Thinking of giving up custody - pros/cons ?

plainNamedDad44

plainNamedDad44

New member
Hi, OCL came back from disclosure with there position.

They want custody to go to mother. :(

Regardless, the access amount they are proposing for me is reasonable.

If I give up custody can I at least get assurances that STBX won't move away with the kids again ?

She has in the past threatened to withhold access for financial gain.


Any input would be most appreciated.
 
I don't think you should give up, self-represent; what do you have to lose? They aren't going to give you less access - you are pretty much at the standard minimum.
 
Yes, Links is correct.

You could lose at court - and would probably get the access schedule you described. And maybe be hit with costs, too.

Mind you, an Order against you for costs really carries little weight in the grand scheme of things.
 
Why would you not at least go for Joint Legal custody? If you have regular contact with your kids, then I assume you would like to have some input into the decision making when it comes to their schooling and medical. Joint legal custody won't change the primary resident parent but it does afford you access and decision making power. Like a parent should have.
 
It's not about "winning" or "losing" - it's about being present in your children's lives. The OCL report gives you a chance to do that, even if it doesn't say everything you wish it did. If I were you, I would agree to go along with their recommendations in exchange for an agreement that your ex will not move out of the children's school district, so you can exercise your access.

The OCL may have recommended sole custody because the relationship between the parents is so acrimonious that it would be impossible for them to agree on decision-making. This may change over time, as in WretchedOtis' story, especially if you keep on doing what you're doing and being as co-operative as possible.
 
stripes said:
It's not about "winning" or "losing" - it's about being present in your children's lives. The OCL report gives you a chance to do that, even if it doesn't say everything you wish it did. If I were you, I would agree to go along with their recommendations in exchange for an agreement that your ex will not move out of the children's school district, so you can exercise your access.

The OCL may have recommended sole custody because the relationship between the parents is so acrimonious that it would be impossible for them to agree on decision-making. This may change over time, as in WretchedOtis' story, especially if you keep on doing what you're doing and being as co-operative as possible.
Click to expand...
Completely in agreement here with the comments. In my instance, when my ex brought the case to court the first time, the judge dismissed the idea right off the bat as there was no chance of coming to an agreement, and granted sole custody. I have gone thru the same with the OCL, and similar recommendations were made.

If I were you I would make an offer incorporating the recommendations, but ensure that you have provisions to ensure you don't have your time reduced by your ex. For example, put in a clause stating a.) a visit can only be cancelled through proper written notification 14 days prior b.) a cancelled visit must be made immediately.

While you can't prohibit the mother from moving, you can put in a provision that should she move, she has to bring them half way to meet you.

If you're self represented, make the offer in front of a judge or seek legal advise first. I am no lawyer.
 
In addition as well, if she moves away, the travel expenses you pay can also be offset to the child support as it is HER decision to move away. Judges award that, only if you ask for it.

Dumb question, what is OCL? Is it like legal aid or something?
 
plainNamedDad44 said:
...OCL came back from disclosure with there position.

They want custody to go to mother. :(

Regardless, the access amount they are proposing for me is reasonable.
...
Click to expand...

For what reason(s) do they state, that Mom should have sole custody?

I would not settle for Mom having sole custody (unless OCL has some really good reasons against you), because it's hard to change that down the road, and there's no reason both parents can't have input into major child decisions, even if this needs to be done via email or over some distance.
 
Why would you listen to Stripes?

Just agree to mom having sole? Just because relationship is so acrimonious that they couldn't agree on decisions? What .. so mom just gets sole? What about parallel parenting?

I don't know all the details but if you want some decision-making in your child's life .. I would fight for it.
 
The most important clauses IMO that you should nail down in your agreement is the parenting time and the mobility clause. Joint gives you the right to make major decision in your childs life.

What are the major decision making areas?

Religon. Has your been baptised? If so, that decision,has been made. Do either of you attend any religious events. Well you can continue in your parenting time to do what you do. When your ex has the child you cannot force,them to follow your faith practices anyway and vice versa.

Education. Not that many choices. Local schools catholic or not. French or English. Same curriculum so not a big,deal what school. BUT if you have the mobility nailed down and child cannot leave the habitual neighbourhood. Then schools are pretty much dealt with. Once post secondary rolls around usually the child has lots to say on that score anyway. Just have a clause where you have access to the school reports and always attend all school activities.

Health. What exactly would be a major decision regarding health? Regular checkup will,happen regardless of who has custody. If a child has an earache and needs some quick attention its not necessary to have both parents sit and make a decision. If a child breaks a arm or leg at sports its off to,the hospital there is,no decision to be made. God forbid your child needs serious life threatening care and a life or death decision needs to be made, but if they do. What possible decision would one parent make,that the other parent would not agree with. Just have a clause that gives you the right to have any medical reports accessible.

So at the end of the day there are many parents who have fought for joint but have failed to set up iron clad clauses regarding parenting time and mobilty. So yes they have the right to jointly make all major decisions in their childs life but left parenting and mobility clauses vague and unenforceable and all they have is the right to make decisions and usually they realise that there are not that many big decision to make.

So in the end its the parenting time you spend with your child that is the important not the title of " joint custody"
 
Last edited:
Is it true that if you're granted "sole" you can automatically change the child's last name to yours?

And what about recreational activities such as skiing, skating, hockey, etc.?

Say OP has soul and you'd like to join your child up for skiing lessons because the child expressed an interest but the OP (sole parent) makes the major decision of saying "no, it's too dangerous". Is that it? Since you don't have custody OP just makes that decision for you and the child?

Or is decision-making strictly limited to religion, education and health? Would thinking skiing is too dangerous relate to "health" for instance?
 
Last edited:
Would that be the end of the world? In Quebec the child often has the Mothers last name. Even in intact families one parent often disagrees with their child going into hockey or football or skiing when they are young, but once they get old enough to voice their own opinion parents find it harder to say no.
 
Beachnana said:
Would that be the end of the world? In Quebec the child often has the Mothers last name. Even in intact families one parent often disagrees with their child going into hockey or football or skiing when they are young, but once they get old enough to voice their own opinion parents find it harder to say no.
Click to expand...

So your answer is yes the "sole person" can instantly change their last name.

And "yes" ex can deny me to give D3 skiing, skating lessons, go tobogganing, join up for hockey, soccer, track and field, the chess club, dance lessons, swimming lessons ... etc.

I realize one parent sometimes disagrees in marriages Beahnanna. The point is .. at least they discuss it rationally. It's not the case here.

My ex is high conflict. She will do this just because she can. I was just curious if "sole" deleted any kind of decisions in life for her .. even healthy ones. Ones where she could meet life long friends and enjoy activities.

This is precisely why I would fight for joint. If joint is not agreed by other party, go for sole. It takes 2 to have the child .. both should be able to make decisions. To me, It should take more than one party refusing to cooperate to give sole to the other party.

The one refusing joint should be considered high conflict you would think. Unless there were extremely good reasons like child abuse, etc.

What's wrong with parallel parenting?
 
Last edited:
Nothing wrong with parellel parenting but if the 2 parties are in Conflict will it really ever happen? I think sole custody is about control over major decisions. Not about taking a child tobboganning or swimming while ,they are in your care.

My point was and is that there are many out there who have joint custody but ommitted to specify the parenting time in really specific detailed terms. Who did not specify that the child will not be moved from the neighbourhood and therefore their local school. There is no clause to deal with When the child is "sick" and its your parenting time and you expect to pick up your child from,school as per usual, but the child did,not go to,school and you are told by the other parent the child is sick so cannot go to,your house. now what can you do?

How many agreements have vague financial clauses that FRO cannot deal with, so everytime you need to change CS you need to go to court.

IMO many lawyers push " well you have joint custody" all is well, so lets just Include general vague clauses on parenting time and it will be flexible". Yeah, so now high conflict ex makes life miserable with their games and you end up financing your lawyers rich lifestyle fighting for access and interpretation of your agreement.

Just saying its the parenting time and the physical location of your child that are the number 1 factors to consider. What there last name is and whether they go skiing is not.
 
Parenting time is great as long as ex doesn't make the decision that I cant do certain fun, recreational things during my parenting time because she feels its dangerous, etc.

So I tie in activities (like skiing) with parenting time and although it's not the number one factor .. I feel it's extremely significant for their growth, development and social intelligence. Not to mention bonding time.

My ex will say "no skiing" .. she may break a leg.
My ex will say "No tobogganing "the hill's too big, he could fall and get hurt.
My ex will say "No hockey, etc .. because tis too dangerous.
I have sole .. so I make the rules.

There are studies conducted regarding the benefits of sports for children/teens. Fresh air, friends, bonding with dad or buddies, exercise, life long memories. So I do feel that's VERY important that ex can just say "naa .. I have sole. I say no".

So Im not sure that "physical location" and "parenting time" should be the only focus. What about the quality of parenting time? If given full decision making, my ex will say no to anything Id like to do with d3 claiming its dangerous (health). Im very active. I grew up very active and I prided myself in being able to raise my children that way. Ex is polar opposite.

I do agree that vague clauses need to be addressed and reformed to be more stringent.

But Im fighting with the notion of handing over all D3's rights to allow her father to help make healthy decisions in her life just because ex wont talk to me. Or just because clauses are vague.

If the OP who got sole is not as high conflict as mine and you could bet you'd be able to go skiing, skating, do things on your own time then Beachnanna has a point.

But in my case .. it would be just as stressful on the child (not getting to do things she may want to so mom can tell dad what to do) than future court over vague clauses would be.

Guess it depends how high conflict your ex is and if this type of thing wold occur or not.
 
Sole custody does NOT give the custodial parent the right to dictate what you do with the kids on your time. Regardless of how 'high conflict' they are.

You just need to get a detailed parenting schedule, protection on mobility, and explicit consent to full access to ALL school/medical information, including ability to speak directly to Drs/teachers etc.

The above won't stop her from causing problems, but getting Joint Custody, or Parallel Parenting won't fix that either. The reality is the courts are useless in fixing evil.
 
Last edited:
dinkyface said:
Sole custody does NOT give the custodial parent the right to dictate what you do with the kids on your time. Regardless of how 'high conflict' they are.

You just need to get a detailed parenting schedule, protection on mobility, and explicit consent to full access to ALL school/medical information, including ability to speak directly to Drs/teachers etc.

The above won't stop her from causing problems, but getting Joint Custody won't fix that either.
Click to expand...

Exactly!

You will just have to learn to push the ignore button and take your child skiing. Remember you sign your child up for skiing you can only ensure she attends and participates in your time. Myou cannot force the other parent to participate when the child is with them regardless of your custody status.
 
dinkyface said:
Sole custody does NOT give the custodial parent the right to dictate what you do with the kids on your time. Regardless of how 'high conflict' they are.
Click to expand...

So ex cant pull the "skiing is dangerous" and I have sole and this is a "health issue" and my personal decision as a "sole custody" parent is that my child is too young to ski, skiing is dangerous, etc.

If they aren't allowed to do things like this than I am more at ease about it. Because if my ex CAN do that .. she will. I just wanted to know if I had a say as a non-custodial parent regarding OP's perception of an "unhealthy" activity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top