After my STBX tried every avenue in court to limit/restrict my time with my son so that she can have him to herself and never see me again, she is now trying the "cannot separate siblings" approach as a hail mary.
The problem is that the siblings are 10 years apart in age, and on top of that half-siblings. My son is 4 years old and his half-brother is 13 years old. I cannot believe I am there in court arguing that its important for a son to spend time with his dad, albeit at the expense of hurt feelings to the teenager. Why should I take a back seat as a parent because the 13 year old doesn't want to share his brother? I support their relationship but he should be wanting to be with others his own age.
It is so absurd that I am having a hard time finding case-law to support my argument. Time with dad means time away from the brother. But if all time is spent with brother, kid does not see dad. Any case law out there anyone aware of?
The problem is that the siblings are 10 years apart in age, and on top of that half-siblings. My son is 4 years old and his half-brother is 13 years old. I cannot believe I am there in court arguing that its important for a son to spend time with his dad, albeit at the expense of hurt feelings to the teenager. Why should I take a back seat as a parent because the 13 year old doesn't want to share his brother? I support their relationship but he should be wanting to be with others his own age.
It is so absurd that I am having a hard time finding case-law to support my argument. Time with dad means time away from the brother. But if all time is spent with brother, kid does not see dad. Any case law out there anyone aware of?
Comment