Custody

[not2cleverRed]

Ohh and no it's not an over night camp it's only during the day

If Dad works days, and camp you might be able to convince him to let the boy go, at least for part of the summer... especially if you pay for it. His new squeeze might be available for "free" childcare while he's at work, but she is legally nothing to your son.

Given that your court orders are relatively new, and that the judge dictated this, not you... I'd follow the judge's directives, and let Dad go to the effort to file for the change. He has to come up with a change of circumstance.

Judge's come up with orders like this when one party annoys them. (VOE. I've got odd court orders - very few holidays mentioned, and half of those are "as the parties agree".)

Dad is unlikely to get a personality transplant. He will likely continue to antagonize judges.

There is a reason why judges rule the way the do. If Dad takes you back to court, and you go before the same judge, following the judges orders will not be held against you. Nor will it be held against you if you make (reasonable) deviation from a court order. As in, once in a while, if Dad wants extra time for a special event. Or Dad's in the area and it's convenient for both of you. An hour and a half drive makes it less likely that such convenient occasions will happen. Let reason be your guide, not fear.

 

[CTU]

If Dad works days, and camp you might be able to convince him to let the boy go, at least for part of the summer... especially if you pay for it. His new squeeze might be available for "free" childcare while he's at work, but she is legally nothing to your son.

Given that your court orders are relatively new, and that the judge dictated this, not you... I'd follow the judge's directives, and let Dad go to the effort to file for the change. He has to come up with a change of circumstance.

Judge's come up with orders like this when one party annoys them. (VOE. I've got odd court orders - very few holidays mentioned, and half of those are "as the parties agree".)

Dad is unlikely to get a personality transplant. He will likely continue to antagonize judges.

There is a reason why judges rule the way the do. If Dad takes you back to court, and you go before the same judge, following the judges orders will not be held against you. Nor will it be held against you if you make (reasonable) deviation from a court order. As in, once in a while, if Dad wants extra time for a special event. Or Dad's in the area and it's convenient for both of you. An hour and a half drive makes it less likely that such convenient occasions will happen. Let reason be your guide, not fear.

Of course, if Dads were treated the same way Moms tend to be treated in court, most wouldn't take such an attitude when they're asked - nay, told - that they've suddenly become an optional (and less important) part of their child's life. Becoming a second-class citizen in your own child's life is not an easy thing to accept.

(Yes, I'm generalizing. But unfortunately my generalization is also the truth)

 

[LdiJ]

Of course, if Dads were treated the same way Moms tend to be treated in court, most wouldn't take such an attitude when they're asked - nay, told - that they've suddenly become an optional (and less important) part of their child's life. Becoming a second-class citizen in your own child's life is not an easy thing to accept.

(Yes, I'm generalizing. But unfortunately my generalization is also the truth)

I think that your generalization is not so general anymore. I know of a lot of dads with primary custody or shared parenting with close to a 50/50 timeshare if not a true 50/50 timeshare.

Unfortunately, I have also known too many young men who have shown their backsides to judges as well. From my own observations, and not just with family law, there are a greater percentage of young men who show their backsides to authority than there are young women. Young women tend to have a greater percentage of drama llamas than young men however.

The bottom line is that when divorce or separation/never married happens, neither parent gets to live full time with their child(ren) anymore. Its hard to swallow for anyone. Its particularly hard to swallow for the person who has been the primary caretaker of the child. ANY parent who does not get primary custody is going to feel marginalized. Many people these days are promoting 50/50, but I have personally never seen a case where it actually worked, for the best interest of the children, on a long term basis. I know one family that made it work until their kids became teens, and then it all fell apart. Every other family I know that tried it had miserably unhappy children.

 

[Ohiogal]

Of course, if Dads were treated the same way Moms tend to be treated in court, most wouldn't take such an attitude when they're asked - nay, told - that they've suddenly become an optional (and less important) part of their child's life. Becoming a second-class citizen in your own child's life is not an easy thing to accept.

(Yes, I'm generalizing. But unfortunately my generalization is also the truth)

I totally agree. And am deleting my pms so...

 

[CTU]

I totally agree. And am deleting my pms so...

Haha I was about to ask you to clean out your box

 

[CTU]

I think that your generalization is not so general anymore. I know of a lot of dads with primary custody or shared parenting with close to a 50/50 timeshare if not a true 50/50 timeshare.

Unfortunately, I have also known too many young men who have shown their backsides to judges as well. From my own observations, and not just with family law, there are a greater percentage of young men who show their backsides to authority than there are young women. Young women tend to have a greater percentage of drama llamas than young men however.

The bottom line is that when divorce or separation/never married happens, neither parent gets to live full time with their child(ren) anymore. Its hard to swallow for anyone. Its particularly hard to swallow for the person who has been the primary caretaker of the child. ANY parent who does not get primary custody is going to feel marginalized. Many people these days are promoting 50/50, but I have personally never seen a case where it actually worked, for the best interest of the children, on a long term basis. I know one family that made it work until their kids became teens, and then it all fell apart. Every other family I know that tried it had miserably unhappy children.

Nothing you have said here surprises me

 

[Ohiogal]

I think that your generalization is not so general anymore. I know of a lot of dads with primary custody or shared parenting with close to a 50/50 timeshare if not a true 50/50 timeshare.

Unfortunately, I have also known too many young men who have shown their backsides to judges as well. From my own observations, and not just with family law, there are a greater percentage of young men who show their backsides to authority than there are young women. Young women tend to have a greater percentage of drama llamas than young men however.

The bottom line is that when divorce or separation/never married happens, neither parent gets to live full time with their child(ren) anymore. Its hard to swallow for anyone. Its particularly hard to swallow for the person who has been the primary caretaker of the child. ANY parent who does not get primary custody is going to feel marginalized. Many people these days are promoting 50/50, but I have personally never seen a case where it actually worked, for the best interest of the children, on a long term basis. I know one family that made it work until their kids became teens, and then it all fell apart. Every other family I know that tried it had miserably unhappy children.

It is though. I know lots of courts and attorneys that have excused mothers for less than perfect attempts at cooperation or coparenting or even facilitating visitation because they are mom and they have other children and ... It can go one... The law says otherwise but it does still happen. I just filed a brief re a judge that was anti dad and it violated several rules of procedure, evidence, and rules of law and such but.... guess what.... ruled against dad and treated me as though I didn't know my place even though I quoted the rules and the judge ignored me and the rules... it hit 27 pages only from editing... it could have gone another 10 to 15 but it wasn't allowed to do so per the rules.

 

[Ohiogal]

Haha I was about to ask you to clean out your box

My PM box is cleared out. I still get PMS however. DAMN. Can I do something about that with the delete feature? LMAO. But yeah I did.

 

[LdiJ]

It is though. I know lots of courts and attorneys that have excused mothers for less than perfect attempts at cooperation or coparenting or even facilitating visitation because they are mom and they have other children and ... It can go one... The law says otherwise but it does still happen. I just filed a brief re a judge that was anti dad and it violated several rules of procedure, evidence, and rules of law and such but.... guess what.... ruled against dad and treated me as though I didn't know my place even though I quoted the rules and the judge ignored me and the rules... it hit 27 pages only from editing... it could have gone another 10 to 15 but it wasn't allowed to do so per the rules.

There are also judges that are pro dad as well. There will always be judges who do not do their jobs properly, because they are human beings, just like everyone else. I see huge changes in the way things are happening. Some of them I happen to think are not very good. Others am I happy to see happen.