Interpretation of summer parenting time

[proud_parent]

OK, thinking out loud for a moment...

Dad made a good start by declaring the 5th weekend in May as his school-year vacation time and by notifying Mom within the prescribed time frame. That strengthens his argument that a willful refusal by Mom to provide kiddo for visitation this weekend would be an act of contempt.

I'm curious about this, however:

Dad hasn't exercised any of the school-year vacation time -- Mom blocked the spring break vacation, another vacation to just p/u DD a few hours early on Fri that would be DH's normal weekend to go to our church's semi-annual conference (saying DD would be beyond upset to miss a soccer game), and I think there was 1 more. Dad has always provided at least 30 days' notice.

If Dad is claiming THIS weekend as his school-year parenting time, what reason did he give for requesting those other times? IIRC, you had another thread discussing the interpretation of the "uninterrupted vacation time" portion of the order, and there was some debate. Did Dad end up interpreting this as two separate vacations of up to one week apiece, and spring break/5th weekend May are the two vacations he chose?

If Dad has documentation to show that he has made every effort to follow the court order regarding notification AND to accomodate DD's activities / Mom's vacation in chosing his dates, then he may have a case for contempt if he shows up this weekend and Mom refuses. Depending on how Mom answers, it may be sufficient for a finding of contempt, but that's a tough call.

However, there may be other benefits of Dad pursuing a contempt action at this time. First, it demonstrates that Dad is willing to call Mom's bluff and take it to court rather than continuing to allow her carte blanche to approve / deny his proposed parenting time schedules. Second, it may (if Mom is smart) encourage her compliance with the order in the short run until the contempt motion is heard.

 

[wileybunch]

Update: DH spoke to counselor and set an appt to meet with him Thursday re: schedule issues. Counselor feels that the triangulation needs to be removed so that's why he wants Mom out of it and have Dad and daughter work out schedule. Dad said he doesn't think that's a good idea, Mom will just put the squeeze on the DD like she already did when they worked out a workaround to the birthday weekend and the kids cave under pressure from Mom.

DH set an appt to talk to counselor alone, but he thinks it's a bad idea to put 13yo in the "driver's seat" if that's the philosophy here (which is Mom's philosophy). I think it's a terrible idea. I don't see what's to be gained by putting DD and DH into a room w/a counselor to hammer out a summer schedule when DD is going into this thinking she only has to go on weekend parenting times like during school year. She totally parroted Mom's views in the summer schedule she wrote up and sent to DH. She already has the schedule Dad drew up that left all the dates in place Mom said DD was not available (I can post it if anyone wants to see what it looks like -- I cannot imagine a judge taking any issue with how he did the time share).

 

[mommyof4]

Okaaaayyy.....

The counselor is partially correct. The triangulation needs to stop. Unfortunately, apparently he skipped class the day they taught 'no playing munckin in the middle'. The one that needs to be removed from the triangle is DD. Period.

 

[wileybunch]

If Dad is claiming THIS weekend as his school-year parenting time, what reason did he give for requesting those other times? IIRC, you had another thread discussing the interpretation of the "uninterrupted vacation time" portion of the order, and there was some debate. Did Dad end up interpreting this as two separate vacations of up to one week apiece, and spring break/5th weekend May are the two vacations he chose?

From same clause which OG said can be interpreted as two one-week vacations. But, Mom didn't allow any so far so he hasn't used any time.
And, Mom doesn't deny he has the time, she simply says too bad she has other plans. For Spring Break, they settled with deciding they will alternate who has spring break every year, Mom taking this year, after it was clear Mom would not back down. While they "worked it out" that way, that was a creative way DH approached that, but it was otherwise going to be a contempt issue. It remains to be seen if DH will get spring break next year, it will need to get into an order.

If Dad has documentation to show that he has made every effort to follow the court order regarding notification AND to accomodate DD's activities / Mom's vacation in chosing his dates, then he may have a case for contempt if he shows up this weekend and Mom refuses. Depending on how Mom answers, it may be sufficient for a finding of contempt, but that's a tough call.

I think he has.

However, there may be other benefits of Dad pursuing a contempt action at this time. First, it demonstrates that Dad is willing to call Mom's bluff and take it to court rather than continuing to allow her carte blanche to approve / deny his proposed parenting time schedules. Second, it may (if Mom is smart) encourage her compliance with the order in the short run until the contempt motion is heard.

The judge made it clear to DH not to wait to return to court if there were more violations. I think it would be a mistake to let it go on any longer given all the skirting the edges of contempt to outright contempt that's gone on since last contempt hearing to let it go on any longer. The judge would consider that accommodating the contempt since DH knows now how to obtain relief for that and if he doesn't choose to, it must not be a problem. Mom has kicked around the summer schedule for so long, not trying to work out anything but denying the summer time in total that she hasn't allowed time for DD to make plans with friends for things to do on DH's time or for us to make plans that include her. Heck, she could be making arrangements to earn some $$ babysitting for people out our way this summer if she wasn't in such limbo!

 

[wileybunch]

Okaaaayyy.....

The counselor is partially correct. The triangulation needs to stop. Unfortunately, apparently he skipped class the day they taught 'no playing munckin in the middle'. The one that needs to be removed from the triangle is DD. Period.

He's right to remove Mom from the triangulation of DD's relationship with Dad, but not on following the court order. Like you said, THERE it's appropriate to remove DD from that triangulation. Well put.

 

[StampGirl]

Okaaaayyy.....

The counselor is partially correct. The triangulation needs to stop. Unfortunately, apparently he skipped class the day they taught 'no playing munckin in the middle'. The one that needs to be removed from the triangle is DD. Period.

EXACTLY!!!

I would question this counselor seriously if he/she thinks that Mom is the one who needs to be removed from this discussion.

I can't even imagine ANY family professional even remotely suggesting putting a 13yr old in charge of visitation schedules. That is utterly silly and ridiculous.

Time to find a new counselor Wiley.

 

[wileybunch]

EXACTLY!!!

I would question this counselor seriously if he/she thinks that Mom is the one who needs to be removed from this discussion.

I can't even imagine ANY family professional even remotely suggesting putting a 13yr old in charge of visitation schedules. That is utterly silly and ridiculous.

Time to find a new counselor Wiley.

DH just called. He is going to call his ex and let her know of Thu appt time. It's the only time the counselor had this week. He'll let her know they can talk about the summer schedule then and see if there's any dates to be moved around and hammer something out. He'll let the counselor know his ex will be there. DH is not going to involve 13yo, period. If she ends up grumpy when she comes for her time and DH feels like they could use a trip to the counselor, then he'll schedule time for her or them, but he's not going to have DD be a proxy for Mom following CO.

I am very disappointed in the counselor if he truly expected that 13yo should be in driver's seat. I'm still hoping he was trying to support DH's side and run interference with DD, not that he was going to let 13yo make the decision of how much parenting time was with Dad.

 

[proud_parent]

Time to find a new counselor Wiley.

I'm afraid I'm inclined to agree.

In the therapist's defense, he could be responding to DD's expressed feelings, perhaps having to do with being caught in the middle of her parents' conflicts. Advocating that a teenager be allowed to participate meaningfully in some aspects of decisionmaking sounds like a typical textbook response.

However, it should be emphasized that this would not be the first or the last time a family counselor has suggested an action that could bite the parent in the butt in family court.



BTW, that was another point made by the judge during the 10-minute harangue that I mentioned earlier. It is etched in my memory forever, and too good not to share, as it seems to apply so well in this scenario:

"You DO NOT have the authority to refuse, restrict, modify, or interfere with [NCP's] exercise of a visitation order. [Dr. Whatsername] DOES NOT have that authority. This COURT has that authority. I PERSONALLY have that authority. I ALSO have the authority to sentence you to jail for ignoring this Court's order, as well as the authority to reverse custody. Follow the order, or expect the exercise of that authority."

Talk about "shock and awe".

 

[wileybunch]

Advocating that a teenager be allowed to participate meaningfully in some aspects of decisionmaking sounds like a typical textbook response.

I'm thinking that's in there and that he has good intentions. He is not of the school of thought that kids should do as kids please. He does teach parents to let things roll off their back when kids get angry w/them and I know he's been teaching the kids to own their own anger and teaching them about anger in general. They are always blaming DH for this or that, basically when they don't get their way (or their Mom's way). But I know he is not into laissez-fair parenting or anything like that.

BTW, that was another point made by the judge during the 10-minute harangue that I mentioned earlier.

He sounds just.like the judge DH had for his contempt hearing last year. Total breath of fresh air. I hope he doesn't leave this part of family court any time soon. We have too many FC judges here that go this way and that depending on dramatics and have a hard time distilling down the issues, like they are still learning how to be judges and get too caught up in the soap opera.

 

[TinkerBelleLuvr]

If the counseling session doesn't go well, you may want to schedule that little hearing with the judge. Hopefully, if anything, you have learned to document EVERYTHING.

I had a major fiasco last summer's end. It appears that our little meeting with the judge worked and that everyone (including me) will be well-behaved. It may take another trip in front of the judge to really get this across.

And hopefully, they take DD out of the middle of this. I understand why she is there, but no 13 yo should be there IMHO.

 

[wileybunch]

Well, what can you do when the NCP is part of the problem? You've heard about what a manipulative person the CP is, how she's purposely and willfully trying to push Dad out of kids' lives, has 3 older kids 17.5+ totally alienated so just 13yo left. In a joint counseling session, counselor said you can't force the kid to do what she doesn't want to do and if she's put in front of a judge and tells him she doesn't want to come for 1/2 the summer, judge won't make her. Both of those statements are totally false. Unbelievable. She just turned 13. This judge would have a fit if he knew what Mom's been pulling. And, DH/NCP agrees DD should have a say. I can't articulate any more why opening that pandora's box is wrong on so many levels. Also, Mom admitted she's been telling the kids they shouldn't come here for more time than just the EOW because their dad will hurt them (ie. physically). It's never happened in the 9 years he's had visitation, but she wants the kids to believe it. Counselor told her she has no proof of that. Ya think? Oh boy. DH said he doesn't believe she will let him have child this weekend and he doesn't know that he wants to push it. Her contempt of the orders is immense. She said she believes it's up to her what "extra" time DH has. She's wrong. It's spelled out in CO.

I think DH deserves the purgatory that goes on b/c he doesn't stand up at the right time for the right reasons. I'm so done with this, it's not even funny.

I've often felt his kids will choose his ex over him b/c she's a warrior. She may be morally and legally wrong day in and day out, but she fights like a beast and the kids know she's a good one to lasso themselves to. DH is obviously too weak. Right or wrong, kids need to know a parent will be there through thick and thin and not insisting that his presence in their life be as the court order has which is really just standard NCP visitation shows that he is more concerned w/himself than his kids.

I may regret posting this, but my feelings are raw and if there are spouses of NCPs in my shoes, you may relate to this. And, if you're an NCP that needs to grow a pair like my DH, know that you can lose your "future" family when you don't stand up and be a man/father to your "first" family.

 

[Bloopy]

And, DH/NCP agrees DD should have a say. I can't articulate any more why opening that pandora's box is wrong on so many levels. Also, Mom admitted she's been telling the kids they shouldn't come here for more time than just the EOW because their dad will hurt them (ie. physically). It's never happened in the 9 years he's had visitation, but she wants the kids to believe it. Counselor told her she has no proof of that. Ya think? Oh boy. DH said he doesn't believe she will let him have child this weekend and he doesn't know that he wants to push it. Her contempt of the orders is immense. She said she believes it's up to her what "extra" time DH has. She's wrong. It's spelled out in CO.

I think DH deserves the purgatory that goes on b/c he doesn't stand up at the right time for the right reasons. I'm so done with this, it's not even funny.

I've often felt his kids will choose his ex over him b/c she's a warrior. She may be morally and legally wrong day in and day out, but she fights like a beast and the kids know she's a good one to lasso themselves to. DH is obviously too weak. Right or wrong, kids need to know a parent will be there through thick and thin and not insisting that his presence in their life be as the court order has which is really just standard NCP visitation shows that he is more concerned w/himself than his kids.

I may regret posting this, but my feelings are raw and if there are spouses of NCPs in my shoes, you may relate to this. And, if you're an NCP that needs to grow a pair like my DH, know that you can lose your "future" family when you don't stand up and be a man/father to your "first" family.

Wiley, in any way possible, you need to take some space from this.

Dad, is chosing to be Dad in his meek manner. If you force him forward it will be contrived. Mom and thie kids will smell it.

That family dynamic is what it is. His choices shouldn't be affected by your respect for him.

 

[proud_parent]

I may regret posting this, but my feelings are raw and if there are spouses of NCPs in my shoes, you may relate to this. And, if you're an NCP that needs to grow a pair like my DH, know that you can lose your "future" family when you don't stand up and be a man/father to your "first" family.

Wiley, my dear, I've been in your shoes. I used to harbor such disdain for my DH when he wouldn't stand up to the ex when we were engaged. We went to premarital counseling, we knew it would be a bumpy road, and that my attitude at the time would help nothing.

In my own time, I came to see that my DH wasn't standing up because he had been knocked to the canvas so many times. I realized he needed someone in his corner to encourage him to pull himself up. But that I would never be the one to fight his fight.


Listen to Bloopy. What she's said is very wise.

 

[wileybunch]

Wiley, in any way possible, you need to take some space from this.

Dad, is chosing to be Dad in his meek manner. If you force him forward it will be contrived. Mom and thie kids will smell it.

That family dynamic is what it is. His choices shouldn't be affected by your respect for him.

I agree w/this. The thing is he isn't making choices in a vacuum, obviously. I have choices, too. We have gone through hell b/c of his ex, b/c that's what she's about, but it's been that much worse b/c he hasn't fought the right fight at the right time. It sucks to be within fallout distance when yoked to that.

 

[LdiJ]

I agree w/this. The thing is he isn't making choices in a vacuum, obviously. I have choices, too. We have gone through hell b/c of his ex, b/c that's what she's about, but it's been that much worse b/c he hasn't fought the right fight at the right time. It sucks to be within fallout distance when yoked to that.

In my approximately 14 years of participating on forums like these I have seen MANY stepparents express the kind of frustration you are expressing here.

The best advice that I can give you when you are feeling this way, is to step back and step out of the situation between your DH, the ex, and the child(ren).

He isn't going to change. He may even feel that he is handling things the right way and all you are going to do is make yourself crazy trying to make him see where he is wrong.

I do agree with him in one respect. I personally think that its important to give teenagers a limited amount of "say" in regards to visitation....and in regards to their life in general. I think it breeds healthier adult relationships, and sometimes even healthier teenage relatonships too. Almost no one on this particular forum agrees with me on that issue, but my observations of real life are what has led me to that conclusion.