Biomom threatening DH over custody days
So my DH has 50/50 custody (physical and legal) with his ex-wife of their 4 year old daughter. The ex withdrew her from school without his consent and quit her job to stay at home with the child during the week (even on his days). Their schedule is such that DH has the kiddo Wed, Thurs, and every other Fri, Sat, and Sun. The adults do not get along and since BM does not work, she insists on having the daughter on DH's days. In their contract originally it states that "In the event that work related childcare is required in the future, each party shall pay their respective share of the agreed upon expenses (50/50). It is anticipated and agreed that daycare expenses will not be necessary as [BM] shall provide all necessary childcare for both parties. If [BM] is not available the parties are encouraged to use family if child care is required prior to incurring childcare expenses." So BM used to stay at home with her until she got a job... the job she just quit to have more control over her daughter and keep her at home. She believes that this gives her the right to have the daughter on DH's days, even though the next clause states, "Both parties agree that during the period each of them has physical child custody, that parent shall decide all normal, regular, and routine matters concerning the child's welfare, and that each parent shall cooperate with the other in maintaining a mutually supportive arrangement regarding such normal, regular, and routine matter." There are other standard conditions that state no parent will have more rights than the other, etc. We've talked to a lawyer and she suggested a parental coordinator, which the BM refuses to agree on.
So here's the problem. BM is refusing to give DH the daughter on his days. He is working, and I as the SM, have arranged my schedule to be able to keep the daughter at our residence during his physical custody days, and educate her from home (I'm a teacher so this is really a win-win for everyone, should they actually be concerned about the daughter's education). Otherwise, they are doing morning and afternoon exchanges, and it's already exhausting for all parties, and most likely really confusing for SD. The BM is furious (we urged her not to quit her job, and DH tried to come to common ground with her about things, as they are legally supposed to according to their contract, but she just did whatever she wanted anyway). She has recently stated that if the daughter is not returned to her on Thursday (DH's day) she will be calling the police. It is our belief that this type of action will come back to bite her in the ass, BUT, we also do not want SD to be traumatized by such a course. It is clear to us that she is very concerned about being in control of this situation, and less concerned about how all of this impacts SD. Have any of you dealt with this before? DH responds to her attacks with suggestions about reading the court document, and fewer anecdotes to try to keep this as black and white as possible. I don't want to find any of us in a situation where police are involved, and no child should be in this type of position. Other than the weird clause about her watching SD during the week, the rest of the document contradicts her thought process, as it should since DH is a 50% custodial parent.
This CO does need to be
This CO does need to be re-written, but they are not incurring fees for childcare, and DH wishes for his daughter to be available in his household during his days. He can also visit her during lunch in his abode. This is not possible with the mother watching her. That clause is also more available to interpretation, whereas the second part dictating that the father can decide his daughter's schedule on his days is not open to interpretation. She is not going to be at preschool since they cannot decide on that, but he wishes for her to have a normal schedule in ONE household instead of going back and forth twice a day.
In Michigan, dad would get to
In Michigan, dad would get to have the daughter and let his wife, or whomever he designated, watch the child while he was at work.
Don't forget, it looks like this BM was working, so she clearly had no problem with kid being at dad's on dad's days until she quit her job...
A judge here would say that dad is entitled to time with his daughter and since mom didn't have an issue with it when she was working, she shouldn't have an issue with it now.
When my boys were with minors, the only time I would get them back during Asshat's time is if he was out of town overnight. If they didn't have school, they were with Money-Ka. I totally understood that they were part of that household, just like they were a part of mine, and I also knew that they had little brothers and a sister there whom they loved and wanted to spend time with.
I was never one of those BMs who said if dad wasn't around, SM couldn't watch them. I just find that argument really petty and punitive.
She misses the cutoff for it
She misses the cutoff for it by about a month. The BM and DH had arrangements to keep SD in school where she was, but the BM un-enrolled her without DH's consent (against custody orders), and has re-enrolled her near her house (again without DH even being informed, and against custody orders). She did not take her daughter to school consistently before, and will be expected to continue this pattern in the future. We anticipate that when kindergarten is on the table, SD will not be in school regularly and BM will get in trouble for truancy. She is incredibly inconsistent and does not follow the CO... until all of a sudden she's suddenly an expert in ONE of the clauses. The clause centers around incurring childcare expenses, and our lawyer said the wording was kind of weird, and that because the focus is on not paying for child care and since I am technically family, there should be no issue with us keeping SD at our house on DH's child custody days.
Yes but the next clause
Yes but the next clause indicates that DH has the ability to decide where and what his daughter is doing on HIS days. This contradicts the other clause, and is very clear.
So that is clause 8. about
So that is clause 8. about work related care, and the next clause states, "Both parties agree that during the period each of them has physical child custody, that parent shall decide all normal, regular, and routine matters concerning the child's welfare, and that each parent shall cooperate with the other in maintaining a mutually supportive arrangement regarding such normal, regular, and routine matter." His physical child custody days are Wed. and Thursday, and HE wants his daughter to stay at his house, where I will be available to watch her.
BM doesn't necessarily get
BM doesn't necessarily get the child is DH is not avail on his days. In our case, DH works nights and I am home with them on those nights. BM tried to argue in court that she should get every overnight since DH was not there and it was court ordered that they can be with me during that time.
Thank you. It's definitely
Thank you. It's definitely not my given name
Based on the court order,mom
Based on the court order,mom is right.
Why on earth would she agree to having her child stay with you while she is home??? Let's say she does agree. Will you later use that as an excuse to claim she is a lazy, unemployed BM who would rather dump her kid on SM than keep her home with her?
There's nothing you going to do in regards to education with the kid that her own mother can't do.
We would not use that as an
We would not use that as an excuse, but the reality is she quit her job and is staying at home not because of watching her daughter, but because she wants more control over the situation. She doesn't want a job and her dad is very wealthy, so she is in a win-win situation (she doesn't need to work, and he can fund her). She also started a home-crafting business, so she really would be happy with extra free time. This whole situation is not about the child from her perspective, unfortunately. It's about her having the most control. The worst part about it is for the child to be transferred from each parent twice a day, and be around their visible tension.
OP has scheduled two to three
OP has scheduled two to three days off (depending on week) to stay home and homeschool the kid. Must be a very flexible teaching job OP has to take every Wednesday and Thursday off along with every other Friday unless she teaches non-elementary.
I would have an issue also with a SM who finds herself more superior in educating my child in a home setting rather than having the child in pre-school or kindergarten. I suggested Dad go and test child and appeal for this year (2017-18) placement. Dad and BM having 50/50 legal means BM can object to the OP homeschool plan...and has.
Yes, it certainly sounds as if there are two women fighting for control. Unfortunate, as in the end the "I'm the better Mommy' only hurts the child in the end. Kid has a mother. Kid could have a regular classroom with normal child to child interaction. Pfft, available to lunch with Dad, I'm not buying.
Come next year when child gets around to being enrolled in kindergarten will be the which school district does she attend. Charter or public or private or will SM just homeschool the kid on Dad's days and BM on BM's days *rolling my eyes*. Living 30 minutes apart, limited time to transport, round and round this issue will go.
Somebody (ahem, SM) needs to stand down and let the parents do the parenting. If the parents fail at mutual decision, a judge can decide for them.
AND BM is always late to
AND BM is always late to drop-offs/pick ups which is impacting DH's schedule as he does need to have a job, and he's kept a consistent work position for years.
I understand that it sounds
I understand that it sounds like I'm trying to control this situation, but I'm really trying to get advice for DH. I want no part in this drama, and unfortunately am stuck in this situation because of my love for my family. This is very stressful for each party involved, and we are simply trying to make it easier for all parents and especially the daughter.
Just playing devil's advocate
Just playing devil's advocate here. If you were able to re arrange your schedule to watch his child.. couldn't you be doing the drop off's instead of him. That way his schedule wouldn't be impacted.
I don't think her going to mom's daily for daycare is different than going to a stranger's. If dad has the day off, he can keep her. If he wants to go pick her up for a lunch on his days he can do that too.
I would absolutely do that
I would absolutely do that although the BM does not like either myself or DH and I try to stay out of their situation as much as possible. (It may seem like I desire more involvement because of this post, but I only seek additional information, and I feel like if DH had posted this, the responses may be different). I prefer to not interact with BM and she definitely does not want to see either DH or myself more than she needs to. The daughter would not be going to any day care, she'd be at her BM's on Monday and Tuesday all day and night, and then at our house Wednesday and Thursday all day and night. With the way BM wants the schedule, she'd have her M, T, W, and T, with SD staying with DH Wed. night and then dropping her off Thurs. morning and picking her up again at night, and same on Friday. The parents have a horrible relationship, and DH has tried really hard to keep the peace. BM can't even talk to DH on the phone and has had her new husband call DH with her number. Every text message she sends him is borderline harassment, and it's best for everyone if we minimize contact of the parents, which is partly why we are trying to get this sorted out so we can have SD on DH's custody days. According to the documents we cannot go to court without first going to talk to a parental counselor, although BM does not understand this and keeps threatening to take DH to court/call the police. DH has been really rational and had adhered strictly to the document, although BM has not, and there is no punishment for her breaching the contract. We simply want SD to be in our residence on DH's physical custody days, and we are just trying to clarify that this is acceptable according to the part that again states, "Both parties agree that during the period each of them has physical child custody, that parent shall decide all normal, regular, and routine matters concerning the child's welfare, and that each parent shall cooperate with the other in maintaining a mutually supportive arrangement regarding such normal, regular, and routine matter."
Here is the bottom line. Your
Here is the bottom line.
Your husband and his EX agreed when they split that she would watch the child.
That is what she is doing. The claim that he would be able to have "more time with her" in the morning etc.. really falls flat because if he is driving her to BM's.. then he is with her then. I think the lunch thing is a bit of a red herring because there is nothing stopping him from going to BM's house to take the kid to lunch on his days if he chooses to do so.
I think this is more of him trying to take time away from his ex and the mother for no real benefit to anyone but him.
Honestly the child is going to be less confused if she goes to the same daycare (AKA biomom) every day. Whether he drives her, or whether you do in his place.. the kid is in the same stable environment every day.. but gets to come to dad's a couple nights a week instead of staying at mom's while he is at work.
If I were you, I would be all for not having to care for his kid.
WHY she decided to stay home
WHY she decided to stay home really doesn't matter since her child benefits from that choice.
It's obviously not something
It's obviously not something that an individual can see outside of this situation, and you're right that that could not be used in court.
Based on the court order,mom
Based on the court order,mom is right.
Why on earth would she agree to having her child stay with you while she is home??? Let's say she does agree. Will you later use that as an excuse to claim she is a lazy, unemployed BM who would rather dump her kid on SM than keep her home with her?
There's nothing you going to do in regards to education with the kid that her own mother can't do.
As I can only share portions
As I can only share portions of our story, rude comments are not necessary. I'm simply seeking advice for our difficult situation. There is much more to this overall story. We just are confused about how the clause about childcare can possibly outweigh the clause about DH being able to decide where his daughter is on his days.
I'm on your side susanseidle.
I'm on your side susanseidle. BM is lazy, that's apparent. I have the same thing going on over here. Unemployed BM who now wants the kids on DH's days, because it's "for their own good" Your husband should stand his ground. Those are HIS days and he should do what he feels is best for her on HIS days. Maybe if this is so important to BM, she should of stayed married to your DH, then she could stay home every day forever and play happy homemaker!
As a SM that has full custody
As a SM that has full custody of my SD and who almost never gets a break, I am not sure why you would want this? Trust me, it is better for all involved if the child stays with her mother. I have my doubts that you are not pushing this. Your DH was obviously comfortable with mom watching the girl before you came into the picture. If he wasn't, he wouldn't have agreed for it to be written in the custody order.
Sorry, but I have to agree that mom is right on this one.
Their relationship imploded
Their relationship imploded after the divorce decree was signed. Everything has changed, and BM has gotten more antagonizing since. During the child custody agreement, DH was struggling to get by as the divorce was messy and he didn't consider future implications. The situation has shifted (regardless of my involvement) and he would like to have a say in what his daughter is doing on his time.
It sounds like dad is trying
It sounds like dad is trying to lash out at mom and use his child as a weapon.
Unless there is a concern regarding the care she is providing her daughter, it is undoubtedly better for the child to go to one "daycare situation" (which is with her mom) instead of having different routines at her mom's and different routines when you watch her.
I don't think a judge would feel that taking time away from a biological parent so that the child can spend time with a non-bio parent (you) is in the child's best interest.
Now, you mention that she has been somewhat difficult with times.. and that impacts his scheduled work hours. Perhaps the judge might make those hours more strictly adhered to on her end. He also might side with your DH on letting YOU make the transfers to BM to facilitate the work schedule.
The bottom line is that the child has a parent who is able and willing to care for her during the workweek. This was pre-established as a preferred option in their CO. Just because your DH wants to somehow withhold his child from his EX now doesn't mean it is the right thing to do. I would maintain that if he can come home to have lunch with her at his house.. he can also go pick her up from mom's on those days for lunch.
If I were him, I would tread awfully carefully on going back to court to try to get things changed. The judge might find that since the mother can stay home full time that she should get her all week and maybe dad will just get EOWE.
That would result in more CS for him to pay.
How long have they been
How long have they been divorced? This feels fresh to me. Hopefully BM will settle down and release her clutches on the kid.
Does your DH not get to see
Does your DH not get to see SD at all during the week because BM is home to keep the SD?
He would only see her W, Tr,
He would only see her W, Tr, and every other Fr. evening (plus Sat and Sun. every other week) if SD stayed with BM like she wants. Otherwise, DH can see her during the day on his lunch and in the morning more W, Tr, and Fr. if she stayed his house under my care.
On his days that he is
On his days that he is supposed to have her, can't he "use" BM like an actual sitter/daycare. When he has to go to work he can drop SD off at BM's and then when he gets off of work pick her up from BM's?
I think BM is right in this
I think BM is right in this one but, that CO is really vague to me. Is there a specific clause for ROFR?
HRNYC glad you brought UP her
HRNYC glad you brought UP her name. I find it rather disturbing. Especially if she is saying that she is a teacher.
Say it outloud.
I call crew on this one.
Sue's in Seattle is what I'
Sue's in Seattle is what I' get from it.... lol
WOW... I thought this was a
:jawdrop: :jawdrop: WOW... I thought this was a place for Step-parents to seek advice, not get lambasted for reaching out. Whats wrong with her name? :jawdrop: :jawdrop:
You went to the trouble of
You went to the trouble of signing up just to smack some fingers? yeah, sure you did.
It's ok, if you have something to say, you can say it without creating new accounts and identity *shrugs* We're all big boys and girls now.
Thanks! So I have an idea.
Thanks! So I have an idea. Imagine the scenario was flipped. Dad is at home and Mom works. Do you think that would make a difference? I think we are reacting to gender roles in this instance. Look at it objectively and assign no gender to each parent in the situation. Parent A parent B. What would be our opinion then?
I agree, if dad was willing
I agree, if dad was willing and able to be a SAHD, and they had agreed initially that he would watch the child full time during the work week then the answer would be the same for me.
I think the single routine during the workweek day for the child of being with her mom is better than switching back and forth.
If it were a situation where on a dad weekend time that he wanted to let his wife watch the child while he went to play golf.. sure no problem.
It just seems that he wants to change the original agreement.. now that he doesn't "like" his ex as much as he did before.
I still have a feeling that the judge would come down in favor of BM being the winner in all this and might even lose DH custody time.
this and might even lose DH
this and might even lose DH custody time.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
And that is a damn shame. How many BMs lose custody because they work? A big fat zero.
I think that if the situation
I think that if the situation were absolutely reversed.. and dad WAS a SAHD that there might be a case and he might win more custody time if he is willing and able to stay home full time with the child.
I am so on the fence here.
I am so on the fence here.
On a BM side…I think the kid should be with me if father is not available.
On my DH side (as NCP) It is his child and he should be able to have child stay with his family if he wants to.
Sorry..I am no help.
"In the event that work
"In the event that work related childcare is required in the future, each party shall pay their respective share of the agreed upon expenses (50/50). It is anticipated and agreed that daycare expenses will not be necessary as [BM] shall provide all necessary childcare for both parties.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It could also be argued that childcare is NOT required OR necessary because DH has childcare covered for his time. JMHO
Yeah that's the way im seeing
Yeah that's the way im seeing it.
Let the little girl stay with
Let the little girl stay with her mom, pick her up and drop her off on DH's days just like if she was in school or day care. She will be in school soon enough, and these situations are always changing as the child ages. The courts will consider what is best for the child, and you will be hard pressed to make a case that what's best for the child is to take her from her mother and leave her with her stepmother, especially at age four. And if you take the tack that midweek exchanges are stressful on the child, the judge very well may take those visits away as some have mentioned. It's a gamble, but if BM doesn't budge then court is your option. That's a gamble I wouldn't bet on, personally.
I understand that the CO does
I understand that the CO does have some contradictory statements.
However- a few things are clear.
Both mom and dad have equal rights. This means that neither parent can decide to enroll the child in a preschool, or pull the child out of school without the others consent. My understanding is BM pulled her out of the school, without your DH's consent, which puts her in violation. You DH should file contempt charges for the child having been removed from school in the first place. BM is not permitted to make unilateral educational decisions for the child.
Secondly, it states that BM may watch the child if childcare is necessary. Since your DH works during the week, it means that BM has the right to watch the child during his working hours only. The child needs to be returned when DH comes home from work, and then go back to BM the next day when DH returns to work. It basically means that BM is daycare, that's all. DH should be using her the same way he used the preschool. Drop kid off in the morning and pick up after work. If this is posing an unnecessary hardship because BM lives too far away to be used as a daycare he needs to go back to court to have this modified due to what I would assume would be a change in circumstances from when they first agreed to this? Why is BM more difficult to use than a daycare?
Your DH needs to be very
Your DH needs to be very careful about giving into his ex. My hunch is she is trying to gain more custody time and at some point petition the court to remove the 50/50, etc. If I were him, I would not give a single inch. He needs to demonstrate every single second he spends with her is important. Period.dot.
I didn't read the other
I didn't read the other responses.
"In the event that work related childcare is required in the future, each party shall pay their respective share of the agreed upon expenses (50/50). It is anticipated and agreed that daycare expenses will not be necessary as [BM] shall provide all necessary childcare for both parties. If [BM] is not available the parties are encouraged to use family if child care is required prior to incurring childcare expenses."
I read this as if childcare is required, they will both pay their agreed upon amounts. I also read this as that childcare shouldn't be required, because BM will be home with the kids as caregiver. I also read this as IF BM isn't available, family/friends should be used before having to pay for childcare.
So BM used to stay at home with her until she got a job... the job she just quit to have more control over her daughter and keep her at home. She believes that this gives her the right to have the daughter on DH's days, even though the next clause states, "Both parties agree that during the period each of them has physical child custody, that parent shall decide all normal, regular, and routine matters concerning the child's welfare, and that each parent shall cooperate with the other in maintaining a mutually supportive arrangement regarding such normal, regular, and routine matter."
I read this as: BM is providing the childcare, as agreed. Even on his days - which seems normal. If you weren't around, he'd still have to have childcare - which SHE PROVIDES. Nothing would change. He'd have to bring the kid to BM on his days anyway. The agreement is between her and him, not her you and him. Normal, regular, and routine matters concerning the child's welfare doesn't include childcare - as childcare has it's own section in the CO. The agreement states that if BM isn't available, family/friends should be used before paying... and you, my dear, are family/friend. BM is available. Thus, you don't get her on his days, unless she's not available.