Can rapists get fathers rights?

chickchickboo

Just wondering about the above question.
If the man was now dead, would his parents be entitled to access to the child. They have seen the child intermittently for the past four years.

GerardKeating

chickchickboo wrote: »

Just wondering about the above question.
If the man was now dead, would his parents be entitled to access to the child. They have seen the child intermittently for the past four years.

Grand Parents have little rights at present, even if the father was married to the mother, this would be an unwinnable case (IMHO),

chickchickboo

GerardKeating wrote: »

Grand Parents have little rights at present, even if the father was married to the mother, this would be an unwinnable case (IMHO),

Unwinnable for the grandparents?
The man was in a relationship with the mother when the child was conceived by rape. It was never reported but the father was in the process of going through the courts for the rape of an underage relative of his at the time of his death.

conorh91

chickchickboo wrote: »

Unwinnable for the grandparents?
The man was in a relationship with the mother when the child was conceived by rape. It was never reported...

In this case the dead man was never convicted of rape of the mother, and upon his death the opportunity for that prosecution passed into the abyss. The allegation of rape itself is not determinative of anything, but it is not irrelevant either. I'll expand on that below.

What happens in these cases is the grandparents seek leave to apply for access. The Court may grant or refuse leave. If granted leave, there is a substantive hearing. At that stage, the Court is obliged to take three factors into account, as per s.11B Guardianship of Infants Act 1964 (inserted by s.9 of the Children Act 1997)

(a) the applicant's connection with the child,
(b) the risk, if any, of the application disrupting the child's life to the extent that the child would be harmed by it,
(c) the wishes of the child's guardians.

If the grandparents have had no relationship with the child, if the mother opposes access and makes serious allegations, the Court would be entitled to refuse access. In my view the Court would be entitled to take into account any distress the mother claims she suffers as a result of the child developing a relationship with the parents of the alleged rapist, especially if that relationship undermines her relationship with her child.

But this is already in the realm of speculation. Nobody here should claim to know what a Court would decide. All we can say is that a procedure exists, as set out in the 1964 Act, and that there is no obligation on the Court to grant access, subject to the three considerations set out above.

chickchickboo

conorh91 wrote: »

In this case the dead man was never convicted of rape of the mother, and upon his death the opportunity for that prosecution passed into the abyss. The allegation of rape itself is not determinative of anything, but it is not irrelevant either. I'll expand on that below.

What happens in these cases is the grandparents seek leave to apply for access. The Court may grant or refuse leave. If granted leave, there is a substantive hearing. At that stage, the Court is obliged to take three factors into account, as per s.11B Guardianship of Infants Act 1964 (inserted by s.9 of the Children Act 1997)

(a) the applicant's connection with the child,
(b) the risk, if any, of the application disrupting the child's life to the extent that the child would be harmed by it,
(c) the wishes of the child's guardians.

If the grandparents have had no relationship with the child, if the mother opposes access and makes serious allegations, the Court would be entitled to refuse access. In my view the Court would be entitled to take into account any distress the mother claims she suffers as a result of the child developing a relationship with the parents of the alleged rapist, especially if that relationship undermines her relationship with her child.

But this is already in the realm of speculation. Nobody here should claim to know what a Court would decide. All we can say is that a procedure exists, as set out in the 1964 Act, and that there is no obligation on the Court to grant access, subject to the three considerations set out above.

The mother in this case is suicidal and suffering from severe psychological distress as a result of these peoples actions. They are bullying her and demanding unreasonable access. Would her mental state be taken into account? It is having a negative effect on her parenting ability.

GerardKeating

chickchickboo wrote: »

The mother in this case is suicidal and suffering from severe psychological distress as a result of these peoples actions. They are bullying her and demanding unreasonable access. Would her mental state be taken into account? It is having a negative effect on her parenting ability.

This is getting very specific, are we talking "In Theory" or are you asking advise on a certain real case?

conorh91

chickchickboo wrote: »

The mother in this case is suicidal and suffering from severe psychological distress as a result of these peoples actions. They are bullying her and demanding unreasonable access. Would her mental state be taken into account? It is having a negative effect on her parenting ability.

There are so many sensitive strands to this that it seems wrong to express an opinion. Most obviously because I don't claim any competence in this area. For her family's sake, the woman should only be taking advice from her family law solicitor

chickchickboo

GerardKeating wrote: »

This is getting very specific, are we talking "In Theory" or are you asking advise on a certain real case?

Family member of mine. She has an appointment for legal advice but not until the end of next week, so was just trying to get a general view of what's expected.
She got advice before but never disclosed the rape aspect to the solicitor and was told the grandparents could get the child for some weekends, even though the child would not be comfortable with that, and they live 2 hours away, not to mention some other dodgy facts about the family involved.

Thanks for all the input anyway.

Mr. Incognito

Alleged rape is not relevant. At all.

Grandparents have no rights over parents. At all.

Speak to a solicitor.

The grandparents sound like ignorant bullies.

chickchickboo

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Alleged rape is not relevant. At all.

Grandparents have no rights over parents. At all.

Speak to a solicitor.

The grandparents sound like ignorant bullies.

They can get rights through the courts. She went to a solicitor recently, didn't mention the rape. However she was told if they bring her to court they WILL get access. It seems incredibly difficult to prevent them getting it. It's causing severe distress for the mother.