Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Parenting Issues

Parenting Issues This forum is for discussing any of the parenting issues involved in your divorce, including parenting of step-children.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #11  
Old 07-21-2013, 07:31 AM
Tayken's Avatar
Tayken Tayken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,000
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
Situation:

EOW 7-7 for 23 months.
"Every other weekend" 7-7? What does this mean? Every other weekend generally means the parent has the child "every other weekend" and some times including an over-night Wednesday on the "other weekend" the child/ren are not with that parent. What is the 7-7 designation?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
Worked well for kids d11 and s9 when mom and dad lived 3 minute walk apart, and we each saw children daily (most of first school year: mom homework after school, dad: kids breakfast, teeth cleaned, on bus: irrespective of who's parenting week)
Move: mom moved 30 mins. away. Changed everything: no daily contact between parents and children.
Daily contact in separation and divorce isn't often possible. But, great that it did happen. 30 Minutes is not a horrific and awful distance. Quite normal really.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
Comment: For reasons stated in this thread 2-2-5-5 seems in best interests of children. I will propose 2-2-5-5 to my ex. I anticipate pushback due to logistics brought on by her move 30 mins. away from habitual school area.
Distance of 30 minutes is not relevant to the court. The lowest number I have ever seen on commute time used is 45 minutes and that was for a child who was <4 years of age. You are dealing with much older children and a 30 minute car ride to school shouldn't be an issue.

School is still in your area and hopefully you haven't agreed to allow the school to be changed closer to the other parent. The children's school should not change as that has been their school and their friends go to school there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
Question: will court acknowledge EOW status quo of 23 months as stability and the norm (status quo), or consider the 2-2-5-5 and deem it in best interests of children - irrespective of 23 months and move of parent?
You claim to see the children every day prior to the move then state EOW (Every Other Weekend). If you are an EOW parent and have been and agreed to EOW and it has been 23 months (2 years) that this schedule has been in place then you will have a hard time upsetting the "status quo" that you established by being (agreeing to / being ordered by the court) an "EOW" parent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
Is status quo 50/50, and EOW or 2-2-5-5 is simply format to arrive at 50/50?

Appreciate insight you'd care to share
Well, as you are a 23 month EOW parent, your first step is not really the schedule but, demonstrating a "material change in circumstance" by which a court would consider a change of access from "every other weekend" to "joint residency" ("equal access").

If you can't first establish that there has been a material change, debating a schedule will be fruitless.

Good Luck!
Tayken
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-21-2013, 08:14 AM
kidsRworthit kidsRworthit is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 131
kidsRworthit is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Every Other Week - 7 days mother, 7 days father

Just to clarify, the 23 month status quo has been 50/50 shared parenting: and following a rotating 7 days with mother, followed by a 7 days with father.

The first school year was ideal for our children (d11 and s9), since the parents agreed to split the work day into an early and late day. Mom would drop off kids at dads early and attend work; irrespective of parenting week. Dad would do the morning child responsibilities (breakfast, clean teeth, put kids on bus). Mom would receive kids in afternoon and assist with homework (French school). Weekend parenting was the responsibility of the respective Parent on Duty. Considering our houses were a 3 minute walk apart, this arrangement worked quite well for the first year - the routine was certainly in our children's best interests = frequent and meaningful contact with each parent.

All changed when mom moved. Homework assistance vanished in spring of first school year which coincided with boyfriend entering the picture. Thus, the daily parent/child interaction ceased, and it was a longer period between seeing children = 7 days.

Move learned through children, not announced by mom. I questioned her, she confirmed move and assured me she would be responsible for all driving to school, sports, friends, etc. 1 month after move, her assurances were not met, and she sought changing sports (forum) for our son based out of community she moved to. She did drive our children to their school.

d11 changes schools. Mom using school (forum) to encourage our d11 to attend school 7-12 in her catchment area. I have registration containing school bus transportation request from mom (2 hrs. on bus/day). No school bus service offered from/to dad's house as this proposed school is in mom's catchment area, not dad's.

My interest in 2-2-5-5 as a 50/50 shared parenting arrangement would address frequent contact, and has the focus of keeping things centred in the kid's existing settled community. Although a move away of 30 mins. is not crucial, it has proven to pose many logistical issues previously not experienced (3 minute walk apart) and has proven not to be in the children's best interests this past school year.

So, approached from the perspective of the children's best interest, we have followed a 50/50 shared parenting arrangement. Do I understand correctly that changing the arrangement from weekabout to 2-2-5-5 after 23 months may be difficult, if I did not advance material change in circumstances prompting change? btw: I was given assurances all driving would be taken care of, however this did not happen as promised. Thus, my request is being made after an unsuccessful first school year/sporting season of trial.

Thanks,
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-21-2013, 12:19 PM
SadAndTired SadAndTired is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,161
SadAndTired is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
"EOW" 7-7? What does this mean?
I believe the OP thought "EOW" meant "Every Other WEEK".

He had the kids one week. Mom had them the next.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-21-2013, 12:28 PM
SadAndTired SadAndTired is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,161
SadAndTired is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
Just to clarify, the 23 month status quo has been 50/50 shared parenting: and following a rotating 7 days with mother, followed by a 7 days with father.
How long ago did the move occur? You allowed her to move?

You allowed your daughter(11) to change schools to Mom's area?

Have you maintained 50/50 throughout?

Have you asked Mom if she would want 2-2-5-5?

If it addressed some of the children's issues and did not disrupt the children's access to each parent, I can't see a judge having much problem with changing access to 2-2-5-5 but you have to have valid reasons why this is necessary. How will it benefit the children and how will it take away some of the current challenges associated with Mom's move??

The stumbling block may be that you agreed to the move and the change of school by doing nothing at the time. This may be something you want to consider acting on quickly as the more time passes, the more status quo is established.

Also, since Mom moved, if you do file motions, ask that she be required to provide transportation to and from access exchange.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-21-2013, 03:03 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Tayken Tayken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,000
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
Just to clarify, the 23 month status quo has been 50/50 shared parenting: and following a rotating 7 days with mother, followed by a 7 days with father.
Thank-you for clarifying. You stated EOW 7-7 which I have to admit is terminology not seen ever to describe equal joint custody with equal access (50-50) also known as the "week about" schedule.

If the week-about schedule is working why change it to a 2-2-5-5. Sure, there are benefits to the 2-2-5-5 schedule. But, if you have week-about access and the children are the ages you stated and are doing well... Why change?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
The first school year was ideal for our children (d11 and s9), since the parents agreed to split the work day into an early and late day. Mom would drop off kids at dads early and attend work; irrespective of parenting week. Dad would do the morning child responsibilities (breakfast, clean teeth, put kids on bus). Mom would receive kids in afternoon and assist with homework (French school). Weekend parenting was the responsibility of the respective Parent on Duty. Considering our houses were a 3 minute walk apart, this arrangement worked quite well for the first year - the routine was certainly in our children's best interests = frequent and meaningful contact with each parent.
But, things change. The week-about schedule should remain the same. Just means that each parent have to do things in parallel to each other now due to the distance. Daycare or other child care providers may have to become involved. But, like life things often change.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
All changed when mom moved. Homework assistance vanished in spring of first school year which coincided with boyfriend entering the picture. Thus, the daily parent/child interaction ceased, and it was a longer period between seeing children = 7 days.
Why does the "boyfriend" factor into anything? You have week-about parenting and you should follow that access schedule. Routines in life change and surely the other parent has a right to seek out new relationships.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
Move learned through children, not announced by mom. I questioned her, she confirmed move and assured me she would be responsible for all driving to school, sports, friends, etc.
This is good. 30 minute drive away isn't a big issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
1 month after move, her assurances were not met, and she sought changing sports (forum) for our son based out of community she moved to. She did drive our children to their school.
You don't have to agree to the change in the enrollment in sports. A justice would look at the enrollment in school and sports as the same. Hockey Canada and Soccer Canada often link their enrollments to the child's school and location of the school. I know Hockey Canada for example has specific rules regarding this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
d11 changes schools. Mom using school (forum) to encourage our d11 to attend school 7-12 in her catchment area. I have registration containing school bus transportation request from mom (2 hrs. on bus/day). No school bus service offered from/to dad's house as this proposed school is in mom's catchment area, not dad's.
Again, the child should be going with the flow of students she went to school with before. New area... new friends and new challenges. You can simply let the school know that as a joint custodial parent your written consent is required to change enrollment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
My interest in 2-2-5-5 as a 50/50 shared parenting arrangement would address frequent contact, and has the focus of keeping things centred in the kid's existing settled community.
2-2-5-5 has nothing to do about the community the children are in but the access they have with parents though...

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
Although a move away of 30 mins. is not crucial, it has proven to pose many logistical issues previously not experienced (3 minute walk apart) and has proven not to be in the children's best interests this past school year.
Not enough that a large fight and court battle would be worth really. You have to consider that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
So, approached from the perspective of the children's best interest, we have followed a 50/50 shared parenting arrangement. Do I understand correctly that changing the arrangement from weekabout to 2-2-5-5 after 23 months may be difficult, if I did not advance material change in circumstances prompting change?
Not really but, the children are well beyond the common age where this is recommended. Not that it isn't appropriate for children of the ages you have shared but, a week about schedule isn't torture and pretty common. 2-2-5-5 is better but, not necessary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
btw: I was given assurances all driving would be taken care of, however this did not happen as promised. Thus, my request is being made after an unsuccessful first school year/sporting season of trial.

Thanks,
Best to retain counsel. Not usually worth fighting over a 30 minute commute between parent's houses. But, best to check with a lawyer to see if you have any valid evidence to seek an order for the child to remain in the current catchment and sports programs within the catchment area.

Good Luck!
Tayken
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-21-2013, 03:55 PM
kidsRworthit kidsRworthit is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 131
kidsRworthit is an unknown quantity at this point
Default 2-2-5-5 should have been followed from the get-go, seemingly not worth chg >23 mths.

If the week-about schedule is working why change it to a 2-2-5-5. Sure, there are benefits to the 2-2-5-5 schedule. But, if you have week-about access and the children are the ages you stated and are doing well... Why change?

Effort of change is seemingly not worth it. In hindsight, should have proposed 2-2-5-5 from the beginning - especially in light of move.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-21-2013, 08:59 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Tayken Tayken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,000
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
Effort of change is seemingly not worth it. In hindsight, should have proposed 2-2-5-5 from the beginning - especially in light of move.
I agree fully with your statement but, the knowledge of the 2-2-5-5 access schedule isn't very common "yet" in the legal community. The 2-2-5-5 access schedules are usually the advice that comes from custody and access assessors. When you came to your week-about agreement it is highly likely that neither you, the other parent or the legal counsel that you both may have had in the matter were familiar with it. Hence the reason I posted the original thread to assist the community of people in gaining common knowledge.

Don't beat yourself up about it now. Week-about schedules are not awful. They are very traditional and common today still. Yes, 2-2-5-5 would possibly be better but, not better than a court battle to have it put in place when you already have a week-about schedule on a 50-50 joint residency pattern with both parents.

There are many people who come to this site that would really like to have joint residency situation no matter what schedule. So you are doing much better than many who struggle to even get that.

Don't look back as much as you look forward. The 30 minutes is not a horrible problem. The decision to move was by the other parent but, what is 15 minutes between parents.

The first step to possibly making your situation better is to possibly move the week-about exchanges to Wednesday after school. The parent receiving the children for their week should be responsible for picking up the children from school. In the summer, you will have to figure something out. This way the children can adjust to the change and for the weekend. You have Wednesday night through to Tuesday Night of the next week for home work and other things.

The biggest benefit for a 2-2-5-5 is being able to know that on every monday/tuesday (or wednesday/thursday) the children are with a specific parent. For a limited set of activities that means as a parent you can schedule the children for that activity and know that you will always be able to take them and not have to discuss it with the other parent. Now this doesn't work for team sports (hockey etc...) but, for piano lessons, swimming lessons, and other individual sports and activities it works out really well.

I wouldn't be too eager to rush into court expecting much to change. It may be an expensive lesson for you and cause more conflict than it is worth in the end. Lawyers are not cheap (250-500+ an hour) and one can't put a cost on the emotional challenge that comes from the adversarial system of family law. Do you really want to engage in a system that pits you as an applicant vs respondent in a lawsuit? I have never seen any matter go to court that makes the situation better for children.

I am of the opinion that the court system should be a last resort left for matters that truly impact Rules 24.(4) ("violence and abuse") and that all matters are best settled peacfully through a mediated solution. This is hard to do in many cases but, I suspect your matter would be a good candidate for mediation.

If you are in Toronto consider leveraging Riverdale Mediation services. They are not cheap but, they are well rounded, highly regarded and Hillary Linton literally wrote the book on Family Law mediation. If you are not in the Toronto area look for someone who has been specifically trained by Hillary Linton or Dr. Barbra Landau (Cooperative Solutions). Most mediators who have been trained by either Hillary or Dr. Landau will list their training from these two highly regarded professionals.

Good LucK!
Tayken
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-21-2013, 09:20 PM
kidsRworthit kidsRworthit is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 131
kidsRworthit is an unknown quantity at this point
Default responses

Quote:
Originally Posted by SadAndTired View Post
How long ago did the move occur? You allowed her to move?
Move: August 2012
Qualified yes. Although I raised my disapproval due to amount of travel to kid's school, sports, friends, etc. I allowed it, as I was given assurances all driving would be taken care of by my ex and her bf.

You allowed your daughter(11) to change schools to Mom's area?
Not exactly - my response is before my ex, supporting this with logistical considerations addressed. Hopefully negotiation will secure a timely solution and prempt requirement to have decision imposed in court.

Have you maintained 50/50 throughout?
Yes

Have you asked Mom if she would want 2-2-5-5?
No, I know I would receive pushback though.

If it addressed some of the children's issues and did not disrupt the children's access to each parent, I can't see a judge having much problem with changing access to 2-2-5-5 but you have to have valid reasons why this is necessary. How will it benefit the children and how will it take away some of the current challenges associated with Mom's move??
Frequent and meaningful contact with both parents is in children's best interests. It would inevitably hinder the routine of mom's move from last August.

The stumbling block may be that you agreed to the move and the change of school by doing nothing at the time. This may be something you want to consider acting on quickly as the more time passes, the more status quo is established.
I disagreed about move, however, I did not seek a court order restricting her move (hindsight is 20*20). School is now a pressing issue which is being pursued. Proper established status quo is good for all... (agreed)

Also, since Mom moved, if you do file motions, ask that she be required to provide transportation to and from access exchange.
Worthwhile asking...if you don't ask in court, you don't receive.
Thx.

Last edited by kidsRworthit; 07-21-2013 at 09:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-21-2013, 09:36 PM
kidsRworthit kidsRworthit is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 131
kidsRworthit is an unknown quantity at this point
Default responses

If the week-about schedule is working why change it to a 2-2-5-5. Sure, there are benefits to the 2-2-5-5 schedule. But, if you have week-about access and the children are the ages you stated and are doing well... Why change?

Agreed: Effort of change is seemingly not worth it. In hindsight, should have proposed 2-2-5-5 from the beginning - especially in light of move by OP and focus on changing sports and school of our s9 and d11 to that centred in her community and catchment area.


But, things change. The week-about schedule should remain the same. Just means that each parent have to do things in parallel to each other now due to the distance. Daycare or other child care providers may have to become involved. But, like life things often change.


Agreed - life goes on.

Why does the "boyfriend" factor into anything? You have week-about parenting and you should follow that access schedule. Routines in life change and surely the other parent has a right to seek out new relationships.


For about 7 months, homework routine was not viewed as work by my ex, as it meant daily contact with our kids and investing in our children - was not "work". Suddenly at end of March, ex is doing "more than her share" of 50/50 routine and specifically wants me to tend to their homework (French). So true week-about format adopted. This coincided with bf new on the scene. I mentioned her comment that existing routine enabled her to see our kids daily - which she stressed as being important. She countered with: "I feel like I've been doing more than my share".

This is good. 30 minute drive away isn't a big issue.



You don't have to agree to the change in the enrollment in sports. A justice would look at the enrollment in school and sports as the same. Hockey Canada and Soccer Canada often link their enrollments to the child's school and location of the school. I know Hockey Canada for example has specific rules regarding this.


Qualification: I have a High Conflict OP
Correct. Due to engineering of arrangement, s9 has been living with mom since Christmas and has not been joining d11 on father's parenting time. The 50/50 (weekabout) shared parenting arrangement has been unilaterally upset by the mother to satisfy her interest in having our son play sports in the community she moved to.

d11 has followed 50/50 parenting arrangement to a tee for 23 months. However, just recently, she has been withheld from my parenting time. Now education is being used as the forum to attract our d11 to stay with mom (most of the time). I am under the impression, this latest tactic constitutes "bad faith", and have counsel working on it.

I've actively disengaged from drama, as our kids are embroiled in adult issues and it is VERY unhealthy for them. Post custody evaluation and recommendation and now into reunification counselling, it is time to secure orders as the HCP has not acknowledged reason and strong recommendations. btw: we're finally using Our Family Wizard communication software.

Again, the child should be going with the flow of students she went to school with before. New area... new friends and new challenges. You can simply let the school know that as a joint custodial parent your written consent is required to change enrollment.


Agreed and rational, although the custody evaluation report recommended that she attend the school in mom's catchment area = 2 hr. daily bus ride from mom's house, and NO bus service from dad's house (???) (> 80% of the 2 graduating gr. 6 students will be attending the school 1.5km down the road: in the father's catchment area)

The school superintendent clarified board policy: so long as a parent is living in the respective catchment area of a school, they may register their child in that school. Thus dual registration is acceptable, however come school time, parental agreement is required, or court order needed to determine which school the child will be attending. School boards let the parents be accountable for their actions and intentionally do not "get involved"

2-2-5-5 has nothing to do about the community the children are in but the access they have with parents though...



Yes, although 2-2-5-5 would "encourage" parents to remain close together due to logistics = best interests of the children. Had 2-2-5-5 been pursued from the get-go, perhaps things would be different...

Not enough that a large fight and court battle would be worth really. You have to consider that.


Absolutely. This has been my life since last Sept.: hockey forum, then school forum. I have disengaged from hockey, and now I have to "prove the logic" of the flow of our daughter joining her friends at the school down the road from where she is graduating. (next to her brother who is 2 years younger) (this after 3 months of an evaluation with illogical recommendations)
I understand the "choose your battles" addage - and am continuously adjusting my course.

Not really but, the children are well beyond the common age where this is recommended. Not that it isn't appropriate for children of the ages you have shared but, a week about schedule isn't torture and pretty common. 2-2-5-5 is better but, not necessary.



Best to retain counsel. Not usually worth fighting over a 30 minute commute between parent's houses. But, best to check with a lawyer to see if you have any valid evidence to seek an order for the child to remain in the current catchment and sports programs within the catchment area.


Being pursued. Evidence and rationale being collected.

Thank you for your insight!

PS - I'll figure out how to respond slickly soon.


Good Luck!
Tayken[/QUOTE]
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-22-2013, 12:39 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Tayken Tayken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,000
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidsRworthit! View Post
If the ...
Question: kidsRworthit! did you contribute to this site in the past under another user account and change the account name? Your story seems familiar but, I can't place the user name now.

Good Luck!
Tayken
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
access schedule


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
When to schedule a case conference gumby Divorce & Family Law 2 07-10-2010 09:42 PM
Child Wants to Change Access Schedule baileybug Parenting Issues 2 11-02-2009 06:26 PM
Christmas Schedule - Norm vs Order #1StepMom Divorce & Family Law 6 10-22-2009 08:47 AM
Shared Custody Schedule dkarmour Divorce & Family Law 9 10-06-2009 12:40 PM
Need some advice on child schedule chinyuk Divorce & Family Law 6 10-06-2008 11:04 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:30 AM.