Access not specified

[wretchedotis]

Well from what I can gather, it's essentially EOW access. Except it's not always on weekends?

I dunno - I don't see much wrong with it from what you've described. One parent had the opportunity for more access - but never followed through.

That sucks. For the kids. Fir sure.

Held in that light - same parent is being given the benefit of the doubt to step up.

I wonder if he will?

Of course, it goes deeper than that. Who knows? Maybe the NCP is 500 km;s away?

[Reality]

Mess

How has this worked out overall? Were the children happy? Were the parents happy?

Overall the NCP has difficulty initiating and due to the childrens ages very little is needed from CP. Over the years the NCP has stopped responding to any initiation by the children or CP and goes long stretches without contact. Children are happy and successful however have become somewhat angry with the NCP absence. CP is not happy with the situation but has learned to understand that you can't force relationships but only encourage them and make the best of it.

Was this flexability actually usefull?

Yes it was. NCP parent work schedule was difficult therefore anytime that there was availability there was no nonsence. Childrens ages made the difference here. No babysitters etc.. IMHO this might cause difficulty with young children or high conflict CP.

What brought this about in the first place?

During marriage routine was ex would help with children 1-2 days out of every 8 because of ex work schedule and preference. All other time they would have to go to babysitter while I was at work.

First order from Minutes of Settlement was ex have children 4 out of 8. Ex never exercised this access schedule and children would not be picked up routinely. It became very difficult to schedule life without knowing if Ex was going to show up or not. Motion to change happened. Trial.

Parent 1 - asked for 2 out of 8 days
Parent 2 - asked for 4 out of 8 days
Children via OCL - asked to have a say in when they go and not as frequent

Judges order as stated

"The children shall have access a maximum of 4 out of every 16 days. The vistation shall take into account the views and prefences and schedules of the children"

[Reality]

Wretchedotis
I was asked to post for discussion only. No question from me. This order has been in place for 3.5 years. No bitching or moaning ever. It is what it is and all parties try to make the best of it.

[Mess]

I do have a few questions....

How has this worked out overall? Were the children happy? Were the parents happy?

The schedule seems kind of like a non-schedule; any 4 days out of 16. Was this flexability actually usefull? Did the schedule change regularly, or did you settle into a routine?

The children were to have their "views and preferences" taken into account. How did this work out? Did they tend to make the decisions on the schedule? How did this affect parenting? I know my kids would suddenly decide to go to their mum's if they were scheduled to clean their rooms...

What brought this about in the first place? If you don't want to go into detail, at least, was this the judge's idea or was it suggested/requested by one of the parties?

[Qrious]

WO - I think she may have posted it just for information.

She mentioned the access setup in her introduction thread and I asked her for more info on it because I had never heard of such a thing. She said she'd start another thread.


I don't think she wants to bitch, moan, or ask a question about it. I think she's saying it is what it is.

?

[wretchedotis]

M'kay.

So I don't see a solid question here?

You want us to comment on the wording? Or how the wording should be exercised?

Anywhooo.. It's not a totally unreasonable result on he balance of probabilities.

So now what are you gonna do?

Bitch and moan about every 4 day request out of 16?

Or just realise you have to co-exist and therefore 'play along to get along'?

[Reality]

wretchedotis

At the beginning of process children were
D5, D10, D15
At the end of trial
D10, D15, D20
Today
D13,D15,D23(no longer child of marriage)

Period of time since co-habitation = 8 years

Pattern of access = sporatic at best

Work History
Parent 1 - 4 days on (6am-6pm 2 days and 6pm-6am 2 days) 4 days off. Parent 1 status - now retired as of 01/12
Parent 2 - Mon-Fri 7am-4pm
Parent 2 status- Same employment schedule

[Reality]

Qrious
You are absolutely correct on all points. This schedule was not asked for by anyone. Not the applicant, not the respondent not the children through OCL. The judge came up with this by taking all parties wishes into account and the best interests of the children. There was lengthy reasons for this judgement at trial.
IMHO if people could get along well enough to make this arrangement work they certainly would not be at a trial.

[wretchedotis]

Ages of child(s)?

Period of time since co-habitation?

Pattern of access since then?

Work history and status of both parties?

[Qrious]

Thanks for this.

So... 4 out of 16 days....

First - negative. how far in advance do the involved parties know which 4 days? Scheduling or life-planning nightmare, I think.

Second - negative. WHO decides which 4 days? - you... X... Child.... Does everyone have to agree? Yikes - not good for higher conflict relationships, I would think. Tough for child if parents can't get along or agree.

Third - positive. More flexibility in schedules and choice for parties, but could be overshadowed by above two points.

Fourth - negative - what if the preference of the kids was to not go the 4 days? Did X care? Does or could this endanger the parent-NCP relationship?

I would think for this to work, all parties would have to get along, respect each other, be easy-going, and very flexible.

So... I guess it didnt really work out for you. Who decided this would be the access arrangement (just curious)?

Thanks again!

[Reality]

I was asked to start a thread because I briefly mentioned in my introduction that access is not specified in my order per say.

Keeping in mind full trial and definate reasons for this specific case were taken into account with full OCL, psych assessments, psychologist findings, case law, research statistics, you name it..it was done. I would not recommend this for any family because it is not a great scenario for the children but it is "reality" for this case. Life is hard..get over it and make the best of it

"The children shall have access a maximum of 4 out of every 16 days. The vistation shall take into account the views and prefences and schedules of the children"

Now read that again and ponder pros and cons and remember keep it real, and objective. I am happy to answer any questions because I don't want to bore you all with rambing on and on. the only question I will answer proactively....no DV here.