Requirements for joint-physical custody

[CJane]

Yeah no exactly.. I'm just saying why she has motive to not agree to maintain our current agreement (she'd like to be able to go out at 6:00),

Your current agreement is NOT going to hold up in court. I can come very close to guaranteeing you that.

not that I want to prevent her from going out - She can do whatever she wants on her own time.

That's a direct conflict with this

If she has full custody, she can drop him off with a baby sitter and head to the bars as frequently as she would like, and I would have no idea.

 

[LdiJ]

Your current agreement is NOT going to hold up in court. I can come very close to guaranteeing you that.



That's a direct conflict with this

It would hold up if they agree to it....it would not hold up if they didn't. It also might fall apart if either one of them gets seriously involved with someone or remarries. However, modifications are always possible further down the road.

It worked for my ex and I because I specifically chose not to get seriously involved with someone or remarry, and his long term girlfriend didn't have a problem with it.

 

[CJane]

It would hold up if they agree to it....it would not hold up if they didn't. It also might fall apart if either one of them gets seriously involved with someone or remarries. However, modifications are always possible further down the road.

It worked for my ex and I because I specifically chose not to get seriously involved with someone or remarry, and his long term girlfriend didn't have a problem with it.

Just based on what OP has posted, I think it's a safe bet that agreeing isn't going to happen.

OP wants to increase his time w/the kid - and who can blame him - which negates agreeing to the current set up anyway. And Mom has already said the current agreement isn't working for her anyway because she wants the kid picked up at 6 instead of 7...

 

[ProSeDadinMD]

...And Mom has already said the current agreement isn't working for her anyway because she wants the kid picked up at 6 instead of 7...

CJane, you forgot "to go out to drink"...

 

[CJane]

CJane, you forgot "to go out to drink"...

I thought that was a given when you've been nannying someone else's kids AND dealing with your own 3 year old all day long.

 

[LdiJ]

Just based on what OP has posted, I think it's a safe bet that agreeing isn't going to happen.

OP wants to increase his time w/the kid - and who can blame him - which negates agreeing to the current set up anyway. And Mom has already said the current agreement isn't working for her anyway because she wants the kid picked up at 6 instead of 7...

I didn't get the impression that he wanted any more time that what he has right now, but that he wanted joint legal and physical custody on paper. I see his point that there really isn't much more awake time that he could spend with the child during the week. However, if he made alternate daycare arrangments for his child he could spend some morning time with the child.

I am just a fan of a child getting to see both parents on a daily or almost daily basis. It really did work well for us.

 

[TinkerBelleLuvr]

A good friend of mine has her X pick up their kids from daycare two nights a week and bring them to her house. He cooks dinner for them and waits till she gets home. He gets them around 4:30 pm and she gets home around 6:30 to 7 pm. Yes, he does have a key to the house. They've done this now for nearly 4 years. She gets some free time without the kids to get errand done and the kids see their dad more times per week than standard.

Can mom drop off the child to maybe a grandparent a couple nights a week so that she can get out earlier, but he still has evening to see the child?

 

[CJane]

I didn't get the impression that he wanted any more time that what he has right now, but that he wanted joint legal and physical custody on paper. I see his point that there really isn't much more awake time that he could spend with the child during the week. However, if he made alternate daycare arrangments for his child he could spend some morning time with the child.

I am just a fan of a child getting to see both parents on a daily or almost daily basis. It really did work well for us.

I got the impression that he wants more time because he is under the impression that it'll make it harder on Mom to move away... he started out asking what 'shared' custody would entail - and then had lots of reasons why it wouldn't work.

I'm a fan of that too... but the parents have to want it to work, and a whole bunch of 'em just don't. It's about winning, not about parenting.

 

[Deemes]

Your current agreement is NOT going to hold up in court. I can come very close to guaranteeing you that.



That's a direct conflict with this

It wouldn't hold up in court? Whats the point of a signed agreement if it doesn't hold up?

.. I was just stating the fact of what she wants, she wants to go out and drink, I'm not trying to make it out as though she is an alcoholic, but if she had it her way, she would drop our son off with a baby sitter earlier in the day, and head to the bars.

 

[CJane]

It wouldn't hold up in court? Whats the point of a signed agreement if it doesn't hold up?

If Mom no longer wants to agree to what you have, and files during the divorce for something different when addressing permanent orders, then what you currently have is NOT going to be ordered by the judge. It's just not.

It's rife with future problems and the courts don't WANT to see you again in a year or 2 when junior starts school.

.. I was just stating the fact of what she wants, she wants to go out and drink, I'm not trying to make it out as though she is an alcoholic, but if she had it her way, she would drop our son off with a baby sitter earlier in the day, and head to the bars.

So why can't she?

 

[LdiJ]

It wouldn't hold up in court? Whats the point of a signed agreement if it doesn't hold up?

.. I was just stating the fact of what she wants, she wants to go out and drink, I'm not trying to make it out as though she is an alcoholic, but if she had it her way, she would drop our son off with a baby sitter earlier in the day, and head to the bars.

She meant a judge wouldn't order it over the objections of one of the parties.

 

[Deemes]

If Mom no longer wants to agree to what you have, and files during the divorce for something different when addressing permanent orders, then what you currently have is NOT going to be ordered by the judge. It's just not.

It's rife with future problems and the courts don't WANT to see you again in a year or 2 when junior starts school.



So why can't she?

I see, well the order is in place for one year, so obviously after that I would imagine that it's all up in the air to new negotiations, however it's only been a few months...

And, she can... I've told her she can, but if she did, then she couldn't use that as an excuse (as far as she is concerned)

 

[ProSeDadinMD]

As I said earlier, she will be filing for a limited divorce sometime in the near future, this week she says.....

If this is the case, then “it's all up in the air to new negotiations” right about now.

 

[CJane]

If this is the case, then “it's all up in the air to new negotiations” right about now.

I was wondering if the temp orders would hold up under a divorce filing.

 

[ProSeDadinMD]

My wife and I are currently separated (not legally). My wife will be filing for a limited divorce soon. I currently pay her child support, as agreed upon in a consent order ...

I should have noticed this earlier. This is a mutually exclusive statement, unless that "consent order" was never filed with the court. In that case I'd say it's just a written agreement, and if the wife files something different, it will change...