Ottawa Divorce .com Forums

Ottawa Divorce .com Forums (https://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/index.php)
-   Parenting Issues (https://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Yet Another Stupid Arguement (https://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13823)

motherbear4 12-06-2012 07:51 PM

Yet Another Stupid Arguement
 
It is my ex's weekend starting tomorrow. He has sent me a text saying he MAY have strep throat, rambled on about being highly contagious, and that he will not be picking them up.

I have responded that I am not available, which I am not. A parent being sick is part of parenthood, just like kids being sick and that he is to pick them up at his usual time.

So, I get the usual "a judge will not be pleased to see/hear that you have abandoned our children" blah blah blah.

I am standing my ground but I know that he will not pick them up. The clincher is he has already been the cause of my being dismissed from two sitters and I cannot have it happen again.

What to do?

blinkandimgone 12-06-2012 09:08 PM

Drop them off at his place. Problem solved.

standing on the sidelines 12-06-2012 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blinkandimgone (Post 118261)
Drop them off at his place. Problem solved.

true but what happens if he does have strep?? I have never had it nor do I know if its contagious.

OhMy 12-06-2012 09:29 PM

Unless he licks the children or coughs directly in their faces, it should be as simple as proper hand washing and coughing etiquette to prevent the spead.

Strep Throat

The above link is for kids, however the same would apply for adults.

standing on the sidelines 12-06-2012 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhMy (Post 118264)
Unless he licks the children or coughs directly in their faces, it should be as simple as proper hand washing and coughing etiquette to prevent the spead.

Strep Throat

The above link is for kids, however the same would apply for adults.

thanks for the information :)

motherbear4 12-06-2012 09:40 PM

Thanks everyone, I needed to know if I was off my rocker :p Strep is contagious, but seems like everything is contagious ;) Any time he gets something bacterial, he's the most contagious person ever to walk the face of the earth and has been instructed by a Dr. to stay away from his kids. This is a load of baloney; I simply cannot see a Dr. saying that. Well, I guess I will wait to see if this particular Dr. tells him to stay away from his kids and see what happens when I drop them off. Could be interesting, I've never even been to his place!

And if he were going to infect them, he's already done it from access earlier this week!

OhMy 12-06-2012 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by motherbear4 (Post 118266)

And if he were going to infect them, he's already done it from access earlier this week!

You are very correct with this statement. Most viruses and bacterial illnesses are most contagious prior to symptoms occurring.

:)

Janus 12-06-2012 09:56 PM

I'm going to dissent here.

If he is paying full table CS plus proportional s7 expenses, then that represents the sum total of his responsibilities to the children. Anything that he does above and beyond paying the CS is awesome, but optional.

If you are receiving table CS, then you are the parent. If you want the money, you need to accept the obligations that come along with the cash. If you want your ex to be a parent with responsibilities, then change your arrangement to one of shared custody.

If his regular (and, to most of us, bewildering) refusal to use access is causing you a problem, go to the courts to fix that. Until then, it is your problem.

momliz 12-06-2012 09:57 PM

What would I do? Personally what I would do is not take the chance that my kids could get sick. Plus just dropping them off when he says he doesn't want them is going to cause drama which I try to avoid. I would just make arrangements if I wasn't going to be home. The kids have Grandma and Grandpa who can help out when needed and not everyone has support, I understand. I'm used to my ex being a bit of a flake and bailing at the last minute. If I didn't have a plan B firmly in place for such occassions I don't know what I'd do. Each parent has to do what makes the most sense to them. Good luck.

momliz 12-06-2012 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janus (Post 118268)
I'm going to dissent here.

If he is paying full table CS plus proportional s7 expenses, then that represents the sum total of his responsibilities to the children. Anything that he does above and beyond paying the CS is awesome, but optional.

If you are receiving table CS, then you are the parent. If you want the money, you need to accept the obligations that come along with the cash. If you want your ex to be a parent with responsibilities, then change your arrangement to one of shared custody.

If his regular (and, to most of us, bewildering) refusal to use access is causing you a problem, go to the courts to fix that. Until then, it is your problem.


I don't agree. Child support and access/custody are two seperate things. Every person is responsible for financially supporting their children. That's a given.

If he is supposed to have visitation but refuses his visit I suggest documenting these occurances. Once day when the kids are bigger and if he suddenly shows interest in his children you will have a documented history of his previous disinterest.

arabian 12-06-2012 10:09 PM

I agree with Janus.

IF you are the custodial parent you are responsible for your children. He doesn't want to see the kids. You have to accept it and move on. Be thankful he gave you warning. It probably screws with your plans but oh well. You have custody and that is all part of it.

Movie night in?

OhMy 12-06-2012 10:17 PM

Janus and Arabian have very valid points. Bottom line, you can't force someone to be a parent and make use of his/her access time.

It's too bad that he has done this. Typically after 2-3 days of antibiotics, strep throat if that is his valid reason starts to drastically improve.

I hope it works out and what ever happens this weekend or where the kids end up that they remain unaffected by it as much as possible and have a good weekend.

Unevenplayingground 12-06-2012 10:40 PM

I was a single mother with sole custody. If my ex called me because he was sick, I would definitely keep them home with me if it was contagious. I would have let him take the next weekend in exchange. I would rather have them enjoy their time with their father and not come home sick. Even if we had shared custody, and he was sick, I would sooner keep them until he was better. I would hope he would do the same favour for me, if the time ever arose.

motherbear4 12-06-2012 11:49 PM

Again, thanks to everyone. I seriously weighed the two big options, drop them off or just keep them, prior to posting here. Its a crappy road to walk trying to come to a decision. Your varying opinions are helping me to come to a decision.

At the end of the day, it really will be the kids upset either way. I'd rather have them home where they are wanted for this particular weekend, rather than where they are not.

SadAndTired 12-07-2012 12:15 AM

Well, if he really is sick, then okay. But if he consistently cancels then I think this theory applies...

Family Law Toronto :: Child Custody :: www.familylawtoronto.com

"The most serious complaints have to do with missed access. Access is considered at law to be the right of the child. It is not the right of the access parent nor is it a punishment of the custodial parent. It is the right of the child to maintain contact and develop a relationship with both parents.

When court ordered access does not take place because of the actions of one parent or the other, the party responsible can expect to be brought back to court. If the access parent consistently misses or cancels access, a judge may curtail the access. Raising a child as a single parent can be an exhausting, all-consuming exercise. The custodial parent has a right to the occasional weekend to him/herself. More importantly, the child has a right to see the access parent and he or she may be disappointed when access visits are cancelled by that parent.

If access is persistently missed, the court may order it be suspended rather than expose the child to future disappointments."


Sending my ex this link helped with "access" cancellations.

Hope it works out.

Janus 12-07-2012 02:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SadAndTired (Post 118287)
It is the right of the child to maintain contact and develop a relationship with both parents.

This would imply that there is an obligation for a non-custodial parent to develop a relationship. That would be... interesting.

Quote:

The custodial parent has a right to the occasional weekend to him/herself.
Where are these rights coming from?

Quote:

If access is persistently missed, the court may order it be suspended rather than expose the child to future disappointments."
Well, that part I believe at least

Quote:

Sending my ex this link helped with "access" cancellations.
You can't expect all ex's to be swayed by such silly stuff.

SadAndTired 12-11-2012 07:54 PM

Quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by SadAndTired
It is the right of the child to maintain contact and develop a relationship with both parents.


This would imply that there is an obligation for a non-custodial parent to develop a relationship. That would be... interesting.
Here you go Janus. Tayken provided caselaw....

http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...t-child-13856/

I know it is sort of a reverse argument, but could it not be made? That the child has a right to the see the non custodial parent regardless of the ncp's plans?

Janus 12-11-2012 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SadAndTired (Post 118684)
I know it is sort of a reverse argument, but could it not be made? That the child has a right to the see the non custodial parent regardless of the ncp's plans?

My understanding is that a child has a right of access to a willing noncustodial parent, and a custodial parent has an obligation to provide that access.

I would be very surprised if a non-custodial parent has an obligation to provide anything other than cash. Frankly, the world would probably be a better place if NC's had to provide love instead of cash, but family law is not set up to enforce that type of stuff. Cash is a good substitute for love in our system :)

OhMy 12-11-2012 10:39 PM

Janus,

It is clear that you are upset at having to pay cs. I am under the impression though that you do pay it.

I am curious what your thoughts are about a non custodial parent utilizing access and the custodial parent being open and encouraging of it, despite the fact that the non custodial is not contributing any cs, despite court order(and has the means to do so)?

Not all custodial parents are just looking for a buck and a lot of them are able to seperate the issues.

Janus 12-11-2012 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhMy (Post 118701)
It is clear that you are upset at having to pay cs. I am under the impression though that you do pay it.

I have 50/50 shared custody, so I only pay offset, but I pay that offset to a substantially wealthier household. I find the idea that this helps my children to be utterly ridiculous, but alas the best interests of my children are not considered in our family law system.

Quote:

I am curious what your thoughts are about a non custodial parent utilizing access and the custodial parent being open and encouraging of it, despite the fact that the non custodial is not contributing any cs, despite court order(and has the means to do so)?
I would be surprised.

That said, CS that is not paid will eventually be paid. Financial arrears cannot be escaped forever. Access "arrears" are generally never made up, and there is no enforcement agency to help those parents. A parent being denied support can get free help. A parent being denied access has to fight on their own dime.

The point is, the custodial parent can afford to be "nice", because the cash will come eventually. A non-custodial parent cannot be "nice", because not getting access eventually can lead to even less access.

As I said, family law has a laser-focus on cash, and very little else. Every now and then the courts fix an access problem, but it shouldn't come to that. Denying access should be tantamount to kidnapping, and treated as such. At the very least, I don't know why parents that deny access don't get their driving license suspended...


Quote:

Not all custodial parents are just looking for a buck and a lot of them are able the separate the issues.
Some are. In the case of non-abusive parents, the focus of a custody battle is almost always cash (or control... but cash is a good form of control)

OhMy 12-11-2012 11:30 PM

Thank you Janus. Your insight is appreciated.

Lastly, I will say 'surprise!'

arabian 12-12-2012 12:43 AM

Thread changed topic - ended up being about child support/money. Wonder how that happened? Did I miss something?

Janus 12-12-2012 12:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhMy (Post 118709)
Lastly, I will say 'surprise!'

;)

I knew where you were going with that, of course.

That said, you will get your cash eventually, so I don't totally buy the "I'm not getting my money, but still letting spouse see the kids" routine. That said, I'm glad that you are letting the kids see their father.

hadenough 12-12-2012 01:32 AM

Quote by Janus "if you are receiving table CS, then you are the parent. If you want the money, you need to accept the obligations that come along with the cash."

It is glaringly obvious that you are obsessed with MONEY. By your assertions, so long as table CS is being paid, that is (apparently) a blank cheque to act like an a-hole.

Really? Are most of us "bewildered" by the other parent not being responsible and seeing their kids regularly/as often as possible? I don't think so.

If it were my kids and "dad" called with his sob story (which could very well be BS) I'd say screw it, and make other arrangements. That's me.

You must have really got the short end of the stick Janus, and I don't pretend to know in which, or how many "ways." You make a lot of really angry, accusatory statements and the common theme you bemoan is usually the almighty BUCK.

OhMy 12-12-2012 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janus (Post 118714)
;)

I knew where you were going with that, of course.

That said, you will get your cash eventually, so I don't totally buy the "I'm not getting my money, but still letting spouse see the kids" routine. That said, I'm glad that you are letting the kids see their father.

Well you are not in my shoes. You have no idea of my actual situation.

I seperated those issues at the very beginning for the sake of the children.

In my situation, the non payment is about the other party trying to control me.
Yes, I have actual evidence of that.

Merry Christmas.

Janus 12-12-2012 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hadenough (Post 118718)
It is glaringly obvious that you are obsessed with MONEY. By your assertions, so long as table CS is being paid, that is (apparently) a blank cheque to act like an a-hole.

Absolutely not, and I'm sorry if I gave that impression. Paying table CS allows a parent to no longer be a parent, not be an asshole. I believe I said that if a parent is not using access and is cancelling at the last second, it would be very appropriate to go to court to reduce said access.

Quote:

Really? Are most of us "bewildered" by the other parent not being responsible and seeing their kids regularly/as often as possible? I don't think so.
Well, *I* am bewildered... I want to see my kids as often as possible :). If I was thinking only of myself and I could grab sole custody tomorrow, I would do it in a heartbeat. Every day away from my kids is really hard to take, especially this time of year for a variety of reasons. However, I can't and I don't think it is good for the children, so I wouldn't change shared custody even if I could.

Quote:

You make a lot of really angry, accusatory statements and the common theme you bemoan is usually the almighty BUCK.
The weird part is that my kids are not getting screwed that badly, I just get annoyed at others who think that paying CS is a priori a good thing. In my personal situation, CS is just an unneeded money grab, surely you can understand why that might colour my viewpoint a little :).

Also, as I read more, I recognize how unfair the CS system is. I don't have to be personally victimized to recognize that table CS at anything above 0% access is ridiculous.

I have also been browsing forums populated almost exclusively by recipients of CS recently. I should probably stop that. In general, their sense of entitlement and complete disdain for the payor of support is a little nauseating. Adults who refuse to work and then ridicule the source of their paycheck deserve their own special little circle in a hot place as far as I am concerned.

good_mom 12-14-2012 11:22 AM

Do keep kids and document. You should ask him by e-mail to supply a doctors note stating that the doc said he must stay away from the kids and for how long he is contagious. You want to make sure that you can make any arrangements that may be required for the time indicated by the doctor not to put them at "risk". He is not a medical doctor and cant determine that only his doctor can. If this is what he is saying, he should be able to back it up. This puts the accountability on him. There are reasons why they are ex's and unfortunate those reasons do not just magically disappear.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:28 PM.