She's blowing smoke up his ass. As long as you aren't doing anything to harm the kid and/or the relationship between her and her parents, you're fine.

He can agree to anything. If he doesn't want to agree he doesn't have to.

Why he would agree to this is beyond me.

Are you a registered sex offender? A convict? A fugitive from justice? Anything less than that she doesn't have a leg to stand on. When his own kid is in his custody that means he's the responsible adult making decisions for her including guests, babysitters AND MOST OF ALL SPOUSES!

What really kills me is you are the mother of this child's half-sibling? But not "allowed" to be around the girl? Good grief. Let her blow smoke.

About the ball game. Don't make visitation time arrangements with the kid. The dad should communicate with the ex for that.

She spoke to a lawyer and will bring him to court.
H needs to call her bluff and you all should be at the zoo today.

He needs to follow the court order. If it's his time, he needs to take it. No switching off. No making it up to her.

If the school does email for announcements and newsletters your H needs to get on the list. H needs to check the school website for dates. H can spend the teacher an email every month or so and ask for an update. BM is not going to supply the info, he needs to be proactive.

She can tell you that her lawyer said anything, but that does not make it true.

She can't do a thing. I once asked a cop about this because BM had insisted that I was named specifically in their parenting plan as not being able to look after SD at the beginning of our marriage. The cop said that it wasn't illegal and was only enforceable if there was a serious, documented reason as to why I shouldn't be around kids (sex offender etc). Otherwise as long as one parent (my husband) was ok with it then it was fine. Now I suppose that had they gone to court during that time and had I been looking after SD on my own in violation of what my husband had agreed to in the parenting plan then maybe he could be held in contempt of the court order, but as it was they didn't go to court and the parenting plan they were working with at that time hadn't even been registered at the court house so who knows if it would have stood up to a judges scrutiny anyway.

But basically as long as the kid isn't in the presence of someone who is known and documented to be harmful for children to be around then she has no say as to what happens on dad's time. Just as he has no say as to who she exposes their daughter on her time.

Let her waste her money on her lawyer.

"Bm informed him last night that he is no longer aloud to bring sd9 around me and if he does she has spoken to a lawyer and will bring him to court. The reasons she gave him was she feels like he isn't a good dad when I'm around."

So what did say she would attempt to do in court? If she is claiming Dad is waiving his current schedule too much, she could try to cut down his days. The thinking being if he's not using them he doesn't need that much. Example, you said he waived Friday for a baseball game but made it up the next day. But if EOWE (Friday/Saturday) is his normal CO schedule, he's not really making it up the next day by having her come on Saturday...that is already his day. If he's waiving too many Friday's, while he can certainly do that. BM may be able to take Friday's from him as he's shown no interest in keeping them.

That would have nothing to do with you though. Her statement " She said that her lawyer stated she doesn't need a valid reason to keep her away from me. Is that true??" no. That is not true. You would not be the reason she would have to use to attempt a cut back. For example she can not (unless x and x persons were proven dangerous to child) run to a judge with a list of people she doesn't like nor want her ex to see when SD is visiting. She doesn't get to pick ex's wives or girlfriends. I mean, seriously, what's next? Is she going to decide perhaps ex talks baseball to a buddy on the phone and ban ex from using the phone during visitation too?

Or did mean back to court for a different provable and actual offense such as back CS if ex doesn't cave and give BM her own way. Or did BM mean 'if I don't get my own way I'll make your life miserable and withhold visitation , make up lies about your wife and fight you from anything but supervised visitations'? Whatever. However the 'case' as you've presented it here is not true and BM believes your DH is a total idiot. But then, seeing he seems to have readily agreed to it she appears to be correct.

He needs to learn his CO and his rights. Never believe what a BM tells you.

DH to BM: "See you in court."

End of discussion.

Do not allow this GUBM to manipulate your DH or family. That DH did not immediately eviscerate her just tells me he needs to initiate a repossession of his testicles from her purse. He seemingly failed to get those back in the divorce.

BM does not tell or demand anything to or from your DH. Ever, for any reason. She asks politely or she gets eviscerated soundly both verbally and in court.

Period. End of story.

"She said that her lawyer stated she doesn't need a valid reason to keep her away from me. Is this true?" Abso-frickin-lutely not true.

Time for DH to man up, own her idiot ass, and quit letting her yank him around by the short and curlies.