Well I recieved a call from my lawyer's secretary yesterday saying that she had recieved a call from my husbands lawyer wanted to set a date for my husband and I and our legal reps to meet for "questioning". She hadn't talked to them yet so it took me a day to figure out what that was all about. I extended an e-mail olive branch to 'HE WHO SHALL NOT BE NAMED" about 10 days a go and what I got back(sent through our son) was very ugly. So I tried again, remaining civil (very difficult to do) and again asking if he could put aside his anger and could we investigate "mediation" vs. "litigation" because of the costs. Last night the light bulb when on and I BELIEVE this is his interpretation, that we meet with our lawyers proir to the settlement hearing.
Here's the problem. Isn't meeting with the lawyers back to "litigation"? He is so angry and I have been trying to figure out some way of sorting this out without going to trial. He has been unbudging but the main issue with him has been money (he took evey red cent we had) and is trying to get sole custody of the children even though I know in my heart it's back to a money issure with him so he won't have to pay anything. (I won't drag everybody through the details again.) Somewhere along the line my lawyer proposed "I get the house..posessionss etc." this was stupid of me to agree to it was only throwing gas on the flames. The only thing I can think of proposing is this.
We sell the house (even though the shop attached is my sole means of income...HAH we're running an average of 10 grand a year in the hole..new business etc. etc....sorry I digress) the whole kit and kaboodle and he gets half. (And yes I'm scared sick about the whole thing however) the point I would stand firm on is that I get sole custody of the children..I'll sign whatever he wants allowing him free access. (I've never denied him that, I've even changed doctors appointments to accomodated him) But the kids have lived with me since this whole thing and I have always been the primary caregiver. "He who must not be named" has an anger managment control problem but the only way I can prove that is to go to trial and I'm trying to avoid that. But I do not want him to have custody of the kids, I do not think he represents a danger to them "at this point" but I wouldn't swear to that on a stack of bibles (mind you they are not babies anymore..daughter 15 son is 12) so I'm hanging on to the kids.
Whatdoyouthink? Am I being an idiot?
Here's the problem. Isn't meeting with the lawyers back to "litigation"? He is so angry and I have been trying to figure out some way of sorting this out without going to trial. He has been unbudging but the main issue with him has been money (he took evey red cent we had) and is trying to get sole custody of the children even though I know in my heart it's back to a money issure with him so he won't have to pay anything. (I won't drag everybody through the details again.) Somewhere along the line my lawyer proposed "I get the house..posessionss etc." this was stupid of me to agree to it was only throwing gas on the flames. The only thing I can think of proposing is this.
We sell the house (even though the shop attached is my sole means of income...HAH we're running an average of 10 grand a year in the hole..new business etc. etc....sorry I digress) the whole kit and kaboodle and he gets half. (And yes I'm scared sick about the whole thing however) the point I would stand firm on is that I get sole custody of the children..I'll sign whatever he wants allowing him free access. (I've never denied him that, I've even changed doctors appointments to accomodated him) But the kids have lived with me since this whole thing and I have always been the primary caregiver. "He who must not be named" has an anger managment control problem but the only way I can prove that is to go to trial and I'm trying to avoid that. But I do not want him to have custody of the kids, I do not think he represents a danger to them "at this point" but I wouldn't swear to that on a stack of bibles (mind you they are not babies anymore..daughter 15 son is 12) so I'm hanging on to the kids.
Whatdoyouthink? Am I being an idiot?
Comment