You are here

Update to BM receiving DH's solicitors letter.

Topmuffin901's picture

Submitted by Topmuffin901 on Wed, 10/16/2013 - 9:51am

So BM must have received the letter on Monday morning as all day DH received non stop phone calls (he never speaks with her anymore) then he received a text to let him know SS would be coming for his Tuesday night sleepover. (obviously letter shook her up a bit). So when SS arrived last night he had a letter from BM to DH stating that she wishes she didnt have to send letters and that he would just talk to her but she is willing to be more reasonable and will allow DH more time with SS when he requests it in the future. Also she will not interfere with DH's phone calls with SS anymore. Yeah right I wonder how long this will last. Just to let all you lovely ladies who have given me advice know that DH has decided now to never reply to BM's texts unless she is refusing access to which he will reply "noted refused visitation on ../../..". Also he will not speak with her during any pick ups or drop offs or answer any phone calls. To be honest I feel this is the only option left now. We have tried being civil, we have tried counteracting any argument she has tried to start and also tried agreeing with her on everything. Nothing stops the crazy train. At least this way the train won't stop in our station.

Comments

Tuff Noogies's picture

Submitted by Tuff Noogies on Wed, 10/16/2013 - 10:46am

idk, this seems to have two sides to it...

for one, technically, the BM *HAS* to make ss available for visitation as ordered in the CO. if that means she has to drive him to the drop off point and wait for 30 mins, then take him home cuz of no-show, so be it. she MUST make him available. whether or not the DH chooses to exercise the visitation is up to him. he has no legal burden to make arrangements with the BM- the arrangement has already been made by the Court. so no response is required on his part.

now that's just technically speaking.

but i LOVE your suggestion tho' - "Duly noted." concise, unaffected yet showing cooperation. necessary? no, but would probably be held in a warmer light by the Court...

Topmuffin901's picture

Submitted by Topmuffin901 on Wed, 10/16/2013 - 11:13am

She only sent a text stating SS was coming for visitation because she has refused the last 2 visits (see blog). She never texts to confirm visits so no response is necessary really but will take on board what you guys have said. Thanks Smile

Jsmom's picture

Submitted by Jsmom on Wed, 10/16/2013 - 11:29am

He needs a one word response to the text so she can't deny sending it...Just a thanks for letting me know, works...DH has no communication with BM either....Works great!

misSTEP's picture

Submitted by misSTEP on Wed, 10/16/2013 - 12:41pm

In our situation, we had a No Contact Order against the psycho. That, of course, was above and beyond exchange situations. But the only time they communicated with each other in THAT regards was when something changed from the standard COed time.

Topmuffin901's picture

Submitted by Topmuffin901 on Thu, 10/17/2013 - 3:19am

Oh there's no question that she was interfering with phone calls. DH would phone SS (court ordered) and she would answer the phone screaming and shouting.