Another Question....Vacation times...

[novemberbride]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA


It's always something with my ex...so forgive me....I posted this on my other thread...but it's a different issue...so..my apologies.

So....another question...

Our court order states:

Mother/Father shall be entitled to 7 days each year of uninterrupted time with the child, with no period to exceed 7 days, provided that the other parent has given the other 30 days written notice of their intent to excersize this vacation time and it does not intereferre with regularly scheduled holidays and/or school attendance.

So, dad's regular visitation begins tonight at 6pm until Friday 7pm. He requested his vacation from 10/9 to 10/16. His regular visitation would be from 10/16 to 10/18.

He didn't give me 30 days notice. He claims to have mailed a letter to my parent's house in September. He emailed me on 9/18 asking for this time.

Anyways....the order says "no one period to exceed 7 days". Does that mean his vacation can't be included with his regular visitation.

I had the cops here.....He wasn't supposed to pick her up until 6pm, but had been calling me since 4:30 harassing me. He called the police on me, claiming I was in contempt.....even though the order says his visitation begins at 6pm.....

I explained to the cops that I understood the order to mean that "no one period to exceed 7 days"...meaning he would forego his visitation, and his vacation would begin on Oct 9th.

They told me to go back to court......which is where I was today.....They were also puzzled as to why he was soo upset when it wasn't 6pm yet.

Anyway...So, I had to turn her over...and I won't see her again until 10/18.

My temporary orders are in effect on Thursday....Does that mean I could get her then?????? I'm so confused.

Anyone else understand it that way???? "No one period to exceed 7 days". The cops just told me to get it clarified by the courts......

 

[Ohiogal]

So dad should not be able to piggy back his time. Okay? But seriously, you guys want to argue over this stuff? Because if so you are going to be arguing for the next lifetime.

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA


It's always something with my ex...so forgive me....I posted this on my other thread...but it's a different issue...so..my apologies.

So....another question...

Our court order states:

Mother/Father shall be entitled to 7 days each year of uninterrupted time with the child, with no period to exceed 7 days, provided that the other parent has given the other 30 days written notice of their intent to excersize this vacation time and it does not intereferre with regularly scheduled holidays and/or school attendance.

So, dad's regular visitation begins tonight at 6pm until Friday 7pm. He requested his vacation from 10/9 to 10/16. His regular visitation would be from 10/16 to 10/18.

He didn't give me 30 days notice. He claims to have mailed a letter to my parent's house in September. He emailed me on 9/18 asking for this time.

Anyways....the order says "no one period to exceed 7 days". Does that mean his vacation can't be included with his regular visitation.

I had the cops here.....He wasn't supposed to pick her up until 6pm, but had been calling me since 4:30 harassing me. He called the police on me, claiming I was in contempt.....even though the order says his visitation begins at 6pm.....

I explained to the cops that I understood the order to mean that "no one period to exceed 7 days"...meaning he would forego his visitation, and his vacation would begin on Oct 9th.

They told me to go back to court......which is where I was today.....They were also puzzled as to why he was soo upset when it wasn't 6pm yet.

Anyway...So, I had to turn her over...and I won't see her again until 10/18.

My temporary orders are in effect on Thursday....Does that mean I could get her then?????? I'm so confused.

Anyone else understand it that way???? "No one period to exceed 7 days". The cops just told me to get it clarified by the courts......

It basically means that he is supposed to include his regular parenting time in the 7 days...so that he doesn't take your weekend to have his 7 days.

 

[novemberbride]

I understood the order to mean that the 7 days of vacation time should not be included in regular visitation.

When he first gave me notice of this vacation, I asked him several times if he was intending to use his visitation with it. He never clarified, all the would say is "I am taking my vacation from 10/9 to 10/16."

Yesterday, I tried to explain to him how I understood the order to read, and could see that we both had a different understanding of it. But, instead he yelled, made threats to me, called me names, cursed...etc. I hang up when he begins this behavior, but he calls back, several times...Leaves harrassing and threatening messages.

The police told me they could only enforce the visitation order. The lines that outline the vacation would have to be more specified by the courts. Since it said he was supposed to pick her up, I had to turn her over. Of course, I was more willing...however it was not yet 6pm, and he was demanding the police to arrest me. They wouldn't, since I was not in any violation or contempt. They escorted me to the meeting location where another officer was speaking with him. They told him if he didn't calm down, they wouldn't allow him to take his daughter because of his behavior. Yelling, making accusations...etc.....

Her dad is now threatening to file contempt charges. I have always complied with my court order, and have never interfered with my daughters time with her dad.

I just understood our order to mean one thing, and he understood it to mean something different.

 

[jbowman]

Im sorry to say this but I think it is truly ridiculous that you are making a big deal out of him keeping your (and his) daughter for an extra 2 days. Is it completely screwing up your plans to fly to France or something? If not, let him have the two days that would be his visitation anyway.
People get so caught up in the fight that they forget that the other party loves the kid too. They forget that it is not going to kill you to give a little. They forget that there are 18 years to go through this crap if you dont use some kindness and common sense now.

 

[novemberbride]

thank you for the responses....

It's not screwing up any of my plans. And, I have no issue with our daughter having her time with her dad.

His regular visitation is from 10/6 to 10/9 then his vacation is from 10/9 to 10/16, then his regular visitation (weekend) would begin on 10/16 until 10/18.

So, she is with him from 10/6 until 10/18. The wording in the order states "no one period to exceed 7 days". I just understood that to mean he couldn't lump it all in with his regular visitation. I guess the only people who could explain the intentions of it are the mediators who wrote it that way.

I didn't deny his visitation, or his vacation. I would never deny my daughter her time with her dad. I just wasn't sure if what I was interpeting was correct or not.

 

[Ohiogal]

Im sorry to say this but I think it is truly ridiculous that you are making a big deal out of him keeping your (and his) daughter for an extra 2 days. Is it completely screwing up your plans to fly to France or something? If not, let him have the two days that would be his visitation anyway.
People get so caught up in the fight that they forget that the other party loves the kid too. They forget that it is not going to kill you to give a little. They forget that there are 18 years to go through this crap if you dont use some kindness and common sense now.

Hey JB. You and I agree. Seriously. Every word you wrote above.

 

[LdiJ]

Hey JB. You and I agree. Seriously. Every word you wrote above.

In this particular case, with this particular dad, I disagree.

This is a dad who is so controlling that mom had to rush to court to get emergency orders so that her daughter will be able to get surgery that she clearly needs. Dad went so far as to threaten the doctors to make sure the surgery didn't happen.

This same father is clearly not allowed (and neither is mom) to have more than 7 consecutive days, yet, he has scheduled things so that he as 12 consecutive days. So, its not two extra days, its 5 extra days.

This is a dad who needs to be made to follow the court orders, exactly and to a tee. This is not a dad that you can work with.

However I also don't think that this is an issue that should go to court by itself. I can just about guess that they will end up back in court again, in the fairly near future, so mom can save this one for that trip to court.

 

[Ohiogal]

In this particular case, with this particular dad, I disagree.

This is a dad who is so controlling that mom had to rush to court to get emergency orders so that her daughter will be able to get surgery that she clearly needs. Dad went so far as to threaten the doctors to make sure the surgery didn't happen.

This same father is clearly not allowed (and neither is mom) to have more than 7 consecutive days, yet, he has scheduled things so that he as 12 consecutive days. So, its not two extra days, its 5 extra days.

This is a dad who needs to be made to follow the court orders, exactly and to a tee. This is not a dad that you can work with.

However I also don't think that this is an issue that should go to court by itself. I can just about guess that they will end up back in court again, in the fairly near future, so mom can save this one for that trip to court.

Here is the thing -- I responded on her other thread. This is NOT something to make a war over -- the surgery issue is a WAR MAKING issue. Not this one. This is something that can keep her and dad battling constantly -- she needs to focus on the war issues and not on the petty BS.

 

[jbowman]

Hey JB. You and I agree. Seriously. Every word you wrote above.

I think we need a plaque to commemorate this day.

 

[LdiJ]

Here is the thing -- I responded on her other thread. This is NOT something to make a war over -- the surgery issue is a WAR MAKING issue. Not this one. This is something that can keep her and dad battling constantly -- she needs to focus on the war issues and not on the petty BS.

While I understand what you are saying and agree to a great extent...however, if you are dealing with a control freak, and the control freak loses on the war making issues, then it tends to make the control freak even worse about the smaller issues that one would normally say were too petty to fight about. When they get even worse about the small issues, it can make life miserable for everybody involved, including the children.

I have run into many "control freaks" in my lifetime...not just in family law issues, but across a broad spectrum of issues.

My experience has been that things do not get better until the control freak both learns, and accepts, that they cannot control the situation, or until they give up and go away because they cannot stand not being in control.

Moms and dads who are control freaks, often become absolutely impossible as grandparents, because they no longer can control their own children, so they try to use the grandchildren to control their adult children. Its a particularly sad and ugly phenomenon.

Mom has to deal with dad and dad's relationship with the child now, but a whole new facet of problems will arise when the child becomes an adult, if dad isn't taken down some pegs now.

 

[novemberbride]

Totally agree..this is not something to war about. But it is something that needs clarification so neither of us can manipulate it. I just wanted some better understanding.

Her health issues, and her father not allowing me to seek medical treatment is my upmost concern. Anything else that is going on with our situation is an after thought, and can be handle through court at a later time. Right now, her health issues have to be addressed.

 

[texastepmom]

thank you for the responses....

It's not screwing up any of my plans. And, I have no issue with our daughter having her time with her dad.

His regular visitation is from 10/6 to 10/9 then his vacation is from 10/9 to 10/16, then his regular visitation (weekend) would begin on 10/16 until 10/18.

So, she is with him from 10/6 until 10/18. The wording in the order states "no one period to exceed 7 days". I just understood that to mean he couldn't lump it all in with his regular visitation. I guess the only people who could explain the intentions of it are the mediators who wrote it that way.

I didn't deny his visitation, or his vacation. I would never deny my daughter her time with her dad. I just wasn't sure if what I was interpeting was correct or not.

your first post made it sound like it was an extra weekend, this one states from 10/6-10/18... what IS your custody arrangement? for him to get visits on a tues-friday is a little unusual...

 

[novemberbride]

He gets her every other Tuesday night through Friday night, and every other Friday night through Sunday night. He doesn't work, so the courts gave him a chunk during the week so our child wasn't sitting in daycare while I am working.

 

[gr8rn]

12 days in a row is a lot for a sick child who's father is disagreeing with her much needed surgery. Not to make OP worry more, but I would have a problem with her being away so long BEFORE the much needed surgery.
(remember the child has documented sleep apnea
I am wondering what does happen when the temporary emergency order goes into effect and how does OP get her child when he is exercising his 12 day visitation?