Custody rights- custodial vs non
Forums:
My DH has joint custody of his son. He doen't have 50/50 time thanks to BM and a horrible attorney but he does have joint custody. The BM keeps throwing up that she is the Primary parent or primary custodial parent and therfore has more rights and say that he does. I was told years back in my divorce that unless you have SOLE custody the rights are all equal and custodial parent is just the primary residence... is that correct? She seems to think she can change child care providers, visitation days, and dictate who is or in my case is not allowed to pick up child on his day.
She's a bully. If you have
She's a bully. If you have joint LEGAL, you can say "no" to any and all things she does. My ex and I have joint legal and if he doesn't want the kids to see a therapist or a physician or to vaccinate them, then he has the right to do so (and he has, unfortunately, every chance he got, even when it is not in the best interest of the children).
Now, on the flip side-his parenting time should be his parenting time, not yours, so careful-that might come back to bite you later, so don't abuse that privilege. I would not bicker about what daycare the kid goes to, as long as it is within the agreed school system, but if she has more physical time with the kid, then the Courts will allow her to choose one closer to her (unless it is unsafe to the child for some reason-like abuse or neglect). You are absolutely allowed to pick up the kid for him.
Now, as for visitation rights- 3 times of denial of parenting time against dad and she will be legally penalized and possibly lose her custody arrangement.
Ask me- I have been through and seen it all, unfortunately...It is only the kid that will end up messed up (like she is).
She is WRONG, and DH needs to
She is WRONG, and DH needs to put a stop to this behavior. PHISICAL custody means they LIVE PHYSICALLY more at one parents house than the other. LEGAL means that LEGALLY they cannot make SOLE desicions they are to be made "JOINTLY". It should be spelled out in the CO education (day care) medical, religion etc etc are all to be agreed upon JOINTLY.
She took him OUT of a daycare
She took him OUT of a daycare closer to our house (we live in same subdivision Yeah) and moved him to another city where the woman doesn't even offer same hours. She said that she had set it up because DH mom would pick child up every day by 2:30! He totally didn't agree with it. He is estranged from his mother so he never would have made that plan. On Friday before Fathers day I took off to prepare for my ds graduation party, and to Father's day shop. I picked him up at noon had a great day. She found out and sent nasty texts to DH saying she didn't get first right of refusal.... Umm pretty sure that only happens is DH wasn't able to pick ss up on time. How would she get him at noon when she works. She also had the nerve to ASK him to give up his Fathers day because whe wanted to travel back home! She makes our life hell and I really cannot wait until we take her back to court. Surely the judges can set her straight.
Well neither parent was with
Well neither parent was with this child, he was at daycare. So that argument makes no sense.
It was dad's weekend. He can delegate anyone he choses to pick up the child, unless the court order dictates otherwise.
How on earth could a mother
How on earth could a mother argue for ROFR when she is at work? Not only that, how can she cry ROFR when the paternal grandmother picks up the child on the other days?
I'm baffled.
Anyway, it does not sound like there is a court order for ROFR so the point is moot.
Our attorney stated that only
Our attorney stated that only applied to child pick up. If she's working she obviously cannot have him secondly she has someone else pick the child up every day on her days at 2:30 never considering this to breech a first right...
I think you are confused with
I think you are confused with wording. ROFR has nothing to do with pick ups or drops offs. I am assuming that it is NOT in a court order.
I'm sure I do, as the whole
I'm sure I do, as the whole thing is ridiculous. Honestly I think the whole think is absurd. On his days I think he should be responsible and same goes for her. If she's stuck in traffic and has her BF or friend get him we don't mind she'd responsible to figure it out. We just wish she gave him the same respect. The problem is she thinks first right means she gets to make arrangements for him not HER typicall since she rarely gets him on her days anyway.
Your husband attorney can
Your husband attorney can write her a letter stating what your husband finds objectionable and threated to go back to family court to clarify what she can and cannot do without his permission.
She is wrong. She can't do
She is wrong. She can't do that. Doesn't mean she won't. BM switched schools without even telling DH and we HAVE 50%.
I have joint with my XH. I should have gotten sole - that was a mistake on my part. XH sees them 10 days a month, pays nothing for them yet has equal say - from my perspective he shouldn't have equal say - and I screwed up on that - I didn't realize at the time how much that was going to effect me.
For example, BD is getting to the age to go into an exchange program. XH doesn't participate in anything accademic with BD. She is a straight a+ student. She has talked about traveling to Europe after high school which she may graduate 6 months early with enough credits. XH couldn't name her best friend, or tell you how she is doing in gym. All of those things he could choose to be privy to but chooses not to. Yet he vetoed the exchange program without even reading about it - because he can.
XH - please look at this link. This is the exchange program running next year at the school. BD wants to attend and qualifies due to her grades. This is something she is interested in and asking about.
Reply from XH within 5 min therefore he didn't even click the link or read it - No. I don't think she should go. Thanks.
I am going to pull my crazy BM card here - f.u. XH - you shouldn't get any say as far as i am concerned, you are barely involved.