ROFR and your Divorce Decree.
Question for those of you with ROFR in your decrees: how's it worded? BM is very assertive that their decree has it. I've gone over said decree with a fine tooth comb, and can't find anything that would indicate a right of first refusal. (We're in Texas, and as far as I know, Texas isn't an implied ROFR state.)
Thoughts?
~Odd
- OddGardner's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
Comments
it's in dh decree, but
it's in dh decree, but neither we or bm uses it..... if we have something to do on our weekend, we get mil to watch them NEVER ask her first...... careful with it, she may want it there so she can track how many more days she gets skids to increase cs....
What the heck is
What the heck is ROFR?
___________________________________________________________________
Rome wasn't built in a day, and my marriage won't be either.
Wait, is it right of first
Wait, is it right of first refusal? LOL I'm slowwww...
____________________________________________________________________
Rome wasn't built in a day, and my marriage won't be either.
ROFR is right of first
ROFR is right of first refusal - if the parent needs a sitter for any reason for the kids, the other parent has the right to take the kids first before anyone else.
“Some cause happiness wherever they go; others whenever they go.”
Right of First Refusal in
Right of First Refusal in this regard is the requirement to offer the other parent "first dibs" on the children if you can't physically be with them. It basically gives the other parent the right to veto any babysitter you might have in mind. ***ooh, beaten like a red-headed... well, you know. Thanks Middlemom***
Starfish, how's it worded? FH doesn't pay cs, he just pays for everything. All child care, all insurance, all extra curricular, etc. In this case, she's invoking it because she doesn't like that we let the SD's visit their paternal grandparents. But I can't find it in the decree, and was wondering if it was worded strangely, or something.
~Odd
i'll have to dig it up ---
i'll have to dig it up --- i'll get back to you when i find the wording.....
i can't imagine her being able to prevent sd from seeing grandparents??
If it were up to her, she
If it were up to her, she would. She can't STAND FH's folks, especially his mother, for reasons I can't really understand. "She's sucking the life out of the children by babying them." Something to that effect.
Newsflash to
Newsflash to BM:
Grandparents baby grandkids. That's how it works. They go to grammas house and get everything they want and then they come back to us and we have to re-program them for 3 days.
The whole world operates that way. Get over it.
____________________________________________________________________
Rome wasn't built in a day, and my marriage won't be either.
We don't have it but it
We don't have it but it would be really nice if we did... BM is always getting a sitter and not asking us (if it was the grandparents I would understand more)...but now they are getting older and so they are almost where they can stay home alone. But we've had a couple times where we went to SS's games and the kids would be there with the sitter...nice,huh? It's like you couldn't have at least asked us to take them to their game and then bring them home to the sitter instead???
Well, the funny thing is
Well, the funny thing is that she's got her panties all in a twist about us letting the kids spend time with their grandparents, but she never has called us to see if we'd keep them when she needed to go out. Shocking, no?
Their decree mentions that if we are unable to take possession of the SD's that we have to notify BM in advance, but that's not ROFR as I understand it.
of course she doesn't ask
of course she doesn't ask you ----- she's the perfect BM and her kids come first, she just doesn't go out when she has her little angels..BARF PUKE... i'm sure she just wants to document how often you "neglect" the skids and dh "doesn't" spend time with them on his days...... so she can put it with her other stack of stuff she's compiling against dh so when she decides to take him back to court for more cs she has something to show..
in our decree: First Right
in our decree:
First Right of Refusal: Both parties shall have the right of first refusal when a baby-sitter or daycare provider becomes necessary for either parent.
wasn't hard to find --- filed in my C@#NT file.....
*gigglesnort* "There are two
*gigglesnort*
"There are two things over which you have complete dominion, authority, and control over - your mind and your mouth".
Starfish - that's
Starfish - that's hysterical!! You have a "C@#NT file, too? I never COULD figure out what to put on the label for that folder we have. lol!!!!!
I'll be pulling that folder out of the file cabinet and labeling it now...tra la la...
Thanks for the laugh Starfish!!! That was awesome!!
It is in DH's and we have
It is in DH's and we have never had a babysitter. We always give her dibs and if she says no then we get a grandparent to take them. BM always gets a babysitter never telling us until after the fact. If she has a babysitter she has to pay for it and now she is suing us for the money she has spent on babysitters. Be careful with it!
@ Starfish, thanks! Yeah,
@ Starfish, thanks! Yeah, absolutely nothing like that in there. Good to know. Lol, also, I suppose that's a handy place to keep files... I keed, I keed.
no problem.... note that it
no problem.... note that it says baby-sitter or day care provider --- it does not say in lieu of grandparents or family.... so she can take her "ex inlaws can't see MY kid anymore" and shove it up her ass.
My BF's DD doesn't have ROFR
My BF's DD doesn't have ROFR language in it and the DD is also tremendously lopsided in BM's favor (as crayon mentioned her SO's DD is). That's what you get when you have a crappy lawyer during the divorce from BM - you get what you pay for!!! AAHHH!! Why are sooo many men so stupid and stubborn when it comes to that? Don't they understand that if the more expensive lawyer would have actually FOUGHT for BF's rights and put in the correct language, that it would have saved them A TON more money in CS & aggravation in the long run?? I digress...
We honor the ROFR concept with BM even though there's no language in the DD. So everytime my BF has to work, he ALWAYS sends BM an email letting her know what dates are in conflict so that she can have the option to take the kids on those days IF SHE SO CHOOSES (she's under NO obligation).
I personally think BF is stupid with this, because most of the time, BM will swoop in like "Supermom" and say she'll take the kids at her house, but then she LEAVES THEM HOME ALONE unattended anyway. That irks the shit out of me. I know she does it just to have more "ammo" against BF if she ever decides to take him back to court for more CS or something.
BM, on the other hand, NEVER, EVER calls us to take skids if she's working (not that she works that often, more like rarely, she obtained some kind of bullcrap nursing certificate 9 mo program so she works whenever she FEELS like it, but goes out shopping & with friends & leaves skids home). We've caught her more times than you can imagine leaving the kids home alone (she'll say her bioson24 from previous relationship is "watching them" but he's NEVER there!!). Sad that BM just wants "brownie points" for her days that she can say she had the kids (for recordkeeping purposes) instead they are home alone instead of being with their FATHER!!
I've disengaged since...not my kids, not my problem. It's known to save sanity & relationships, so I tried it and for me, it works!!
You know what, Heaven forbid something happens to skids while she's SUPPOSED to be watching then - that'll be on HER, not me. She's just such a pathetic excuse for a person - and certainly NOT the "Supermom" that she tries to make everyone on the "outside" think she is. Ridiculous.