Long Distance Parenting Plan Advice

[gapeach404]

OP,

Try again and be willing to live what you are willing to give to Dad.

Here's the thing, my attorney does not want keep negotiating against himself which I agree with. If what I'm offering is 'not good enough' which is what his attorney keeps saying then counter with something reasonable instead of what he offered which is completely unreasonable. I've offered him more than what the forensic psychologist offered. We've been at this for almost 2 years. I've gotten 1 counter in that time frame and that was this week. The courts are going to have to decide. I honestly don't think he will ever settle. This is about winning for him.

 

[stealth2]

IMO, at this point, you're looking to be the reasonable one in the judge's eyes.

 

[LdiJ]

IMO, at this point, you're looking to be the reasonable one in the judge's eyes.

I agree. Its probably time to let it go before the judge and let the judge decide.

 

[t74]

I wish OP would respond to the birthday issue. There appears to be a lot of "attitude" on both sides. It is also about "winning" for Mom otherwise she would have offered more of what Dad listed even if she believed it to be unfair.

Remember, Mom is the one that moved and is thus limiting Dad's contact. He has the right to be upset. She could always find a job in Dad's community and return to the child's home for the majority of his life.

 

[stealth2]

Actually t74, I understood that Mom has pretty well offered Dad everything he asked for except for July (because he now only wants one month in summer) & allowing him to stay in her home when he visits in NC. And the change in custody. She has been bringing the child to see him, at her expense. Her relocation was based on his (verbal) agreement.

She could further sweeten the bday pot by offering an extra weekend in July the summers he does not have the child for the bday - at his expense. I would consider that fair as she would be providing all other transportation. Or alternate June and July on a yearly basis.

 

[LdiJ]

I wish OP would respond to the birthday issue. There appears to be a lot of "attitude" on both sides. It is also about "winning" for Mom otherwise she would have offered more of what Dad listed even if she believed it to be unfair.

Remember, Mom is the one that moved and is thus limiting Dad's contact. He has the right to be upset. She could always find a job in Dad's community and return to the child's home for the majority of his life.

She offered dad as much as it was actually possible to offer on a long distance basis.

He offered next to nothing.

Its time for the judge to decide and dad is not going to come off as reasonable at all. Two weeks only in the summer and only Christmas as a holiday every other year is ridiculous.

 

[Ohiogal]

She offered dad as much as it was actually possible to offer on a long distance basis.

He offered next to nothing.

Its time for the judge to decide and dad is not going to come off as reasonable at all. Two weeks only in the summer and only Christmas as a holiday every other year is ridiculous.

She offered June in the summer. The question becomes is when does school end and when does it begin?

He offered not just two weeks in the summer and Christmas every other year but also every three day weekend. There is a counter in between the two.

 

[CJane]

My relocation case (MO to WA) took from January 2014 to January 2017. And this was a case where the party opposing the relocation hadn't even had contact with the kids for more than 2 years prior to 2014, and wasn't asking for custody - he was actually asking that I retain custody and be forced to stay in Missouri.

So I'm not totally surprised that your case is taking so long.

We moved out here on temp orders in August 2014. The oldest turned 18 in December 2014, so she only had to go back for one visit. The younger went back for Christmas, Spring Break, and Summer. After that, my Ex again decided not to have visits and to cease contact with the children. I went back for a hearing in November of last year, and we sat down without attorneys and hashed out an agreement in the GAL's office. If we hadn't, we would have had to go to trial, and I had decided to let exactly that happen.

Our agreement includes me paying for transportation, and if he chooses to exercise time in our area, I will pay for his transportation AND lodging. Visits are "as Child, Mother and Father agree", and will not be for more than 14 days in a row.

In your case, I think you should just stop trying to negotiate with Dad. The judge is not likely at all to go against the recommendations of they forensic psychologist, and it doesn't sound like the child's best interests would be served by offering Dad really extended visits.

 

[CJane]

Also, I'm not sure how helpful it is to rely on "typical" long distance plans in situations like yours.

Originally, when my relocation was approved via temp orders, our schedule looked like this:

Kid(s) with Dad in MO
2nd half of Christmas Break (Beginning Dec 27) every year
Spring Break e/o year
6 Weeks in Summer, beginning the Saturday after school releases and ending the 6th Saturday following
Thanksgiving e/o year

My Husband has custody of his kids, and their order looks more like this:

Kids with Mom
Alternating 1/2s of Christmas Break (transitions take place on Dec 26)
e/o Spring Break
6 Weeks in Summer, beginning the Saturday after school releases and ending the 6th Saturday following
Additional time as agreed when she is in our town (works out to about 2 weekends a year)
They split transportation costs if the kids fly, meet halfway between our homes if we're driving.

Would I be "willing" to live with either of the NCP's schedules? Not particularly. But the children live with the parents they live with for a reason. And in OUR cases, that reason is because the parent they live with is significantly more fit and stable than the other parent.

 

[gapeach404]

My relocation case (MO to WA) took from January 2014 to January 2017. And this was a case where the party opposing the relocation hadn't even had contact with the kids for more than 2 years prior to 2014, and wasn't asking for custody - he was actually asking that I retain custody and be forced to stay in Missouri.

This is exactly what my ex wants. He doesn't want custody as long as I stay in NY.

We moved out here on temp orders in August 2014.

Hmm, interesting.

it doesn't sound like the child's best interests would be served by offering Dad really extended visits.

Its not. Which is why the judge has given him the bare minimum parenting time. What I've proposed to him is way more time than he currently has. Under the current temp order he gets our son biweekly Saturday 10am and brings him back Sunday @ 6pm. He was never an active participant when we lived together and I'm not exaggerating. This isn't about what's best for our son but about punishing me for leaving the relationship.

 

[PaLv]

This is exactly what my ex wants. He doesn't want custody as long as I stay in NY.


Hmm, interesting.

Its not. Which is why the judge has given him the bare minimum parenting time. What I've proposed to him is way more time than he currently has. Under the current temp order he gets our son biweekly Saturday 10am and brings him back Sunday @ 6pm. He was never an active participant when we lived together and I'm not exaggerating. This isn't about what's best for our son but about punishing me for leaving the relationship.

This is the case so often. Men punishing women for not wanting a relationship. It makes the whole “Fathers right movement” a joke—those fathers wanted to parent the children, not control Mom. Hope in next decade things sway toward a “best interest of child” movement.

 

[LdiJ]

This is the case so often. Men punishing women for not wanting a relationship. It makes the whole “Fathers right movement” a joke—those fathers wanted to parent the children, not control Mom. Hope in next decade things sway toward a “best interest of child” movement.

I hope that what you meant to say was that those men who just want to punish women for not wanting a relationship are making it harder on the dad's who really want to parent and love their children.

 

[PaLv]

I hope that what you meant to say was that those men who just want to punish women for not wanting a relationship are making it harder on the dad's who really want to parent and love their children.

My state is 50:50 if the father wants it.
Some men use “rights” , to punish women by control via the child. Who they prior wanted little to do with. Or in many cases still want little to do with (skipping custodial time). I don’t agree with the right to be a ****ty parent, it should be what is best for the child.
I’m not sure your question, but don’t want to derail her thread too much.

 

[CTU]

This is the case so often. Men punishing women for not wanting a relationship. It makes the whole “Fathers right movement” a joke—those fathers wanted to parent the children, not control Mom. Hope in next decade things sway toward a “best interest of child” movement.

And equally often, women penalize men for not wanting a relationship. It's the "golden uterus" syndrome and it's real.

 

[PaLv]

And equally often, women penalize men for not wanting a relationship. It's the "golden uterus" syndrome and it's real.

Agree,
In my state if the father wants 50/50, he can have it so a “golden uterus” can’t penalize much