Can I appeal an order if the lawyer didn't object?

[Proserpina]

Y'know, based purely the posts here, this Stepdad needs to get other stepparents on the same page. He knows his limits, obviously. But with the level of care (obvious AND massive) and that sense of humour, we need to see more of that.

 

[Ohiogal]

Y'know, based purely the posts here, this Stepdad needs to get other stepparents on the same page. He knows his limits, obviously. But with the level of care (obvious AND massive) and that sense of humour, we need to see more of that.

He mis-speaks at times which gives the wrong impression but he does seem to get it. The problem is that MOM doesn't get it and she strikes me as a big issue here. Apparently she struck the judge as the same.

 

[databit]

In my house, I won't take the phone away because we don't have a landline, and the kids are home alone pretty often. But I WILL shut down the data on the phone so that they can't do anything but use it to call/text, if they're behaving irresponsibly. And while I hesitate to remove extracurriculars as punishment because I feel like it punishes the team, I am leaning towards requiring the children to be "behaviorally eligible" just as they have to be academically eligible to participate in meets/games.

And I think you're incorrect on the car thing. Mom can absolutely tell the child that the car dad purchased cannot be parked at her house (because of the liability involved) and that kiddo cannot drive on her time. That's not the same thing as restricting communication between dad/kids, which is what taking away the phone falls under.

That first part is kind of what is being leaned towards, we've read about doing "contracts" with the kids that let them see and agree to what is expected and what the possible consequence/rewards are and it seems like a good idea. On half the phones we don't have access to turn the data portion off.

On the second part, hadn't really the whole parking aspect of it. Good one.

I don't have the exact wording on the new order (it's just coming through) but from what was said it will be "anything the one parent provides to the children will not be restricted" I think that's just crazy talk and don't see how it's right. Communication devices I could understand but "anything" is to broad in my opinion. Maybe it's being over thought and she is waiting to see the final order but until then it's broad in her mind so she isn't going to push anything and mess-up again.

 

[Ohiogal]

That first part is kind of what is being leaned towards, we've read about doing "contracts" with the kids that let them see and agree to what is expected and what the possible consequence/rewards are and it seems like a good idea. On half the phones we don't have access to turn the data portion off.

On the second part, hadn't really the whole parking aspect of it. Good one.

I don't have the exact wording on the new order (it's just coming through) but from what was said it will be "anything the one parent provides to the children will not be restricted" I think that's just crazy talk and don't see how it's right. Communication devices I could understand but "anything" is to broad in my opinion. Maybe it's being over thought and she is waiting to see the final order but until then it's broad in her mind so she isn't going to push anything and mess-up again.

How is it right? How is it right that your wife interferes with dad's communication and visitation with his children? The court responded to your wife's actions.

 

[CJane]

How is it right? How is it right that your wife interferes with dad's communication and visitation with his children? The court responded to your wife's actions.

Grounding the children from their smartphones when there are other methods of communication available - including a landline phone - isn't really interfering with communication with Dad. Yes, I understand that the judge is apparently putting this language into the order, but I think that generally speaking it wouldn't be considered interfering.

I think, if the language that step-dad quoted makes it into the order, it's just rife with opportunities for violation by BOTH sides. "I can wear these (too short/small/revealing) clothes because DAD bought them! So there!" "I can play my XBox whenever I want because MOM bought it, so there!" "I can take off and drive away in the car because DAD bought it!" Ad nauseum.

 

[Ohiogal]

Grounding the children from their smartphones when there are other methods of communication available - including a landline phone - isn't really interfering with communication with Dad. Yes, I understand that the judge is apparently putting this language into the order, but I think that generally speaking it wouldn't be considered interfering.

I think, if the language that step-dad quoted makes it into the order, it's just rife with opportunities for violation by BOTH sides. "I can wear these (too short/small/revealing) clothes because DAD bought them! So there!" "I can play my XBox whenever I want because MOM bought it, so there!" "I can take off and drive away in the car because DAD bought it!" Ad nauseum.

Generally maybe not. But dad did partially pay for the access. That is a problem -- if mom fully paid for the phone then it may not be an issue. Plus mom has done other things to interfere with dad's custody. So the judge apparently is fed up.

I do agree that the order is not properly written if it states what stepdad says because of the reason you stated.

 

[ecmst12]

Simple solution - stop allowing dad to pay half the cell phone bill.

 

[Ohiogal]

Simple solution - stop allowing dad to pay half the cell phone bill.

That wouldn't solve the interference issue in this case. And the first time the child was grounded from the phone and dad tried to reach them? This would be back in court and mom would probably get slapped down by the judge. Based on how this has gone.

 

[databit]

Y'know, based purely the posts here, this Stepdad needs to get other stepparents on the same page. He knows his limits, obviously. But with the level of care (obvious AND massive) and that sense of humour, we need to see more of that.

Ohiogal
Quote Originally Posted by Proserpina View Post
Y'know, based purely the posts here, this Stepdad needs to get other stepparents on the same page. He knows his limits, obviously. But with the level of care (obvious AND massive) and that sense of humour, we need to see more of that.

He mis-speaks at times which gives the wrong impression but he does seem to get it. The problem is that MOM doesn't get it and she strikes me as a big issue here. Apparently she struck the judge as the same.

Thanks!

And I will say I was confused at the time of the interference as well. It seemed to make sense with me that kids should be with parents on school nights. But I can see now that it's a matter of boundaries that have to be drawn

 

[databit]

Generally maybe not. But dad did partially pay for the access. That is a problem -- if mom fully paid for the phone then it may not be an issue. Plus mom has done other things to interfere with dad's custody. So the judge apparently is fed up.

I do agree that the order is not properly written if it states what stepdad says because of the reason you stated.

The final order isn't written yet, coming soon. Like I said, could be over thinking

 

[databit]

How is it right? How is it right that your wife interferes with dad's communication and visitation with his children? The court responded to your wife's actions.

Because my mom use to say "two wrongs don't make a right"

She interfered with visitation, she did not interfere with communication I don't think that her attorney defended the communication part at all, no questions about it from anyone other than his attorney.

On the topic of phones, it's my belief that people are over dependent on the smart phones these days. If you knew me/my industry you would probably find my philosophy about people and phones hilarious.

 

[mommyanme]

A few more suggestions so Mom does not interfere with Dad's access to the kiddos. The not parking a car Dad buys is good, the liability in that is you would have to enter the child and that car on your insurance. Anyway, Television and computers are good to remove. If one of the kiddos doesn't like to read, require them to read a book and write a report on it to you before the grounding is over, this teaches them several things including writing and grammar, which children today seem to lose because of "text speak". A child who does not like to write have them write a short story.
One that does not like yard work, they do yard work in the way of mowing, pulling weeds out of Mom's flowers, cleaning up trash. Another is to volunteer for something like a soup kitchen. Mom needs to relax and start thinking outside of the box and spend less time thinking about how Dad is/could interfere with her parenting. In turn that will stop her from interfering with his parenting, because she will be busy thinking of creative punishments for unacceptable behavior.

 

[databit]

A few more suggestions so Mom does not interfere with Dad's access to the kiddos. The not parking a car Dad buys is good, the liability in that is you would have to enter the child and that car on your insurance. Anyway, Television and computers are good to remove. If one of the kiddos doesn't like to read, require them to read a book and write a report on it to you before the grounding is over, this teaches them several things including writing and grammar, which children today seem to lose because of "text speak". A child who does not like to write have them write a short story.
One that does not like yard work, they do yard work in the way of mowing, pulling weeds out of Mom's flowers, cleaning up trash. Another is to volunteer for something like a soup kitchen. Mom needs to relax and start thinking outside of the box and spend less time thinking about how Dad is/could interfere with her parenting. In turn that will stop her from interfering with his parenting, because she will be busy thinking of creative punishments for unacceptable behavior.

Great suggestions, she knows there is a way to for it to work, just have to find them and apply them.

 

[stealth2]

Some good ideas here...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/24/mom-creates-grounding-chart_n_5206707.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000023&ir=Good+News

 

[databit]

Some good ideas here...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/24/mom-creates-grounding-chart_n_5206707.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000023&ir=Good+News

We did something very similar to that with allowance but I think we set the value of tasks way to high. $3 to sweep. It takes maybe 10 minutes which works out to about $18/hour, cash money no taxes.
I think this point system for getting ungrounded would be pretty good though, I'll have to recommend it
Thanks!

Now any tips for reading on co-parent when the other parent doesn't want to? We've found some but nothing that great