Parent Coordinator is in Place

[mama-wolf]

The past couple of weeks have been what I will call "interesting," culminating in today with a heavy dose of extra anxiety for me.

We had our court hearing on 9/18 to formally appoint the Parent Coordinator that I insisted on in our marathon mediation.  That was fairly uneventful overall, though I did find it weird to be in court at all (first time for me).  My stbx showed up with her mom, and was clearly emotional.  She cried during the (very brief) proceeding.

Skip ahead two days later to my first actual meeting with the PC, who wanted to know a bit of our background and laid out some of his ground rules and expectations.  I was encouraged by the way he described how he wanted communication to go (minimal "commentary" as he called it, which messages from my stbx have been full of).  I was a little concerned about his seeming lack of caring to even factor in whether a care provider (like a therapist) is in network.  That may not be the best--nor should it necessarily be the first--determinant of whether to engage their services, but I really do think it should at least be considered.  All in all, I felt I would have fewer issues dealing with him than my stbx.

And here we are at 9/26, now that my stbx has finally had her own intake appointment (she "got the time wrong" last week when she was originally scheduled).  Using the PC's prescribed communication format, she followed the appointment by inundating me with seven separate message threads in the parent portal about all the various points of disagreement that she hasn't been able to force me into agreeing on over the past three months.  It's exhausting to have to rehash the same arguments simply for the sake of having my responses formally updated in this format, but I'm working through each one.

My biggest concern is the one about therapy for our kids.  We had agreed to start looking for a therapist for S5 due to some anger issues he was dealing with and to generally help him with the transition.  As of last week, my stbx had her own parent consult with D9's therapist, who recommended that she and D9 seek family therapy to work on their relationship.  I have indicated that I would rather we identify one provider to work with both of them and S5 rather than seeking two new therapists to add into the mix.  My stbx has now proposed that we essentially wipe the slate clean of all therapists currently engaged with our family and defer to the PC's recommendation for one practice to holistically see all of us.

This has ratcheted up my anxiety in a big way, for a number of reasons:

1) The custody order specifically states that D9 will continue seeing her current T until that T releases her from care, and I think it's critical that she retain that established therapeutic relationship.  I do not agree to changing this, and don't think the PC has the authority to do so himself.
2) I am fearful now that somehow the PC will have the authority to make me stop seeing my own T (setting aside the anxiety I already have about interruption in care due to her upcoming maternity leave).  I can't even quite identify the awful feelings this is causing to bubble up.
3) I tend to wonder at my stbx's willingness to give up her own therapist so easily, which I think is partially motivated by the fact that his office is inconveniently located and suspect maybe she has split on him as well.
4) The way my stbx worded her message, including yet another request that we engage with a particular practice that a friend of hers used for her son, which is out of network, and almost 100% psychiatrists and psychologists (not therapists)... .it feels as if she already knows the PC might be inclined to force us into that option.  If we end up there, I'm really afraid she will somehow convince them to medicate D9 unnecessarily.

So, as one might expect, I found it pretty darn difficult to focus on much of anything pretty much all afternoon, and now I'm trying to get it out here for some perspective and support.  One way or another, I figure I'll be engaged with whoever provides family therapy to help the kids through the divorce.  I just hope they'll be able to see the borderline characteristics as well as my T can, and she hasn't even met my stbx!

mw

[livednlearned]

Is the PC trained as a psychologist? Does your PC have extension of judicial duties (e.g. allowed to make modifications to the court order)?

[mama-wolf]

Is the PC trained as a psychologist? Does your PC have extension of judicial duties (e.g. allowed to make modifications to the court order)?

Not trained as a psychologist... .he's an attorney, though I now he has professional relationships with others who are trained in mental health.  And he does have the authority to supplement the order, but to my knowledge cannot flat-out change the order itself.

mw

[worriedStepmom]

If the court order says that D9 will continue seeing her therapist... .and that therapist also does family counseling... .then D9 and your xW see that therapist together to do family counseling.  Because D9 has an established relationship and the family therapy is, at its core, to help D9, not to help xW.

A friend of mine has an ex who is diagnosed NPD with other stuff.  He tried going to the same therapist that his kids were seeing.  It was not good for the kids.  Dad's goals were very different than what the children actually needed (and Dad eventually got fired as a client).  It can put a therapist in a really awkward position to have to help the parent(s) do what is best for themselves while also trying to do what is best for the children when those goals do not align.

I don't see how the parent coordinator should be able to make you give up your own therapist. 

[mama-wolf]

then D9 and your xW see that therapist together to do family counseling. 

D9's therapist does not do family therapy... .she is more individually focused, which I think is best for D9 to be able to have that "safe place" given the dynamics with a uBPD parent.  My stbx has already tried influencing D9's therapist into serving her own goals rather than doing what is best for D9.  When she found that wasn't working out, she split on that therapist and started trying to wear me down on taking D9 to the other practice I mentioned in my earlier post.  She then tried to force a condition in the custody order that we take her to that other practice, and I got that taken out during our mediation and switched it to making sure D9 gets to stay with her current therapist to maintain the established therapeutic relationship.  Now that the PC is in the mix, my stbx is trying yet again to force the subject.

mw

[livednlearned]

From the PC's perspective, he will be looking for the points of pain, and then he will be looking to see who escalates things. It will probably take him a while to sort that out, although depending on his emotional/psychological intelligence, he may already have a hunch about who is doing what.

I have indicated that I would rather we identify one provider to work with both of them and S5 rather than seeking two new therapists to add into the mix.

 

How will this impact you directly?

If I were the PC, I would be hearing issue A. I would hear how mama-wolf says she wants it one way. Then I would hear how ex escalates it: Let's get rid of the whole batch and start over (an extreme position).

To which you have taken the bait: "I may have to change Ts!" (I know you haven't shared this with him -- it's just an example)

You suggested one thing and your ex escalated -- that's the pattern. So when she does that, your response might be: Here's what's important to me, these reasonable things. Let's try to accommodate ex while keeping in mind that I am a reasonable person, the PC is reasonable, and reasonable is best for the kids."

What you want the PC to know is that you are capable of flexible thinking and that means knowing what's important and what isn't. "What is important to me is that D9's therapist remains the same. This is a long-term therapeutic relationship and it's in the order (hey PC: this is not up for discussion). I would prefer S5 be seen by the same provider for reasonable reason A and reasonable reason B (e.g. easier, more convenient, in network, etc.). Perhaps we can talk through some possibilities that make it easier for ex while staying within reason of these very reasonable things."

You don't even engage the thing about your own T because that's loopy.

My stbx has now proposed that we essentially wipe the slate clean of all therapists currently engaged with our family and defer to the PC's recommendation for one practice to holistically see all of us.

That's an extreme reaction -- she is throwing up her hands. Loopy.

Then let the PC help your ex get herself back to reasonable (which is taking care of her side of the street). You give him information about what's important to you, plus some reasonable things that you care about.

When someone emotionally aroused gets into a problem-solving space, things get emotionally reactive -- that's what big emotions do, they chain react. Then we get reactive back.

You want to show the PC that you can get a handle on that second chain reaction and stay grounded in problem-solving.

 

[worriedStepmom]

D9's therapist does not do family therapy... .she is more individually focused, which I think is best for D9 to be able to have that "safe place" given the dynamics with a uBPD parent.  My stbx has already tried influencing D9's therapist into serving her own goals rather than doing what is best for D9.  When she found that wasn't working out, she split on that therapist and started trying to wear me down on taking D9 to the other practice I mentioned in my earlier post.  She then tried to force a condition in the custody order that we take her to that other practice, and I got that taken out during our mediation and switched it to making sure D9 gets to stay with her current therapist to maintain the established therapeutic relationship.  Now that the PC is in the mix, my stbx is trying yet again to force the subject.

Gotcha.  SD's mom is running a long-term battle to switch the T too.

Does D9's current therapist have any advice on what to look for in a family therapist?  What ground rules to set with a family therapist so as not to interfere with the individual therapy?  Whether/how the current T will interface with the new T to make sure she knows what's going on?  Your ex has a point that it can be really confusing for kids to have 2 therapists, especially if the goals are not aligned, but there are ways to handle that without making D9 give up her current T.  I'm sure the T will also not want family therapy to be done by xW's individual therapist.

Any information the current T can provide you is good evidence to support whatever reasonable things you ask.

If xW insists on a family therapist that is out of network, when other qualified family therapists are in network, insist that she pays the difference between the normal copay and the full cost. That might be enough to get her to back down.

You might also use the language recommended here a lot - have xW choose 3 qualified practices for family therapy, and you can make the final decision among those.  That way both of you get a say, and it isn't such a tug-of-war.

[ForeverDad]

I agree with everyone here, don't worry about losing your T, ex almost surely can't force that.

You might also use the language recommended here a lot - have xW choose 3 qualified practices for family therapy, and you can make the final decision among those.  That way both of you get a say, and it isn't such a tug-of-war.

Courts like it when both parents are involved in a solution.  If that approach is chosen, then just make sure you're the one making the short list for the ex to choose from.  You know you'll pick experienced, capable and highly recommended T's.  It's doubtful you can trust the ex to actually make a good short list.

[mama-wolf]

First, I'll get it out there that I'm going to start using "uBPDxw" instead of "stbx."  I haven't been sure what to use since the divorce won't be final until next June, but decided it feels silly to continue using "stbx."

Thank you as always lnl, worriedStepmom, and FD for your perspective!

When someone emotionally aroused gets into a problem-solving space, things get emotionally reactive -- that's what big emotions do, they chain react. Then we get reactive back.

I wasn't quite prepared for the intensity of my reaction to the potential threat of losing my therapist, and that's what threw off my ability to process the situation overall.  It even prompted me to pull my next therapy appointment in to late next week because I thought I was getting better at handling this stuff.

It's still unclear to me whether the PC has the authority to make me stop seeing her.  I had sent the question to my L, and she responded that she's not sure if he has that authority or not.  I would have strongly preferred that she felt confident enough to say "absolutely not"... .

You want to show the PC that you can get a handle on that second chain reaction and stay grounded in problem-solving.

Yes, this is what I'm working on.  I think right now I'm inclined to wait for her to escalate this to the PC, but I have already drafted a response to the message I anticipate receiving from him.  I will modify the contents based on what he actually brings to me, but I find it a good exercise to organize my thoughts and lay out what I do feel is reasonable and best for the kids.  I will copy it below following my other responses because I'd love to have feedback from this community.

Does D9's current therapist have any advice on what to look for in a family therapist?  What ground rules to set with a family therapist so as not to interfere with the individual therapy?  Whether/how the current T will interface with the new T to make sure she knows what's going on? 

I plan to bring these questions to both D9's T as well as my own (my T is actually an LMFT and has been an incredibly valuable resource on this matter even though I engaged her for individual therapy).

You might also use the language recommended here a lot - have xW choose 3 qualified practices for family therapy, and you can make the final decision among those.  That way both of you get a say, and it isn't such a tug-of-war.

Courts like it when both parents are involved in a solution.  If that approach is chosen, then just make sure you're the one making the short list for the ex to choose from.  You know you'll pick experienced, capable and highly recommended T's.  It's doubtful you can trust the ex to actually make a good short list.

So I hadn't planned it that way, but I ended up doing this when I responded to her request to "provide input" on finding a therapist for her and D9.  I told her that with us already looking at finding someone to work with S5, I wanted the kids to see the same person.  So I listed a total of five providers from three different practices based on recommendations received and my own research.  I also indicated I would be willing to still consider one other practice that I had previously proposed when just looking for someone for S5.

I may have provided too many options, but I'm comfortable with all of them and will get better at narrowing the options further in future disputes.

So here is the initial draft for my response to the anticipated escalation to the PC.  Given the latest development of uBPDxw declaring in the parent portal that the cost and location are not a priority for her, I will likely at least take out the parts about logistics from anything I end up sending to him.  I leave it in here for a more comprehensive view of the situation... .

PC,

I feel the need to engage with you on the subject of therapy for both our kids, as uBPDxw and I cannot agree on the path forward.

Initially, the matter was just for S5 and helping him through the transition of his parents divorcing, prompted by some behavioral issues he was having at home (especially at uBPDxw's house).  Our focus has been to find someone experienced in play therapy given his age, and I want to ensure we have the right fit of someone who is comfortable dealing with high-conflict divorce, same-sex parents, and our son's tendency towards gender non-conformity.

You and I discussed previously that the custody order stipulates D9 will continue seeing her individual therapist, maintaining the established therapeutic relationship they have developed over the past year.  D9's T has recently recommended family therapy for D9 and uBPDxw in order to specifically help them with their relationship.  Based on the fact that S5 has not yet started working with a therapist himself, I think it best for him to see the same provider.  There are many overlapping dynamics in place for the two kids, and the more providers who get added to the mix the more difficult coordinating care for everyone is going to be.

My ultimate goal is to ensure S5 and D9 get the right support.  I have every intention of staying involved with their care, regardless of where they are seen or the nature of the care.  My desire to stay in-network and my request to find a professional who is located closer to Town A/Town B (where I live, work, and the kids go to school) go to sustainability for both me and uBPDxw.

Financially, I will bear 70% of the cost of any unreimbursed medical expenses.  The cost of out-of-network care would make that option difficult enough for me, but even the 30% that would be uBPDxw's responsibility will be extremely hard on her right now.

Logistically, I have asked that if I am to assist with taking either child to any if these appointments, that we consider finding a therapist who is closer to Town A given my existing commitments.  Those commitments include:

1. Working a salaried position in neighboring Town B which carries expectations for availability during a standard working day (though I do have PTO and options to occasionally work remote).  I do not have the kind of flexibility in scheduling that uBPDxw has in being self-employed
2. Taking D9 to all of her therapy appointments every Tuesday late afternoon/evening
3. Taking S5 and D9 to most, if not all, doctor/dentist appointments (their pediatrician is in Town A and dentist is in West Town B)
4. Taking D9 to all Girl Scouts meetings on the second and fourth Tuesday evenings, and Troop activities that fall on my custodial weekends
5. Taking S5 to dance class on the Saturday mornings of my custodial weekends, and occasional make-up dance classes on Monday evenings (for example, for the class he missed due to cancellation for Hurricane Florence, or due to attending a make-up day for school on a Saturday morning)

The additional logistical consideration is scheduling.  Evening and weekend appointments are preferable so that the kids don't miss school, but options for those can be very limited.  I don't like the idea of weekend appointments if they can be avoided, because of the increased impact on opportunities to participate in other activities and plans such as birthday parties, play-dates, family visits, trips out of town, etc.  I can help with taking the kids to appointments during the week, but they would potentially miss less school--and I would miss less work--if they were taken to a provider closer to Town A/Town B.

uBPDxw has argued that she has a very long commute on the days that she is dropping off and/or picking up the kids.  She chose to move to Town C knowing the conditions that had been built into the custody order regarding school, etc.   It is in consideration of her commute, her office location in City D, and my office location in Town B that I try to take care of the doctor and dentist appointments.

uBPDxw has argued that she was forced to choose Town C based on cost and her financial situation post-separation.  As someone who grew up in (affluent area) in City D and lived in (affluent area) in City E during high school, and someone who put considerable strain on our finances over the course of our marriage, she has a standard of living that she wishes to maintain. To that end, she found a new construction townhouse with extremely nice finishes in Town C.  I highly doubt she was willing to expend the time or energy to explore other options in West City D, Town B, or Town A in consideration of the logistical impact.

Being in-network and convenience of location are not the only--or even the most important--considerations, though I do feel they are reasonable factors in weighing the options upon identifying qualified candidates for providing care.  At the base of it, we as parents need to get S5 the care he needs and otherwise make it work.  To that end, I have suggested the following provider options to uBPDxw based on their credentials, background, professional recommendations, location and in-network status.

Provider 1 at Practice A
Provider 2 at Practice B
Provider 3 at Practice B
Provider 4 at Practice C
Provider 5 at Practice C
 
Provider 1 came with the highest recommendation from my T based on my T's knowledge of our family dynamics, the modalities of therapy offered at Practice A and Provider 1's experience.  I have also had a preliminary phone conversation with her, and she does in fact seem to be the best fit for the kids's needs.  Based on this, I would be fully in support of taking them to her practice in City E regardless of the logistical impact.

Practice B is almost directly on the way between uBPDxw's address in Town C and the kids’ school, and is very close to half-way between her house and mine. My therapist has heard great things about Provider 3, though she may not be seeing kids specifically.  However, she is in the same practice as Provider 2 who clearly does work with kids, and Provider 3 also serves in a supervisory role for other LMFTs.

As mentioned in our initial meeting, I have already signed the release for you to speak with D9's therapist.  In addition, I have now also signed a release for you to speak with my therapist (mw's T, at same practice) in case you would like to discuss her recommendation further with her.  Please note that she will be going out on maternity leave in two weeks, returning to work in early January.  Contact information for both therapists is copied below:

mw's T: email
D9's: email
Phone for both: phone number

mw

[livednlearned]

I would've felt triggered, too, if someone suggested giving up my T. It's good that you recognize what happened -- a lot of people cannot do that.

The letter to the PC is well written and there's a lot of good information. What do you think about cutting it in length and proposing solutions instead?

"Ex and I are at a bit of a stalemate with regards to therapy for the kids. I would like to propose the following, and welcome your input on how to proceed:

1. D9 continues to see her T (as discussed)
2. D9 and ex arrange a family therapist per D9's therapist recommendation that D9/ex work on their relationship issues, selecting from the providers/practices included below.
3. Because S5 has some overlapping/similar issues, I recommend he see a provider in the same practice as D9/ex (for logistical reasons, including my availability, in-network costs, etc.)
4. S5 sees a therapist who is experienced working with same-sex parents, gender non-conformity, and high-conflict divorce. I have attached 5 recommendations below, and encourage ex to select from those providers so she has input.

Those are the three interrelated issues, is that correct?

Once you clarify (and simplify) the issues, you could explain some of the salient values/points, although at the level the PC is working, it's unclear how much that information matters -- he's likely working a level above the details.

These items are important to me:

* because of my traditional work schedule (and limited PTO), it is more feasible for me to facilitate appointments that are located near my work, during the work week
* per the order, I am responsible for 75% costs of care -- I ask that therapy is in-network so I can financially manage the appointments. If ex selects an out-of-network provider, I request that she be responsible for the comparative balance
* I can provide a schedule of the kids' activities to identify which days/times are optimal for getting S5 and D9 to any appointments during my custodial time, and politely request that this schedule (including mine) be considered in any appointments

I only recommend these clarification because I thought I was following your issues and then got confused and a bit bogged down in what you wrote. You don't want the PC to think, "Well ex gets way too emotional but MW is super wordy and made this kinda complicated -- I'm not sure what exactly she's proposing and why. I can see why these two don't communicate."

It might be different with your PC, but with mine (and with the judge) I was taken aback how considerate they were toward ex, even when he was dysregulated. And then he started to attack them, and suddenly things got real because they were now the targets. At that point, everything got much, much easier for me.

I don't know if it will go that way in your case, but just know that there is probably an underlying arc to this story that's just beginning to unfold. Be firm about the details you consider important when important decisions are getting made, and stay focused on the long game. At some point, your ex may target the PC and if you have been impeccable in your focus on solving problems, you will have a huge ally going forward.

[worriedStepmom]

I agree with all of LnL's suggestions.

I think you need to remove all references to uBPDxw's choice of living arrangements, work schedule, reasons for making her choices, etc.

Your goal is to focus on what is best for your children - not to argue that uBPDxw brought a lot of this on herself (even though she did).  Shifting the focus to uBPDxw in any way allows the discussion to get way off-track.  If you can be laser-tight focused on what you want for the kids (regardless of what uBPDxw might argue), then you can keep the discussion centered right where it needs to be.

Your original note also contradicts itself.  You give several paragraphs of reasons why the appointments should be near towns A/B, then later state that you are perfectly happy going to town E.  Although you are willing to make the sacrifice to see one specific therapist, you've just proven you can do the longer commute and think it's okay for the kids to miss more school, and I would expect uBPDxw to exploit that concession and push other therapists in that area.

[formflier]

Mama-Wolf

I'm glad that things are progressing and I think ultimately the PC will be a positive "structure" for your evolving relationship as a coparent.

You and I are "lovers of detail".  My guess is if I challenged you to rank the details and add comments about why you chose the ranking, you could fill a couple pages with relevant information.  I certainly could/can on most of the issues I put a lot of thought into.

I like the writing of drafts.  Solid work!  I would challenge you to cut the word count by 2/3rds.  I bet you could do even better.

Lots of detail is helpful for people like us to think things through, yet all that detail tends to bog down communication.  Especially with people that process information differently.

Until you get a better read on how much detail the PC deems helpful, leave out most of it.

Pick your number 1 argument and succinctly present that, perhaps alluding that there are other less important arguments you could share if the PC is interested.

Presented another way.  If your number 1 argument "wins the day" with the PC, does it matter that you have 7 more reasons... .or 22 in rank order? 

So... .out of all your reasons, what do you think is your best argument?  I see it.  I perceive that others on the board see it as well.

An existing therapeutic relationship defined by court order.  (don't focus on court order, but do mention it.  Any good L will get that)

Your argument about both children have same therapists because same dynamics are present for both was particularly powerful for me.  In FF world that carries the day.

As a detail guy, I'm always trying to "add to" an argument.  If it were me, I would add that the same therapist can also help the siblings work on their relationship, which will be an especially important lifelong relationship.

By staying there... .the focus is entirely on the kids and what's best for their relationships.  Adults can sort out logistics, payment and their own adult emotions.

Last:  I bet you can end up far less than 1/3 of original words in your draft.  Up for the challenge?   

FF

[mama-wolf]

Thank you LnL, worriedStepmom, and FF for the feedback!

All points about making the message shorter are well taken, and worriedStepmom's point about contradicting myself in the initial draft is spot-on.  I will clarify that I had initially crafted the message based on my uBPDxw's former insistence on finding a therapist very near her new home.  I had already given up the argument of trying to convince her to consider what I believe to be the absolute best option (Practice A in my draft) due to its location essentially across town from both of us.  I knew this would be a major argument, and I think avoiding it was more of the learned behavior from within our marriage, where I would just give up the fight that I knew was coming and try to at least scrounge for the least unfavorable of the remaining options.

What do you think about cutting it in length and proposing solutions instead?

Once you clarify (and simplify) the issues, you could explain some of the salient values/points, although at the level the PC is working, it's unclear how much that information matters -- he's likely working a level above the details.

Very sound advice on keeping the message shorter and focused on solutions.

Shifting the focus to uBPDxw in any way allows the discussion to get way off-track.  If you can be laser-tight focused on what you want for the kids (regardless of what uBPDxw might argue), then you can keep the discussion centered right where it needs to be.

Thank you worriedStepmom in particular for the reminder to stay focused.  It really is easy to fall into the explanations of how uBPDxw's choices should not get to restrict/define my options.  I want to trust that the PC will see this, but have worried a lot over the past week about what she may be able to convince him of.

Lots of detail is helpful for people like us to think things through, yet all that detail tends to bog down communication.  Especially with people that process information differently.

Yes, the details in the draft are really for me to organize my thoughts/arguments, but this is exactly why I posted here for feedback.  It's very helpful to have the input on what's best to trim out and what should stay.

So let's give this a try... .

PC,

I feel the need to engage with you on the subject of therapy for both our kids, as uBPDxw and I cannot agree on the path forward.  This is what I consider to be most important for the benefit of the kids:

1) D9 continues to see her individual therapist as per the custody order, in order to maintain the established therapeutic relationship
2) S5 see a therapist experienced in play therapy given his age, someone who will support him in dealing with the divorce as well as being comfortable with himself and his tendency towards gender non-conformity
3) D9 and uBPDxw see a therapist experienced in family therapy (per the recent recommendation of D9's T) in order to help them rebuild/repair their relationship
4) S5 and D9 see the same therapist in the interest of coordinating care given the overlapping dynamics, someone experienced with high-conflict divorce, and comfortable dealing with same-sex parents

I have suggested the following provider options to uBPDxw based on their credentials, background, and professional recommendations:

Provider 1 at Practice A
Provider 2 at Practice B
Provider 3 at Practice B
Provider 4 at Practice C
Provider 5 at Practice C
 
Provider 1 came with the highest recommendation from my T based on my T's knowledge of our family dynamics, the modalities of therapy offered at Practice A and Provider 1's experience.  I have also had a preliminary phone conversation with her, and she does in fact seem to be an excellent fit for the kids's needs.

My therapist has heard great things about Provider 3, though she may not be seeing kids specifically.  However, she is in the same practice as Provider 2 who clearly does work with kids, and has ready access to Provider 3 who serves in a supervisory role for other LMFTs.

My ultimate goal is to ensure S5 and D9 get the right support through this divorce.  I will participate in the family therapy as deemed necessary and beneficial by the provider.  My preference to stay in-network goes to sustainability for both me and uBPDxw.  Financially, per the custody order I will bear 70% of the cost of any unreimbursed medical expenses.  The cost of out-of-network care would make that option difficult enough for me to manage other expenses related to the kids, but even the 30% that would be uBPDxw's responsibility will be extremely hard on her right now.

There are scheduling considerations as well.  I can provide a schedule of the kids' activities to identify which days/times are optimal for getting S5 and D9 to any appointments, and request that these activities be considered in addition to my traditional work schedule (though I do have options for PTO and occasional remote work).

As mentioned in our initial meeting, I have already signed the release for you to speak with D9's therapist.  In addition, I have now also signed a release for you to speak with my therapist (mw's T, at same practice) in case you would like to discuss her recommendation further with her.  Please note that she will be going out on maternity leave in two weeks, returning to work in early January.  Contact information for both therapists is copied below:

mw's T: email
D9's: email
Phone for both: phone number

mw

[david]

I live in Pa. We had a pc years ago. She was an attorney. She viewed everything through legal eyes. She looked at things the way courts do. If mom and dad couldn't come to an agreement she made a decision neither party liked.
The pc actually changed things in our court order when ex kept bringing up the same issue and the pc simply changed the judges order to "fix" the problem. It made the situation worse.
Shortly after that our state supreme court made a ruling that said pc's could not change orders from judges. Anything changed by a pc was reinstated. The only ones allowed to change a court order was a court. Pc's disappeared after that.   

[formflier]

Set the tone... .waaaaaay too long.



FF recommends

PC,

X and I are unable to come to agree on therapy for our children.

I have a recommendation from D9s T and my T that D9 continue with current court ordered therapy and D9 and S5 have the same therapist.  There are additional details both Ts agree on.

I’ve signed releases so you can talk to D9s T and my T.

Would you like me to explain my understanding of the therapists’ judgments about what is best for the children or would you like to talk to them directly?

MW

[worriedStepmom]

Your second draft is much better!  I would stop after the list of 5 providers.  Those other paragraphs are only necessary if they ask you why you chose those 5.

[livednlearned]

Your second draft is much better!  I would stop after the list of 5 providers.  Those other paragraphs are only necessary if they ask you why you chose those 5.

I agree with worriedStepmom

People with codependent traits have a tendency to over explain and anticipate and wring hands without letting things play out (uncertainty could lead to chaos).

Giving ex the choice of 5 providers means letting go to let her choose. It's hard. We know it won't be perfect.

There will probably be rounds to this issue, you'll all get to know a little better how this new PC thing is going to work.

A big issue still on the table is whether your PC will actually make decisions for you, or if he will facilitate how to communicate in an effective way.

That second part of the email seems to assume that he is your decider.

Might be how it ends up working out, but it also could be that he is simply looking to see if there is an obvious dynamic that needs finessing, in which case he would want to address that first.

Most courts do not want to make decisions for people, even at the judge level. I can imagine it's the same for PCs tho I never fail to be surprised  

[formflier]

A big issue still on the table is whether your PC will actually make decisions for you, or if he will facilitate how to communicate in an effective way.
 

That's a big question. 

My understanding is this is the first "issue"... correct?

I would think it wise to ask this question.

Shorter the better, especially when "setting the tone".  To have on person be succinct and focused on  what doctors and Ts think is best for children and to have another adult saying "i want... i want... not fair... .I want" is going to draw a big contrast"

If you notice in my draft, I did not explicitly lay out "what you want".  That was by design.  You stated what Ts think are best.

In follow up round of communications, I'm sure there would be many... many... .many.  I would stay away from saying "I want xyz... "

Rather... ."Help me understand the wisdom of going against professional recommendations of the court ordered T... "  Something like that.    At some point it may be appropriate to say that you want accept the existing professional recommendations.

FF

[mama-wolf]

The pc actually changed things in our court order when ex kept bringing up the same issue and the pc simply changed the judges order to "fix" the problem.

Hi david... .I can imagine that was terrible to go through!  It is my understanding that our PC is clear he cannot change the conditions of the custody order itself, but he will exercise the right to supplement as needed (or interpret based on his judgement if there is any ambiguity).

People with codependent traits have a tendency to over explain and anticipate and wring hands without letting things play out (uncertainty could lead to chaos).

Giving ex the choice of 5 providers means letting go to let her choose. It's hard. We know it won't be perfect.

I think this hit pretty close to the mark.  I know there was codependency in our marriage, and it seems I still have plenty to work on in that respect.

A big issue still on the table is whether your PC will actually make decisions for you, or if he will facilitate how to communicate in an effective way.

That second part of the email seems to assume that he is your decider.

My understanding is this is the first "issue"... correct?

According to a message received from uBPDxw today, it seems she has forwarded to the PC multiple responses of mine to the barrage of demands that she sent me last week.  This matter is one of them, and as the first escalation to the PC it's unclear how much he will try to finesse the communications between us or just flat out make a decision.  In my initial intake meeting with him, it did sound like a big focus of his will be helping us with our communication.

Ultimately, he does have the authority to make decisions, and it will be binding as essentially an addendum to our custody order.  I asked to have him in place for just that reason... .so that if uBPDxw and I became gridlocked then there would be someone there to be the tie-breaker and end the argument one way or another (so that I don't spend years with the Chinese water torture of the same matter coming up again, and again, and again until she gets what she wants... .like I have throughout our marriage).  I can only hope that in the long-run it works out in my favor as the more stable parent.

So, for better or for worse, here is what I sent to him today.  Thanks again to all for the help!

PC,

I understand from uBPDxw's latest message on Our Family Wizard (attached) that she has escalated several topics to you.  I am proactively reaching out on the subject of therapy for our children due to a timing constraint.

This is what I consider to be most important for the benefit of the kids:

1) D9 continue to see her individual therapist, D9's T (as per the custody order), allowing her to maintain their established therapeutic relationship
2) S5 see a therapist experienced in play therapy given his age, someone who will support him in dealing with the divorce as well as being comfortable with himself and his tendency towards gender non-conformity
3) D9 and uBPDxw see a therapist experienced in family therapy (per the recent recommendation from D9's T) in order to help them rebuild/repair their relationship
4) S5 and D9 see the same therapist in the interest of coordinating care given the overlapping dynamics, someone experienced with high-conflict divorce and comfortable dealing with same-sex parents

Provider 1 at Practice A was highly recommended by my therapist, mw's T.  mw's T has in-depth knowledge of our family dynamics, and as an LMFT herself she is well qualified to assess both the modalities of therapy offered at that practice and Provider 1's experience.

In addition to a release for you to speak with D9's T, I have signed a release so that you could speak with mw's T as well.  If you wish to discuss mw's T's recommendation further with her, please note she will be going on maternity leave as of 10/19 (if not before).

Please let me know if you would like for me to respond to any particular elements brought to you by uBPDxw, whether regarding the path forward in this matter or any others.

mw

[livednlearned]

You're handling this a lot better than I did.

I was wound so tight that I smiled at a work function and my boss came over to say, wow-- hadn't seen one of those in a while.



These are impossible situations.

We can only make them as bearable as possible, and hope that third party professionals see what's going on, using their influence to help us do what's best for the kids (and us).

[formflier]

Great job!

   

FF