When to file contempt

[onebreath]

As hemmend in by my court order with ex, this is one thing I don't have to deal with. I don't agree with a parent having to consult with the other parent to get agreement on what I consider basic parenting roles...one being taking one's child to the doctor to check out a sore throat to make sure its not strep, or any other doctor visits.

My ex and I have an agreement...if child is sick we inform the other parent via email that day. The same (obviously) goes for doctors appt's, dental appt's, fevers, absences from school due to sickness. I don't know whats in your court order (the GOD of parenting decisions), however I think its a huge mistake to have to consult with the other parent over such basic parenting decisions. If your child is sick, only you were there to observe listlisness, and build up of symptoms, a possible fever...my god, to consult with the other parent as to the appropriateness to take a child to the doctor when its best to be preventative in the first place?

Personally, as a well seasoned coparenter of over 8 years, I think hubby and ex needs to just drop that deal from the court order as of yesterday. If you can't even trust the other parent to take care of the child if sick, then its a pretty sad state.

 

[crhsah]

Anything in that parenting plan about joint religious decision making? If so, you had better not say "bless you" when the child sneezes. Not without calling the mother first and gaining her written approval. The mother might sit quietly back and count the number of times you say blessing before dinner and then sue you for contempt when she has gained enough evidence.

You are starting down a slippery slope if you want "joint decision" to read "veto power" over her parenting decisions. Because if you open the door to doing so, and use the most extreme means to enforce it...be prepared for the mother to do the same.

If the father wants to be notified, he should be. If he wasn't, then he should call and ask to be kept informed.

 

[stealth2]

It never fails to amaze me how petty people can be. Expecting a parent to get prior "approval" for doctor's visits is, frankly, pretty darned controlling. When the kids are with me, if they get sick, I decide if they need to see someone. As does my ex when they're with him. If it's something that requires real care (as opposed to "give two Tylenol and some chicken soup and see how s/he is in the morning")? Sure, give the other parent a ring and let them know.

But then, I operate on the "you better be bleeding, vomiting or have broken something" principle.

Y'all need to grow up.

 

[majomom1]

It never fails to amaze me how petty people can be. Expecting a parent to get prior "approval" for doctor's visits is, frankly, pretty darned controlling. When the kids are with me, if they get sick, I decide if they need to see someone. As does my ex when they're with him. If it's something that requires real care (as opposed to "give two Tylenol and some chicken soup and see how s/he is in the morning")? Sure, give the other parent a ring and let them know.

But then, I operate on the "you better be bleeding, vomiting or have broken something" principle.

Y'all need to grow up.

This is how I operate too. And if I am not mistaken, most CO have a provision that each parent is responsible for routine day to day care, in their home - so it really could be viewed in a variety of ways.

I have an ex that wants to run to the doctor, or ER, for every little thing. He claims it is better safe that sorry and we have insurance so use it. My youngest (14) now thinks he needs to go for every little thing...

As for this being handled as a "business" - I do agree. But you generally are not rude with your business partner, and you do trust them to handle things in the best interest of both of you. If you applied the same logic for dealing with the ex, and your kids, there would be less grief. We all love our kids and want what is best for them. There may be differences in parenting, but generally even that is not too far off.

 

[JBMD]

What is the name of your state? LA...child resides in TN

My husbands order reads that "non-emergency medical decisions shall be made jointly". He had spoken with his 9yo daughter on the phone last night and found out from her that she had stayed home from school on Monday because she had a sore throat and her mom took her to the doctor for it. Mom didn't inform/discuss this with Dad. Obviously, this is contempt, but is it too petty to bring infront of the judge? Should he wait to see if she continues to do this and then file?

It's going to be another 9 long years. Choose your battles wisely or it will cost youa fortune!

 

[amberlea434]

Hey, I'm not disagreeing or disputing anything, here. Just looking for clarification. Apparently, CO's need to be read between the lines and are open to interpretation to whomever's reading them. God forbid you take anything for face value, especially a CO, designed specifically to lay everything out in black and white so there's no argument. I don't know, I guess we're way off base here.

LD, there's no exaggeration here. Mom takes her constantly for small things that always turn out to be nothing serious.

crhsah, I'm not a doctor/nurse nor have I claimed to be one. And how, exactly, is dad supposed to pick up the phone and ask what's going on if he doesn't KNOW that she's taking her to the doctor? He DOES ask to be notified, he's asked for years now and she doesn't take him seriously. Which is why he wanted it put into their new CO. Not for permission, per se, but to at least involve him on issues with their daughter.

I'm sorry if ya'll think this is petty. I didn't know following a CO was petty.

 

[wileybunch]

amberlea434, on the face of it, your husband's CO language -- "non-emergency medical decisions shall be made jointly" -- does not appear to require Mom to let Dad know when she's taking child to the doctor for a sore throat. A "non-emergency medical decision" is something like whether to get tonsils out, have surgery to open blocked tear duct, surgery for hernia repair, etc. If there was more to it like Mom's bordering on Munchausen's or something, I would think the language would restrict Mom from taking child to the doctor -- period -- without Dad's approval which isn't what his CO says.

 

[escape2paradise]

amberlea434, on the face of it, your husband's CO language -- "non-emergency medical decisions shall be made jointly" -- does not appear to require Mom to let Dad know when she's taking child to the doctor for a sore throat. A "non-emergency medical decision" is something like whether to get tonsils out, have surgery to open blocked tear duct, surgery for hernia repair, etc. If there was more to it like Mom's bordering on Munchausen's or something, I would think the language would restrict Mom from taking child to the doctor -- period -- without Dad's approval which isn't what his CO says.

This is also how my attorney explained this to me. I don't have to get dad's okay to take DD to the doctor, but it's nice of me to let him know, which I do.

 

[LdiJ]

Hey, I'm not disagreeing or disputing anything, here. Just looking for clarification. Apparently, CO's need to be read between the lines and are open to interpretation to whomever's reading them. God forbid you take anything for face value, especially a CO, designed specifically to lay everything out in black and white so there's no argument. I don't know, I guess we're way off base here.

LD, there's no exaggeration here. Mom takes her constantly for small things that always turn out to be nothing serious.

crhsah, I'm not a doctor/nurse nor have I claimed to be one. And how, exactly, is dad supposed to pick up the phone and ask what's going on if he doesn't KNOW that she's taking her to the doctor? He DOES ask to be notified, he's asked for years now and she doesn't take him seriously. Which is why he wanted it put into their new CO. Not for permission, per se, but to at least involve him on issues with their daughter.

I'm sorry if ya'll think this is petty. I didn't know following a CO was petty.

I really don't think that you understand what we are telling you. Your husband had language put into an order that does NOT accomplish what he assumed it would accomplish, or what he wanted it to accomplish. Several people have explained to you what "non-emergency" means legally, and you insist on interpreting it differently. Please feel free to pay an attorney to give your husband similar advice.

I am also pretty certain that you are exaggerating about the every week thing, because if that was really true, and was really going on for the child's entire life, the doctor would have expressed some serious concerns and likely would have involved CPS, unless the child has ongoing medical issues.

The bottom line however, is that wording of the order DOES NOT accomplish what your husband thought it would accomplish.

 

[Bloopy]

If there was more to it like Mom's bordering on Munchausen's or something, I would think the language would restrict Mom from taking child to the doctor -- period -- without Dad's approval which isn't what his CO says.

I am also pretty certain that you are exaggerating about the every week thing, because if that was really true, and was really going on for the child's entire life, the doctor would have expressed some serious concerns and likely would have involved CPS, unless the child has ongoing medical issues.

The bottom line however, is that wording of the order DOES NOT accomplish what your husband thought it would accomplish.

Agreed.

Dad thought Mom was taking the child/ren to the doctor excessively and was hoping the order would give him veto power.

The court did not find the visits to be excessive/harmful and did not put such a restriction on Mom.

 

[crhsah]

Precisely Bloopy...no restriction were put on the mother...sounds like typical wording of parenting plan.

Just because something COULD be treated at home, doesn't mean it is the best medical decision. You COULD treat a fever at home with Tylenol. Or you could take her to the doctor and find out the cause of the fever and treat it. Your husband has decided that treating symptoms and assuming that the fever is not something like Leukemia is the right thing. Her means of dealing with the situation is to determine the cause and rule out anything serious. And he has decided that her way of doing things is wrong and his is right and he wants to make her do things his way.

 

[amberlea434]

I understand. Thank you.