BPDFamily.com

So here's our situation in a nutshell... .  DH and his ex divorced shortly after she found out she was pregnant (i.e: she got what she wanted and was done). She withheld the child from him the first 4 months of her life and even went as far as to leave him off the birth certificate. They went to court (which drug out for a year of course) to get the judge to settle things. I came along in the middle of the custody battle. During the custody battle time, his ex-wife did a lot of dumb things such as withholding visitation, falsifying medical information, and going against doctor's orders. So her attorney was desperate at that point to settle outside of court and they ended up agreeing to a schedule that is EOW friday 8:00AM to sunday 6:00PM, and on the off weeks Wedesdays at 8:00AM to Thursdays at 6:00PM. They set a specific doctor's office as the child's primary doctor so that both parents could keep track of medical stuff since mom wasn't actually taking child to the doctor like she was saying. Since that time DH has taken child to a majority of her Dr.'s appointments, caught her up on immunizations, etc. The only one mom took her to was when she was going to the doctor for herself and they told her it was time to give baby another round of shots.

Fast forward to now... .  baby girl is 3 years old, mom just got remarried a few months ago and filed for a modification of custody based on her remarriage. Court is set for next Wednesday. In the last month, mom has rented out their home and moved in to her dad's house about 30 minutes away and has started making baby girl call her step-father Dad. She used to call him Daddy hit_ (his name) but baby girl told us recently she gets in trouble and is only allowed to call him Daddy now. He's been in the picture for like 6 months now?  We are asking for week on week off 50/50 time as child has gotten older than in teh first decre and child is about to be a sibling in our household and we want them spending quality time together (I personally think this is why mom is being such a beast). We just got mom's response today and their plan: no more vacation time (we currently get one week in July and one in December... .  not a lot as it is), EOW Friday at 6:00PM til Sunday at 6PM (10 less hours) and in the off week Wednesdays from 8AM-noon (that's  30 hours less per off week and seriously 4 hours!). She is doing this based on the "minimum parenting time plan" for our county... .  stupid anyways and can they really do that and go backwards in our time after 2 years?  She is also requesting they change school districts to her current residence even though the old decree stated she would go here and the school district sends a bus to where she lives now so she wouldn't even have to drive her! And she is asking to change doctors to one that is an hour away from us  (30 minutes the other direction from her). All of this because she states that the child cries when her dad comes to pick her up... .  which she has a FEW times, not regularly, and oh yeah - she's a 3 year old! Her mother in law was present for 1 pick up, 1 and only one, and is listed as a witness to testify against us how distraught the child was to have to leave with her dad. When my husband tries to call his daughter for the past month mom's reply is always "She's throwing a fit and doesn't want to talk to you and I won't force her to do so if she doesnt' want to." Please tell me no judge would really go for this right? Will they really go backwards on our time just because that's the county's minimum time standard even if we have been doing otherwise for 2 years now with no problems? Oh and I should mention that we have multiple texts from mom from just a few months previous to filing stating how happy child is when she's at our house and she's so glad she has us to work with in parenting. 

You have no choice but to proceed.  Whether a court would do all that she wanted, I doubt it but in family court literally anything can happen.

Do prepare the time line, how mother was happy/satisfied with arrangement before, how she flipped to the polar opposite when DH request equal time.  A major point to make is that her request for less time has no basis in documented incidents (sorry, "he always... .  " is too vague to mean much) and review of the time line shows every earmark of being retaliatory.  I suspect she feels her control and child support meal ticket are being threatened.

I wonder... .  will history repeat itself, will her new marriage end too once she gets pregnant again?

Separately each request she makes could seem okay to a judge, so you need to address them separately and also together.  For example, she's moved and wants a different doctor.  Judge has to be reminded of the history even if it's officially in the past and moot.  Presumably she's equidistant between the doctors, so a change shouldn't be necessary.  Besides, the fact that he takes D to the doctor far more than ex does is huge, it shows he's very involved and moving the doctor to an hour away would effectively be a hardship for the most involved parent.

Interestingly, in my county there's a new judge and the 'standard' guideline changed.  It specifically states that a primary parent for the very young children (babies and toddlers) and the teens is preferable but leaves open the issue of pre-schoolers and grade school children.  Apparently 50/50 is okay for the middle kids.  I've got 50/50 now and my child will be going to middle school next school year, so part of the reason I'm seeking majority time is that soon he won't be able to go to daycare anymore.  (After 5 years I finally got custody but unofficially parenting time was left equal so ex could get child support and hopefully be more stable.  Yeah, I saw that as just a postponement of the inevitable.  I'm back in court now to fix that, if all goes well, I'll be majority time parent during his teen years.)

Thanks for your reply. I hate hate hate family court for that reason... .  even though we feel and our lawyer feels her claims are ridiculous and all signs point to her trying to be a pain in the butt... .  you never really know what the judge will do. We are going forward with the case Wednesday. We have a good lawyer who was with us before. Her lawyer is known for being super aggressive though and that's kind of scary because it fuels her entitlement. Our judge is supposedly "father friendly" and used to be a father's rights advocate when she was a lawyer. Hopefully she sees through her. She is pretty good at manipulating and bringing on the waterworks though.

So perhaps a lot depends upon his presentation (really, lawyer's presentation) of all the facts in a comprehensive way.  As a whole, she flunks, but courts have a nasty habit of parsing out issues and dealing with each separately.  His primary goal will be to deflate that tactic.  He also needs the court to realize who the difficult parent is.

What he has on his side is the current order.  Reducing his time can be argued against since he has a good history and courts are reluctant to change what works.  So he'll need to have valid reasons for seeking 50/50.  Also, if he does get 50/50, then at some point before his daughter starts school he should try to become Residential Parent for School Purposes.

My case... .  After a lengthy 2 year divorce process my ex eventually said she was ready to settle - on Trial Morning.  My primary condition for her to avoid trial was that I be RP.  Oh, she resisted that, even both lawyers said it didn't mean anything. (Yuck, even my lawyer!)  So I became RP and asked her school to let son stay the remaining 3 months of kindergarten.  Within 2 months of the final decree, her school got so fed up with her that they gave me one day to enroll him in my school district.  If she had been RP, they would have been forced to put up with her antics.  If she had been RP, this would not have exposed how she really was.

Another risk is that often courts don't like to let one parent 'win' and the other 'lose'.  Some judges have even told parents, "You better settle because neither of you will like my decision."  Frankly, though, our cases are often so one-sided (one side won't negotiate reasonably) that often letting the court decide, though more expensive up front, is better than what we would have gotten by settling on ex's terms.