LdiJ
Senior Member
Dad was the one to suggest that they wait until after the restraining order was dropped to go "school shopping".Humusluvr is quite correct: What matters is the court order. It states exactly what you and Dad were to do, and gave a date to do it.
You were "waiting for the RO to be dropped," eh? Well, so was he. And IF you two were following the CO, and IF you didn't *report* him as violating the RO had the two of you gone looking at schools, WHAT would be the huuuuge problem of going in March?
same as aboveThe problem? Is you. You are the one who has refused to follow the CO. You sure knew how to follow the RO, but couldn't bend to the NEW court order?
Huh, I don't get this one at all. If you received a list of schools that someone was proposing that your child attend, wouldn't you look them up on the net to see where they were located and to get information about them? That seems like the totally normal thing to do.The first thing you did upon receiving Dad's invite to go school shopping was to check how far the schools were from YOUR house? That shows that you had/have no intention of following the new CO.
Again, I don't see where you are coming from here. In general, if a child is doing well at a school, and is happy there, the general consensus is that the child should not have to change schools.The new CO was clearly designed to set up a 50/50 split of daughter's time, with consideration given for driving for each parent. That's why it was to be equidistant.
But you have tried to make it so that daughter goes to school ONLY in YOUR area.
IF the CO was taking daughter's wishes into account, it wouldn't ORDER a CHANGE of schools, now would it? The decision to change was made IN the new CO.
I don't see this boding well for you.
In any case, most of the schools that dad proposed were either close to him, or close to neither of them. That doesn't exactly make dad as someone trying to follow the court order.