Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New half sibling and custody disputes

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    If the courts or lawyers or psychologists or whoever decide that maximum contact is the best option all the time in every case, then why are parent not mandated to go 50-50 right from the start?
    We're trying to push for this (in the absence of abuse, danger, etc). I think it's currently like this in QC.

    The more parents who decide that an equal relationship with both loving parents is the way to go (and 90% of the time it is..not always...but most).. the more the caselaw and laws will change. Hence our discussion with you.

    By the way....not one of us here have EVER said that 50/50 should be every case...but your ex is not an abuser, drug addict, pedophile, etc ..... so there's no good reason for you to be rejecting an equal relationship with his kids.

    I have said it before and will reiterate again, it is not about money for me.
    Then you need to stop bringing up money again and again. His KIDS (and time spent with them) certainly mean something to him....no matter what you say.

    I am not an unreasonable person. If this was amicable and we were working together and he was showing me that he's a good dad
    It's not you to decide if he's a good dad. You have a VERY subjective opinion of him and surely amplify his negative qualities and minimize any of his good qualities .. it's VERY hard for you to be objective. You should read Tayken's truisms threads:
    When parties are not communicating, any slight or criticism is magnified. There is a tendency to minimize the other spouse’s good qualities and maximize the bad. Warring spouses are rarely in a position to step back and evaluate the other’s behaviour with objective eyes. Nor are they able to critically assess their own behaviour...
    http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...ase-law-16809/
    You said it yourself...:
    He isn't abusing them. He isn't hurting them per se. I do think he loves them. I just don't want to lose the arrangement I have.
    Is this really a good enough reason to not promote an equal relationship between 2 loving parents and undergo an expensive, stressful court battle? Over 15% increase? You still haven't responded to Paris either. Would you accept a 5% increase to 40% time with them?
    Last edited by LovingFather32; 01-06-2017, 02:50 PM.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
      Actually, a stable home and family unit is a pretty nice material change. Sounds like he's ready for more responsibility. Instead of saying no give it a whirl.
      I'd like to point out that this man is cheating on his live-in girlfriend. I would not call that a stable home or family unit, nor him a man who is particularly responsible. The whole thing could come crashing down on him at any moment the girlfriend figures him out.

      In cases like this though, I turn to wondering 'what would the parents do if they were still together?' It sound like the poster would be caring for the children when the dad was working his shifts, and he would care for the children when he was not working and she was. Is there any predictable schedule they can switch to that could imitate this pattern? The key word here is predictable. Kids need routine and being able to understand where they will be on any given day far into the future.

      She has said he works a four week rotational shift. Are there any weekdays he consistently has off every week? Or is he basically asking to take the children on random days of the week in accordance with his work schedule?

      Forget the money issue for now, although I agree that the arrears should be sorted out. He's doing the right thing (wanting more time with his children) for the wrong reason (money) but that doesn't mean the children won't benefit from the increased contact.

      As for him badmouthing the poster, and being a poor role model by asking them to conceal his cheating, the poster just has to keep reinforcing what good behaviour is for the children on her parenting time.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Rioe View Post
        I'd like to point out that this man is cheating on his live-in girlfriend.
        Yea, not giving this much weight. If it were true I think the poster would've mentioned it earlier. Only when things got hot in the thread she pulled this out of her hat.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
          Yea, not giving this much weight. If it were true I think the poster would've mentioned it earlier. Only when things got hot in the thread she pulled this out of her hat.


          Oh it's completely true I assure you. I did not say that he is currently cheating on his live-in girlfriend although I wouldn't be surprised. I gave the example that my daughter witnessed. I also didn't bring up but I know that a few months ago he was initiating hook ups with an ex girlfriend. I saw evidence of it even. I didn't bring all of this up because I didn't feel I need to convince you with every single detail. It should be good enough that I am telling you there are questionable immoral things occurring and that it is a huge worry for me. He has never been faithful to a partner. His last girlfriend lasted 4 years and ended with an epic Facebook hacking and shaming. Many affairs exposed again. I try to distance myself from all of he scandalous bullshit though because honestly it sounds like I married a guy from melrose place.


          Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
            We're trying to push for this (in the absence of abuse, danger, etc). I think it's currently like this in QC.

            The more parents who decide that an equal relationship with both loving parents is the way to go (and 90% of the time it is..not always...but most).. the more the caselaw and laws will change. Hence our discussion with you.

            By the way....not one of us here have EVER said that 50/50 should be every case...but your ex is not an abuser, drug addict, pedophile, etc ..... so there's no good reason for you to be rejecting an equal relationship with his kids.


            Then you need to stop bringing up money again and again. His KIDS (and time spent with them) certainly mean something to him....no matter what you say.


            It's not you to decide if he's a good dad. You have a VERY subjective opinion of him and surely amplify his negative qualities and minimize any of his good qualities .. it's VERY hard for you to be objective. You should read Tayken's truisms threads:

            You said it yourself...:

            Is this really a good enough reason to not promote an equal relationship between 2 loving parents and undergo an expensive, stressful court battle? Over 15% increase? You still haven't responded to Paris either. Would you accept a 5% increase to 40% time with them?


            When I said I don't want to lose the arrangement I have I meant that I have this arrangement for a reason and I think it's still in the best interests of the children. There are many reasons for me and even others you don't know about. I am also not going to put down a percentage custody amount here on a public forum. There already is enough identifying info if my ex was on here. I will have to consider my options and see where it goes after we mediate.



            Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

            Comment


            • #66
              Listen if your ex did that I'm sorry....that sucks. But many phenomenal parents have made poor romance decisions. ....and they still remain good parents. Making a romantic mistake VS ability to parent aren't highly correlated in my books.
              Might I add that you seem to know an awful lot about his private life (hook ups with ex's, etc). Perhaps the time has come to distance yourself from his personal stuff.

              My ex also isn't the grandest of role models. She frauds welfare and the system any way she can....stays home and babysitting under the table while she has a paralegal degree and completely bilingual with a few men (that I know of)...coming and going.

              But....that's D5's mom and they love each other. So I promote 50/50.

              That's your children's dad and guess what ...
              He's no harm to them and they love each other.

              We don't hate you Angie...we don't have our own agendas here. It's not a "Dads rights" thing. If you were a dad telling me all the same things I'd promote 50/50 to and tell him the same things I've told you. Based on everything you've written it's the right thing to do. IMO

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Rioe View Post
                I'd like to point out that this man is cheating on his live-in girlfriend. I would not call that a stable home or family unit, nor him a man who is particularly responsible. The whole thing could come crashing down on him at any moment the girlfriend figures him out.

                In cases like this though, I turn to wondering 'what would the parents do if they were still together?' It sound like the poster would be caring for the children when the dad was working his shifts, and he would care for the children when he was not working and she was. Is there any predictable schedule they can switch to that could imitate this pattern? The key word here is predictable. Kids need routine and being able to understand where they will be on any given day far into the future.

                She has said he works a four week rotational shift. Are there any weekdays he consistently has off every week? Or is he basically asking to take the children on random days of the week in accordance with his work schedule?

                Forget the money issue for now, although I agree that the arrears should be sorted out. He's doing the right thing (wanting more time with his children) for the wrong reason (money) but that doesn't mean the children won't benefit from the increased contact.

                As for him badmouthing the poster, and being a poor role model by asking them to conceal his cheating, the poster just has to keep reinforcing what good behaviour is for the children on her parenting time.


                This is exactly what I do. This is what my family and friends tell me to do. I can't prevent them from seeing more of this in the future because they need dad in their life.


                Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
                  Listen if your ex did that I'm sorry....that sucks. But many phenomenal parents have made poor romance decisions. ....and they still remain good parents. Making a romantic mistake VS ability to parent aren't highly correlated in my books.

                  Might I add that you seem to know an awful lot about his private life (hook ups with ex's, etc). Perhaps the time has come to distance yourself from his personal stuff.



                  My ex also isn't the grandest of role models. She frauds welfare and the system any way she can....stays home and babysitting under the table while she has a paralegal degree and completely bilingual with a few men (that I know of)...coming and going.



                  But....that's D5's mom and they love each other. So I promote 50/50.



                  That's your children's dad and guess what ...

                  He's no harm to them and they love each other.



                  We don't hate you Angie...we don't have our own agendas here. It's not a "Dads rights" thing. If you were a dad telling me all the same things I'd promote 50/50 to and tell him the same things I've told you. Based on everything you've written it's the right thing to do. IMO


                  I agree that a cheater isn't always a bad parent. In my case though, his private life crossed over into my kids' lives and I truly believe it's a matter of time before it does again. You will argue that this is speculative and I can't predict the future; however, a track record exists. I worry about them losing another girlfriend (of his). They were heartbroken after the last one left. I don't think you will ever convince me that 50-50 is best right now. I am not saying it won't ever be.


                  Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
                    Listen if your ex did that I'm sorry....that sucks. But many phenomenal parents have made poor romance decisions. ....and they still remain good parents. Making a romantic mistake VS ability to parent aren't highly correlated in my books.

                    Might I add that you seem to know an awful lot about his private life (hook ups with ex's, etc). Perhaps the time has come to distance yourself from his personal stuff.



                    My ex also isn't the grandest of role models. She frauds welfare and the system any way she can....stays home and babysitting under the table while she has a paralegal degree and completely bilingual with a few men (that I know of)...coming and going.



                    But....that's D5's mom and they love each other. So I promote 50/50.



                    That's your children's dad and guess what ...

                    He's no harm to them and they love each other.



                    We don't hate you Angie...we don't have our own agendas here. It's not a "Dads rights" thing. If you were a dad telling me all the same things I'd promote 50/50 to and tell him the same things I've told you. Based on everything you've written it's the right thing to do. IMO


                    I should add too that we may have differing definitions of "harm". I do think that it is harmful for a child to hear that their mother is lying about something. I do think it's harmful for a kid to see an image of dad vacationing with a woman who isn't his girlfriend. There are other harmful items as well....
                    They may not leave a bruise, a scar, any physical trace but what are they doing to their impressionable minds?


                    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by rockscan View Post
                      Regardless of what your agreement says, child support is to be updated when his income changed. He should have been sharing all updated income information on a regular basis.

                      He did not share any of his info with me until this year. He made the support increase on Jan 1st 2017 but refuses to pay the arrears. Won't have a leg to stand on through since the date of increase is written right into the agreement.

                      If you have a lawyer I don't understand why you asked such an odd question about having a sibling being weighted in a custody dispute. Additionally, has he actually filed paperwork or is this just talk/threats?

                      Threats. I was legit wondering about this question in the event that it went to court. I didn't expect it to morph into this whole 50-50 vs not debate.

                      If you're so worried, start by telling him you want to resolve the cs issues before you consider any changes in custody. This includes providing full income details for the last three years and payment of all cs arrears to date. This way when he does file any paperwork, you have proof that you asked for this and he refused to comply.

                      He will only verbally tell me he's refusing payment. Won't put that in writing.

                      If that all gets resolved then you move to suggest a gradual increase in custody with a six month review of activities. For instance, how their school work is being completed, activities he participates in, how the children are faring from the changes, etc. If he has them an increased amount of time and their school work is suffering, he isn't getting them to activities they enjoy and they aren't thriving in his care, you can show the issue with increased custody. However, you have to encourage him to take an active role and it doesn't have to be "supermom" level, it has to be reasonable. As in, they are doing well with their school work with him not they have to get a+ grades in his care at all times. If there is a problem, you have to demonstrate you addressed it satisfactorily. If you go back for a review and you say he failed but then you did nothing to work together, it wont look good, it demonstrates UNREASONABLE behaviour.

                      You are going to need to build a case regardless of how you feel about it and being a helicopter parent isn't going to help. You're looking like a controlling gate keeper right now and judges hate that.

                      If your lawyer hasn't suggested any of this then you need a new lawyer. You could be required to pay his legal costs if he wins and you were shown to be unreasonable. Demonstrate reasonableness and that means leaving your feelings about him out of it. What he did to YOU is irrelevant. What he does to the kids is relevant.


                      I think that making an offer period shows I am reasonable. It may not be 50-50 but it will be an offer.


                      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Reminder:

                        A parent who goes to court with a lawyer to increase access time isn't doing it for the money. The costs alone to do this would eat up any change in the child support payments.

                        Just do the math. You mentioned that the other parent is a shift worker. So lets assume an income of 80,000 (works for Toyota/Honda as an example).

                        CS for two children in ON at 80K is $1,172 per month or $14,064 per year.

                        Trial costs for something like this from start (first conference) to end would easily be about 145,000 in legals including assessment and other nonsense.

                        Roughly it would cost the other parent 10.31 years in CHILD SUPPORT to bring this matter to court. Offset is based on both parent's income so the reduction is often minimal unless both parents make the same income then the net payable of CS is 0$ per month. Ultimately the other parent generally has to pay on the offset.

                        Based on the age of the children 10.31 years may be longer than the actual time the are eligible for child support! So why would a parent make this kind of investment to increase access time with their children? Because TIME with the children is WORTH MORE than the MONEY. It isn't about the CS... It is about the TIME.

                        So, to say this is all about money could be a mistake. Someone spending 145,000 to gain more access with their children isn't doing it "for the money". People who are doing it "for the money" would never take this kind of risk.

                        Costs are rarely ordered on full recovery. Even in WD's matter he has never gotten full recovery.

                        Don't think a judge isn't sitting there doing this analysis. Especially if the other parent comes to court with a good lawyer. It will easy to determine if the request is based on money.

                        FYI: The material change could be met based on the children's ages and a request to have a Section 30 / OCL to determine the wishes of the children. If the other parent has a good lawyer they can present the "time = material change" argument. I have seen many good lawyers present the proper BoA to do this but, have never seen a self rep do this...

                        Good Luck!
                        Tayken

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Ange71727 View Post
                          I agree that a cheater isn't always a bad parent. In my case though, his private life crossed over into my kids' lives and I truly believe it's a matter of time before it does again. You will argue that this is speculative and I can't predict the future; however, a track record exists. I worry about them losing another girlfriend (of his). They were heartbroken after the last one left. I don't think you will ever convince me that 50-50 is best right now. I am not saying it won't ever be.


                          Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
                          So let me get this straight. He's perfectly fine as a father with 35% access (if he cheats and your worried about kids)...but at 50% .. that crosses some sort of line? Can you tell me more about that line?

                          If you're so concerned about the kids mental health and your definition of "harm" (try using your definition in court ) ... then why not decrease his time?

                          If you're so concerned about psychological abuse (you say he talks badly of you, calls you a liar, etc)...then why haven't you sought OCL, CAS...or supervised visits? You did say he is "harming" them right? By your definition?

                          Most importantly......why have you been okay with all of this for 8 years at 35% access time? Now that he wants to spend more time with his kids you're suddenly bringing all this up?

                          The judge "will" ask you q's like these.

                          I don't think you will ever convince me that 50-50 is best right now
                          My opinion would be a graduated schedule leading to 50/50 and counselling sessions with all of you in the room to put an end to any nonsense chatter that may be occurring. The 2 of you shouldn't be at each others throats at the Dr's office in front of these poor kids.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Tayken View Post
                            Reminder:

                            A parent who goes to court with a lawyer to increase access time isn't doing it for the money. The costs alone to do this would eat up any change in the child support payments.

                            Just do the math. You mentioned that the other parent is a shift worker. So lets assume an income of 80,000 (works for Toyota/Honda as an example).

                            CS for two children in ON at 80K is $1,172 per month or $14,064 per year.

                            Trial costs for something like this from start (first conference) to end would easily be about 145,000 in legals including assessment and other nonsense.

                            Roughly it would cost the other parent 10.31 years in CHILD SUPPORT to bring this matter to court. Offset is based on both parent's income so the reduction is often minimal unless both parents make the same income then the net payable of CS is 0$ per month. Ultimately the other parent generally has to pay on the offset.

                            Based on the age of the children 10.31 years may be longer than the actual time the are eligible for child support! So why would a parent make this kind of investment to increase access time with their children? Because TIME with the children is WORTH MORE than the MONEY. It isn't about the CS... It is about the TIME.

                            So, to say this is all about money could be a mistake. Someone spending 145,000 to gain more access with their children isn't doing it "for the money". People who are doing it "for the money" would never take this kind of risk.

                            Costs are rarely ordered on full recovery. Even in WD's matter he has never gotten full recovery.

                            Don't think a judge isn't sitting there doing this analysis. Especially if the other parent comes to court with a good lawyer. It will easy to determine if the request is based on money.

                            FYI: The material change could be met based on the children's ages and a request to have a Section 30 / OCL to determine the wishes of the children. If the other parent has a good lawyer they can present the "time = material change" argument. I have seen many good lawyers present the proper BoA to do this but, have never seen a self rep do this...

                            Good Luck!
                            Tayken


                            The money it would take is exactly why I don't think it will make it to court. There is no way he will spend that much for this. He is going to take my deal to reduce his payments.


                            Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
                              So let me get this straight. He's perfectly fine as a father with 35% access (if he cheats and your worried about kids)...but at 50% .. that crosses some sort of line? Can you tell me more about that line?

                              If you're so concerned about the kids mental health and your definition of "harm" (try using your definition in court ) ... then why not decrease his time?

                              If you're so concerned about psychological abuse (you say he talks badly of you, calls you a liar, etc)...then why haven't you sought OCL, CAS...or supervised visits? You did say he is "harming" them right? By your definition?

                              Most importantly......why have you been okay with all of this for 8 years at 35% access time? Now that he wants to spend more time with his kids you're suddenly bringing all this up?

                              The judge "will" ask you q's like these.


                              My opinion would be a graduated schedule leading to 50/50 and counselling sessions with all of you in the room to put an end to any nonsense chatter that may be occurring. The 2 of you shouldn't be at each others throats at the Dr's office in front of these poor kids.


                              Just to clarify - HE falsely accused me of doing all of this in front of our kid at the doctor's office. I already told you that he made this up. I repeatedly told him to stop yelling at me that day. My son was nowhere near this and when he came out of the doctor's office his dad and I were sitting there silent. The doctor knows about this and will speak on my behalf.
                              I would absolutely never conduct myself that way in front of my child. Their father has though.
                              I HAVE considered a reduction in custody. I just think that less time with them would be detrimental to my kids. I would have to explain why daddy is getting less time now because they would need justification at their ages. I think they're too young to hear the adult stuff. I'm not a mom who needs to slander my ex to my kids despite all of your comments about me being jealous and throwing tantrums etc.


                              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                In reviewing this thread I think that you initially indicated that you took issue with the father wanting children only on his time off. You felt this was unfair as you don't get the same consideration in your current schedule as weekends are your only time off.

                                You have repeatedly stated that you have no issue with him spending more time with the children. The current arrangement 65/35 was what he requested (and you agreed to) 8 years ago. The two of you share holiday time.

                                The father is a shift worker.

                                Someone else in this thread raised an interesting point wondering how the two of you would have handled this if you were still together.

                                Perhaps you and the father simply have to get together and figure out a schedule which is workable for everyone. Father says he doesn't want to pay for child care. If that is the case then he should be considering a different job perhaps but I agree with another poster that his issue with his employer isn't your problem.

                                Perhaps ask the father to put down the boxing gloves for a period so the two of you can work out a new and improved schedule which takes both of your views into consideration.

                                Few lawyers out there forewarn their clients of the huge cost of going to trial. From the first visit to a lawyer, after you fill out the financial information (including credit, assets, etc), the lawyer knows how far the litigation is likely to go. I bring this up because you might alert the father of this (and how lawyers will tell you what you want to hear as long as they are certain they will get paid) and propose the two of you get together and work something out before lawyers take the hard-earned money.
                                Last edited by arabian; 01-07-2017, 11:06 AM.

                                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