Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Just need to vent..................

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

  • #16
    BTW - toronto father, you are a dream. Never have I seen a Dad look at it from your 'eyes' before. The fact that you do accomodate in this way speaks volumes!

    For me it wasn't, nor do I think it ever will be, about money. But to compensate that way, KUDOS TO YOU for acknowledging that economic perspective!

    Comment


    • #17
      It is inconsiderate and my ex did it plenty. He suits "himself" - now it's to the point that dad doesn't see son at all. Good old dad put a stop to that months ago. At least now there's no "expectation" - hence there's no disappointment or having to rearrange plans.

      Comment


      • #18
        Ok I have a similar situation that happened to me a while ago but from the other side... I have a job that based on weather forecasts I have to in work really early (5:30 - 6:00 range). It doesn't happen frequently, but it happens from time to time and I may literally not know until the Weather network updates their forecast at 10pm.

        One Sunday when I had the kids I found out that i have to go in early around dinner time. I called my Parents and my kids had a sleep over with them that night, not a big deal in my mind my parents are retired and were able to bring the kids into school in the morning.

        The next evening I get a call from my ex saying that I should have called her and let her take the kids and argued that it was a decision that showed i didn't have the children's best interests at heart. My reasoning for not was that I didn't want to put her on the spot, and expect her to drop everything to take the kids last minute when I was able to find suitable alternate care for the kids.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by SingingDad View Post
          One Sunday when I had the kids I found out that i have to go in early around dinner time. I called my Parents and my kids had a sleep over with them that night, not a big deal in my mind my parents are retired and were able to bring the kids into school in the morning.

          The next evening I get a call from my ex saying that I should have called her and let her take the kids and argued that it was a decision that showed i didn't have the children's best interests at heart. My reasoning for not was that I didn't want to put her on the spot, and expect her to drop everything to take the kids last minute when I was able to find suitable alternate care for the kids.
          I would think it is perfectly reasonable for grandparents to take care of the children overnight and take them into school the next morning. If it was for a longer period of time or if the children were being left with someone they did not know very well, I would expect my ex to provide me with first right of refusal. I would do the same if I was ever in a similar situation.
          Last edited by Nadia; 03-08-2013, 10:18 PM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by SingingDad View Post
            Ok I have a similar situation that happened to me a while ago but from the other side... I have a job that based on weather forecasts I have to in work really early (5:30 - 6:00 range). It doesn't happen frequently, but it happens from time to time and I may literally not know until the Weather network updates their forecast at 10pm.

            One Sunday when I had the kids I found out that i have to go in early around dinner time. I called my Parents and my kids had a sleep over with them that night, not a big deal in my mind my parents are retired and were able to bring the kids into school in the morning.

            The next evening I get a call from my ex saying that I should have called her and let her take the kids and argued that it was a decision that showed i didn't have the children's best interests at heart. My reasoning for not was that I didn't want to put her on the spot, and expect her to drop everything to take the kids last minute when I was able to find suitable alternate care for the kids.
            Damned if you do, damned if you don't...

            Comment


            • #21
              Hi I look forward to the free time I finally have when my son is gone. I work full time, a 2nd part time job for those free time days, I attend school,classes yoga classes and gym, evening adult plans etc.
              I count on those visits to be child free. I love my child but its his dads time. If there is a cancelation have a back up like I do and pay them 100 bucks for that Friday-Sunday on call. I do the work on that missed day but need someone be there to also accommodate my plans.
              Ya it's shitty he has to work....but set some priorities at work on this days. And then ya he should put h in for missing it unless he/she can accommodate.


              She can't accommodate? Se still takes the kids and is stuck. Pay a family member, willing to provide a receipt and will claim the income on their taxes, and get a receipts presented to ur ex.
              The tune changes when he has babysitting to pay for his missed days. NOT hers. Cant always dump it on the other parent...equal parents. But seriously would I be sour if my ex cancelled and then gave me babysitting costs 100 for that weekend ....no. It's respectful of my time, my life, and energy. And keep the receipts
              So who expects free child care from their ex and not pay or compensate? Would u expect that done free to submit to him for payment...doesn't pay? court will fix that when they find out its missed visits and a babysitting charge. Expect it free care from some one else?
              U pay for child care.


              ? No...but ur ex is a free slave u can dump and not pay? not together and dumping and not being the parent u could be. The potential is there but lost bc u dumped it off. That's work for both parents....not assume its automatically only one parent duty.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by mom2three View Post
                Grrrrrrrr, why is it that a parent thinks he/she can arbitrarily change schedules without consulting the other parent?

                Good old March Break and kids are scheduled to go to the other parents today. I received an email last night that stated: "Sorry, won't be able to pick up the kids tomorrow but I will get them on Sunday." Well, hello? I understand that one needs to work but what about the other parents plans? Of course, being the custodial parent it is assumed (by my ex) that it is my responsibility to accomodate.

                What REALLY got up my craw was when I addressed this in a phone conversation last night the response was "if I don't work, you don't get paid". So sad.

                I am no doormat but I will suck it up, change my plans (really, I have a schedule to) and spend the time with the kids .

                I will play my violin next time he whines about not having enough time with the kids.
                You have full custody? I presume you fought for it.

                So yes - he has a valid point. You wanted the lions' share of the responsabilty, and now you have it. Deal.

                But perhaps my personal situation clouds my opinion. So whatever.

                Comment


                • #23
                  "But perhaps my personal situation clouds my opinion. So whatever."

                  Yes, perhaps it does cloud your impartial perspective.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by wretchedotis View Post
                    You have full custody? I presume you fought for it.

                    So yes - he has a valid point. You wanted the lions' share of the responsabilty, and now you have it. Deal.

                    But perhaps my personal situation clouds my opinion. So whatever.
                    Why do people get so confused between sole custody and parenting? Just because one parent has sole custody does not mean that the non-custodial parent is any less responsible for the child/children.

                    A couple of months ago when my daughter needed Asthma medication, my ex informed me that as the CP it was "my job" to make sure she had an ample supply of this to take to his residence and that it "was not his job" to pick it up from the local drug store or pay for it. However, if I wanted to change the custody situation, he would be ok with getting her medication. The medication is covered by his health plan. I usually have to pay for it up front and then wait for him to reimburse me.

                    All "sole custody" means is for whatever reason unique to your specific situation (there could be a whole host of reasons) you as parents are not able to make decisions together/collectively. To the point that every decision will be most likely be litigated to death. So in the best interests of the children one parent has the legal "final" say on all the major decisions.

                    Courts are becoming more progressive in recent years by carving out areas where each parent can have sole custody over certain areas. For example, parent "A" will have final say on matters related to education, while Parent "B" will have the final say on religion. Thereby providing a seemingly more equal arrangement.
                    Last edited by Nadia; 03-09-2013, 10:08 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Oh it can certainly have to "do with" MONEY. Explain this: ex paid $300/mo CS for quite some time - saw child regularly .. The minute that CS was ordered 'up' (by quite a lot) - all of a sudden Dad doesn't want to see Son. Hmmm. What a coincidence.

                      Seemed he was quite willing when he was throwing chump change our way. So I present a case of an "Abandonment of Maximum Access" that has to do with MONEY.
                      Last edited by hadenough; 03-09-2013, 11:54 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by oink View Post
                        I hear ya....the point being put fwd above though, is to do with the amount of time spent with each party. If someone tells the court that they deserve for some weird reason to have the child more than the other, why on earth would they then b1tch about all of a sudden "have things to do too"

                        I mean you can skin the cat whichever way you want....we all know deep down that most of the the time, the denial of "maximum access" to a child, has to do with MONEY
                        The amount of time spent with each parent was not put forward - don't put words in someones mouth.

                        Yes, I do have the majority of the time with the children. I am a joint custodial parent with the children's primary custody with me. I can assure you that had circumstances been different at the time (and now) of separation I would not have had an issue with 50/50. Do not paint everyone with the same brush. And, if there ever comes a time where 50/50 would be practical in our circumstance I would embrace it. But that is not practical at the moment.

                        Your vision is clouded if you think all custodial parents keep the children only for the monetary aspect.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Nadia View Post
                          A couple of months ago when my daughter needed Asthma medication, my ex informed me that as the CP it was "my job" to make sure she had an ample supply of this to take to his residence and that it "was not his job" to pick it up from the local drug store or pay for it.
                          Presumably, he pays you child support, not the other way around? Therefore, child support is supposed to cover the asthma medication cost. So he would be right, in questioning why he would have to pay for it. If it's covered anyway through a medical insurance plan, that's more of a moot point. Best idea there, is to throw the cost (if you have to pay up-front), on a credit card, and then it's 30 days later before the bill is due. It usually does not take long for a "reimbursement" to happen through insurance.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Nadia View Post
                            Why do people get so confused between sole custody and parenting? Just because one parent has sole custody does not mean that the non-custodial parent is any less responsible for the child/children...
                            ...
                            Courts are becoming more progressive in recent years by carving out areas where each parent can have sole custody over certain areas. For example, parent "A" will have final say on matters related to education, while Parent "B" will have the final say on religion. Thereby providing a seemingly more equal arrangement.
                            So this scenario described, is not "sole custody". That would be more joint, or "parallel parenting". So this scenario does not make a good example (or perhaps it is a good "example"?) of why people are confused about sole custody and parenting.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by dad2bandm View Post
                              Presumably, he pays you child support, not the other way around? Therefore, child support is supposed to cover the asthma medication cost. So he would be right, in questioning why he would have to pay for it. If it's covered anyway through a medical insurance plan, that's more of a moot point. Best idea there, is to throw the cost (if you have to pay up-front), on a credit card, and then it's 30 days later before the bill is due. It usually does not take long for a "reimbursement" to happen through insurance.
                              The cost of asthma medication (which is significant) is covered by his health care plan not by child support. It would be "nice" to receive the reimbursement within 30 days from him or even 60 days or 90 days. But it often takes 6 months. I have reason/evidence to believe he is reimbursed within two weeks but delays forwarding the cheque to me.

                              The incident referenced above was a "one" and only time where I asked him to pick up the medication because I had left her medication at home by the door step. I had a prescription in my bag and handed that over to him. After a two hour drive to his residence it made no sense to drive all the way back and return. I have been purchasing the children's medication for the past 6 years without an issue and always make sure he has it when I drop them off.

                              On this particular occasion he said he was happy to go out and get the medication if I considered changing the custody arrangement. Given the significant disparity in income between the parties, any change in custody would not make any significant difference to the amount of child support he is paying or rather should be paying.

                              I have no private health insurance and he kindly agreed in our "consent" order to continue to have the children covered by his health plan (as they have been on his plan since birth). Unfortunately, we have to pay for medication up front before he is reimbursed.

                              So we end up playing this dance whereby I pay for the full cost, submit drug receipts to him via registered mail (otherwise he claims he never got them) and then I wait, wait and wait for him to decide today will be the day he will write that cheque.
                              Last edited by Nadia; 03-11-2013, 12:15 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Nadia View Post
                                The cost of asthma medication (which is significant) is covered by his health care plan not be child support. It would be "nice" to receive the reimbursement within 30 days from him or even 60 days or 90 days. But it often takes 6 months. I have reason/evidence to believe he is reimbursed within two weeks but delays forwarding the cheque to me.
                                If you are waiting 6 months for reimbursement from a "health care insurance" plan held by your ex, you have entirely different issues then. Either go to court to remedy that, or simply avoid the issue all-together, by getting your own health-care insurance, or some kind of coverage, so that you can submit your own claims, until you remedy it through other means. Both parents should carry coverage anyway, if they can.

                                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