Long distance ex trying to get every other weekend

[blinkandimgone]

You're comfortable with letting your son decide if and when to see his dad.

Should he decide he wants to live with dad and not see you, I assume you'll be comfortable with that as well, given you feel he is capable of making such decisions at this age...?

[mcdreamy]

(And things will go better if you and Dad work out a schedule rather than having a judge tell you that Dad gets every other weekend starting next week).

^^Doubtful that would happen, given the history.

But, imo, you'd be crazy to want a judge to make parenting decisions for you.

[Links17]

Disclaimer: I am a bitter dad

Parents have no rights - only obligations.
-Summer is 10 weeks. 5 weeks of summer = shared custody during the summer

From what I understand you are ok with the schedule he is proposing, you are just requiring your ex to take the kid to hockey on any weekend he has the kid?

I think this is reasonable, I don't believe a judge will allow this joker to show up after 10 years and turn this kid's life upside down - the father has to accommodate the son not vice versa.

Unless, your requirement is some form of constructive obstruction - you can just stick to that position in court and you'll be fine.

You should oblige your son to give his dad a chance, He still has a long life ahead - it would be better would be a proper relationship with his dad, teaching your son that sometimes people make mistakes and deserve a second chance shouldn't be too hard.

I think it is also reasonable to ask for a graduate access increase....

Finally, would you trade child support for a father? Let's just say you can get 300$ more per month or you can get a father who takes up 50% of the parenting of your son and is a presence in his life, what would you take? Even if he is making some sort of long term play towards custody, so what? He will either screw it up and alienate your son or he won't and your son will get a father...

[somethingelse]

Here's something which influences my reading of the OP's statements.

I am a dad. In our child's case, the mother has worked extremely hard to get me out of our child's life. Done everything she can to make it unpleasant, inconvenient, difficult, expensive and time consuming for myself and our child to have a relationship. This started months before the child was born. The strategies have included false allegations of abuse and non-acceptance of offers-to-settle which resulted in the mother being ordered to pay court costs to me, which she didn't. Also, making every transfer to me horrendous for myself and the child. Clearly a strategy- if I see the transfers to me are horrendous for the child, maybe I'll give up on showing up. This seems to be a common strategy. Lots of contempt of court orders, which I've made the mistake of not bringing contempt motions about. (Don't make this mistake.)

At any time in our child's life, I might have given up on a relationship with our child because it was so incredibly hard for the child and I. I could not have been faulted for giving up, sad as it would have been for our child and me. Considered suicide a couple of times b/c didn't want to give but didn't see how continuation was possible.

Astoundingly, at the same time, in parallel, in our case the mother repeatedly made and makes statements to the court and community that she values the child's relationship with me. This language sounds similar to the language the OP uses here- says committed but not acting committed. The OP says she is committed to the child's relationship to the dad, and works hard to ensure there is a relationship, and sees the dad as not committed. But at the same time the OP seems to value sports as more valuable than the child's relationship with someone the child will (or is it may if the mother allows it?) have a relationship with for the next fourty years.

OP, the child's relationship with its parents has enormous value. Act like you believe it and your child will thank you.

BTW, have you mentioned how the two parents came to be living so far apart? Have you mentioned how the sport is paid for?

[Rioe]

I'm suspecting that since the father lives three hours away, the intention is that the child travel to him every other weekend. This would make it impossible for the father to get the child to the local hockey.

I also caught the undercurrent that the mother believes that since this request for access didn't come until she requested proper table CS, the request for access is just retaliation, and not sincere. As in "Oh, YOU want more money? Well, I'm going to turn your life upsidedown by getting more access then!"

And for all the child is saying "whatever" to his mom when she suggests he have time with his father, he's probably secretly dreaming that his dad will swoop in and be a proper parent and care about him.

All that said, I do still think that dropping hockey for access is setting up the child-father relationship for failure. The child will resent the father for forcing him out of hockey, and the father will have to cope with a sulky adolescent he doesn't know very well.

If at all possible, I would talk to the father and simply explain that the child loves hockey, and taking him out of it for access would not be a good start at establishing a father-son relationship. Then work TOGETHER to come up with a good way to do it that doesn't require disrupting hockey. Send the child out of town on non-hockey weekends. On local hockey weekends, maybe the father could come to town and attend and cheer his son on and they could stay in a hotel together. On out of town tournament weekends, maybe the dad could meet the kid there and take over care for the weekend.

[YoungDad23]

Great post Rioe!

[Links17]

I agree with Rioe, the child attending hockey is the priority everything else should work around that

[arabian]

Having a child outside of a committed relationship is a very serious and deliberate decision. The OP has stated she never lived with the father and they broke up during the pregnancy. For all we know, the decision to proceed with the birth of the child might have been the reason for the break up. Not everyone wants to be a parent.

11 years go by and the self-imposed single mother applies to have CS increased as child support is the right of the child.

Meanwhile the father has decided he wants to have a meaningful relationship with his child. His motivations are irrelevant as the child has a right to have both parents in his life.

Mother's filing for adjusted CS and father's desire to increase time spent with son intertwined? Doubtful as father would by now know that there is absolutely no financial gain for him to do so. We're not talking about father trying to get custody (which he would probably fail at unless the mother were deemed to be unfit).

I think that when the mother made the decision to go it alone and raise the child she made the decision knowing that the father would simply pay money every month. If she truly wanted the father to be a part of the child's life she would have moved the 3 hours to where the father lived (and where her family lives). She made the conscious decision to not pursue this option.

11 years after birth of the child the father, for whatever reason, wants to be part of the child's life now. It may be disruptive for all but the child has the right to have both parents in his life.

I agree that every effort should be made to accommodate the father's wishes. Mother and father can coordinate this so the child doesn't miss too much of his hockey activity. Child is only 11 and hasn't spent much time with the Father so of course child is going to be anxious about this.

The mother can work cooperatively with the father or the court can order access (and mother can pay the father's court costs). Once again, the ball is in her court.