C100 - Specific Issues Order
Discussion
My ex wife will not agree to the children being COVID Vaccinated. They are 14 and 12 ( in March).
We have had a long dialogue followed by a meeting today - all going nowhere.
Her reasons are " the vaccine is worse than Covid" but produces not a shred of evidence. I have used govt sources to undermine her argument - but of course all all lies and censorship. The sad thing is she is an intelligent woman with a degree in biology / zoology.
As such the option now is a C100 specific issues order. Requires an attempt at mediation ( MAIM) which wont go anywhere as last time we mediated the mediator ( court qualified etc) was " biased and a bully". Yeah right!
There is a case - https://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed2184... which seems to make the likelihood of a court awarding the order extremely high.
My questions are to those that have been through it
1. How long did it take to get to court - and when was this - I assume things will have slowed recently ?
2. What did it cost you in lawyers fees - Assuming a similar relatively simple issue
3. CAFCAS - there is no issue of neglect etc, the children are not at risk of harm, private school etc. What will Cafcas do in this type of case? Anything ? If so what. I would like to understand what the children will be put through. Daughter is at boarding school ( her choice and loves it) so they will have to visit!
4. My 14 year old says she has no view. This is not true, but she knows I want it and mum does not. To what extent is the 14 year ( girl) old likely to be involved - appear in court etc. Likewise the 12 year old ( boy)
I want them vaccinated, I appreciate that taking my ex to court wont go down well - which I am fine with - but I am not prepared to have the children dragged through the mud by Cafcas / court etc so am seeking to understand the process more to balance my view.
Thank you
We have had a long dialogue followed by a meeting today - all going nowhere.
Her reasons are " the vaccine is worse than Covid" but produces not a shred of evidence. I have used govt sources to undermine her argument - but of course all all lies and censorship. The sad thing is she is an intelligent woman with a degree in biology / zoology.
As such the option now is a C100 specific issues order. Requires an attempt at mediation ( MAIM) which wont go anywhere as last time we mediated the mediator ( court qualified etc) was " biased and a bully". Yeah right!
There is a case - https://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed2184... which seems to make the likelihood of a court awarding the order extremely high.
My questions are to those that have been through it
1. How long did it take to get to court - and when was this - I assume things will have slowed recently ?
2. What did it cost you in lawyers fees - Assuming a similar relatively simple issue
3. CAFCAS - there is no issue of neglect etc, the children are not at risk of harm, private school etc. What will Cafcas do in this type of case? Anything ? If so what. I would like to understand what the children will be put through. Daughter is at boarding school ( her choice and loves it) so they will have to visit!
4. My 14 year old says she has no view. This is not true, but she knows I want it and mum does not. To what extent is the 14 year ( girl) old likely to be involved - appear in court etc. Likewise the 12 year old ( boy)
I want them vaccinated, I appreciate that taking my ex to court wont go down well - which I am fine with - but I am not prepared to have the children dragged through the mud by Cafcas / court etc so am seeking to understand the process more to balance my view.
Thank you
You really need to speak with a good solicitor as your questions are very specific to you and your family.
The cost will depend upon where you live, the quality of the service from your chosen solicitor as like all profession’s there are variations in quality of who you get to sort this.
Some solicitors are poor while others are outstanding.
Plan your questions, write them down, then see the solicitor as this is the only true way to get definitive answers to this scenario.
Good luck with this as it won’t be easy as the children get dragged through any arguments between you and your ex.
The cost will depend upon where you live, the quality of the service from your chosen solicitor as like all profession’s there are variations in quality of who you get to sort this.
Some solicitors are poor while others are outstanding.
Plan your questions, write them down, then see the solicitor as this is the only true way to get definitive answers to this scenario.
Good luck with this as it won’t be easy as the children get dragged through any arguments between you and your ex.
Cold said:
The sensible answer is that your children are not at risk from CV19 so why bother with all this angst?
(No the vaccine does not stop them from spreading it either)
Do you have children ?(No the vaccine does not stop them from spreading it either)
Do you believe in what you have just written or are you simply seeking to be controversial on an Internet forum ?
The cold hard figures do not agree with you. The risk of Covid in children has a greater risk of harm than the vaccine. Children do ( rarely) die of Covid. None to date in the Uk and USA have died of the vaccine.
The vaccinated are 3 times less likely to contract it, and hence spread it.
These are all facts not rumour.
I won't continue as my question is re court proceedings to understand a way forward as opposed to an anti vax discussion.
Jeremy-75qq8 said:
Do you have children ?
Do you believe in what you have just written or are you simply seeking to be controversial on an Internet forum ?
The cold hard figures do not agree with you. The risk of Covid in children has a greater risk of harm than the vaccine. Children do ( rarely) die of Covid. None to date in the Uk and USA have died of the vaccine.
The vaccinated are 3 times less likely to contract it, and hence spread it.
These are all facts not rumour.
I won't continue as my question is re court proceedings to understand a way forward as opposed to an anti vax discussion.
Yes I do, but what is the relevance? Do you believe in what you have just written or are you simply seeking to be controversial on an Internet forum ?
The cold hard figures do not agree with you. The risk of Covid in children has a greater risk of harm than the vaccine. Children do ( rarely) die of Covid. None to date in the Uk and USA have died of the vaccine.
The vaccinated are 3 times less likely to contract it, and hence spread it.
These are all facts not rumour.
I won't continue as my question is re court proceedings to understand a way forward as opposed to an anti vax discussion.
We know who is at risk from CV19 and young healthy children are not on that list. You are creating drama for no good reason.
Immunisation in children where separated parents disagree has been tested in court six times in the last 15 years and in all but one case the court has agreed that the child should be immunised. In the sixth case there were significant medical cautions against the child receiving the specific immunisation being considered.
Cold said:
Yes I do, but what is the relevance?
We know who is at risk from CV19 and young healthy children are not on that list. You are creating drama for no good reason.
Have your kids had the jab?We know who is at risk from CV19 and young healthy children are not on that list. You are creating drama for no good reason.
It's not about whether they are "at risk" in a binary sense - it's about the desire to give the kids something that will, on balance, be beneficial to them. It'll also make their lives easier if/when restrictions on travel & leisure for the unvaxed are tightened. This would already be an issue if OP wanted to take his kids overseas on holiday, IIRC.
NickCQ said:
Have your kids had the jab?
It's not about whether they are "at risk" in a binary sense - it's about the desire to give the kids something that will, on balance, be beneficial to them. It'll also make their lives easier if/when restrictions on travel & leisure for the unvaxed are tightened. This would already be an issue if OP wanted to take his kids overseas on holiday, IIRC.
It is currently an issue as we have had to cancel a trip to Teneriffe at xmas as Spain will now not allow unvax over 12s in the country. However this is a secondary issue and the vaccination discussion has been ongoing since well before Spain made this decision. It's not about whether they are "at risk" in a binary sense - it's about the desire to give the kids something that will, on balance, be beneficial to them. It'll also make their lives easier if/when restrictions on travel & leisure for the unvaxed are tightened. This would already be an issue if OP wanted to take his kids overseas on holiday, IIRC.
I have a 12 year old and she's free to provide her own consent to jabs. I'd probably rather she didn't have it as I perceive it pointless, her mother will have the opposite persuasion.
My 12 year old probably would have it, if the difference between being able to go to Spain and not.
The idea of one of us taking the other to court to try and force our preference is just mental. Why not let them make up their own minds.
My 12 year old probably would have it, if the difference between being able to go to Spain and not.
The idea of one of us taking the other to court to try and force our preference is just mental. Why not let them make up their own minds.
theboss said:
The idea of one of us taking the other to court to try and force our preference is just mental. Why not let them make up their own minds.
Read the original post - "my 14 year old says she has no view". It feels like the kids know they are stuck in the middle of a parental battle and don't want to pick sides. Add to that the fact that they are more likely to go along with the parent they live with (presumably mum?) and you can see how they might go along with not having it even if they would prefer to get it.Jeremy-75qq8 said:
M
There is a case - https://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed2184... which seems to make the likelihood of a court awarding the order extremely high.
One minor point; family court doesn't set precedent. While it might be a reasonable and well constructed argument and strengthen your case it would still come down to your judge?There is a case - https://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed2184... which seems to make the likelihood of a court awarding the order extremely high.
IANAL.
Good luck.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff