The OCL report was in favour of her gettting custody and me getting alternate week-ends and wednesdays. The basis for his finding was predicated on that we cannot communicate effectively (as is obvious by her actions here), and the fact that she is 5 months pregnant. Therefore, it's in our sons best interest to be with her and bond with the new baby.
That SUCKS!
I've been down the OCL road too. Moreover, I have business relationships with a few people who are or were tied to the OCL and one of them estimated that the OCL recommendations are endorsed/followed about 80% of the time, so you're right, it does look grim.
But you have a right to critique those recommendations and if you are committed and can politely but firmly stand up to the heat to which you will be increasingly subjected by a judge in settlement, trial management and exit pre-trial conferences then you might be able to pull this one out of the fire.
Here's my three step (off the top of my head) strategy:
1.Rebut the "we can't along because there's too much conflict" b/s by arguing the conflict is being created strategically, and that the two of you can get along if necessary once you are out of the legal spotlight.
One tried and true strategic dirty tactic that is pulled in a parent's quest for sole custody is to create conflict in order to claim that you can't get along for the sake of the child. The person who is the problem creates and plays up the storm in order to get custody. If that person is already in a strong position, like your ex, they sabatoge communication in order to get custody.
Your challenge will to be to establish that she is doing that, but you will have to VERY careful not to cross the line where you start trashing her character, even if her character deserves to be trashed. That will be quite a high wire act, but if you're successful you could well be more than half way home.
That she called the cops over a jacket, and it is documented, was not smart on her part. It plays into your argument that she has created needless conflict by how over the top that reaction was. If you have other examples of that kind of behaviour, that will assist your argument. But that step is a kind of negative approach because it focuses on the bad stuff. There has to be some positive arguments made to ensure you come off as being a sensible child-centred parent instead of bitter...
2.The status quo is important and the child's routine with both parents ought not to be disturbed.
In your favour is the status quo and you should argue that the child's current routine is more important than getting to know his as yet unborn sibling at the expense of removing him from his father for so much of the time. You can say that there will be ample opportunity for him to bond with his sibling since he will be with Mom 50% of the time. To suggest otherwise is ludicrous, especially when it has the effect of seriously diminishing his time with his father...a loving father who has a proven track record of caring for him.
3.Come up with a solid parenting plan to support why your child needs to remain with both of you 50/50.
I don't think you said how old your son is. Propose a parenting schedule the same or as close to the one you have now as possible (remember status quo and routine). Also give some thought to what you think is best for the child in the next 1-5 years and put that into the plan to show how you are looking forward for your child's best interest.
It sounds like you live reasonably close to your ex. Make the point that you made that choice in order to minimize disruption during transfer times and to root your child in a neighbourhood where both parents live, and to be generally available and in close proximity to your son, even in times when he's not with you. If you don't live close by, then move closer and make that point. Don't tell the court you intend to move. Do it and then tell the court.
If you haven't already, do a search on parenting plans and glean whatever is relevant to your situation out of that research in order to come up with a kick-ass parenting plan. Judges
love parenting plans.
All in all, you want to present as loving, involved child-centred Dad. So be careful on step 1. It needs to addressed in order to rebut the basis for the OCL recommendation, but you want judges remembering how stable, positive, child-centred and thougthful you have been in looking out for your son.
If I were you, I would spend some serious time developing a strategy and getting that strategy consistently into every conference brief, continuing record and court appearance from here on in, all the way to trial if necessary, but realizing that only 2% of cases go to trial.
I find it highly questionable how someone can argue that a child's need to bond with his as yet unborn infant sibling justifies removing him from his other parent for so much of the time - especially when the child will have ample time with his sibling as it is. If you can get that point across in a tactful reasoned way, you may be able to keep shared parenting.
all that over a forgotten jacket??
