Are we responsible for the bill?

[mnmharrison]

Washington state. My husband has 2 children with his exwife. Recently she brought up the fact that his daughter needed to go get a new eye exam. I told her that I would let Mike (my husband) know and we would take care of it (he has sole custody of the children). A day later when she picked them up for visitation she went to shopko and had his daughters eyes checked anyways. The bill was $211.97 if we take her to the appointment we already have in a week its FREE because we have state medical for the children. The exwife sent a paper home a couple visitations later stating he is to pay half because the divorce papers state "each parent is to pay half of medial costs after insurance". The glasses have not been seen she has them at her house and the kids are with us during the week (for school) when she would need them most. Are we responsible for half the bill? Even though we have insurance and mike has SOLE custody?

 

[ecmst12]

There is no WE. There is mom, and there is dad. You are no one.

And it looks like dad is responsible for half of the bill.

 

[Gracie3787]

Washington state. My husband has 2 children with his exwife. Recently she brought up the fact that his daughter needed to go get a new eye exam. I told her that I would let Mike (my husband) know and we would take care of it (he has sole custody of the children). A day later when she picked them up for visitation she went to shopko and had his daughters eyes checked anyways. The bill was $211.97 if we take her to the appointment we already have in a week its FREE because we have state medical for the children. The exwife sent a paper home a couple visitations later stating he is to pay half because the divorce papers state "each parent is to pay half of medial costs after insurance". The glasses have not been seen she has them at her house and the kids are with us during the week (for school) when she would need them most. Are we responsible for half the bill? Even though we have insurance and mike has SOLE custody?

Your husband should take a copy of his court order to a local attorney for a consult to see if he is required to pay half of this particular bill or not.

If it turns out that he has to pay it, he should pay it directly to the Dr unless his ex can prove that she has already paid the ENTIRE bill.

 

[LdiJ]

In my opinion dad is not responsible for the bill. Mom did not consult with dad and did not take the child somewhere where dad's insurance could have been utilized. That was mom's CHOICE and mom should be responsible for that choice. Its also appalling that mom is not allowing the child to have the glasses for school.

Dad has an appointment for the child, and its free. Dad should keep that appointment and get another pair of glasses for the child so that she actually HAS them for school.

If it ever comes up in court, mom is the one who is going to look like an idiot.

 

[Antigone*]

In my opinion dad is not responsible for the bill. Mom did not consult with dad and did not take the child somewhere where dad's insurance could have been utilized. That was mom's CHOICE and mom should be responsible for that choice. Its also appalling that mom is not allowing the child to have the glasses for school.

Dad has an appointment for the child, and its free. Dad should keep that appointment and get another pair of glasses for the child so that she actually HAS them for school.

If it ever comes up in court, mom is the one who is going to look like an idiot.

I agree with LdiJ on this one. In addition mom sounds like a piece of work if in fact she is keeping these glasses for the reasons stated.

Dad can call the eye doctor, get the prescription and buy another pair for her to wear as prescribed.

DAD should tell mom to pound sand.

 

[ecmst12]

I missed the part where mom is not actually letting the child HAVE the glasses. In that case, I agree, dad is not responsible since he still has to take her to the appointment he made for her and get her glasses that she actually gets to keep all the time.

 

[mistoffolees]

I agree with LdiJ on this one. In addition mom sounds like a piece of work if in fact she is keeping these glasses for the reasons stated.

Dad can call the eye doctor, get the prescription and buy another pair for her to wear as prescribed.

DAD should tell mom to pound sand.

I don't think it's that simple. I think people are letting their own sense of right and wrong interfere with the issues.

The key question is when OP says husband has sole custody, is she talking legal or physical custody. I will cover the scenarios separately:

Sole physical custody, as well as full legal custody to the father. In this case, father has no obligation to pay the bill. Case closed, no further discussion needed.

Sole physical custody, but JOINT legal custody. This one becomes tougher. The mother has the right to make decisions like taking the child to be examined in this case. The decree clearly says that husband is responsible for 1/2 of medical expenses. I don't see anything that says he's only responsible for 1/2 of medical expenses that he likes or pre-approves. In this scenario, he may very well be obligated to pay.

Unless there's a rule that the glasses need to be sent back and forth between the homes, he should just buy another pair for his house. He doesn't need to go through another examination - just take the prescription to LensCrafters or somewhere like that.

Now, he would be within his rights to send her a strongly worded letter stating that he has insurance that covers things like that and that IN THE FUTURE, he will not pay for non-emergency medical expenses unless she consults with him, but to get that formalized, he would need to ask for a modification.

 

[LdiJ]

I don't think it's that simple. I think people are letting their own sense of right and wrong interfere with the issues.

The key question is when OP says husband has sole custody, is she talking legal or physical custody. I will cover the scenarios separately:

Sole physical custody, as well as full legal custody to the father. In this case, father has no obligation to pay the bill. Case closed, no further discussion needed.

Sole physical custody, but JOINT legal custody. This one becomes tougher. The mother has the right to make decisions like taking the child to be examined in this case. The decree clearly says that husband is responsible for 1/2 of medical expenses. I don't see anything that says he's only responsible for 1/2 of medical expenses that he likes or pre-approves. In this scenario, he may very well be obligated to pay.

Unless there's a rule that the glasses need to be sent back and forth between the homes, he should just buy another pair for his house. He doesn't need to go through another examination - just take the prescription to LensCrafters or somewhere like that.

Now, he would be within his rights to send her a strongly worded letter stating that he has insurance that covers things like that and that IN THE FUTURE, he will not pay for non-emergency medical expenses unless she consults with him, but to get that formalized, he would need to ask for a modification.

You are missing the point Misto....

My opinion has nothing to do with who has custody and of what sort.

Dad has state insurance for the child. Dad had an appointment for the child which would have cost the parents nothing. Mom decided unilaterally to take the child somewhere that dad's insurance didn't work, and now expects dad to pay 50% of the bill.

That's a huge no-no. A judge will not reward that behavior.

In addition to that, mom is keeping the glasses at her house, when the child goes to school from dad's house and that is obviously when the glasses would be most needed.

Again, a huge no-no. Again a judge will not reward that behavior.

Now, I will comment on the custody side of things. If they have joint legal custody, decisions are supposed to be made JOINTLY, not unilaterally unless they are emergency decisions. Therefore mom was in the wrong. If dad has sole custody, mom had no right to take the child to the doctor at all, if it was not an emergency. So, again, mom is in the wrong.

 

[mistoffolees]

You are missing the point Misto....

My opinion has nothing to do with who has custody and of what sort.

Dad has state insurance for the child. Dad had an appointment for the child which would have cost the parents nothing. Mom decided unilaterally to take the child somewhere that dad's insurance didn't work, and now expects dad to pay 50% of the bill.

That's a huge no-no. A judge will not reward that behavior.

In addition to that, mom is keeping the glasses at her house, when the child goes to school from dad's house and that is obviously when the glasses would be most needed.

Again, a huge no-no. Again a judge will not reward that behavior.

Now, I will comment on the custody side of things. If they have joint legal custody, decisions are supposed to be made JOINTLY, not unilaterally unless they are emergency decisions. Therefore mom was in the wrong. If dad has sole custody, mom had no right to take the child to the doctor at all, if it was not an emergency. So, again, mom is in the wrong.

You're dreaming.

Joint legal custody means that while they SHOULD discuss things, there is nothing to preclude either of them from taking the child to the doctor. If the agreement says that he owes half of the medical bill, he owes it - whether you like it or not. I don't know of anyone who has been EVER punished by the court for taking their child to an optometrist for an examination. It's just not going to happen.

The agreement doesn't say "husband pays 1/2 of medical bill unless he can find a cheaper way to get service". That's your wishful thinking.

The court very well MIGHT stop her from doing it in the future if he requests it or he may be able to get an order saying that he has sole responsibility for medical decisions or that he only pays 1/2 of appointments he agrees with or something like that, but until then, the existing order is quite specific - and it apparently doesn't say that he has to pre-approve medical expenses.

As for the glasses, you're again using your gut rather than interpreting the law. Children have belongings. Much of the time, the belongings stay at one home and are not sent back and forth. That is perfectly reasonable and allowed. Now, the wife is being a pain in not sending the glasses, but there's nothing illegal about it, nor is the court going to get involved. Furthermore, it's an incredibly stupid thing to be discussing. New glasses cost $50 or less at Lenscrafters (with their state insurance, it may be less). It's far cheaper and easier to just go buy another pair of glasses than fighting over it - and it's to the child's benefit to have a second pair of glasses, anyway.

 

[justalayman]

Sole physical custody, but JOINT legal custody. This one becomes tougher. The mother has the right to make decisions like taking the child to be examined in this case. The decree clearly says that husband is responsible for 1/2 of medical expenses. I don't see anything that says he's only responsible for 1/2 of medical expenses that he likes or pre-approves. In this scenario, he may very well be obligated to pay.
.

order is dad pays 1/2 after any applicable insurance. There was insurance mom refused to utilize. Mom chose to commit the funds and failed to mitigate the costs, mom owes 100%, dad 0%.

 

[LdiJ]

You're dreaming.

Joint legal custody means that while they SHOULD discuss things, there is nothing to preclude either of them from taking the child to the doctor. If the agreement says that he owes half of the medical bill, he owes it - whether you like it or not. I don't know of anyone who has been EVER punished by the court for taking their child to an optometrist for an examination. It's just not going to happen.

The agreement doesn't say "husband pays 1/2 of medical bill unless he can find a cheaper way to get service". That's your wishful thinking.

The court very well MIGHT stop her from doing it in the future if he requests it or he may be able to get an order saying that he has sole responsibility for medical decisions or that he only pays 1/2 of appointments he agrees with or something like that, but until then, the existing order is quite specific - and it apparently doesn't say that he has to pre-approve medical expenses.

As for the glasses, you're again using your gut rather than interpreting the law. Children have belongings. Much of the time, the belongings stay at one home and are not sent back and forth. That is perfectly reasonable and allowed. Now, the wife is being a pain in not sending the glasses, but there's nothing illegal about it, nor is the court going to get involved. Furthermore, it's an incredibly stupid thing to be discussing. New glasses cost $50 or less at Lenscrafters (with their state insurance, it may be less). It's far cheaper and easier to just go buy another pair of glasses than fighting over it - and it's to the child's benefit to have a second pair of glasses, anyway.

Misto, obviously you haven't experienced a situation where one of the parents chooses to take a child "out of network", or have dealt with a situation where the child has free medical care through the primary custodial parent.

Not properly utilizing insurance HONESTLY makes a big difference in court.

 

[mistoffolees]

Misto, obviously you haven't experienced a situation where one of the parents chooses to take a child "out of network", or have dealt with a situation where the child has free medical care through the primary custodial parent.

Not properly utilizing insurance HONESTLY makes a big difference in court.

In theory, perhaps. But she can provide all sorts of reasons (she preferred to keep the child with the same doctor, she didn't know about the other insurance, whatever) and it's VERY unlikely that she would be sanctioned in any way.

In reality, there is a valid court order that says each party has to pay 1/2 of medical expenses. That is going to apply until OP gets it changed.

 

[Zigner]

In theory, perhaps. But she can provide all sorts of reasons (she preferred to keep the child with the same doctor, she didn't know about the other insurance, whatever) and it's VERY unlikely that she would be sanctioned in any way.

In reality, there is a valid court order that says each party has to pay 1/2 of medical expenses. That is going to apply until OP gets it changed.

Misto - you're wrong on this one. Dad is to pay 1/2 the cost after insurance. Mom MUST make a good-faith effort to utilize said insurance.

 

[Ohiogal]

Misto - you're wrong on this one. Dad is to pay 1/2 the cost after insurance. Mom MUST make a good-faith effort to utilize said insurance.

YOu would think but I have seen where it doesn't matter if the insurance was not utilized. The big thing is the fact that dad has sole custody. Mom is not allowed to make any such decisions. Dad can make an argument but quite frankly the out of network or failure to utilize should be placed in the court order.

 

[mistoffolees]

YOu would think but I have seen where it doesn't matter if the insurance was not utilized. The big thing is the fact that dad has sole custody. Mom is not allowed to make any such decisions. Dad can make an argument but quite frankly the out of network or failure to utilize should be placed in the court order.

OP still hasn't answered the important question - Does Dad have sole LEGAL custody or is it joint Legal with Dad having sole PHYSICAL custody.

If there is joint LEGAL custody, then Mom has the right to take the child to the doctor, as well.