Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

custodial parent working night shifts

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

  • #16
    So then what is happening is mom works nights and kid goes to day care during the day while mom sleeps. This isnt a material change for custody. It may be a material change for ss/cs but you dont have off set.

    You really should focus on your motion for 50/50 and stop getting in the weeds about all the other stuff. Great that mom is working but even with off set you dont get to dictate where kid spends time. Its no different than if you had kid on a pd day but had to work and put them in a day camp. Would you say to mom “ok she can skip day camp and go see you that day”? More than likely not.

    All of these little nit picky things make you look unreasonable and confrontational. Focus on the argument that parenting time should be increased because you are a good parent, there are no issues, child is getting older and its a good thing. When you start adding grandma might smoke and mom works nights and the daycare provider is mean etc then the judge will roll their eyes and hate your case.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Janus View Post
      My opinion: Right of first refusal is a terrible thing to include in any agreement. It almost guarantees arguments. The goal of a separation agreement should be to make arguments as unlikely as possible.

      If the parents don't get along, RFR will be used as a weapon.

      If the parents get along, RFR is unnecessary.
      I agree 100%.

      RFR only works with parents who get along therefor it is not necessary. Courts rarely order it because it only creates conflict. The objective of all this, as you state is to reduce conflict.

      Comment


      • #18
        Conflict... that is the word I was looking for. I hate using the wrong word.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by trinton View Post
          It was reasonable to expect should would be seeking employment, but not seeking employment and working late into evenings leaving child with daycare to almost her bed time, or working overnights and leaving child with grandmother - all when the father is available. Also there is a further access clause - why should further access be sanctioned when there is opportunity to provide father with more time without taking any away from mom ?

          Your arguments are about the mother's rights - and nothing to do with the best interest of the child.
          Was it stated in the agreement that she could not seek certain types of employment or work at certain times?

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by rockscan View Post
            Focus on the argument that parenting time should be increased because you are a good parent, there are no issues, child is getting older and its a good thing. When you start adding grandma might smoke and mom works nights and the daycare provider is mean etc then the judge will roll their eyes and hate your case.
            Why should anything be changed if there are no issues ?

            I know grandma smokes. Oh does she ever.

            Mom works nights - I could have time when mom works nights. If 50/50 is in place, then I would agree with you. She can do whatever she wants on her time and leave child with whoever. But If I am only every other weekend, and there is room to expand access, the overnights would give me more time with child without taking any time away from mom. Just an option if 50/50 doesn't happen.

            Daycare is unpleasant to deal and disrespectful towards me in front of child. The judge can hate my case all they want. Judge can roll their eyes all the want. The child notices tensions at daycare and it is not health for her.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
              Was it stated in the agreement that she could not seek certain types of employment or work at certain times?
              Again, your arguments are about the mother's rights and have no bearing into the best interests of a child.

              The Chambers judge found the affidavit evidence demonstrated a material change in circumstances based upon the following factors which are set out at para. 8 of his Fiat. They read as follows:
              i. [The child] is no longer a baby. She is of an age where it is reasonable for her to spend more time away from her mother and has a need to spend more time with her father.

              ii. The parents have in the summer months extended parenting time for the father beyond that contemplated by the interspousal agreement.

              iii. The father’s work schedule has changed such that he is now able to provide full-time care on a predictable schedule and thus his ability to meet [the child’s] needs has changed in a fundamental way.

              iv. [The child] is about to start kindergarten.
              http://canlii.ca/t/fsrj1

              There was never any order or agreement that the father could not seek certain types of employment or work at certain times. Your argument is mute.
              Last edited by trinton; 10-25-2017, 11:36 PM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Ok. Good luck!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Custody is based on REAL AVAILABILITY. It doesn't make sense to have "custody" of a child if your schedule doesn't allow. There is case law where parents work schedules preventing them from "really" spending time with their kids (i.e: working an afternoon shift and not seeing your kid except for an hour in the morning)

                  Is it material?
                  Is it a permanent state of affairs?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
                    Ok. Good luck!
                    Hey! Just because you put "ok" before it doesn't mean you are not infringing on my (TM) (C) on "Good luck!". You have been warned!!!!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Is it wrong that I want to start a set of parody threads that illustrate the petty nit-pickiness?

                      1. Mom keeps reading "Hop on Pop" to kid far past recommended reading age. Is this something I can use against her in court?
                      2. Kids shoes are often on the wrong feet..clearly mom isn't paying attention. Should I get kid a psych evaluation?
                      3. Daycare worker gave me obvious stank-eye when I picked kid up. Can I compel court to make mom quit job so that kid doesn't have to attend day-care?

                      (Sorry dealing with stupid court action and feeling punchy today)...

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
                        Is it wrong that I want to start a set of parody threads that illustrate the petty nit-pickiness?

                        1. Mom keeps reading "Hop on Pop" to kid far past recommended reading age. Is this something I can use against her in court?
                        Please point me to such thread and to a post where the words " Is this something I can use against her in court?" comes from me ?

                        Originally posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
                        2. Kids shoes are often on the wrong feet..clearly mom isn't paying attention. Should I get kid a psych evaluation?
                        Again, point me to a thread where I look to take the kid for psych evaluation for something mom has tone ?

                        Originally posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
                        3. Daycare worker gave me obvious stank-eye when I picked kid up. Can I compel court to make mom quit job so that kid doesn't have to attend day-care?
                        Lastly, point me to a thread where I asked to "compel court to make mom quit job" I simply asked if mom working nights was a material change, and if I should be given right to look after child at nights and in mornings? Also, kids don't attend daycare due to mom working. Mom is off work when kids go to daycare.

                        Originally posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
                        (Sorry dealing with stupid court action and feeling punchy today).
                        No worries. I completely understand where your hatred towards dad's come from. I'm not looking to control mom's time and not one of those parents who dictated the type of haircut or what color nail polish other parent puts on child during their parenting time. Just asking simple questions about right of first refusal, and whether parents get precedence over grandparents in family law or vice versa (when both parents are fit).

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Tayken View Post
                          Hey! Just because you put "ok" before it doesn't mean you are not infringing on my (TM) (C) on "Good luck!". You have been warned!!!!
                          Take it up with my lawyer!!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            No worries. I completely understand where your hatred towards dad's come from. I'm not looking to control mom's time and not one of those parents who dictated the type of haircut or what color nail polish other parent puts on child during their parenting time. Just asking simple questions about right of first refusal, and whether parents get precedence over grandparents in family law or vice versa (when both parents are fit).
                            lol, I don't hate dads or men...calm down.

                            You just seem to post a lot of very petty, nit-picky threads trying to gain a tactical advantage over insignificant issues.

                            Anyway, I'm not trying to inflame you so I'll refrain from any further stupid comments on your multiple posts...apologies.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
                              lol, I don't hate dads or men...calm down.
                              Except for the father of your child right ?


                              Originally posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
                              You just seem to post a lot of very petty, nit-picky threads trying to gain a tactical advantage over insignificant issues.
                              Those are some really fruitful words that you like to use. I take it you must be a very sweet person. You might think the parents work schedules are insignificant. But all the cases I am coming across contradict your mom made theories.

                              Originally posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
                              Anyway, I'm not trying to inflame you so I'll refrain from any further stupid comments on your multiple posts...apologies.
                              No no, please continue. Here is more judge thoughts for ya.

                              [48] What appears to the Court to be the relevant circumstances today as far as the children’s needs are concerned, in addition to that change of the father work’s schedule, are: i) the young age of the children; ii) the parental capacities of both parents; iii) the close distance from one residence to each other; iv) the stability offered by the mother since the separation and the recent capacity of the father to also offer a stable environment to the children in his present situation at home and at his work; v) the recent improvement of the communication between the parties.

                              [49] The mother is reluctant to put in place a shared custody but she realizes that the children need to see their father despite what appears to her to be the latter’s relative incapacity to properly take care of them. It is true that she is perhaps somehow protective and this is very understandable. However, she also wants to maximize the contacts between her children and their father since the separation, which are in their interest. She also considers to reorganize his own life, which is also very understandable, as illustrated by her recent new employment. The Court takes also into account the children’s need for stability which they have and was successfully satisfied until now since the separation by their mother on almost a fulltime basis[6].

                              [52] The Court is of the opinion that the parties should evolve toward eventually a fully shared children custody such as a 7-7 day sequence.

                              [54] Thus, the Court will order that specific shared custody arrangement, which does not exclude any agreement that may intervene between the parties.
                              Why don't you tell us more about the relationship you have encouraged between your child and her father at this time? Or does she still not want to see him

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                I highly recommend that the poster obtain legal advice.

                                Family law is a serious matter and certainly not trivial. This poster is seeking objective advice and when receives it responds with condescending snarky remarks. We can do without the slide show thank you.

                                If find Trinton's remarks to be quite objectionable and hope that he stops this "flaming" immediately. Pursuing Happiness is a senior contributor to this forum and is trying to offer her advice and certainly doesn't deserve the disrespect from Trinton.

                                Enough already!
                                Last edited by arabian; 10-26-2017, 11:36 PM.

                                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