Court order states that during periods of access, father should be with kids at all times and not be left in care of anyone at any point. Seems rather odd and baffling to me.
So he's not allowed to go and pee if anyone else is in the home lest that be construed as leaving them in the care of someone else for a minute or two? Seriously, that's loopy. It's an exaggeration of FROR - usually if you have first right of refusal, you have to give the kids back to the other parent after a given length of absence - 2 hours say. I've never heard of it being so extreme (-but I'm no reference) that no allowance is permitted.
Another thing that surprises me is that this refers to the father... shouldn't the same condition extend to the mother too? Or can she leave the kids with any Tom, Dick, or Harry (sorry, Harry, no offence intended!)?
How long ago was this put in the CO? And how old are the kids in question now?
No, it's not reasonable. They can't go see Grandma for the night? Or go to a friend's house? He can't run to the store and leave them home? You can't get a babysitter and go out to dinner?
Also, don't go for a Right of First Refusal either, those are abused by high-conflict BMs (if that's what you have).
How old are the kids in question? That doesn't sounds reasonable at all.
My DH's FROR said time had to be offered to the other parent before hiring a babysitter's services. That seemed reasonable (though BM did try to twist it to consider me a babysitter). For kids beyond age 12 or so, certainly by high school - ROFRs seem pointless, unless for say a parent's extended business trip.
See, to me, not even that is reasonable. Why can't you get a babysitter and go out for two hours rather than having to deal with taking the kid to BM and dropping them off?
We had a similar thing, that no one else could be with SS for more than 2 hours, and it was a pain in the rear. BM, of course, never followed it, but SS would tattle his face off if we didn't, so we had to always be careful. The father's time should be left to the father to deal with - and only high conflict BMs want that clause anyway. Normal BMs have no issue with having some time away from their kids.
His ROFR was even more limited, actually: it specified "if the parent has to work on the weekend during parenting time," without giving a time limit.
BM wasn't so intrusive as to demand them for a few hour increments, but she did want them overnights, including on weekdays, if DH was gone. Which gave me a break, though was disruptive to the kids' continuity at one home. As they've gotten older, though, the ROFR is pretty much out the window.
Time for a modification. So DH isn't allowed to work when it's his custody time? You are not allowed to do anything one on one with SK? I would only think this would be the case for EXTREMES like if abuse had been happening, etc.
In our CO, there is a stipulation that if either parent is going to be out of town or gone for an extended period, the that parent may offer extra custody time to the other parent. But I also think that is just common courtesy to let the other parent know they will not be around.
Please tell me that a Judge did not come up with this. My guess is that this is the CP's idiocy and not something actually expressed by a Judge. If this actually has been issued in a CO, it in all likelihood was slipped in by whichever party's attorney was tasked with writing up the order and the Judge missed it when signing the order.
If it is something that the CP tried to slip in, the NCP needs to tell the CP to shove it up their ass.
We attempted to not surrender the Skid to random transporters chosen by the SpermClan to escort my SS to SpermLand for visitation. The Spermidiot never came to pick up his son once. Neither did the SpermGrandHag or SpermGrandPa. From when SS was 2yo until he turned 12 and could fly as an unaccompanied minor we struggled with this. Initially we refused to let SS go with anyone but recognized family. We put this in front of the Judge who chewed our butts and updated the CO to clearly state that transportation for visitation could be done by anyone designated by the SpermClan. In that same court hearing we attempted to have the CO clearly state that SS had to be with the Spermidiot during COd visitation. Again we got our butts chewed for trying to interfere in visitation. The Judge made it clear to us that the DipShitiot could give his visitation time to whoever he wanted and we had nothing to say about it. For the 16+ years of the CO, SS saw his BioDad no more than a few hours during visitation whether the visitation was the 5wk summer visitation or the 1wk winter and spring visitations. Until they all passed away, SS spend most of his visitation time with his GGPs and after they passed he spent his visitation time with SpermGrandHag and rarely ever saw his Spermidiot. We had to accept that the court really didn't give a shit about anything but ticking the box on SpermLand visitation.
So, based on our experiences in related elements of our 16+ years under a CO, I would suspect that a Judge would shred this attempt by the CP to interfere in the NCPs time with their kids.
Even if it was in the CO, there really isn't anything the CP could do about it if the NCP was not with the Skid every second of visitation time. If I was the NCP subject to this element in a CO, I would ignore it.
This is a control tactic that has absolutely no basis in child health, safety or emotional needs.
We have had things put in such as care givers need to either be professionals or known to the parent/child for at least 2 years - which is a little restrictive, but it at least accounts for the fact that parents can and do need to use outside child care on their custody time.
So he's not allowed to go and
So he's not allowed to go and pee if anyone else is in the home lest that be construed as leaving them in the care of someone else for a minute or two? Seriously, that's loopy. It's an exaggeration of FROR - usually if you have first right of refusal, you have to give the kids back to the other parent after a given length of absence - 2 hours say. I've never heard of it being so extreme (-but I'm no reference) that no allowance is permitted.
Another thing that surprises me is that this refers to the father... shouldn't the same condition extend to the mother too? Or can she leave the kids with any Tom, Dick, or Harry (sorry, Harry, no offence intended!)?
How long ago was this put in the CO? And how old are the kids in question now?
No, it's not reasonable. They
No, it's not reasonable. They can't go see Grandma for the night? Or go to a friend's house? He can't run to the store and leave them home? You can't get a babysitter and go out to dinner?
Also, don't go for a Right of First Refusal either, those are abused by high-conflict BMs (if that's what you have).
If this is in the existing CO
If this is in the existing CO, it's time for a review.
No, that is not reasonable at
No, that is not reasonable at all.
How old are the kids in
How old are the kids in question? That doesn't sounds reasonable at all.
My DH's FROR said time had to be offered to the other parent before hiring a babysitter's services. That seemed reasonable (though BM did try to twist it to consider me a babysitter).
For kids beyond age 12 or so, certainly by high school - ROFRs seem pointless, unless for say a parent's extended business trip.
See, to me, not even that is
See, to me, not even that is reasonable. Why can't you get a babysitter and go out for two hours rather than having to deal with taking the kid to BM and dropping them off?
We had a similar thing, that no one else could be with SS for more than 2 hours, and it was a pain in the rear. BM, of course, never followed it, but SS would tattle his face off if we didn't, so we had to always be careful. The father's time should be left to the father to deal with - and only high conflict BMs want that clause anyway. Normal BMs have no issue with having some time away from their kids.
His ROFR was even more
His ROFR was even more limited, actually: it specified "if the parent has to work on the weekend during parenting time," without giving a time limit.
BM wasn't so intrusive as to demand them for a few hour increments, but she did want them overnights, including on weekdays, if DH was gone. Which gave me a break, though was disruptive to the kids' continuity at one home. As they've gotten older, though, the ROFR is pretty much out the window.
Oh that would be fair. I
Oh that would be fair. I wouldn't keep them alone if DH was working anyway.
Time for a modification. So
Time for a modification. So DH isn't allowed to work when it's his custody time? You are not allowed to do anything one on one with SK? I would only think this would be the case for EXTREMES like if abuse had been happening, etc.
In our CO, there is a stipulation that if either parent is going to be out of town or gone for an extended period, the that parent may offer extra custody time to the other parent. But I also think that is just common courtesy to let the other parent know they will not be around.
He can work - but the kid
He can work - but the kid would have to go to BM's.
Or he can take the kid with
Or he can take the kid with him to work. Just imagine how much fun THAT would be...
To answer your question: NOPE
To answer your question: NOPE
Please tell me that a Judge
Please tell me that a Judge did not come up with this. My guess is that this is the CP's idiocy and not something actually expressed by a Judge. If this actually has been issued in a CO, it in all likelihood was slipped in by whichever party's attorney was tasked with writing up the order and the Judge missed it when signing the order.
If it is something that the CP tried to slip in, the NCP needs to tell the CP to shove it up their ass.
We attempted to not surrender the Skid to random transporters chosen by the SpermClan to escort my SS to SpermLand for visitation. The Spermidiot never came to pick up his son once. Neither did the SpermGrandHag or SpermGrandPa. From when SS was 2yo until he turned 12 and could fly as an unaccompanied minor we struggled with this. Initially we refused to let SS go with anyone but recognized family. We put this in front of the Judge who chewed our butts and updated the CO to clearly state that transportation for visitation could be done by anyone designated by the SpermClan. In that same court hearing we attempted to have the CO clearly state that SS had to be with the Spermidiot during COd visitation. Again we got our butts chewed for trying to interfere in visitation. The Judge made it clear to us that the DipShitiot could give his visitation time to whoever he wanted and we had nothing to say about it. For the 16+ years of the CO, SS saw his BioDad no more than a few hours during visitation whether the visitation was the 5wk summer visitation or the 1wk winter and spring visitations. Until they all passed away, SS spend most of his visitation time with his GGPs and after they passed he spent his visitation time with SpermGrandHag and rarely ever saw his Spermidiot. We had to accept that the court really didn't give a shit about anything but ticking the box on SpermLand visitation.
So, based on our experiences in related elements of our 16+ years under a CO, I would suspect that a Judge would shred this attempt by the CP to interfere in the NCPs time with their kids.
Even if it was in the CO, there really isn't anything the CP could do about it if the NCP was not with the Skid every second of visitation time. If I was the NCP subject to this element in a CO, I would ignore it.
This is a control tactic that
This is a control tactic that has absolutely no basis in child health, safety or emotional needs.
We have had things put in such as care givers need to either be professionals or known to the parent/child for at least 2 years - which is a little restrictive, but it at least accounts for the fact that parents can and do need to use outside child care on their custody time.
My bf court order says that
My bf court order says that the other parent gets first choice for overnight supervision if the bio parent is unavailable.
Nothing don't ask, don't tell
Nothing don't ask, don't tell won't resolve. What BM does not know, she cannot bitch about. Keep in mind that this goes both ways.