100 Mile Leash Law

[Bethany]

What is the name of your state? Michigan.
I have been divorced for four years. I have primary physical custody of my two children, and share joint legal custody with their father. I am now engaged, and my fiance has been offered a great job on the other side of the state. I know I'm not supposed to move further than 100 miles from my ex-husband. What we considered doing was to move closer to his new job, but still within that 100 mile radius. We would want to move to an area with good schools and opportunities for me to get a decent job as well.
I am worried that once my ex-husband hears of my plan to move with the children, he will do everything in his power to either stop me from moving, or take the children.
I am very nervous about this. I wonder if anyone has dealt with a similar situation and can give me an idea of what my ex-husband's recourse might entail.
Is it fair for him to expect me to live here, even years after we're divorced? I want to move on with my life, and I feel very depressed and nervous that even four years after we're divorced; he might still prevent me from doing that.

 

[Zephyr]

if you knew your ex was going to try to move away with the children wouldn't you do everything in your power to stop him? he is not the bad guy for wanting to remain close to his kids.

what does your court order say about the procedure you must follow when moving?

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Where did you get the 100 miles figure from?

 

[Bethany]

In Reply

I got the figures from the court order. It says that I have to notify the court, and my ex, if I want to change the legal residence of the kids. It also says that I can't go further than 100 miles without a court order.
And for the record, he IS a good dad. However, he's never had physical custody of the kids, and has never sought to have it. The 100 mile leash is meant to keep me from moving the kids too far from their dad. I don't want to keep the kids from their dad. That would be hurtful to them. I do, however, want to move on with my life. I want to make a fresh start in a new town. The kids would still see their dad every other weekend. Of course.

 

[MrsK]

I got the figures from the court order. It says that I have to notify the court, and my ex, if I want to change the legal residence of the kids. It also says that I can't go further than 100 miles without a court order.
And for the record, he IS a good dad. However, he's never had physical custody of the kids, and has never sought to have it. The 100 mile leash is meant to keep me from moving the kids too far from their dad. I don't want to keep the kids from their dad. That would be hurtful to them. I do, however, want to move on with my life. I want to make a fresh start in a new town. The kids would still see their dad every other weekend. Of course.

If your court order says you can move within 100 miles WITHOUT a court order (which is what it looks like to me....just that you have to notify them) cant you just move within 100 miles and go about the proper channels of notifying them? I mean Im sure he could still contest the move but it looks like you dont need to go to court to get an order, and maybe he wouldnt be too upset about 100 miles.

My husband's CO says 150 miles, the mom can move less than 150 miles without needing permission from the court, she just has to notify within 30 days....but she has to do the driving.

So it looks like you can probably move within 100 miles, but expect on doing the driving for exchanges with the children, since YOU are putting the distance between them.

 

[Bethany]

In Reply

Ideally, yes; I would be able to just go ahead and move. However, I am concerned that my ex-husband will contest the move. What he's done in the past is to hire a lawyer (which he knows full well I cannot afford to do) and attempt to thwart any moves that I make. I won't get into detail, but I will say that he is a very persistant man.
I am concerned that if I do try to move, he will petition the court for physical custody. What would a judge normally do in this situation? I am a good mother, there's no way he could prove me unfit. I always thought that in order to change physical custody, the non-custodial parent had to prove the custodial parent unfit. Am I wrong about this?
Financially, it would be in the best interest of the kids to make the move. It would also be detrimental for them to stay if it means their mother is absolutley miserable, and they have to live with her like that. Am I right?

 

[Zephyr]

Ideally, yes; I would be able to just go ahead and move. However, I am concerned that my ex-husband will contest the move. What he's done in the past is to hire a lawyer (which he knows full well I cannot afford to do) and attempt to thwart any moves that I make. I won't get into detail, but I will say that he is a very persistant man.

and that is his RIGHT to do when you are trying to move the children away from him,


I am concerned that if I do try to move, he will petition the court for physical custody. What would a judge normally do in this situation? I am a good mother, there's no way he could prove me unfit. I always thought that in order to change physical custody, the non-custodial parent had to prove the custodial parent unfit. Am I wrong about this?

yes, but it is hard to change established custody

Financially, it would be in the best interest of the kids to make the move. It would also be detrimental for them to stay if it means their mother is absolutley miserable, and they have to live with her like that. Am I right?

mom being happy, or pouting cause she couldn't move are not good arguements to move....make the notifications as stated by your order- the only way to ensure that he won't fight you on the issue of a move is to not move.....

 

[ceara19]

Is it fair for him to expect me to live here, even years after we're divorced?

Is it FAIR for you to put some other man's best interests above those of the children and their FATHER? When you have kids, YOUR needs and wants get put on the back burner until the children are grown.

 

[nextwife]

Is it FAIR for you to put some other man's best interests above those of the children and their FATHER? When you have kids, YOUR needs and wants get put on the back burner until the children are grown.

I agree. The career ambitions of a legal stranger are not MORE important than a child's need to have both of their parents actively involved in their EVERYDAY lives.

Just because you "want to move on" does not negate the fact that your children need and desrve their dad. As MORE than simply an EOW visitor!

You, BTW, ARE free to move anywhere you wish. It is the children who cannot move that distance. Hubby and I could make more money by moving to certain other markets, but money is NOT more important than my child's stability and the easy access we both have to her school and activities that living here provides us. Being able to pop into school in the middle of the day for a music program, or Daddy taking her to the Sock Hop tomorrow after school is worth far more to us. They are only kids ONCE, and we want ACCESS anytime anything is going on that we want to attend for her! A move by you takes away your kid's right to have Daddy at their regular functions.

 

[Bethany]

Okay

Are you people serious? Are you suggesting that I put my ex-husband's wishes ahead of my current (future) husband's? I never once suggested that I would prevent the children from seeing their father. I would never do that. However, I refuse to believe that it's in ANYBODY'S best interest for him to expect me to live in the same town in the same house with the same job and same financial rut because it's best for him.
At what point after a divorce, in your opinion, am I allowed to live for myself? At what point is it okay for me to expect to be able to live my life as I see fit, not what's most convenient for my ex-husband?
My children have never been deprived a relationship with their father and that's not what I'm suggesting.
I'm appalled that there are people out there that would honestly expect me to put my ex-husband before my current husband. No wonder you're all divorced.

And the best interest of the children is to be more financially secure, in a better school, in a family that is happy, not perpetually trapped.

And just so you know, the ex husband? Left me and the kids on Christmas Eve to go be with his new girlfriend. Yeah, what a noble guy. So worthy of your support.

 

[nextwife]

Are you people serious? Are you suggesting that I put my ex-husband's wishes ahead of my current (future) husband's? I never once suggested that I would prevent the children from seeing their father. I would never do that. However, I refuse to believe that it's in ANYBODY'S best interest for him to expect me to live in the same town in the same house with the same job and same financial rut because it's best for him.
At what point after a divorce, in your opinion, am I allowed to live for myself? At what point is it okay for me to expect to be able to live my life as I see fit, not what's most convenient for my ex-husband?
My children have never been deprived a relationship with their father and that's not what I'm suggesting.
I'm appalled that there are people out there that would honestly expect me to put my ex-husband before my current husband. No wonder you're all divorced.

And the best interest of the children is to be more financially secure, in a better school, in a family that is happy, not perpetually trapped.

And just so you know, the ex husband? Left me and the kids on Christmas Eve to go be with his new girlfriend. Yeah, what a noble guy. So worthy of your support.

Hon, I'm not only NOT divorced, but I'm married to the father of my child for ten years now. And I had hiim move HERE, because I had family obligations HERE. I take family very seriously. And when my kid goes to college is when I'd consider leaving the immediate area.

Not displacing kids and making them move is not "perpetually trapping them"

My husband loved me enough to understand that our marriage required us to live here. He KNEW that going into the relationship, before he married me.

 

[ceara19]

Are you people serious? Are you suggesting that I put my ex-husband's wishes ahead of my current (future) husband's? I never once suggested that I would prevent the children from seeing their father. I would never do that. However, I refuse to believe that it's in ANYBODY'S best interest for him to expect me to live in the same town in the same house with the same job and same financial rut because it's best for him.
At what point after a divorce, in your opinion, am I allowed to live for myself? At what point is it okay for me to expect to be able to live my life as I see fit, not what's most convenient for my ex-husband?
My children have never been deprived a relationship with their father and that's not what I'm suggesting.
I'm appalled that there are people out there that would honestly expect me to put my ex-husband before my current husband. No wonder you're all divorced.

And the best interest of the children is to be more financially secure, in a better school, in a family that is happy, not perpetually trapped.

And just so you know, the ex husband? Left me and the kids on Christmas Eve to go be with his new girlfriend. Yeah, what a noble guy. So worthy of your support.

No one expects you to put your ex husbands desires first. You are, however, required to put the children's FATHER ahead of some new man. The fact that they just happen to be the same person is incidental. No one ever implied that the ex husband should be more important to YOU then the new one. They are all telling you that the FATHER is more important to the CHILDREN then your new husband though.

You want to move, prove to the court why you feel that the children would be better off with more money, a better school, whatever other duma$$ excuses you want to throw in to try and excuse yourself from any responsibility to make sure the kids have access to their father. But a judge isn't going to agree since the childrens needs are being met just fine where they are now.

 

[Bethany]

Well Aren't You Special

If you're not divorced, you've never been through ANYTHING like what I'm going through, and I really don't want your advice.

Jesus. I hate it when people are so self-riteous.

I came on here because I wanted to know if anyone had been through an experience like mine. What I get is high & mighty martyrs who have never been where I am and have no idea what they're talking about.

I refuse to believe that wanting to be happy is a bad thing. Yes, I want to be happy! Is that so bad? I want my kids to be happy! I want my future husband to be happy! My ex? Eh, not my concern.

All I wanted to know was whether the 100 mile leash is a binding rule.

And I refuse to believe that making myself miserable is the best thing for my kids. Come on, people! How happy can kids be living with miserable parents?
This is like the mom that stays with the cheating husband for the kids. A good idea?
Umm. NO! Not in my opinion.

 

[nicetryadmin]

Are you people serious? Are you suggesting that I put my ex-husband's wishes ahead of my current (future) husband's?

No, but did you make your current hubby aware of your divorce decree and the language in it? That is your responsibility.

I never once suggested that I would prevent the children from seeing their father. I would never do that.

But the move WILL affect the relationship between children and dad. While your order says 100 miles "without a court order"...is it 100 HIGHWAY miles or a combination of both? You might think this is petty but think how long it takes to go 30 miles on a highway and 30 miles in the city.

However, I refuse to believe that it's in ANYBODY'S best interest for him to expect me to live in the same town in the same house with the same job and same financial rut because it's best for him.

This is NOT about you. It's about the children and their relationship with their father. YOU are not prohibited from moving. You could move to Guam if you wanted to. You just can't take the kids with you without his OK or the courts.

At what point after a divorce, in your opinion, am I allowed to live for myself?
At what point is it okay for me to expect to be able to live my life as I see fit, not what's most convenient for my ex-husband?

Again, this is NOT about you. It's about the children. You are allowed to live your life as you see fit. BUT, because you are the custodial parent, you also accepted certain responsibilities and restrictions to have that "title." Perhaps it's time to switch roles.

My children have never been deprived a relationship with their father and that's not what I'm suggesting.

No, but you would be impairing it.

I'm appalled that there are people out there that would honestly expect me to put my ex-husband before my current husband.

No, you're just pissed because you're not getting the answers you wanted.

No wonder you're all divorced.

Umm...I am not divorced. So you can shove that comment up your a**.

And the best interest of the children is to be more financially secure, in a better school, in a family that is happy, not perpetually trapped.

Even more reason that you should become the NCP and let dad have residential custody.

And just so you know, the ex husband? Left me and the kids on Christmas Eve to go be with his new girlfriend. Yeah, what a noble guy.

And that's irrelevant.

So worthy of your support.

You're welcome.

 

[BadDecision]

No one expects you to put your ex husbands desires first. You are, however, required to put the children's FATHER ahead of some new man. The fact that they just happen to be the same person is incidental. No one ever implied that the ex husband should be more important to YOU then the new one. They are all telling you that the FATHER is more important to the CHILDREN then your new husband though.

You want to move, prove to the court why you feel that the children would be better off with more money, a better school, whatever other duma$$ excuses you want to throw in to try and excuse yourself from any responsibility to make sure the kids have access to their father. But a judge isn't going to agree since the childrens needs are being met just fine where they are now.

Actually, she is not required to put the children's father ahead of her new man. She is required to follow the CO.

If you are moving, notify the court and the ex, like it states in your order. If he wants to fight you in court, he has every right to do that. But you need to follow the CO and go ahead in a legal manner, not an emotional one.

I beleive everyone here is trying to point out that it will be hard to show the court how this will be in your CHILDRENS best interest to move. You can, however, try to prove it.
Everyone here is trying to explain to you that this is difficult, and they are making points your ex's attorney will throw at you. So, eveything they are telling you that is irrelevant (your new hubby's future, your job, etc.) you may not want to bring up as your REASON. Fair or not, that is the court system.

You really never know how the judge is going to decide, but since you have not disrupted or tried to limit the childrens relationship with their father, you may have a shot, thoguh it may be small. It is up to you to pursue.

I would notify the court and ex, see what he is willing to do as far as taking you to court. Then you may be able to make a more informed decision on how to proceed for yourself and your kids.

Just my 2 cents