Hi All,
Rather than posting some case law I figured everyone would enjoy this excellent example of a blogger turned "divorce advice columnist" bad advice.
There are just too many of these bloggers out there to simply review them all but, I found this one particularly interesting because the projection of blame on the other parent was lengthy and detailed. The controlling aspect of this parent is very common and often the root cause of conflict in custody and access disputes.
I doubt that this blogger realizes their own contribution to the mess that was created and their equal responsibility to clean it up.
Live By Surprise: Why Parenting Coordination Didn't Work for Me
Why parenting coordination didn't really work:
First off the author of this "article" fails to realize that there is really no good legal definition for "co-parenting". There is joint custody, parallel parenting and then there is sole custody. The whole concept of "co-parenting" is one sold by hipster bloggers who really have no concept of what parenting after divorce truly means.
Furthermore, we see the bad advice that is often vomited onto the internet by these want-to-be "divorce experts".
1. Some people have it easier than others because they understand the basic and core concepts of custody and access. In addition they understand that these two concepts are two different issues altogether. (Unlike this uniformed blogger.)
2. You don't need to put aside your "differences" you may in fact have to realize that 99% of what you expect is not relevant in terms of "custody" and the decisions you and the other parent need to make "jointly". For example... Haircuts are not governed under "custody" nor do parents need to discuss simple things like this.
3. If one parent distances themselves from the children? Then isn't the whole concept of the mythical "co-parenting" concept null and void? The major component of "co-parenting" is equal residential (equal access) time with both parents. Clearly this blogger has failed to understand the concept of "co-parenting" that hipsters are selling.
4. The courts are not moving towards "co-parenting" they are moving towards "joint custody with equal access".
This is where the very common and accepted and often ordered concept of "parallel parenting" is implemented. It isn't "impossible" for parents to have some form of joint custody and equal access. Nor do parents need to discuss every element of their children's lives. (Most times this only creates conflict that is unnecessary.)
Unfortunately, I think this blogger falls into this category not because of the other parent's conduct but their own lack of education in these matters and false beliefs about parenting after divorce.
What "ways" was that? Joint custody, parallel parenting, split parallel parenting, etc...
How about having "your son" reside equally with both parents where you don't have to be there monitoring the other parent's conduct and interactions with the child. This isn't "co-parenting" this is controlling conduct by one parent who believes they have ownership over "their" child.
Or you were simply demonstrating that you were "controlling" and unable to allow the other parent to spend time alone with your daughter. The courts regularly order equal access for children whom are 2.5 years of age. Not sure why this "controlling" parent need to run governance over the other parent. Who approved her as the expert child care provider?
Which would be expected if you were "controlling" how much time the other parent got to spend with the children as described already in this article. It takes two litigants for matters to get nasty.
Easy to make a false allegation of "domestic violence" like this. But, as we know on this forum there is often a difficulty with the term "abuse". One could say that this parent's conduct to restrict access of the children is a form of "abuse" as well.
Why is having a residence a form of "defeat"? It is place to live. At any time this litigant could have partitioned for the sale of the matrimonial home. From the perspective of a judge it is both parties' responsibility to deal with the equalization of assets.
... continued ...
Rather than posting some case law I figured everyone would enjoy this excellent example of a blogger turned "divorce advice columnist" bad advice.
There are just too many of these bloggers out there to simply review them all but, I found this one particularly interesting because the projection of blame on the other parent was lengthy and detailed. The controlling aspect of this parent is very common and often the root cause of conflict in custody and access disputes.
I doubt that this blogger realizes their own contribution to the mess that was created and their equal responsibility to clean it up.
Live By Surprise: Why Parenting Coordination Didn't Work for Me
Why parenting coordination didn't really work:
Co-parenting after divorce is difficult. There's no two ways about it. If you couldn't make the partnership work before the divorce, chances are there are irreconcilable differences in your parenting styles as well. It's just a fact.
Some people have it easier than others. If both parents are willing to put their differences aside for the sake of the children, you may be able to make it work. If one parent distances themselves from the relationship, and limits the amount of time they see the children, it can also work. But in this world where courts are working more and more in favour of both parents parenting 50% of the time, co-parenting cooperatively becomes more and more of an issue.
1. Some people have it easier than others because they understand the basic and core concepts of custody and access. In addition they understand that these two concepts are two different issues altogether. (Unlike this uniformed blogger.)
2. You don't need to put aside your "differences" you may in fact have to realize that 99% of what you expect is not relevant in terms of "custody" and the decisions you and the other parent need to make "jointly". For example... Haircuts are not governed under "custody" nor do parents need to discuss simple things like this.
3. If one parent distances themselves from the children? Then isn't the whole concept of the mythical "co-parenting" concept null and void? The major component of "co-parenting" is equal residential (equal access) time with both parents. Clearly this blogger has failed to understand the concept of "co-parenting" that hipsters are selling.
4. The courts are not moving towards "co-parenting" they are moving towards "joint custody with equal access".
And where one of the partners is just diametrically opposed to working with the other parent, it's practically impossible.
Unfortunately, I think I may fall into the latter category.
We tried various different ways of parenting throughout the "divorce" period.
At first, I tried to work together with my ex, allowing him to come shopping with us, go on walks, even allowing him in my home for Christmas with our son.
The end result unfortunately was that he got the impression that I was interested in a reconciliation. I was not. I just wanted to ensure that he was capable and competent enough to care for our then 2 1/2 year old and our new infant daughter.
As the divorce progressed, it began to get nasty.
I left the marital home. At the time, it was the best move for me - it made the split more real for both of us. It allowed me to begin to put myself back together after years and years of emotional abuse.
It allowed me to parent my children with a little bit of sanity. But it cause more problems - my ex held on to the house as long as he possibly could - because letting go meant admitting defeat.
... continued ...
Comment