My wife calls her girls every Sunday for 30 minutes or less and that's all what her ex allows when it comes to contacting her daughters (their ages are are 6, 7 and 8). They keep asking why can't they meet her. My wife gives no answer.

I have discussed it with her many times and I can't make up my mind myself so it must be hard decision on her.

I think 100% honesty is the key for everything but also if she tells them the truth that would damage the relationship between her daughters and their father. My wife is taking a big risk here and probably sacrificing her relationship with them as they will grow up thinking that she does not want to meet them.

I am not after a legal answer but merely asking what to tell the children till we figure out a way to force that selfish father of them to allow more than just a phone call.


Is it better for siblings to meet at a young age?

  • Any alternatives to the obvious one of asserting the children's right to see both their parents via appropriate legal processes will involve putting the kids in the middle of the situation. I've voted to close this since it's unclear as to what the message you want to convey is, even if you could convince your wife to say it were there one. Commented Jan 3, 2016 at 1:55

1 Answer 1


From what you describe, the father obviously has sole custody of the children. To really know what to do in this situation, it would probably be necessary to understand why he has sole custody.

However, a general rule of parenting after divorce is not to speak ill of the other parent, and without more information, that is what I would advise doing in this situation. Your wife should honestly tell her daughters that she is not able to see them; she misses them, but it's not possible for them to get together, and she does not know when or if it will be possible in the future. By all means, she should try to convince her father to let her see them, but the kids should not be pulled into this conflict between their parents.

  • 1
    Well she never speaks bad about him but how is she suppose to answer their question "why"? I think you haven't answered the most important bit of my question.
    – Ulkoma
    Commented Dec 24, 2015 at 15:16
  • 3
    Well, I think the answer is pretty clear (however, it may not be the answer you are after): Without more information, Buzz recommends to not speak bad about the other parent.This means tell the kids it's not possible to meet despite the fact that she loves them very much. The why is "because it is not possible".Unfortunately, not pulling the kids into the conflict often means making sacrifices but considering that the parents and only the parents are responsible for the conflict this is always better than the alternative which would mean making the kids part of a conflict which is not theirs.
    – Thawn
    Commented Dec 26, 2015 at 21:51
  • 3
    Just to be clear. This does not mean your wife should not fight for her right to see her kids (and for the kid's right to see their mother) but that fight should be between her and the father and should involve the kids as little as possible.
    – Thawn
    Commented Dec 26, 2015 at 21:58
  • 2
    I like this answer but I would tell the kids they are allowed to come anytime, they just have ask their dad. This shifts responsibility to their dad, avoids speaking ill of the ex, and gives the dad a fair chance to determine what his future relationship with his children will be. Commented Dec 27, 2015 at 1:58
  • 2
    @A.K. - While this sounds like a good solution, it still pulls the kids into the fight. Furthermore, she might be encouraging her children to ask to break a court order. If the custody agreement is that tight, there are a lot of things we don't know about. Let it stay between the mom and the dad. Commented Dec 31, 2015 at 17:16

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .