Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Not following endorsement of dad being primary caregiver

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

  • Not following endorsement of dad being primary caregiver

    Hi,

    Have a case of a narcissistic ex wife that thinks she is above the law. In late June we had a private court meeting with a judge. At the start of the session he read out his endorsement - a three page analysis of the many affidavits submitted to him that outline the issues faced btw the parties. SHE was named the one that has repeatedly put the child in the middle of adult conflict. But her action continue. But being a narcissist she can't help herself!

    But the one piece of the endorsement that was notable...was Dad was named as the "primary caregiver" i.e. when the mom is not available to care for the child, he would be the first to be contacted. As background, in the two years leading up to this session the ex wife continually pawned off her child to the maternal grandma. WELL...apparently she is above the law and doesn't care what the judge ordered...and since that day in court 1month ago we have 5 examples with 2 more examples to add by the end of the week where GRAMMIE and NOT DAD was used to care for the child DESPITE full knowledge that Dad is available to care.

    So...my question is. We have another court case in Sept. We just keep recording notes upon notes of her actions. What consequences can/will she face?

    I keep believing in karma

  • #2
    I will be watching the responses to your post with interest. I too have have had numerous court orders which continually get ignored by my ex and there seems to be little or no consequence. My personal view is that it comes down to the judge.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by mattine View Post
      Dad was named as the "primary caregiver" i.e. when the mom is not available to care for the child, he would be the first to be contacted. ... we have 5 examples with 2 more examples to add by the end of the week where GRAMMIE and NOT DAD was used to care for the child DESPITE full knowledge that Dad is available to care.
      You have it exactly backwards. It means dad is to be contacted first (by Dr/Hospital/School), THEN mom. Also, it is nothing to do with who gets first dibs on time with kid ... THAT is defined by your regular access schedule (you did not mention anything about an access schedule). Sometimes parties agree that if one parent cannot fulfill their access time, then the FIRST person they must call to step in is the other parent (not a babysitter or relative). That is called 'Right of First Refusal' (ROFR) ... not 'primary caregiver'. Since you did not mention ROFR, I'll assume you have not agreed to it.

      Your problems SHOULD be solved by adhering to your access schedule ... then butting out if she decides that on HER time, she foists the kids off on relatives.

      Comment


      • #4
        There is NO regular access schedule as her work schedule and his work schedule varies week to week SO access schedules need to be determined month by month with HER not disclosing her schedule because she can, and him always disclosing his work schedule because he is honest and amicable. There is also no agreement yet with a clause for ROFR. This agreement is what is being fought for - with FULL ignorance by HER after two and half years (i.e. two offers to settle fully ignored by her). This case is likely headed to trial because she is a pig headed controlling narcissistic B.

        HOWEVER there IS an endorsement by the judge that the father be considered FIRST when SHE is unavailable when developing the schedule OR when she is looking for a "babysitter" i.e. he be given ROFR. BUT she is failing to adhere to any of this.

        SOOOO....he is not going to BUTT OUT when she is pawning off the child more times than not to grammie as opposed to using dad...when dads time is limited already.

        Comment


        • #5
          btw...I totally agree - IF access was 50-50 as he wants, than I fully agree that she can do what she so pleases with her daughter in terms of care when it is on her time as he would on his. THAT is the way it works well in my situation. BUT two factors to consider here 1) She wants bare schedule i.e. a weekly visit and maybe 4 overnights a month even though his flexible work schedule allows for so much more and 2) SHE has from day one been the one to bark at him and make a HUGE stink about him calling her when he is unavailable when their daughter is in her care. She wants ROFR when it comes to his access time, but she dont give a rats about ROFR for him... AND this was all transparent to the judge. HENCE why the endorsement.
          SO...back to my question....what kind of consequences can/will she face???

          Comment


          • #6
            If your question is what consequences will the mother face, by allowing her mother to care for the child on days that she has access but is not available to do so, I think dinkyface answered your question.

            That is, it's her day(s) with the child so it's her choice as to how the child spends the time.

            IMO,The "primary caregiver" can't agree to an access schedule and then tell the other parent how her portion of that access is utilized.

            I'm not endorsing what she does as I believe she should spend as much time as possible with her child on her access day(s).

            Comment


            • #7
              The problem is the irregular access schedule. Having a flexible schedule only works if parents can negotiate things calmly and fairly. This is apparently not the case. So you need to agree on a regular access schedule. And then if you cannot meet your scheduled parenting time, you have to find a caregiver. Same goes for her. Using the other parent as caregiver is an option, but apparently in your case it is causing additional conflict. Sad for the kids.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by mattine View Post
                There is NO regular access schedule as her work schedule and his work schedule varies week to week SO access schedules need to be determined month by month with HER not disclosing her schedule because she can, and him always disclosing his work schedule because he is honest and amicable. There is also no agreement yet with a clause for ROFR. This agreement is what is being fought for - with FULL ignorance by HER after two and half years (i.e. two offers to settle fully ignored by her). This case is likely headed to trial because she is a pig headed controlling narcissistic B.

                HOWEVER there IS an endorsement by the judge that the father be considered FIRST when SHE is unavailable when developing the schedule OR when she is looking for a "babysitter" i.e. he be given ROFR. BUT she is failing to adhere to any of this.

                SOOOO....he is not going to BUTT OUT when she is pawning off the child more times than not to grammie as opposed to using dad...when dads time is limited already.
                Yeah, this still falls under ROFR, and NOT 'primary caregiver'. Not sure why dad is letting her call the shots as far as access schedule. It is not his or the child's problem or reponsibility to deal with the fact that her work schedule changes. Dad should apply for joint custody, 50-50 and have a regular schedule set. He decides what to do with the child on his time and she on hers. Problem solved, minimal whining and interferance by either parent on the others' time.

                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