Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

making a change with no agreement

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • making a change with no agreement

    So here is a situation:

    No agreement in place. Separated for a year. Matrimonal house just sold. Mom has bought a house 25 minutes drive east to live with new spouse and his kid. Dad is renting apartment near matrimonal home.

    Kids goes to daycare 2 days a week while mom is at work and is dropped off by mom both mornings. Daycare starts at 9am and moms work starts at noon. Dad picks up kids after work those 2 days.

    The other 3 days a week mom stays home with kids. Oldest kid will start JK in September.

    Mom has requested kids attend school in her district. Dad has requested kids attend school in matrimonal home district. After mom told him she bought a house he said he disagreed where it is and said he will buy a house where they use to live.

    Can mom unilaterally change the daycare today (because there is no agreement and she does both drop offs)? What are her options?

    What options does dad have? Can he enfore they stay at the same daycare?

  • #2
    Mom should've taken into consideration the daycare/school change prior to moving and found a consensus then. The parent that moved should bear the burden of being inconvenienced do to their decision.

    That said, the kids haven't attended regular school yet, as such haven't really established themselves there. They don't have a regular school.

    What is the parenting schedule? Is it shared, or does one parent have more time than the other? There are factors that need to be known that may impact how it plays out.

    Comment


    • #3
      kid schedule is majority of time with mom. Dad gets oldest 2 over nights a week and EOW until Sunday night.

      Youngest is same schedule but returns to mom every night before bed. youngest do not do overnights at all with dad.

      Mom did take into the considerations but was not able to find a suitable residence. She also wants to reside with her new partner and have all 3 kids attend the same school. She cannot switch her step childs school, it is already decided.

      Mom also stays home with both kids 3 days a week during the day along with 2 nights a week and EOW and every Sunday night.

      Comment


      • #4
        The consensus for mom by dad was "you agree with what I want or I will not agree to change"

        Mom had to move, matrimonal house sold. Plus dad doesn't live in that school district. It wasn't until mom told dad where she bought a house that dad flipped out and said no change. Until that point dad was open to change.

        Comment


        • #5
          Off topic - how old is the youngest and why isn't that child spending overnights?

          Lets be clear here. Yes, mom likely had to move as the matrimonial home sold. Buuuuuut, instead of looking for something more local she decided to move in with Mr. Wonderful in his area. Now mom wants her kids to go to school with Mr. Wonderful's kid(s) because Mr. Wonderful's child can't switch schools because Mr. Wonderful's ex likely won't agree. But lets not try and play it off as something more or less innocent than the situation really is. Mom resides where she does because of their new partner. While it is suggested that Mom couldn't find accommodation closer, that may be true, but I actually doubt it was a consideration given the plan to live with Mr. Wonderful who is bound to keep their kid in the current school.

          At any rate, because the kids weren't registered in school prior, it is unlikely that a court will force them to return to the old area. Mom's decision to move them unilaterally was wrong, but in this case will likely be rewarded because there is no agreement and because of the kids ages. Mom likely should bear some of the responsibility for facilitating their ex's parenting time should mom's decision impact the ex's ability to exercise their parenting time. Extra time in the summer or some other concession should be made.

          Comment


          • #6
            Mom did look for something more local. Found something closer to ex husbands work since his apartment was only temporary. Also found a better community to raise the children in.

            That is the big question - if mom unilaterally changes the daycare now and dad files an emergency motion, will the court hear it as an emergency or just say the kids have care, all is fine, will decide 1 year from now with the rest of the separation stuff.

            Mom has offered more parenting time with dad and less support to offset the move. Dad will start 50/50 equal schedule with both kids and get to drop off kid at school in mornings and get pickup at school 2-3 days a week. (on his days).

            Comment


            • #7
              I agree with HammerDad. As Mom has de facto primary residence with the kids, and there's no agreement; and the kids have no history of school in the district around the former matrimonial home, the kids will probably end up in Mom's school.

              But this puts a burden on Dad because Mom decided to move out of the area and in with her new partner. The burden most likely takes the form of transport time to get the kids between Mom's area and Dad's area. Can Mom compensate Dad for the travel burden? By doing all the driving on the weekends Dad has the kids? Taking the kids from school to Dad's place on his nights with them? As the one who moved, Mom should be the one to go the extra mile to make sure her move doesn't create more problems for Dad.

              Alternately, is it possible for the kids to reside in Mom's area and go to school in Dad's? Might be a good idea to call your school board and find out.

              Comment


              • #8
                ...or knowing that mom has defacto custody dad could solve the problem entirely and be cooperative and buy a house near moms house. His residence is an apartment, so why move from that to move further away from mom knowing now where she and the kids live and will be going to school. It is counter productive.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by HammerDad View Post
                  Off topic - how old is the youngest and why isn't that child spending overnights?

                  Lets be clear here. Yes, mom likely had to move as the matrimonial home sold. Buuuuuut, instead of looking for something more local she decided to move in with Mr. Wonderful in his area. Now mom wants her kids to go to school with Mr. Wonderful's kid(s) because Mr. Wonderful's child can't switch schools because Mr. Wonderful's ex likely won't agree. But lets not try and play it off as something more or less innocent than the situation really is. Mom resides where she does because of their new partner. While it is suggested that Mom couldn't find accommodation closer, that may be true, but I actually doubt it was a consideration given the plan to live with Mr. Wonderful who is bound to keep their kid in the current school.

                  At any rate, because the kids weren't registered in school prior, it is unlikely that a court will force them to return to the old area. Mom's decision to move them unilaterally was wrong, but in this case will likely be rewarded because there is no agreement and because of the kids ages. Mom likely should bear some of the responsibility for facilitating their ex's parenting time should mom's decision impact the ex's ability to exercise their parenting time. Extra time in the summer or some other concession should be made.

                  HD...good post and points made in this. However, why are you bring Kevin O leary into this? LOL



                  Originally posted by SuzieSunshine View Post
                  ...or knowing that mom has defacto custody dad could solve the problem entirely and be cooperative and buy a house near moms house. His residence is an apartment, so why move from that to move further away from mom knowing now where she and the kids live and will be going to school. It is counter productive.
                  How are you related to the parties.....?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by SuzieSunshine View Post
                    .... It is counter productive.
                    So is moving the kids further away from the other parent without consulting them.

                    Make no mistake, mom is not without fault here. She made decisions based on what she thought was best for her. While those decisions may also be in the best interests of the kids, it was ultimately for her benefit so that she can reside with Mr. Wonderful. Should the ex file a motion to have the kids registered in the old area, both the ex and mom would have to argue why it is in the kids best interests. They both will look pretty bad, as mom shouldn't have relocated the kids from their familiar area without a) consulting and maybe b) the ex's consent. Lets also be clear here, without an agreement each parent has defacto JOINT custody. Only a judge can determine if the other parent gets a lesser form of custody/decision making ability.

                    Also, without an agreement and because each parent shares defacto joint custody, the ex can in turn register the kids in the old school district. And Mom would be forced to fight it in court, just like should mom register first dad would have to fight it.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by serendipitous View Post
                      HD...good post and points made in this. However, why are you bring Kevin O leary into this? LOL
                      Mr./Mrs. Wonderful = the term usually used for the new guy/girl in each parents life. The ones the bonding parent person sees with rose coloured glasses and usually makes decisions to be near or with new Wonderful individual that negatively impacts the other parent.....and rarely understands or care that those decisions impact the other parent. Mr./Mrs. Wonderful may turn into a long time partner or a fly-by-the-night fling.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by SuzieSunshine View Post
                        ...or knowing that mom has defacto custody dad could solve the problem entirely and be cooperative and buy a house near moms house. His residence is an apartment, so why move from that to move further away from mom knowing now where she and the kids live and will be going to school. It is counter productive.
                        If Dad always did everything Mom wanted, it would solve all of Mom's problems. However, Dad may have priorities of his own. He may have his own new partner in the area, he may work nearby, his family may live there, he may ... Mom and Dad need to balance their interests.

                        Mom should also read up on the difference between joint custody and residency. The kids may stay with her most days. That is residency. However, custody refers to decision-making in areas like education, health, location, religion, etc. Even if the kids aren't staying with Dad most nights, he still has the right to be involved in decisions about their future, including where they will go to school. Primary residency doesn't mean that she gets to decide everything.

                        In this particular case, because the kids are very young and not yet established in a school, a court would probably say they should go to school in Mom's area. However, if they were older, had already been going to school for a while, Dad lived in the area, etc it wouldn't be so clear-cut and Mom might not be allowed to move the children, even if they resided primarily with her.

                        Mom and Dad need to get themselves a proper separation agreement which spells out the details of joint custody, so they are both clear on it.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by SuzieSunshine View Post
                          ...or knowing that mom has defacto custody dad could solve the problem entirely and be cooperative and buy a house near moms house. His residence is an apartment, so why move from that to move further away from mom knowing now where she and the kids live and will be going to school. It is counter productive.
                          In other words, "dad could solve the problem entirely by doing what mom wants, because that's what she wants"

                          Honestly, that's what it reads like.

                          HammerDad's phrase and explanation of "Mr.Wonderful" is so apt.

                          At the time of separation, my ex and I had one kid in school, and one still at home. She moved on to her own Mr. Wonderful very quickly, and suddenly decided, 4 months in, that they were moving 20 minutes out of town to a lovely dream house in the country. She did this without talking with me first, or consulting the school bus company to see if the kids would get bus service in the area for the school district that they already lived.

                          Sure enough, to my ex's frustration and shock, she discovered that 1) The school bus company would only provide bus service to her if she switched the kids schools, and 2) Dad (me) was completely unwilling to allow her to change our kid's lives and my own so that he life could be more convenient.

                          Was I being a jealous jerk and being angry about her moving on before me? Nope. I was simply wanting the kids to remain in the area that they had spent a couple of years in already, AND I was opposed to having to do any extra driving as a result of someone else moving. Why should I incur extra time and spend extra money on gas for no other reason than to help my ex move to a nice place? I didn't begrudge her move, but what she was fundamentally asking me to do was help facilitate it, and I was of the firm belief that she was to be fully responsible for funding and managing her own choices moving forward.

                          The only fair thing to do in these cases is to take a snapshot of where the family is located at the time of separation, and then use that as a baseline. If someone moves out of that area, it should be incumbent upon them to manage the costs and inconveniences that come with it.

                          Think about it, if the tables were turned, how happy would mom be if dad moved a fair bit away, and then arrogantly expected mom to simply move to that area or take on the driving, or consent to the kid's daycare or school being changed to suit dad's situation? What's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

                          I see this happen a lot with divorced couples. One or both of the parties move on, find someone new, and then they try to subtly shift everything to revolve around a grand new life plan with their new amazing partner, and just assume that everyone their kids, their ex) will share in their joy and shift along with them.

                          What mom needs to realize is that they entered this parent thing as equal partners and need to treat each other as such. It really does suck that having kids with the ex leaves you anchored to them in some fashion, but that's the price of bringing amazing little kidlets into the world.

                          As for my ex in my situation, she stayed at dream house for a total of six months and then moved back into town, and once again moved into a different school area. If I had let the kids move school areas to match her whims, they would have changed schools twice in one year. Me? I have remained in the same spot for the last three years, and even though I have moved on with a new partner and find it tempting to find a different place to live, I refuse to put any more moves on my kids, or assume that I will be able to get my ex to agree to let the kids change schools to make my life more convenient. Imagine that.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by SuzieSunshine View Post
                            Mom did look for something more local. Found something closer to ex husbands work since his apartment was only temporary. Also found a better community to raise the children in.

                            That is the big question - if mom unilaterally changes the daycare now and dad files an emergency motion, will the court hear it as an emergency or just say the kids have care, all is fine, will decide 1 year from now with the rest of the separation stuff.

                            Mom has offered more parenting time with dad and less support to offset the move. Dad will start 50/50 equal schedule with both kids and get to drop off kid at school in mornings and get pickup at school 2-3 days a week. (on his days).
                            So the mom chose a good location for the kids that is close to the dad's work? And the dad's apartment was meant to be temporary, so he's free to move to the school zone in question with the bonus if it being closer to his employment? And the mother anticipates that he'll be an equally involved parent at the school, with 50-50 access and offset CS? How is any of this bad, and require an emergency motion to prevent?

                            It sounds to me like he's just pissed off that he has to concede that she's the one in the right here. Maybe he's afraid to set a precedent of things going her way because she might take advantage later?

                            I'd suggest that he take these offers and get the separation agreement to reflect these arrangements before the child is registered in school and he moves.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by HammerDad View Post
                              So is moving the kids further away from the other parent without consulting them..
                              Discussion was had. Mom informed dad before moving that she would not reside in the same school district and would be looking for residence outside of that school district.

                              Once she found a house and made a purchase she informed him of her district. At no time did dad insist on the existing school district because he wanted one closer to his work.

                              When he found out her new home was not beside his work, even though it is closer, he reverted to the defacto situation to spite her decision to not agree to a school he wanted.

                              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