This is likely to be a nonsensical, rambling vent. But there's no place else to put this, especially at 8AM the day before Thanksgiving. 

Yesterday morning, we received notice from BM's lawyer that DH needed to be at court today because BM is filing for an ex parte hearing. (Not sure how it works for everyone else, but in California, ex parte hearings are supposed to be for immediate danger to people or property and/or children being taken out of the state.) When the attorney's office called yesterday, they refused to give us the grounds on which BM was filing. They had until 4:30PM to get us that information, for the hearing which will happen at 8:30AM today. We received BM's filing yesterday at a hair past 4:30PM.

Wow.

She is filing this "emergency" hearing because DH has "unilaterally cut her from her children's lives". Let's discuss!

1) Statement: DH has refused to allow BM visitation. BM requests visitation resume with GBM as the supervisor. 

Background: BM has supervised visitation. This was assigned because she has a very serious mental illness which she does not consistently treat. At the last court date, BM argued for, and my DH did not challenge (grrr) GBM being BM's supervisor. While not ideal (in my opinion) this worked fine until the last visit, around 11/1, where GBM got tired of supervising and sat in her car during a visit leaving OSD13, YSDnow9, and BM to have words about the rules of supervision and how uncomfortable OSD was with GBM sitting in the car. BM ignored her. OSD told DH and DH emailed BM stating they need to move to a professional supervisor and requested she contact one as soon as she was able so she did not lose any visitation time, but that neither he nor OSD was comfortable using GBM at this time. BM said no and she'd take us to court (in an email).

Favorite part of filing: BM acknowledges that GBM absolutely went and sat in the car, acknowledges OSD was upset, but states she felt her actions were reasonable because BM is safe and healthy now and "OSD babysits YSD at DH's house so BM sees no issue with OSD being alone with her and YSD during the visit". Direct quote. BM states her mental health is demonstrated by the fact that she is working two jobs and has gotten a trade license recently. She then states DH wants her to use professional supervision (so... he's not denying visitation then???) but claims she cannot a professional supervision whatsoever. 

2) Statement: DH has refused to continue with reunification therapy. BM demands that as specific reunification supervisor be used for reunification therapy. 

Background: In May, CO was entered that BM needed to attend reunification therapy with children and father had final approval of counselor. Children had four visits with counselor in five months and not one was with BM. When DH pressed for more progress, counselor said, "BM isn't ready and had to work through her personal issues first". BM has two other therapists so we thought that is what counselor was referring to. Nope. Turns out BM was using the reunification counselor as her personal counselor and this counselor began contacting DH asking for increased visitation on BM's behalf, writing emails and texts for BM (which counselor admitted to doing) and at no point did counselor begin any sessions with BM and kids for reunification from June 1 to Oct 28, over five months. DH discontinued sessions with this counselor citing that counselor was working as BM's personal therapist, which was fine, but that it was not longer appropriate for them to pursue reunification therapy through her. Over the last month, DH has sent multiple emails to BM with a list of three alternate counselors he had called and they could use so that reunification therapy could continue as quickly as possible. BM does not include these emails in her filing and ignores he even did this. DH's response includes the emails. 

Favorite part of filing: BM and states that counselor is only for reunification therapy and has never served as her personal therapist, and if she has, it was all moving towards reunification because she needs to work through her own issues to "help the girls". (BM fails to mention her two other therapists at this point). Said counselor submitted a letter stating that, "Yes, she (counselor) did begin to contact DH on BM's behalf but that was 'to ease tension' between the parents" and she "regrets that decision now and could see how father thought she was acting as a liaison on mother's behalf but that is most definitely not the case as [she] has her primary focus as always and only been on reunification. than a reunification therapist  BM then goes on to state that she has been seeing the reunification counselor for individual therapy WEEKLY and is doing so presently. 

Bonus favorite part: BM demands DH also attend reunification therapy with the children and this counselor because they need it. 

Everything Else

The brief is lengthy, because BM has a lot to say about DH -- he is brain washing the children and engaging in "psychological warfare" and she has done everything necessary to prove she is mentally healthy and he keeps stopping her from having a relationship with the children -- all delightful fabrications and completely untrue. (One part of the CO says she needs to submit compelling evidence she's been medically compliant for one year. 1) It's been 6 months and 2) the only "compelling evidence" she has submitted is a letter saying she's kept all her appointments except for two, and she "is medically compliant as indicated by her good mood". Yes folks, you know when a schizophrenic person is taking their meds because for the one hour a month you see them, they are in a good mood! How much more compelling can you get, really?) There's also complaints that "DH asked her for money". Umm, that's the money she owes for her half of medical expenses which she hasn't paid since May.

My real frustration is how shady she's been with her therapists. Since this happened last October, she has changed therapists 3 or 4 times. She doesn't provide any notification to DH. She just switches therapists. Or, still kind of goes to one, but starts really seeing the other and doesn't tell DH. We find out when she files for a modification and lo and behold, there's a new note from a new therapist saying how great she is! BM also doesn't transfer any of her medical records, a fact that came out in court last time. So each new therapist is writing a letter of recommendation based off what BM told them has happened, not what's actually happened. She's gotten caught in the past because the social worker at the last family court session called her therapists to discuss her progress and when they whole story came out, the therapists confessed they did not have any of the information about BM's psychosis or schrizoaffective disorder and only knew she was bipolar. So she's revealing half-truths about her mental illness and not discussing the full spectrum of issues. And she has a bunch of letters again this time, all saying how much progress she is made, how she is clearly understanding her impact on the children and can empathize with what they have experienced from being present at her last "manic episode" (please notice they say MANIC, not PSYCHOTIC, and believe me when I say there is a big flippin' difference).

So what will happen? Who knows? We are hoping the judge throws it out as an ex parte and we have to be rerouted through FCS on the regular timeline, not the expedited timeline. But really, tons of people have fallen for her BS lies, so I suppose that could happen too. I have not idea. I'm just displeased this is something we have to worry about the day before Thanksgiving and a week long international vacation!

Spellcheck isn't working. I'm typing furiously and have to go so can't proof read. I don't even know if anyone will read this anyway. It's long and bores even me. I'm so tired of this BS.