Worth Taking to Court?

[optomistic_nonsense]

Hi all and thanks for the read.

 

So...I am trying to get all my ducks in a row and figure out if I will have a leg to stand on in the courts. I am not asking for legal advice here, just a general consensus from you all.

 

6 or so years ago, I signed a custody agreement with my ex-husband regarding our, at the time, 1 year old son. We had a short, rocky marriage, and were not married all that long. During the time the custody agreement was signed, I was working 45+ hours a week and was living alone. He too was working a hefty amount of hours each week.

Fast forward to present day: I now own my own business and work from home part-time and am fortunate enough to make up my own schedule. My husband works 40 hours a week and we have an 8 month baby, my older son's step-brother.

 

Although my ex-husband and I are civil with each other, when my 7 year old son is not with me and my family and is supposed to be with my ex - he is with my ex's mother. All day. Typically until at least 6:30 or 7pm and then he goes to bed at 8:30 or 9pm. To me....this just does not make sense anymore. I now have the opportunity to support my family in a large way by caring for my children here at home and not utilize childcare. My ex's mother was never, nor is she now, a legal role in our custody agreement. I would not even entertain the idea of this if in fact my ex was the one raising our 7 year old son, but he just isn't. Even on the weekends, my ex coaches and does other things and leaves my 7 year old with his parents a lot of the time.

 

I am not trying to come across as this all mighty perfect parent of the century here....but....I just don't see the sense behind it. We have a 50/50 custody agreement right now, but....again....I personally feel that it would be in the best interest of my 7 year old to be here more. I've had lawyers and therapist friends of mine ask one important question each: "Is your ex a good father?".

I really don't even know the answer to that. I have to assume that if he was actually spending a fair amount of time with my son that he would be....but I just don't know. Even when my son was first born, my ex would come home from a 10 hour work day and run out the door to play sports with his friends. I just cannot gauge currently what his parenting skills are like. I do know that my ex's mother is a wonderful person and is very loving with my son....but again, she is not a factor in our legal agreement. I am wanting to change our 50/50 custody agreement to more of a 90/10. My ex husband would still be with our son every other weekend like he currently is, but the big change would be during the week - rather than every other week being with my ex-husband (or grandmother in this case), he'd remain here.

 

Thoughts?

[jen1447]

Hm. Off the cuff my thinking is that FotC would err on the side of precedent and not want to change anything without good reason, and what you have (no offense, just being straight) isn't really even demonstrable unless you got your ex to admit it or had your 7 year old provide testimony. And even if it was demonstrable I don't know how compelling it'd be.

 

Have you discussed changing the agreement w/your ex at all?

[optomistic_nonsense]

Thank so much for responding, Jen

 

Haven't mentioned it to my ex just yet. He is very short-fused. If you rub him the wrong way - watch out! This is just one small grain of sand in why I had to leave him several years ago, however - I am planning on e-mailing him once I figure out a gentle way to express my thoughts to him, that way if it IS taken to court I can at least say "I tried and here is proof". My ex has lashed out (verbally) at my parents twice when we were married, and luckily I have my parents' full support in this. Another issue we had when married is that my ex suffered from some form of PTSD from being in the Balkan war back in the 90's. He had to keep weapons under our bed in case someone came after us at night....

He is not psychotic or I never would've agreed to ANY custody agreement with him, he is just in need some wires getting tightened, in my opinion.

 

Any way - nothing has been mentioned yet. Still in the beginning stages of this.

[CupCakess]

My opinion:

 

- First of all, you are wrong.

 

- Second of all, you will hurt your son by this.

 

- Third you will probably fail at court.

 

a) He is not a bad father. There is nothing wrong with his grandma taking over the role of nanny. He does spend time with his son, at least a few hours a day doesn't he? Let me sk you something, does your new husband spend that much time with his own son? or does he, spend only a few hours a day when he comes back from work and before your kid goes to sleep? You are being bias towards youyr ex-.

 

b) If you attempt or manage to remove your ex from your son, you will hurt him, and will strain the relationship between them. Given that his father does love him, your son will side with him, and he will eventually resent you from removing his father from his daily life. Furthermore, have you even consider the fact that your son may wish to see his father weekly? you probably have not given much of a thought.

 

c) There is nothing wrong with the case you describe. He is not a bad father, and the court will not rule out your previous agreement. You will only waste money.

 

PS: to be honest, you haven't considered your son at all in this; you are not thinking bout his own feelings, which in turns makes very bad parenting on your behalf. Think of your son and whats good for him, not whats good for you.

[jen1447]

I understand. It's kind of a diff tack going down that road tho, bc it's bscly all about being unfit, even if you try to be reasonable about it. (And the implication is if he's unfit to be a parent, why do you want him to have any time at all? And if you're ok w/him having time then he must not be unfit, etc. So it's like you have to go all-in on that or not at all.)

 

I guess it's possible you could get some traction on just pushing the greater means/better way of life angle, and you do have the advantage of being the mother. But I think that'd be best tried in an easygoing manner - all about you and what's changed under your roof over the years and nothing trying to tear him down.

[carhill]

A few questions:

 

1. It appears you have some pretty detailed information on your son's activities when with his father. How is that information being gathered?

 

2. In general, how is your son's behavior and performance in school?

 

3. In general, how does your son feel about the current parenting arrangement?

 

4. How does your exH feel about the current parenting arrangement?

 

5. If circumstances were reversed, with your exH being remarried and able to provide full-time personal care, and you in his current circumstances, how would you feel about being approached to substantially reduce your legal and practical contact with your child?

 

With a good lawyer, I think you could make a compelling case for a custody modification if exH wasn't amenable. The unknown is the fallout of that choice in the parent/child realm. Then there's also the variable of the judge, though a good lawyer knows how to play the judge game and vet the judge. Lastly, there's cost. What's it worth for you to get to 90/10, especially if over his objections? IDK.

[optomistic_nonsense]

My opinion:

 

- First of all, you are wrong.

 

- Second of all, you will hurt your son by this.

 

- Third you will probably fail at court.

 

a) He is not a bad father. There is nothing wrong with his grandma taking over the role of nanny. He does spend time with his son, at least a few hours a day doesn't he? Let me sk you something, does your new husband spend that much time with his own son? or does he, spend only a few hours a day when he comes back from work and before your kid goes to sleep? You are being bias towards youyr ex-.

 

b) If you attempt or manage to remove your ex from your son, you will hurt him, and will strain the relationship between them. Given that his father does love him, your son will side with him, and he will eventually resent you from removing his father from his daily life. Furthermore, have you even consider the fact that your son may wish to see his father weekly? you probably have not given much of a thought.

 

c) There is nothing wrong with the case you describe. He is not a bad father, and the court will not rule out your previous agreement. You will only waste money.

 

PS: to be honest, you haven't considered your son at all in this; you are not thinking bout his own feelings, which in turns makes very bad parenting on your behalf. Think of your son and whats good for him, not whats good for you.

 

 

Thanks for your response CupCakess.

 

To clarify one your point "A"-

My ex spends maybe 2 hours a night with my 7 year old assuming he gets home on time.

My husband gets home at a reasonable time every day and spends approximately 4 1/2 hours each night with me and both of the boys

 

I appreciate your honestly, although I am a bit offended at your assumption of me doing this out of selfish reasons. I am doing quite the opposite, in my opinion. At the age of 7, my son does not quite understand/comprehend what's going on and sees this as his every day way of life. As I stated above, I would never even entertain the idea of this if my ex husband were actually raising my son. The grandmother is in fact the one raising my son when he is not with me and my husband, and the grandmother has no part in our legal custody agreement. Yes, she is a wonderful woman, but she is acting the part of a nanny for my ex. I have worked very hard to get myself into a position in life where I am able to raise my children without the help of anyone and I just do not see a need for my son to have to have a babysitter during the daytime when I am here able to do so myself. Am I taking time away from my son and his bio-dad during the day? Not at all. Would I be taking 1-2 hours away from him at night 4 days a week or so? Yes, I would be, and I am sorry you disagree, but given the situation I just do not feel that would be all that earth shattering given the mentality of my ex.

[optomistic_nonsense]

A few questions:

 

1. It appears you have some pretty detailed information on your son's activities when with his father. How is that information being gathered?

 

2. In general, how is your son's behavior and performance in school?

 

3. In general, how does your son feel about the current parenting arrangement?

 

4. How does your exH feel about the current parenting arrangement?

 

5. If circumstances were reversed, with your exH being remarried and able to provide full-time personal care, and you in his current circumstances, how would you feel about being approached to substantially reduce your legal and practical contact with your child?

 

With a good lawyer, I think you could make a compelling case for a custody modification if exH wasn't amenable. The unknown is the fallout of that choice in the parent/child realm. Then there's also the variable of the judge, though a good lawyer knows how to play the judge game and vet the judge. Lastly, there's cost. What's it worth for you to get to 90/10, especially if over his objections? IDK.

 

 

Thanks for responding, carhill. To answer your questions:

 

1) I typically keep an email log of activities which stem from me asking my ex directly, however the majority of the time the activities involved my ex's parents doing something with my son.

 

2) My son's behavior in school is excellent and luckily always has been. During the school year, although the 50/50 custody remains - he is with me and my husband for a solid 7 day week, then with my ex for a solid 7 day week (it must be this way due to my son needing to ride 2 different buses). This is a whole other discussion however as my son is not always "up to date" with his homework and other school activities when he is with my son (ie: my ex agreed to bring in cupcakes for my son's birthday this year but forgot). I had birthday treats ready to go as my ex can be absent minded. I don't mean to sound harsh, just going off of past-occurrances.

The other issue with the school year is that my son more or less lives with his grandmother during the school year weeks because my ex leaves too early for work and is unable to put him on the bus, nor is he home in time to get him off the bus, therefore his mother must do this for him from her house

 

3) My son has been very, very fluid and easy-going, and I do believe that is is in part because this is how it's been for 6 of his 7 years of life, and there has never been much/any drama between me and my ex. When there is, it was always between e-mail. It is not something I would ever subject my son to.

 

4) My ex is not a fan of the current arrangement. He has stated before that he feels our son is not being raised in the right religious light (I am a non-denominational Christian, and my ex is Muslim). He does not like our son being around Christmasy "things" and Eastery "things" nor does he want him dabbling in Halloween, etc. In our agreement, it was agreed upon that our son would not go to church, which....we do not go to church, however we are very spiritual and faithful people, as are they, we just come from different paths, and he feels that our son would do better in a more full-time Islamic setting. I, however, disagree.

 

5) I would feel robbed of what little time I do have with my son, should the tables be turned. I am acknowledging 100% that to my ex, this would seem unfair for him.

 

I do realize why people would think I am considering this for selfish reasons, and that's fine, I cannot control the picture people will perceive by reading this, but as a mother, I just cannot help but feel my son would have a better upbringing here with us.

[optomistic_nonsense]

I understand. It's kind of a diff tack going down that road tho, bc it's bscly all about being unfit, even if you try to be reasonable about it. (And the implication is if he's unfit to be a parent, why do you want him to have any time at all? And if you're ok w/him having time then he must not be unfit, etc. So it's like you have to go all-in on that or not at all.)

 

I guess it's possible you could get some traction on just pushing the greater means/better way of life angle, and you do have the advantage of being the mother. But I think that'd be best tried in an easygoing manner - all about you and what's changed under your roof over the years and nothing trying to tear him down.

 

 

Jen - you hit the nail on the head. My go-to point is that my life has dramatically changed over the past several years to a point where I feel that me and my husband could provide a more suitable and healthier environment for my son.

[CupCakess]

Thanks for your response CupCakess.

 

To clarify one your point "A"-

My ex spends maybe 2 hours a night with my 7 year old assuming he gets home on time.

My husband gets home at a reasonable time every day and spends approximately 4 1/2 hours each night with me and both of the boys

 

I appreciate your honestly, although I am a bit offended at your assumption of me doing this out of selfish reasons. I am doing quite the opposite, in my opinion. At the age of 7, my son does not quite understand/comprehend what's going on and sees this as his every day way of life. As I stated above, I would never even entertain the idea of this if my ex husband were actually raising my son. The grandmother is in fact the one raising my son when he is not with me and my husband, and the grandmother has no part in our legal custody agreement. Yes, she is a wonderful woman, but she is acting the part of a nanny for my ex. I have worked very hard to get myself into a position in life where I am able to raise my children without the help of anyone and I just do not see a need for my son to have to have a babysitter during the daytime when I am here able to do so myself. Am I taking time away from my son and his bio-dad during the day? Not at all. Would I be taking 1-2 hours away from him at night 4 days a week or so? Yes, I would be, and I am sorry you disagree, but given the situation I just do not feel that would be all that earth shattering given the mentality of my ex.

 

I'm sorry if you feel offended, its not really my intention, but you re being biased.

 

a) You are married, your ex is not. In this case the kid's grandma is filling that role. If he got re-married, would you complain about the agreement too? Your ex has a job, and a life too. Your husband doesn't spend a large part of his day with his kid either, given that he probably has a job and a life. Lets not forget also that his actual child is currently a baby. But I do not see much difference between whats going on.

 

b) Your conclusion is based on the spectrum that "you" could be taking care of him because "you" have time to do it. What would happen if suddenly you couldn't afford that time? And if your ex did? will you be ok with him taking care of your son?

 

c) I have to stress something very important here. Your son is 7...in a few years he will be 10. When you start your "pre-teen" years your mother's role in your life becomes largely more irrelevant, while your father becomes more important, given he is the one to guide you in the "manly ways". At that age he will begin developing a stronger bond with his father (based on sports at first, then girls when he is a teen, and politics when a young adult).

 

Your role as a mother, will deminish day by day. I know it sucks to put it this way, but it is how it is for every boy whose father is still in the picture (an argument can be made for moms who fill the fatherly role too).

 

If you remove this custody agreement, you will strain one of the best gifts in life: a relationship with your father, who in time he will become a good friend, buddy and guide in life.

 

This is why I see it as selfish reson. I really do not intend to be offensive, but you are not thinking what is good for your son.

 

PS: Male children that have good relationships with their father are much better adapted to society when adults.

[jen1447]

^ She said 90/10 - she's not trying to eliminate the father from her son's life. And the basis of her claim isn't that she has "more time," it's that she can provide stability and comfort in a way she wasn't able to before. And she keeps pointing out that the grandmother, wonderful as she may be, has sort of slid into this caregiving role and she didn't play a part in the original agreement.

 

Jen - you hit the nail on the head. My go-to point is that my life has dramatically changed over the past several years to a point where I feel that me and my husband could provide a more suitable and healthier environment for my son.

 

Given all that I think you should try. You're interest here is obvs your son's well-being, so in that sense, nothing is really out of bounds.

[CupCakess]

^ She said 90/10 - she's not trying to eliminate the father from her son's life. And the basis of her claim isn't that she has "more time," it's that she can provide stability and comfort in a way she wasn't able to before. And she keeps pointing out that the grandmother, wonderful as she may be, has sort of slid into this caregiving role and she didn't play a part in the original agreement.

 

Given all that I think you should try. You're interest here is obvs your son's well-being, so in that sense, nothing is really out of bounds.

 

A 90/10 is pretty much allowing the father to barely have visitation rights. Lets be realistic on the fact that its not really much time to spend with your son, much less to develop a good relationship.

 

Grandma may not be part of the original agreement, so what? life goes on, and people adapt as they go.

 

To be honest the whole argument is based on pretty weak reasons, that will not have much strenght in a court case .

 

Makes me think this might not be the actual reason why the OP wants to change the custody agreement.

[jen1447]

A 90/10 is pretty much allowing the father to barely have visitation rights. Lets be realistic on the fact that its not really much time to spend with your son, much less to develop a good relationship.

 

Grandma may not be part of the original agreement, so what? life goes on, and people adapt as they go.

 

To be honest the whole argument is based on pretty weak reasons, that will not have much strenght in a court case .

 

Makes me think this might not be the actual reason why the OP wants to change the custody agreement.

 

If she had a more typical arrangement, like every other weekend and every odd Wednesday for the father (which is most likely what she'd get), that'd be more like 20% for him, which is far from insignificant. And the significance of the mother is that the 'parenting time' her ex is getting is actually amounting to parenting time for his mother anyway. She obvs wouldn't seek to eliminate her son's grandmother from his life anymore than his father, but she didn't agree to the grandmother being the defacto father and the court was unaware of that eventuality by the sound. So the agreement as it's playing out now wasn't even what the court mandated anyway.

 

I don't think her case is exactly strong, but I don't think it's at all weak for the reasons you mention either. If there are weaknesses, they're more to do with upsetting the status quo imo.

[CupCakess]

If she had a more typical arrangement, like every other weekend and every odd Wednesday for the father (which is most likely what she'd get), that'd be more like 20% for him, which is far from insignificant. And the significance of the mother is that the 'parenting time' her ex is getting is actually amounting to parenting time for his mother anyway. She obvs wouldn't seek to eliminate her son's grandmother from his life anymore than his father, but she didn't agree to the grandmother being the defacto father and the court was unaware of that eventuality by the sound. So the agreement as it's playing out now wasn't even what the court mandated anyway.

 

I don't think her case is exactly strong, but I don't think it's at all weak for the reasons you mention either. If there are weaknesses, they're more to do with upsetting the status quo imo.

 

Its not about parenting "time". I certainly doubt Mom spends 100% of the days she gets with her son, after all she has to work, and perhaps do other stuff. Maybe her husband sometimes takes over in the watching over, as it is usual. Clearly she is making the distinction that in total she spends more weekly hours with the kid than her dad. But that isn't a bad or uncommon thing to have.

 

Here she is trying to quantify the exact amount of hours he spends in the presence of her father, which is stupid.

 

And btw, there is no such thing as a "typical" arrangement. Fathers have the same right as the mother to spend time with his kid. A 50/50 arrangement is ideal thing. In fact for young men, studies suggest it is better to spend more time with your father than your mother.

 

A "dad gets him on weekend" is a vew discriminatory view against men, because it implies the mother is more entitled to spend time with the kids.

[jen1447]

Its not about parenting "time". I certainly doubt Mom spends 100% of the days she gets with her son, after all she has to work, and perhaps do other stuff. Maybe her husband sometimes takes over in the watching over, as it is usual. Clearly she is making the distinction that in total she spends more weekly hours with the kid than her dad. But that isn't a bad or uncommon thing to have.

 

Here she is trying to quantify the exact amount of hours he spends in the presence of her father, which is stupid.

 

And btw, there is no such thing as a "typical" arrangement. Father has the same right as the mother to spend time with his kid. A 50/50 arrangement is ideal thing.

 

A "dad gets him on weekend" is a vew discriminatory view against men, because it implies the mother is more entitled to spend time with the kids.

 

Parenting time = time actually spent with your child to influence their life accordingly as a parent. If he's not there for much or most of his custody periods, he's not doing that.

 

If you have an ax to grind with the FotC that's your business (and frankly it sounds like you do), but in the US at least, a part-time custody situation for the father - every other weekend +1 - is indeed the norm.

 

I'm not interested in quibbling about what you perceive to be the grandmother's role or what you think is morally righteous in this case or not - it wasn't in the custody agreement, the OP isn't happy with it, and the OP appears to have her son's best interests at heart as the other parent, end of story. She should pursue what she thinks is best for him.

[CupCakess]

Parenting time = time actually spent with your child to influence their life accordingly as a parent. If he's not there for much or most of his custody periods, he's not doing that.

 

If you have an ax to grind with the FotC that's your business (and frankly it sounds like you do), but in the US at least, a part-time custody situation for the father - every other weekend +1 - is indeed the norm.

 

I'm not interested in quibbling about what you perceive to be the grandmother's role or what you think is morally righteous in this case or not - it wasn't in the custody agreement, the OP isn't happy with it, and the OP appears to have her son's best interests at heart as the other parent, end of story. She should pursue what she thinks is best for him.

 

The case for father getting children on weekends, was back then when woman would traditionally be stay at home moms, while dads had to work and pay alimoney. It isn't like that now days, and it isn't like that in the U.S. It might have been a few decades ago, but the new trend in family law is to allow 50/50 custody agreement, which is becoming the norm not only in the US, but in the whole world. Saying otherwise is holding a very old fashioned view of how the world works. And no court will rule against the father for having the kids grandmother watch over him part time, despite not being part of the original agreement. The kid is under constant adult supervision by a respectable and truthworthy family member.

 

I'm not interested in holding an argument with you either, but let me remind you that you are the one who adressed my post, not the other way around. I'm giving advice to the OP, just because I don't hold a view in her favour, it does not mean I have an axe to grind as you stated, which by the way, it is a bit disrespectful to imply.

 

Her son's best interest is to have a good relationship with his father. Having time allows that to happen. Given that her ex is not an abusive, alcoholic, unemployed father, it doesn't seem like the OP is giving much thought to the implications of pretty much removing the father from her son's life (which lets face it, a 90/10 agreement would be).

 

I certainly believe this isn't the whole reason. It might be the argument to take the ex to court, but there is probably a deeper meaning why she wants this change.

Edited June 28, 2016 by CupCakess

[jen1447]

The case for father getting children on weekends, was back then when woman would traditionally be stay at home moms, while dads had to work and pay alimoney. It isn't like that now days, and it isn't like that in the U.S. It might have been a few decades ago, but the new trend in family law is to allow 50/50 custody agreement, which is becoming the norm not only in the US, but in the whole world. Saying otherwise is holding a very old fashioned view of how the world works. And no court will rule against the father for having the kids grandmother watch over him part time, despite not being part of the original agreement. The kid is under constant adult supervision by a respectable and truthworthy family member.

 

Saying otherwise is responding to a direct view of the current and ongoing situation in US courts, sorry. I don't know where you're generating your opinion from.

 

I responded to you, frankly, bc you were being somewhat inappropriately antagonistic toward the OP and I don't like it when honest and forthright ppl are bullied, not bc I was interested in your PoV. That said, you can consider me finished with you on this topic as of now.

[carhill]

I recall something similar, with a long-time friend of mine, an early fighter for equal custody for guys, back in the early 80's, who successfully got the court to give him 50% physical custody of his two young children, a boy and a girl. He was, as most men are, employed full-time, a lifer at our local public utility, and his school-age kids often spent a few hours each day after school at his parents house until he got off work. They're now long since grown and he's a grandfather a couple times over.

 

His main assets were he was very focused and being a father was very important to him and he had deep enough pockets from a very good job to fight the prevailing legal sentiments back then regarding men and custody. Other than one other friend, now my best friend of nearly 30 years, who also sued for and got 50/50 back then, most of my male friends were the two weekends a month fathers paying child support. Heck, my dad never saw his daughters and still paid child support because his wife divorced him took them to another state while he was at war. That's what fathers had to go through. Fortunately, times are changing and, generally, children are the beneficiaries.

 

Those sentiments may have traction in this milieu, depending on how passionate the father here is about his role in his child's life. If he's 'whatever', then perhaps an agreement can be hammered out that reflects the current sentiments. If he's a fighter, well, buckle in.

[CupCakess]

Saying otherwise is responding to a direct view of the current and ongoing situation in US courts, sorry. I don't know where you're generating your opinion from.

 

I responded to you, frankly, bc you were being somewhat inappropriately antagonistic toward the OP and I don't like it when honest and forthright ppl are bullied, not bc I was interested in your PoV. That said, you can consider me finished with you on this topic as of now.

 

Its cool, but I will respond to this last post of you either way, given that I find it a bit unpolite that you walk away from a conversation you started without allowing me the proper courtesy of responding your arguments.

 

As for your first paragraph, a simple google search:"shared custody in america", shows the reality of now days custody battles, if you wish here is an example link Custody: Joint Custody On the Rise, Maternal Custody Plummets . It is a growing trend in the new generation for mostly young parents. You are free to look it up if you don't believe me.

 

As for your 2nd paragraph, I hardly see the OP as an honest person, given that her argument (at least what she has mentioned) is based on attempting to manipulate the law in her favour, and it would be your personal assumption that she is "honest and kind". However, my intention while a little bit harshly said it is actually in her favour. You can notice this by the fact that I focused most of my argument on the well-being of her son, based on the strain it may cause in the reltionship with his father, which the mother hasn't relly seemed to have considered. If I talk to her in a harshly direct matter, its to let her understand how important that is. Furthermore, divorced parents are usually selfish towards their own perception of what they think its better for their kid, and it is something that affects most parents.

Edited June 28, 2016 by CupCakess

[jakrbbt]

Congratulations on a more stable situation, and on getting the stay-at-home parenting arrangement you wanted for your second child.

 

Now let me reassure you that your older child, the one with dad/dad's mother some of the time, is likely doing fine. His situation is stable too. My advice for you is to not take it to court. Instead make it clear you'll be open to a change in the parenting plan if-and-when grandma becomes unavailable for such constant child care.

 

Parenting is not about majority hours racked up. It's about regular, nurturing contact, and providing a home for the child. I have done an obsessive amount of discerning research on this!

 

Frequency of contact, not duration of time. The existence of a home the kid comes home to, even if just to sleep. Nurturing, non-abusive time together. That's parenting. Amount of time, not nearly as much of a factor as popularly thought (or in your case, maybe, feared).

 

Take for instance, children who are home-schooled: They do not necessarily feel any more "parented" than children who go to school and live with good stable parents.

 

He knows dad's home is home, and your home is other home. Even if he only goes "home" at Dad's for an hour before bedtime. That hour can be highly influential.

 

More to the point, placing your kids in day care/ school/ Grandma's-- that you choose, you arrange, your provide and orchestrate-- is parenting. Courts recognize that. And kids know it. I knew my parents were choosing to place me in the school they did. Or at camps et cetara. I wasn't just wandering into schools and camps like an orphan.

 

Anyway courts see it as parenting too. They do not dock parenting-time for hours left in day care.

 

Courts do not have a preference for stay-at-home parents over working parents. And that may be your choice to stay at home, but let me assure you that working parents are not choosing any less stable an option per se.

 

I just went through a similar concern and just asked my (excellent) family therapist, "Isn't it much better for child to me with me than with dad, if dad will have him at grandma's for 13 hours?" The answer I got was, being at Grandma's (or other) is NOT going to make child feel insecure. It's not per se unstable. It's NOT going to make child feel like he has no home.

 

I give you these answers because, all things being equal, it's best for your child to stay where he is (unless grandma's is bad for him). If you go to court and say "change kid's situation and give kid to me because I am a stay at home parent," court may be unimpressed by that. One parent asking to have child because other parent works, is not likely to fly. Then in the court's mind (I'm not saying this is likely), who's to know you'll always be in second marriage and always be able to stay at home parent?

 

I am not trying to be discouraging, just the opposite! I mean to encourage you to KEEP your GOOD and FINE situation. Son's situation is not unstable as you think it to be. You should reassure yourself with the book "Growing Up Again" and with (if you can find one) an experienced family therapist. Best of luck. Congrats on new marriage and baby!

Edited June 28, 2016 by jakrbbt

[jakrbbt]

One more point: When i was a kid I often had school, sports, study hall, and then got home an hour or two before bedtime. But if someone had petitioned to take me from my parents' home, and won, I'd have been pissed off at that person for life.

 

And if the person said, "But you were only there an hour a night anyway," I'd have been even more angry. I would have thought: That was my home! I would have been very surprised to hear that a person only has a "right" to their home and family if they are there a certain number of hours per day. Your son may resent you and may feel a lot more insecure about his right to a home and family, if his own dad's home-and-family situation is taken away from him.

[minimariah]

Parenting time = time actually spent with your child to influence their life accordingly as a parent. If he's not there for much or most of his custody periods, he's not doing that.

 

of course but... can she actually PROVE that the X isn't around much...? it will be her word + ONE attempt at trying to CHANGE the agreement; no proof of the OP actually trying to CO-PARENT with the X. she doesn't even know what are his parenting skills like... meaning they don't communicate about the HOWs to raise their child. the father isn't with the son but with his grandmother & the OP wants him to be with her during that time; that can be used against her by a smart lawyer because it can be presented as a form of parental alienation. i don't know... the only thing she has going for her objectively is the new family environment and i guess the court will decide if that's enough.

 

shame though. the kid will probably lose contact with his biofather by the age of 18 & bond more with the stepfather also... just me noticing -- this happens a LOT; the 50/50 custody RARELY works out... i always thought the opposite is true. like, it works for some period of time and then someone at SOME point seeks sole custody and it goes downhill from there. odd.

[CupCakess]

 

shame though. the kid will probably lose contact with his biofather by the age of 18 & bond more with the stepfather also... just me noticing -- this happens a LOT; the 50/50 custody RARELY works out... i always thought the opposite is true. like, it works for some period of time and then someone at SOME point seeks sole custody and it goes downhill from there. odd.

 

The basic argument she is using to take him to court is very weak, to say the least. Seems more as an attempt to put the father aside, than anything else. I really don't think the OP is being truthful about her motives though.

[jen1447]

of course but... can she actually PROVE that the X isn't around much...? it will be her word + ONE attempt at trying to CHANGE the agreement; no proof of the OP actually trying to CO-PARENT with the X. she doesn't even know what are his parenting skills like... meaning they don't communicate about the HOWs to raise their child. the father isn't with the son but with his grandmother & the OP wants him to be with her during that time; that can be used against her by a smart lawyer because it can be presented as a form of parental alienation. i don't know... the only thing she has going for her objectively is the new family environment and i guess the court will decide if that's enough.

 

Yeah, that was the point I made originally mimi. I agree it's a tenuous claim but I don't know that anyone can expect her to do anything less than try if she thinks her son isn't getting the best life he possibly can.

[CupCakess]

You may think awfull of me for showing this, but a simple research into the OP shows she isn't the best parent herself. Yet she plans to cut out the father from her childs life for stuff that isn't even wrong.

 

Not using this to shame OP, just something to think about how we all make mistakes, and how our ideas may not be the best at all times.

 

From an old topic by the OP: http://www.loveshack.org/forums/familial/parenting/277119-best-judgement

I'm a little concerned on me not knowing what to do in this particular situation, as I always know what to (or at least THINK I know what to do ) when it comes to making decisions for my son, who will be 2 at the end of June.

 

I live in a lovely apartment complex, extremely secure and in a very good neighborhood. Like clockwork every night, he falls asleep at 8:30pm and wakes up around 7:30am. He has been sleeping through the entire night since he was about 6 months old. Within the pas year and a half, he never woke up during the night unless he was battling a cold.

 

We live on the 2nd floor, and below on the 1st floor is a gym which is open 24/7 in the building.

 

I'm almost embarrassed to even be asking this, but would it be horrible for me to jump downstairs for an hour at night while he's asleep? A monitor doesn't reach, I tried. I figured when we were living in a house and he was sleeping, I would go down stairs, put my headphones in and work out, although it's still just down the stairs....I dunno. Part of it just seems wrong.

 

Thoughts anyone?

 

Yet the father is in the wrong for leaving his kid with his grandmother. Go figure.