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

[CJane]

1) They call me Steppy, I like it. About 2 hours after we got married, we were walking through the store getting stuff for a softball tournament (yes our honeymoon was that hot) and one of the kids asked "So what do we have to call you dad now?" (jokingly) and I replied "No, you have a dad, I'm <my name>". One of the other kids said "How about Steppy?" I said "I like it!" and they typically call me by name unless they are being funny or want to try and butter me up for something.
2) I am listed as a step parent and able to pick them up, check them out or have lunch with them. Their father is listed as their father. Their father's mother is listed as a contact the same way I am and their father's new wife will be once they are married. That's never been a problem
3) Permission slips and report cards? No. Reading logs and some assignments, if it's convenient then yes. Also, at the kids request I'm the one that typically helps with homework, especially math because I enjoy it.

This made me laugh. I got married on Friday, and shortly after the ceremony, we were loading the van up for a camping trip with all 7 kids and one of the dogs. Serious romance there, huh? And... I told my new step-kids that they can call me Maleficent.

I've been the Guardian/Escort on all of the military paperwork for my step-kids for the past year or so, since their Mom moved away. I'm listed as the emergency contact on everything since I'm local, and she's listed as Mom on everything. It works for all of us. It might not work for everyone.

 

[Ohiogal]

Cultural - My wife had collected information about the local schools, activities, museums, entertainment and such as it compares to our current location then had showed the kids current activities and how it fits it to provide a benefit.
And you are right, it should have been a virtual shoe-in but because of the denial of visitation it was shot down. And yes, she has her faults as a parent as well, I wouldn't say either one of them get a gold star here.



1) I didn't make any changes, she consulted me and her attorney and that is the only reason for the use of the word we there
2) I've said I'm not the father and I don't pretend to be, they have a good father, I tell the kids that and that was even in my testimony
3) I wholeheartedly disagree that they should not have been told about the potential move, we told them that it wasn't set in stone but that we were considering it. The move would have great impact on them and we wanted their opinion on the matter before we proceeded. If they had been against the move we wouldn't have gone any further because they deserve an opinion.

1) They call me Steppy, I like it. About 2 hours after we got married, we were walking through the store getting stuff for a softball tournament (yes our honeymoon was that hot) and one of the kids asked "So what do we have to call you dad now?" (jokingly) and I replied "No, you have a dad, I'm <my name>". One of the other kids said "How about Steppy?" I said "I like it!" and they typically call me by name unless they are being funny or want to try and butter me up for something.
2) I am listed as a step parent and able to pick them up, check them out or have lunch with them. Their father is listed as their father. Their father's mother is listed as a contact the same way I am and their father's new wife will be once they are married. That's never been a problem
3) Permission slips and report cards? No. Reading logs and some assignments, if it's convenient then yes. Also, at the kids request I'm the one that typically helps with homework, especially math because I enjoy it.

Court says she had no right to make the changes and deny grandma picking up the kids, she now accepts that and admits it was a misunderstanding on her part. She never demanded that he take a parenting class, she sent 2 emails and a letter that basically said "Look, we suck at communicating and this isn't good for the kids, I found this parenting for divorced parents class and was wondering if you would consider taking it with me." that was it. There was no demand, the 2 emails didn't receive a response so she sent a letter, then gave up the idea.

Then quite frankly, I will retract the overinvolved comment and chalk it up to you mis-speaking regarding your involvement with making visitation decisions and a few other things in this thread.

By your wife stating that it was a misunderstanding, she is not taking responsibility for her violation of the court order. She really needs to do so. The idea that she was selling the idea of the move to the children also seems to play into her trying to distance the children's father from them -- either by getting to move or having the children blame dad for not allowing them to move to this fabulous wonderland of opportunity.

 

[databit]

1) Yet your wife benefited from him working on a boat due to the pay and other benefits that went with it.



2) She "allows" him? She has no right to allow or disallow. She needs to get over being a control freak.


3) Then she needs to grow up and learn to coparent.


4) Quite frankly she should have known how to co-parent before she had all three children with him. These children are NOT just her children. He is just as much as their parent as she is.



5) AND? His history of child support or not isn't your business. What did your wife to enforce the court order that required him to pay? Did your wife tell him about the appointments that lead to the medical bills? Did she copy him on the bills? Did she put him on the medical records?




6) Really? How do you know he tells them to lie? You have no right to be angry about how dad parents HIS children.



7) Yes but your wife unilaterally dictated to dad what would or wouldn't happen.


8) So blame your wife because she is the one responsible for the move not taking place. She acted inappropriately and selfishly.

I don't think you like me that much that's ok though, I like differing opinions.

1. Yes she did get the benefits, she also go the breakdown of the marriage due to distance. That's not really a benefit
2. I quoted the "allowed" word myself. I couldn't think of a better word but maybe "accepting that he has the right". I said she has a hard time, she is working on it but change is difficult for some
3. She does need to learn to coparent, but in the word itself it says that it requires work from both sides. 1 parent can't learn to co parent if the other parent doesn't
4. Same as 3, she should have known how but that is how the two of them decided to raise their kids at the time and I can't really comment on the right or wrong of it
5a. His history of child support/other payments isn't my business I was saying that his history causes my wife to get upset with him and it impacts their ability to communicate because, as with many people, it's difficult to put emotions aside.
5c. To enforce the order she sent demand letters after 90 days (court order says 30) with offers to make payment arrangements if he couldn't pay it all at once. His response was to tell her she isn't a bill collector. She filed for contempt and it was lumped in with the relocation when relocation came around.
5b. Yes she tells him about the appoints as soon as they are made. All bills are sent as soon as they are received, monthly a spreadsheet is sent over that shows all of the kids medical bills year to date.
6. I've seen it in text messages and heard the kids say it
7. I don't have a ton of experience but since I've been looking into family court stuff I've found the word "unilaterally" is typically used to paint a picture as opposed to state a fact. She consulted with an attorney, myself and our family counselor before making decisions, she attempted to consult with her ex but he wouldn't. Personally I wouldn't call that unilateral.
8) I haven't blamed anyone, court order says what it says and the judge clarified that. We followed the process for relocation and were denied relocation, really there isn't a blame here it's just process.

 

[databit]

Then quite frankly, I will retract the overinvolved comment and chalk it up to you mis-speaking regarding your involvement with making visitation decisions and a few other things in this thread.

By your wife stating that it was a misunderstanding, she is not taking responsibility for her violation of the court order. She really needs to do so. The idea that she was selling the idea of the move to the children also seems to play into her trying to distance the children's father from them -- either by getting to move or having the children blame dad for not allowing them to move to this fabulous wonderland of opportunity.

There was no "selling" to the kids, and this may be where I am over involved, before having the conversation my wife and I talked about what we would say to the kids and I made it a point that we need to remain objective regarding the move, it would be easy to sell the idea of a move to a beach with disneyland not far a way to kids but a move like this is scary and hard and I wanted to make sure they knew this and my wife knew this. None of them, my wife or the kids, have ever moved further than a 15 minute drive and have always lived in a small town, this was going to be a drastic change and I didn't want everyone to get there and freak out and we have to move back because my career/our lively hood would have been on the line.


Edit: there was selling to the court, the lawyer said that it was needed then.

 

[databit]

There are some people who believe that any step-parent who involves themselves with the children in any manner other than perhaps babysitting them occasionally is overstepping. Some people seem to think that the only way to be a successful step-parent is to remain 100% hands-off, and leave all of the parenting/adult interaction/etc to the biological parents.

Some people feel differently. But one of those demographics is louder and more ... vocal ... in their opinion.

I've read your responses, and I don't actually think you're overstepping. I think you're taking a calm and rational approach to this, and rolling with the punches with a lot more grace than a lot of parents who come here.

That said, you've got to turn down that job offer and settle in, frustrating as that may be.

Thanks, I do take an active role in the kids life but after they first moved in I told them all that I would only take whatever role in their life that they wanted me to, not in a garish, sit them down and have a long talk about it but more causal when the topic came up sort of way. I had the ******* stepparent for a little while when I grew up and I've seen it in others, I don't want to be that guy.

Also, while the kids dad was giving his testimony he said he thinks I'm good to/for the kids.

And yep, I have a call with the other company in about an hour and have to tell them no

 

[databit]

Then quite frankly, I will retract the overinvolved comment and chalk it up to you mis-speaking regarding your involvement with making visitation decisions and a few other things in this thread.

By your wife stating that it was a misunderstanding, she is not taking responsibility for her violation of the court order. She really needs to do so. The idea that she was selling the idea of the move to the children also seems to play into her trying to distance the children's father from them -- either by getting to move or having the children blame dad for not allowing them to move to this fabulous wonderland of opportunity.

Thanks!

I think her accepting that it was her changing the visitation that prevented the move because she misunderstood the order is "good enough" a this point. I'm a smart guy and enjoy sleeping in my bed so I don't think I'm going to attempt the conversation that she needs to change her wording to "violation"

 

[databit]

This made me laugh. I got married on Friday, and shortly after the ceremony, we were loading the van up for a camping trip with all 7 kids and one of the dogs. Serious romance there, huh? And... I told my new step-kids that they can call me Maleficent.

I've been the Guardian/Escort on all of the military paperwork for my step-kids for the past year or so, since their Mom moved away. I'm listed as the emergency contact on everything since I'm local, and she's listed as Mom on everything. It works for all of us. It might not work for everyone.

Kids - Blocking romance since 9 months before they are born

I almost made myself look like an idiot (for bout the 50th time in this thread) by saying "Wasn't Maleficent a girl?" after I typed it and was about to press send I was like "wait...Mom moved away...oh ya step parents can be girls too!" I guess I'm sexist.

 

[Silverplum]

Thanks!

I think her accepting that it was her changing the visitation that prevented the move because she misunderstood the order is "good enough" a this point. I'm a smart guy and enjoy sleeping in my bed so I don't think I'm going to attempt the conversation that she needs to change her wording to "violation"

Excellent. We "educated" a stepparent, and he will *not* be transferring the legal info to the actual parent.

 

[Ladyback1]

(cultural? Explain that one please) .

Proserpina,

OP gives his state as Arkansas. And having been born in raised in that state, I can say with some certainty: There is not a lot of chance for "culture" (museums, theatre, music, etc) in the whole friggin' state! If you live in Little Rock, there are more opportunities but still blessed few. If you live in the Fayetteville, AR area, there are some opportunities and most are directly related to the Univ. of AR and/or The Walton Family (aka Wal*M@rt money)--and Crystal Bridges is a phenomenal addition to the area.
If you are not a fan of "the" Razorbacks, and you don't know how to "Call the Hogs", then you miss out on the most culturally diverse event(s)--The Football Season.

 

[databit]

Excellent. We "educated" a stepparent, and he will *not* be transferring the legal info to the actual parent.

Haha, I've transferred most all of the legal stuff over, I was joking around saying that I'm not going to argue her inner dialog because I know how that conversation will go and I'm ok with her accepting responsibility on the level she has, I don't need to enforce any responsibility.

Summation of the legal stuff I've relayed
No we can't appeal, court order says he picks them up then the standard order defines "pick up" in the section transportation.
Like the judge said, you shouldn't have changed visitation when his work schedule changed. She already knew this though
They (this forum) seemed to like the idea of the parenting classes so maybe after the dust settles you should try to reach out again.

In the mean time, we had already discussed modifying the current counselling we go to a couple times a month (marriage) to a family counselling and try to get more assistance with the co-parenting side of things from this side of the fence. We've touched on it a good bit in the past but with some of the new confines of the order neither one of us have any idea how she is supposed to parent the kids.

 

[CJane]

Haha, I've transferred most all of the legal stuff over, I was joking around saying that I'm not going to argue her inner dialog because I know how that conversation will go and I'm ok with her accepting responsibility on the level she has, I don't need to enforce any responsibility.

Summation of the legal stuff I've relayed
No we can't appeal, court order says he picks them up then the standard order defines "pick up" in the section transportation.
Like the judge said, you shouldn't have changed visitation when his work schedule changed. She already knew this though
They (this forum) seemed to like the idea of the parenting classes so maybe after the dust settles you should try to reach out again.

In the mean time, we had already discussed modifying the current counselling we go to a couple times a month (marriage) to a family counselling and try to get more assistance with the co-parenting side of things from this side of the fence. We've touched on it a good bit in the past but with some of the new confines of the order neither one of us have any idea how she is supposed to parent the kids.

Can you explain the bolded?

 

[databit]

Proserpina,

OP gives his state as Arkansas. And having been born in raised in that state, I can say with some certainty: There is not a lot of chance for "culture" (museums, theatre, music, etc) in the whole friggin' state! If you live in Little Rock, there are more opportunities but still blessed few. If you live in the Fayetteville, AR area, there are some opportunities and most are directly related to the Univ. of AR and/or The Walton Family (aka Wal*M@rt money)--and Crystal Bridges is a phenomenal addition to the area.
If you are not a fan of "the" Razorbacks, and you don't know how to "Call the Hogs", then you miss out on the most culturally diverse event(s)--The Football Season.

Alma so yep. And the Crystal Bridges museum is awesome, we've been there a few times since it open and love it.

 

[databit]

Can you explain the bolded?

Each of the kids have smart phones and one is about to have their license. Grounding from smart phones has been an effective way to provide consequence for the kids not doing their chores, without a decent reason, or doing something they aren't supposed to do.
In court, the kids dad's lawyer said that we take their phones away and dressed it up as denying him access. The kids have the house phone and can use their siblings phone to contact or be contacted by their Dad at any time, nobody has ever been grounded from the house phone and we got it specifically so that they would have a line of communication to their dad if we took their phone. Judge says she can't take their phones because he pays the bill on half of them. My wife doesn't like to take away extra-curricular activities so that is rarely used. The kids bounce around between their two homes so much that groundings don't have an impact other than "Mom takes away and dad gives back" so it is hard to hold them accountable.
With the driving, we plan on buying that one a car when he get's his license, under the new wording if their dad buys them something we can't restrict it in any way, so if he gets a car for the oldest as well then that would mean she can't restrict that when he is here. That is really worrisome with teenage rebellion and all. Lots of concerns about all of it, he has shown a history of trying to circumvent such as telling one of the kids "Go to your mom's room and take the phone out her drawer when she isn't looking." Kid confirmed and so did he.
We've talked and don't know an answer so know that we should consult someone that might (family counselor)

 

[CJane]

Each of the kids have smart phones and one is about to have their license. Grounding from smart phones has been an effective way to provide consequence for the kids not doing their chores, without a decent reason, or doing something they aren't supposed to do.
In court, the kids dad's lawyer said that we take their phones away and dressed it up as denying him access. The kids have the house phone and can use their siblings phone to contact or be contacted by their Dad at any time, nobody has ever been grounded from the house phone and we got it specifically so that they would have a line of communication to their dad if we took their phone. Judge says she can't take their phones because he pays the bill on half of them. My wife doesn't like to take away extra-curricular activities so that is rarely used. The kids bounce around between their two homes so much that groundings don't have an impact other than "Mom takes away and dad gives back" so it is hard to hold them accountable.
With the driving, we plan on buying that one a car when he get's his license, under the new wording if their dad buys them something we can't restrict it in any way, so if he gets a car for the oldest as well then that would mean she can't restrict that when he is here. That is really worrisome with teenage rebellion and all. Lots of concerns about all of it, he has shown a history of trying to circumvent such as telling one of the kids "Go to your mom's room and take the phone out her drawer when she isn't looking." Kid confirmed and so did he.
We've talked and don't know an answer so know that we should consult someone that might (family counselor)

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.

 

[Ohiogal]

Each of the kids have smart phones and one is about to have their license. Grounding from smart phones has been an effective way to provide consequence for the kids not doing their chores, without a decent reason, or doing something they aren't supposed to do.
In court, the kids dad's lawyer said that we take their phones away and dressed it up as denying him access. The kids have the house phone and can use their siblings phone to contact or be contacted by their Dad at any time, nobody has ever been grounded from the house phone and we got it specifically so that they would have a line of communication to their dad if we took their phone. Judge says she can't take their phones because he pays the bill on half of them. My wife doesn't like to take away extra-curricular activities so that is rarely used. The kids bounce around between their two homes so much that groundings don't have an impact other than "Mom takes away and dad gives back" so it is hard to hold them accountable.
With the driving, we plan on buying that one a car when he get's his license, under the new wording if their dad buys them something we can't restrict it in any way, so if he gets a car for the oldest as well then that would mean she can't restrict that when he is here. That is really worrisome with teenage rebellion and all. Lots of concerns about all of it, he has shown a history of trying to circumvent such as telling one of the kids "Go to your mom's room and take the phone out her drawer when she isn't looking." Kid confirmed and so did he.
We've talked and don't know an answer so know that we should consult someone that might (family counselor)

The kids should be able to have their phones for contact with DAD on them. Just because your wife doesn't like to take extracurricular activities, doesn't mean that that can't be effective. Taking the children's phones when dad pays half the bill is another form of interfering with dad's rights. Your wife seems to like to make decisions that isolate the children from dad. Like deciding without agreement from dad to deny him visitation time. Like grounding the children from the phone that dad also pays for and limiting his access. I can say that your wife needs to learn how to coparent better. She can do parenting classes without her ex. Your wife has shown a history of interfering with dad's rights. You realize that, don't you? If she continues with that, she could actually LOSE custody. How should she parent? She should parent in ways that don't interfere with dad. She should parent in ways that don't restrict the children from the father. Extracurricular activities should be missed before the children are not allowed to call their father. Your wife is coming across as very immature and controlling.