Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

custodial parent working night shifts

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • custodial parent working night shifts

    custodial parent is now working night shifts, and leaving child with grandmother overnight, who has health issues and is a heavy smoker.

    thoughts ? material change ?

  • #2
    Not even close. No evidence that child is suffering or in danger. You going to put the grandmother and her medical doctors on the stand?

    If CAS isn't concerned then the courts will not be concerned.

    Isn't it a good thing that your ex is working? Or are you frustrated that you can't refer to her as lazy? Sounds to me that she is doing things correctly.

    I'm a smoker. My son has asthma. I didn't smoke around my son.

    Comment


    • #3
      My husbands ex worked nights for over two years, kids stayed at their grandparents every night. Nothing we could do... she was working on her time and was entitled to find suitable childcare. Kids hated it and expressed this but still didn’t matter


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by trinton View Post
        custodial parent is now working night shifts, and leaving child with grandmother overnight, who has health issues and is a heavy smoker.

        thoughts ? material change ?
        Not a material change.

        Is the grandmother blowing the smoke into the child's face? Last time I checked smoking wasn't illegal and they sell cigarettes at the corner store. Soon they will be selling weed there too.

        Your Social Worker - Gary Direnfeld, MSW, RSW

        In hotly contested child custody and access disputes, a contentious matter that often arises is the right of first refusal. Typically this refers to situations where a parent is unable to meet an obligation for the care of the child and that parent may then consider the use of a baby-sitter over the other parent. In such situations, the other parent seeks to have this right of first refusal to care for their child in lieu of resorting to a baby-sitter.

        In these acrimonious disputes, both parents seek to withhold the child from the other parent even when they themselves are not available. There is such an animosity, that both do not want to give any perceived advantage of a special relationship with the child to the other parent by virtue of more time. This matter also rears its ugly head when one or other parent has a new partner that the other parent does not accept.

        As the parents enter combat over the right of first refusal, the game playing heats up. If the parent who is unable to meet their obligation uses a grandparent or allows the child a sleepover with a friend or other family member from their side, is that contravening this right of first refusal? This becomes a very sticky point, as both parents can be remarkably manipulative at withholding or at least not supporting the relationship with the other parent whilst coming up with ways to beat the rules.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Tayken View Post
          Not a material change.

          Is the grandmother blowing the smoke into the child's face? Last time I checked smoking wasn't illegal and they sell cigarettes at the corner store. Soon they will be selling weed there too.

          What if this happened after a material change, or as part of a material change?

          CAS won't have issue unless I call them. They did have issue with mom smoking in house with child and told her to smoke outside. Would probably say same to grandmother. Anyway, forget the whole smoking thing.

          Anyways, when there is been a material change and custody and access is being looked into.. would you say parents should get time before grandparents ?

          Comment


          • #6
            It isnt a material change. She's arrangimg childcare for the child during her time, which she is entitled to do regardless of time of day.

            What is the material change and how does this relate to it?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
              It isnt a material change. She's arrangimg childcare for the child during her time, which she is entitled to do regardless of time of day.

              What is the material change and how does this relate to it?
              overnightchildcare 5 days a week? that isn't a change in moms life effecting the child ? since when working nights had no impact on children ?

              daycare is in mornings, when mom is actually off work. double daycare. I could understand if CAS was involved and placed child with grandparent. but if father is available why should grandmother take over father ? since when did grandmother's get such big entitlement to access with children?

              material change is conflict leading to CAS and police involvement, inability to agree on regular holiday schedule leading to issues with regular access and police involvement. child struggling at school. and CAS raising concerns that child's been impacted by conflict. basically the conflict is material change.

              access is being looked into from fresh inquiry. why should child be with grandparents when parents are available ? is mom really facilitating maximum contact with me or the complete opposite?
              Last edited by trinton; 10-24-2017, 06:41 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by arabian View Post
                Sounds to me that she is doing things correctly.
                .
                Until you see child's report cards and school absences.

                Comment


                • #9
                  The kid is asleep. The kid would be asleep overnight regardless of where they are. It is fortunate that mom can have gramma look after the kid overnight since overnight daycares (which she is well within her rights to choose to use) cost a fortune. And the kid is fortunate to have that relationship with the extended family.

                  Sounds to me like you do not have a clear understanding of what constitutes a material change.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    https://family-law.freeadvice.com/fa...cumstances.htm

                    It would have to be a change that could not reasonably have been expected when the agreement was made. Was it unreasonable to expect that she would either seek employment or that her hours may change and that childcare would be needed? Absolutely not.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I cant speak to whether it is a material change, I dont know enough about that, but I think from a common sense perspective whether right of first refusal should beincluded in an agreement, it really depends on the frequency, length and whether it is day or over night. It seems that if mom is taking the child to grandparents home 5 nights a week, then maybe should be with dad. If the grandmother is coming over to the childs house and is just spending an hour or 2 with child, puts child to bed and mom is there when child wakes, then yes child should stay at home during moms parenting time. It makes sense now, why mom is also using a daycar during the mornings, probalby sleeping after a night shift. Also there is a big difference between a situation which occurs 5 times/week and once in awhile. I dont think those clauses should be so strict as to restrict grandparents time. If each parent has right of first refusal for all situations and all people, then the child could never spend a weekend with grandparents or a week at grandmas in the summer. Ive been contemplating having this included in our agreement for the length of time of a work day, so maybe have right of first refusal if gone for 8 hours, but I am worried ex would take that to the extreme and then say that children cant stay with grandparents ever. I would think that looking at the length, frequency and who would be important in determining if it is being used to keep child from parent, or just a once in awhile thing to maintain relationships with other important people, or an occasional need for a babysitter.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
                        The kid is asleep. The kid would be asleep overnight regardless of where they are.
                        What happens before the kid goes to sleep? Daddy would read a story with her and thug her in, right? If I was in the army then I would agree with you. But I'm not in the army, I'm right here. Why should child miss out on this opportunity to be tucked in by dad 5 days a week and instead by grandmother ? Sure as hell wasn't anticipated that the grandmother would be doing that when the order was made. There is a clause to allow more time and it would reasonably be expected mom would be willing to allow ( and facilitate) maximum contact (and a relationship) with child and other parent, me, child's father - and not the other way around.


                        Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
                        It is fortunate that mom can have gramma look after the kid overnight since overnight daycares (which she is well within her rights to choose to use) cost a fortune. And the kid is fortunate to have that relationship with the extended family.
                        Shouldn't the child be fortunate to have that relationship with BOTH extended families ? There is no "The extended family", there is two. And why would a mom put child in daycare overnight as opposed to providing the father with opportunity to have more time? What is their motive and perception of the father ? Do they want to keep dad out of child that badly that they will choose grandmothers and strangers to keep child overnight as opposed to the child's very own father ?

                        Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
                        Sounds to me like you do not have a clear understanding of what constitutes a material change.
                        Forget the material change part for now. Why should child be with grandmother 5 consecutive nights a week when father is available ?
                        Last edited by trinton; 10-25-2017, 12:00 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
                          https://family-law.freeadvice.com/fa...cumstances.htm

                          It would have to be a change that could not reasonably have been expected when the agreement was made. Was it unreasonable to expect that she would either seek employment or that her hours may change and that childcare would be needed? Absolutely not.

                          It was reasonable to expect should would be seeking employment, but not seeking employment and working late into evenings leaving child with daycare to almost her bed time, or working overnights and leaving child with grandmother - all when the father is available. Also there is a further access clause - why should further access be sanctioned when there is opportunity to provide father with more time without taking any away from mom ?

                          Your arguments are about the mother's rights - and nothing to do with the best interest of the child.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by denbigh View Post
                            I think from a common sense perspective whether right of first refusal should beincluded in an agreement, it really depends on the frequency, length and whether it is day or over night. It seems that if mom is taking the child to grandparents home 5 nights a week, then maybe should be with dad.
                            Agreed. And that is exactly what my lawyer said too.

                            Originally posted by denbigh View Post
                            Ive been contemplating having this included in our agreement for the length of time of a work day, so maybe have right of first refusal if gone for 8 hours, but I am worried ex would take that to the extreme and then say that children cant stay with grandparents ever. I would think that looking at the length, frequency and who would be important in determining if it is being used to keep child from parent, or just a once in awhile thing to maintain relationships with other important people, or an occasional need for a babysitter.
                            Grandparents are SOL. Parents first, then grandparents. Grandparents can apply for access if they want. Good luck to them.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by denbigh View Post
                              whether right of first refusal should beincluded in an agreement, it really depends on the frequency, length and whether it is day or over night.
                              My opinion: Right of first refusal is a terrible thing to include in any agreement. It almost guarantees * conflict *. The goal of a separation agreement should be to make * conflict * as unlikely as possible.

                              If the parents don't get along, RFR will be used as a weapon.

                              If the parents get along, RFR is unnecessary.
                              Last edited by blinkandimgone; 10-25-2017, 05:16 PM. Reason: Conflict!

                              Comment

                              Our Divorce Forums
                              Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                              Working...
                              X