Trial outcome - please help

[CJane]

Do you have any contact with Dad's family? Are his "wealthy" parents really going to "allow" the children to be subjected to the level of poverty that you're describing before they expect their son to behave in a reasonable manner?

I realize he's a grown man, but if Mommy is controlling the purse strings, then Mommy is controlling HIM.

It's worth a shot.

 

[killerzoey]

Do you have any contact with Dad's family? Are his "wealthy" parents really going to "allow" the children to be subjected to the level of poverty that you're describing before they expect their son to behave in a reasonable manner?

I realize he's a grown man, but if Mommy is controlling the purse strings, then Mommy is controlling HIM.

It's worth a shot.

CJane, that is really my only shot the way I see it. But he has slandered me successfully to her and anyone else who would listen. Said outright untrue things to gain her support and she has funded his whole legal battle. She is an enabler and all he has to do is act like the henpecked man and she hates whatever woman did this to her poor innocent boy...forever. Even to the point of financial punishment in the case of past women. This has never involved grandchildren before (he has no others) so I don't really know where her loyalty will play out here. I just hate to drag the kids to the point of bad living conditions to convince her that all is not well here. He tells her all I need to do is blink and I could get a great job, I have this great earning potential, yada yada, and she buys it. That and so many other things. But if I try to set the record straight at the moment about everything because emotions are just too ramped up. She is actually visiting right now for a week, and perhaps we'll get a chance to talk. But last time she came out she basically blamed me for everything and it was like he was talking through her. I never ever cheated on him or even considered it in our short marriage. But he has her convinced of so many things and she loses all objectivity when it comes to her son.

 

[filledeplage]

Talk about traumatic for the kids... the shelter would be better than that option. Both are under school age, one is 1.5. There is no way I would do that to them.

I did say you would not like the option. From what you have posted, you are not going to get a change to the order. If his mom is just giving him money when he requests, I imagine that would not count as income anymore than a stepparents funding of their spouse would (I don't know this, but that makes sense). You just keep bringing up the same information over and over, but none of it changes the outcome. The judge did not rule in a biased way; you and your lawyer just failed to prove your case to him.

Talking to the grandmother sounds like a really good option but I advise that you not discuss your relationship with the children's father at all since that seems to enrage her. Just discuss the children's needs.

 

[killerzoey]

I did say you would not like the option. From what you have posted, you are not going to get a change to the order. If his mom is just giving him money when he requests, I imagine that would not count as income anymore than a stepparents funding of their spouse would (I don't know this, but that makes sense). You just keep bringing up the same information over and over, but none of it changes the outcome. The judge did not rule in a biased way; you and your lawyer just failed to prove your case to him.

Talking to the grandmother sounds like a really good option but I advise that you not discuss your relationship with the children's father at all since that seems to enrage her. Just discuss the children's needs.

I understand that my lawyer and I failed to prove my case.

Which is why the purpose of this OP was to gain insight into how to present the information to the judge.

I don't think I'm the one losing sight of the point of my post.

I really didn't want to rehash everything about my case here, just talk about how to go pro se for this next round. I need to make my case about what is going to become of the kids based on his temporary orders.

 

[CJane]

I understand that my lawyer and I failed to prove my case.

Which is why the purpose of this OP was to gain insight into how to present the information to the judge.

I don't think I'm the one losing sight of the point of my post.

I really didn't want to rehash everything about my case here, just talk about how to go pro se for this next round. I need to make my case about what is going to become of the kids based on his temporary orders.

Is Dad exercising his time with the kids?

What you'll have to prove to the court is...

1) That you have made every reasonable effort to obtain employment. You need to be able to show that you've sent out X number of resumes, that there is NOTHING available in your industry in HI, and in fact nothing available to you on the island on which you live.

2) That Dad is NOT currently providing adequate care for the children.

3) That the ONLY way the children's needs can be met is by relocating to CA (or wherever).

The problem you're going to have is that if the kids stay in HI and you are forced to relocate in order to survive, you, your ex and probably the judge, know that Grandma will continue to funnel money to the ex. And so he WILL be able to financially support them even if he never gets a job.

Honestly? I think your chances of success pro se, given what's currently happening, are slim. The judge doesn't think it's in the kids' best interests for them to leave, and he apparently has issues with your credibility regarding the financial situation - I don't know why, none of us do.

 

[killerzoey]

Is Dad exercising his time with the kids?

What you'll have to prove to the court is...

1) That you have made every reasonable effort to obtain employment. You need to be able to show that you've sent out X number of resumes, that there is NOTHING available in your industry in HI, and in fact nothing available to you on the island on which you live.

2) That Dad is NOT currently providing adequate care for the children.

3) That the ONLY way the children's needs can be met is by relocating to CA (or wherever).

The problem you're going to have is that if the kids stay in HI and you are forced to relocate in order to survive, you, your ex and probably the judge, know that Grandma will continue to funnel money to the ex. And so he WILL be able to financially support them even if he never gets a job.

Honestly? I think your chances of success pro se, given what's currently happening, are slim. The judge doesn't think it's in the kids' best interests for them to leave, and he apparently has issues with your credibility regarding the financial situation - I don't know why, none of us do.

Thank you, CJane. Yes, Dad is exercising his time with the kids.

 

[filledeplage]

I understand that my lawyer and I failed to prove my case.

Which is why the purpose of this OP was to gain insight into how to present the information to the judge.

I don't think I'm the one losing sight of the point of my post.

I really didn't want to rehash everything about my case here, just talk about how to go pro se for this next round. I need to make my case about what is going to become of the kids based on his temporary orders.

I am not losing sight of the point of your post, I just do not understand what you think you will be able to do to change the judge's mind that your lawyer did not already do. Unless you can provide additional and far more reliable proof of actual income for your children's father, you will not be able to prove that a change in financial circumstance has occured since the temporary orders.

The judge ordered shared custody, which tells me he does not want the children leaving their father. Which is why I made my first post. I cannot see any other options. Parents moving to provide better for their children is not uncommon, even if it means moving from the children. Yes, I have not fully memorized your posting history, but you are the one that wants to move the children away from their dad. If the judge wants you to have shared custody, I do not see him agreeing that it is less traumatic for the kids to be seperated from their father than from you. You would have as much visitation if you moved without them as he would have if you moved them from him.

In your situation, you are the one that is currently not able to provide enough and needs to move to be able to do so, but you are not showing a good enough reason for the children to move with you (atleast not in the judge's opinion). You just seem to be between a rock and a hard place with no way around either. I am not meaning to come across as harsh; I imagine this is extremely painful for you.

 

[killerzoey]

I am not losing sight of the point of your post, I just do not understand what you think you will be able to do to change the judge's mind that your lawyer did not already do. Unless you can provide additional and far more reliable proof of actual income for your children's father, you will not be able to prove that a change in financial circumstance has occured since the temporary orders.

The judge ordered shared custody, which tells me he does not want the children leaving their father. Which is why I made my first post. I cannot see any other options. Parents moving to provide better for their children is not uncommon, even if it means moving from the children. Yes, I have not fully memorized your posting history, but you are the one that wants to move the children away from their dad. If the judge wants you to have shared custody, I do not see him agreeing that it is less traumatic for the kids to be seperated from their father than from you. You would have as much visitation if you moved without them as he would have if you moved them from him.

In your situation, you are the one that is currently not able to provide enough and needs to move to be able to do so, but you are not showing a good enough reason for the children to move with you (atleast not in the judge's opinion). You just seem to be between a rock and a hard place with no way around either. I am not meaning to come across as harsh; I imagine this is extremely painful for you.

Well, that last part is surely true.

I have a hard time understanding why stability is considered so important in terms of proximity to Dad, but the stability of Mom is not given as much weight.

I am the one who has cared for these kids since they were born, I am the one who has provided the emotional support and guidance for them. Why is my ability to continue to do this for their sake not given more importance? I guess I was looking for some sort of theme in law that would help me buttress up the negative impact of staying in terms of how it will erode the children's central support - me.

 

[InsaneJane]

I feel for you, being between a rock and a hard place.
If you move to Ca, and take the job, and share the children 50/50: don't forget to take into account that your ex has the right to take you back to court to re adjust the child support using your new income.

 

[killerzoey]

I feel for you, being between a rock and a hard place.
If you move to Ca, and take the job, and share the children 50/50: don't forget to take into account that your ex has the right to take you back to court to re adjust the child support using your new income.

I suppose I hadn't thought of that...thanks. Still, whatever it ends up being, having access to my industry offers the only hope I see at this time.

 

[CJane]

I suppose I hadn't thought of that...thanks. Still, whatever it ends up being, having access to my industry offers the only hope I see at this time.

You might have to choose between access to your industry and access to your children. I'm sorry, but that might just be what it shakes out to. Judges tend to err on the side of NOT granting relocation if the remaining parent is fit, and dad is fit.

If you want to take the kids to CA, you've pretty much GOT to get Dad to agree to a schedule that works...

 

[killerzoey]

You might have to choose between access to your industry and access to your children. I'm sorry, but that might just be what it shakes out to. Judges tend to err on the side of NOT granting relocation if the remaining parent is fit, and dad is fit.

If you want to take the kids to CA, you've pretty much GOT to get Dad to agree to a schedule that works...

Well that's not gonna happen (the agreement thing). I will always choose access to my children, of course. I will stay near them and do whatever I can. But that does not mean I think this existence is best for them and it is frustrating.

I am planning on going back to school and getting my teaching credential so I can hopefully have stable work here on the island (as well as the same schedule as the girls). It's just I have no plan for NOW, know what I mean? Anything I can see is a few years down the line. I know I'll pull through, but it sucks that this situation has to affect the kids like it probably will.

 

[killerzoey]

Anything to lose?

I just got an e-mail from STBX requesting that I phone his attorney and try to settle this case.

What is the danger, if any, in doing this?

 

[Ohiogal]

I just got an e-mail from STBX requesting that I phone his attorney and try to settle this case.

What is the danger, if any, in doing this?

Little. Negotiation is NOT admissible HOWEVER you need to be careful of what you state that is not negotiation.

 

[killerzoey]

Little. Negotiation is NOT admissible HOWEVER you need to be careful of what you state that is not negotiation.

Yikes that sounds tricky. Where do I draw the line between negotiation and not? She is a VERY good lawyer and will smile and act nice and slaughter me later.