Father seeking primary custody - needing opinions/advice

[CJane]

Thank you so much for your reply.

When she was letting them see their dad less and less, the more he would push to see the kids, the less she would let them have them. They had said from the get-go that they didn't want to get into a messy custody thing, so he attempted to uphold that for as long as possible, but her control over the kids, and how she treats them, is getting unbearable.

And that is exactly what is meant by passive agreement.

He didn't want to prohibit them from moving, as he didn't want to control their lives or keep the new husband from being able to join the army and have income.

He couldn't have prevented THAT anyway.

It's only in the past week that he has learned of her scheduling the surgery in the middle of the time he was supposed to have with them. He's realizing now that she is making all decisions for the kids independent of their father, and is now telling him what will and won't happen (regarding visitation, medical care, etc.).

And that sucks.

As for the medical records, he has only had the surgeries for the past year, and none out on the west coast yet, so my fiance has been able to be present for those. (The doctor here in NC has taken care of everything up until this point, and is fully capable of continuing to.) He was told last week by his ex that she wouldn't give him any information regarding the doctor they were now seeing. He wasn't aware that he wasn't listed as a guardian (there or here) until he called this week trying to get information for the doctor he will now be seeing on the west coast.

Edit: He called the doctor in NC, trying to find out where the records had been transferred to, and found out he hadn't been listed as a legal guardian.

It doesn't matter if he's listed as a legal guardian or not. State and Federal Law will back up his access to those records regardless. He simply needs to properly request them.

Again, passive agreement.

Honestly. Dad has NO SHOT at primary custody here. None.

What he SHOULD do is file to modify the visitation so that he can receive an enforceable visitation schedule with the kids that takes into account the distance they now live from each other.

 

[Proserpina]

Dad needs to get a decent, specific, enforceable visitation order in place.

He should start googling long-distance parenting plans.

I do not think Dad has enough to justify custody changing at this point in time.

 

[Ohiogal]

lol, I actually wasn't the paramour in this situation at all...

He talks with his kids on the phone. When the mom is out of the room, they call him "dad" and ask him why he did this-or-that thing their mom said he did. When they do get to visit (only once since their move, but every so often before the move), they tell him a lot more.

Per the definition of paramour, yes you are, yes, yes, yes you are.

 

[Proserpina]

Per the definition of paramour, yes you are, yes, yes, yes you are.

I'm glad you caught that.

What's good for the goose, etc.,

 

[gr8rn]

I can't understand how any parent can walk out of court with such a vague order. Isn't custody the most important issue? It was for me. Everything else is just, things.

 

[Proserpina]

I can't understand how any parent can walk out of court with such a vague order. Isn't custody the most important issue? It was for me. Everything else is just, things.

Well yes, one would think!

That truly is a horrid order though, isn't it?

 

[mistoffolees]

I can't understand how any parent can walk out of court with such a vague order. Isn't custody the most important issue? It was for me. Everything else is just, things.

I agree. Everyone involved ought to be horsewhipped. The judge for writing such an inane order and both parties for agreeing to it without objection. And the attorneys if any were involved.

 

[cappadocia]

I can't understand how any parent can walk out of court with such a vague order. Isn't custody the most important issue? It was for me. Everything else is just, things.

Dad may have been perfectly fine with the order until a new party with a vested interest in his paycheck and personal life stepped in and told him that he was no longer okay with it.

 

[Ohiogal]

lol. We're about to be married, so what affects him and his kids affects me as well. I am about to be their step-mom, after all. Of course I'm going to also care about their welfare.

Change of circumstance...wouldn't her moving them across the country to the west coast, and in a sense cutting them off from their dad be a change in circumstance?

Being their stepmom matters not. YOU ARE NO ONE LEGALLY. Try to remember that they are HIS kids and YOU have no say so to any of it.

 

[InfantCustody]

I love "I'm about to be their step-Mom."

Pardon me...but you are Dad's girlfriend? Dad allowed Mom to move. Plain and simple. He made his bed...now HE gets to lie in it. Note...just because you share his bed, that doesn't make THIS your issue as well!

 

[CJane]

Dad may have been perfectly fine with the order until a new party with a vested interest in his paycheck and personal life stepped in and told him that he was no longer okay with it.

I do believe you've hit that one square on the nose.

 

[mistoffolees]

Dad may have been perfectly fine with the order until a new party with a vested interest in his paycheck and personal life stepped in and told him that he was no longer okay with it.

Could be. Which is one of the reasons I hate to answer questions for bedwarmers.

 

[LdiJ]

So in summary, here are the grounds that we feel would be important to the case:
--Stability - mom and Paramour have moved the kids around a lot post-divorce, and being in the military, that's likely to continue (even, she had mentioned, internationally). Dad has owned and lived in in the same house since well before the divorce, and won't uproot the kids.

All of that is basically irrelevant because military families cannot be discriminated against in that kind of manner.

In addition, mom moved them out of the house at the time of separation, and into Paramour's house within 6 months of each other. The dad and I do not live together, and won't until we're married, and we have been very careful in gauging the children's acceptance of our relationship in general.

That might have been relevant at the time of the divorce if dad had raised the issue then. However, he did not and therefore its no longer relevant.

--Financial - mom and paramour have both been out of work, had a house foreclosed on, etc, and have been generally in financial straits, while dad has a good job, nice home, and can more than provide for the children.

Sorry but again irrelevant. A judge cannot violate a parent's constitutional rights by basing custody on who has more money to support the children.

--Psychological abuse - in mom's attempt to turn the kids against the dad, she hurts the kids. She has confused them about their identity and the identity of their father. She does things to spite the kids if they spend time with dad.

This has some relevance if dad can prove it with hard, cold evidence.

--Character - the mom lied about the separation date in the divorce papers, cheated, moved her kids in with her lover before the divorce, is being stingy with the kids and information regarding them, and doesn't seem to have the kids' best interests at heart.

Again, those are things that would have been relevant at the time of the divorce, but since dad didn't raise those issues then, its too late now.

Objectively about the only thing that I can see that gives dad any ammo at all is the possible alienation, and dad would have to prove that.

Mom's move out of state might have some relevancy, but the fact that it was a military move and the amount of time that has passed is not in your husband's favor.

 

[chataine]

My, my, aren't we a snarky bunch...

Per the definition of paramour, yes you are, yes, yes, yes you are.

Considering it means "illicit lover of a married person," and I didn't even know him when he was married...much less become his lover, until well after he became single...I would have to disagree.

I agree. Everyone involved ought to be horsewhipped. The judge for writing such an inane order and both parties for agreeing to it without objection. And the attorneys if any were involved.

And I agree with you. Everyone was at fault in the matter from the get-go.

Dad may have been perfectly fine with the order until a new party with a vested interest in his paycheck and personal life stepped in and told him that he was no longer okay with it.

Haha. I have nothing to prove, so I'll simply state that, what he wants (primary custody) would cause greater financial and personal burdens than the situation he/they are in now. In this situation, any woman who was as you assume all significant others to be, would push for things to remain the same, I promise. Sometimes significant others just want - gasp! - to support the parent and kids, regardless of the personal sacrifices.

Being their stepmom matters not. YOU ARE NO ONE LEGALLY. Try to remember that they are HIS kids and YOU have no say so to any of it.

Got it. Completely. I never said "we" were seeking custody. The only times I used "we" was in relation to things the kids had told both of us (some of the psychological abuse) or things in which I had a hand assisting him (he had asked me to call the doctor and see how he could request transcripts).

 

[chataine]

Again, those are things that would have been relevant at the time of the divorce, but since dad didn't raise those issues then, its too late now.

Objectively about the only thing that I can see that gives dad any ammo at all is the possible alienation, and dad would have to prove that.

Mom's move out of state might have some relevancy, but the fact that it was a military move and the amount of time that has passed is not in your husband's favor.

Thank you so much for your reply. I will pass the information on to him.