correctly), is the same lady as the one quoted in the following link concerning a debate in the House of Lords about human embryos, (the upper house of our parliament, with an advisory and revising role in our government drawing up legislation, and some other powers too):
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200607/jtselect/jtembryos/169/7061306.htm

Quote:
"Q417 Bishop of St Albans: Can you say why you think the rights of parents should always trump the rights of a putative child in terms of the kind of parents they might have?

Lady Tugendhat: I am sorry. I do not completely understand where that question is coming from.

Q418 Bishop of St Albans: If you are deciding that a child does not necessarily need a father, you are making an assumption about the right of that child not to have a father. Do you think that in all circumstances the rights of parents should always trump the rights of a child to have a mother and a father, for instance?

Lady Tugendhat: It would perhaps be ideal if every child could have a good mother and father but I think it is really important that people who want to be parents, whether it is adoption or fostering or through infertility treatment, are given the chance to be parents, even if there is not a father involved. I think good parenting is good for children."

 

[grahamg]

"Forum member might wish to feel themselves lucky that my day has improved because I was about to start a thread under the title, "I'm sorry to all excluded fathers/mothers and grandparents have no statutory rights in the UK, (and your fellow forum members are content those in authority deny you statutory parental rights)." "
How dare you be so cavalier as to quote forum members as to what was never said? Maybe it's just your rights we couldn't care less about. Only yours. We support everyone else's.

Good, you support everyone else's rights, (or indicate this is the case generally,...., hope I'm not misinterpreting you there?).

"How dare I" you say, (make assumptions about the views of others),..., well, "are you aware" that in this county if someone chooses to remain silent when questioned our courts may interpret their refusing to answer a question as indicating whatever it was the questioner thought they were guilty of when asked to respond, (hence I'm following established legal precedent here, "like it or not!" )

 

[Pepper]

"How dare I" you say, (make assumptions about the views of others),..., well, "are you aware" that in this county if someone chooses to remain silent when questioned our courts may interpret their refusing to answer a question as indicating whatever it was the questioner thought they were guilty of when asked to respond, (hence I'm following established legal precedent here, "like it or not!" )

You're not in your country when you post here so your rules don't apply. This is an international forum.

The U.S. Supreme Court has decided precedent doesn't matter here anymore anyway. How dare you demand.............in your court case was it noted how demanding you are?

 

[grahamg]

You're not in your country when you post here so your rules don't apply. This is an international forum.
The U.S. Supreme Court has decided precedent doesn't matter here anymore anyway. How dare you demand.............in your court case was it noted how demanding you are?

If you're certain US supreme court rules dont allow the same assumptions our legal system has brought in concerning those refusing to answer questions, (okay if you are, though the underlying principle which our courts apply when making their assumption remains the same in any event).

Can I ask you a personal question, (obviously no need whatever to answer such a question, and no assumptions will be made if you dont),...., I'd like to know whether, (in the words of my own mother), "Have you ever found a happy medium in your relationships"?

(My mother thinking this a desirable thing, whilst my dad didn't believe in it so much btw).

 

[Pepper]

"Have you ever found a happy medium in your relationships"?
Yes.

 

[Knight]

@grahamg
Quote
"Q418 Bishop of St Albans: If you are deciding that a child does not necessarily need a father, you are making an assumption about the right of that child not to have a father. Do you think that in all circumstances the rights of parents should always trump the rights of a child to have a mother and a father, for instance?

Lady Tugendhat: It would perhaps be ideal if every child could have a good mother and father but I think it is really important that people who want to be parents, whether it is adoption or fostering or through infertility treatment, are given the chance to be parents, even if there is not a father involved. I think good parenting is good for children."


Seems like Lady Tugendhat leaves out natural procreation but does agree good parenting is good for children. Obviously the system that you complain about found in favor of the mother as being good for her daughter and. I'm not sure but I think in some of your posts you mentioned having visited your daughter & maybe even had her stay with you. So you did get the chance to bond but for whatever reason you didn't & continue to blame the system.

 

[grahamg]

@grahamgQuote: "Q418 Bishop of St Albans: If you are deciding that a child does not necessarily need a father, you are making an assumption about the right of that child not to have a father. Do you think that in all circumstances the rights of parents should always trump the rights of a child to have a mother and a father, for instance?
Lady Tugendhat: It would perhaps be ideal if every child could have a good mother and father but I think it is really important that people who want to be parents, whether it is adoption or fostering or through infertility treatment, are given the chance to be parents, even if there is not a father involved. I think good parenting is good for children." Knight wrote: "Seems like Lady Tugendhat leaves out natural procreation but does agree good parenting is good for children."

Lady Tugendhat was involved in a debate about the way human embryo's using invitro fertilisation should be handled, "hence could obviously not refer to other means of procreation in that debate".

 

[grahamg]

@grahamg
Quote
"Obviously the system that you complain about found in favor of the mother as being good for her daughter and. I'm not sure but I think in some of your posts you mentioned having visited your daughter & maybe even had her stay with you. So you did get the chance to bond but for whatever reason you didn't & continue to blame the system."

Nice try,............., the world like a trier!!!!!!

Instead of "the system that you complain about", lets at least agree it is a "UK family law system so many complain about", as I've proved on this thread!

 

[grahamg]

"Have you ever found a happy medium in your relationships"?
Yes.

We'll take your word on that one,...., no need "to hear the other sides version at all"!

 

[JaniceM]

You are one negative lil individual, aren't you.

 

[grahamg]

You are one negative lil individual, aren't you.

Are you darn sure about dat madam!(?).

 

[Knight]

Lady Tugendhat was involved in a debate about the way human embryo's using invitro fertilisation should be handled, "hence could obviously not refer to other means of procreation in that debate".

Using your quoted sections I don't see using invitro fertilization.

Then there is from my post.
Quote
"Obviously the system that you complain about"

What part of system did I exclude when the posts are about UK family law SYSTEM

You missed explaining whether or not you were granted rights to visit & share responsibility in raising your daughter. Were You granted that right?

 

[grahamg]

Using your quoted sections I don't see using invitro fertilization.

This is the section from my post above where the House of Lords debate took place, (I hope this makes it clear why this Lady Tugendhat (the lady I hope is the same Julia Tugendhat, author of the book we've been discussing):

Grahamg quote:
"Moving on, I'm not sure if the author of the book I'm quoting, (who I believe is a qualified barrister/lawyer if memory serves me correctly), is the same lady as the one quoted in the following link concerning a debate in the House of Lords about human embryos , (the upper house of our parliament, with an advisory and revising role in our government drawing up legislation, and some other powers too):
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200607/jtselect/jtembryos/169/7061306.htm