Back to court - self representation question

[Family Court Strategies: When Your Partner Has BPD OR NPD Traits.]

DH was ‘served’ by his uBPDx with documents saying she has a court date in mid March to get retroactive child support for funds she has spent on their 25 year old son since he turned 18, and to continue to have DH provide her with child support. She came to our home with two huge binders full of documents. And she has been back to our house 4 more times with documents that she missed.

SS25 was diagnosed last year with BPD plus other issues. UBPDx has decided he has had BPD for years and can’t possibly work so therefore DH has to pay for her expenses. SS25 is an addict and she has enabled him off and on for years.

Her binders included tons of info - most more useful for DH than for her. We have been in this situation before when uBPDx tried to get sole guardianship of SS23 who has special needs. She provided tons of ‘evidence’ without realizing she was doing her case more harm than good. She dug her own holes in her affidavit and in her testimony.

She is not using a lawyer - which is both good and bad. It means no one is regulating her distorted thinking so her submissions are confusing and conflicting. But it also means that she uses the wrong forms, which we need to correct, plus she provides inaccurate information that DH has to clarify. For example, she claims SS25 has lived with her for 5 years since he was an adult, and her evidence includes one piece of mail correspondence with her address for each year. So we have to provide evidence that shows SS25 wasn’t living with her most of those years.

It is going to take a bunch of time to pull all of the stuff together. She made sure she dropped off the documents just prior to us going away for 2 weeks, so now we have a week and a half before we have to file everything. Sadly she is allowed to ask for DH’s financial information for all these years, and DH has to provide it, even though it is unlikely a judge will award her anything. The courts have tried to streamline child support proceedings by having the financial information available at the hearing.

DH is using a lawyer because we need to do this right. DH is debating whether he will represent himself on the day in court, or if he will get his lawyer to do that. Anyone with experience one way or the other? The lawyer is recommending DH represent himself, saying that a judge may look at DH having a lawyer as being at an unfair advantage. But DH will be super nervous and tends to shut down when attacked by his ex.

Thoughts?

[NorthernGirl]

DH was ‘served’ by his uBPDx with documents saying she has a court date in mid March to get retroactive child support for funds she has spent on their 25 year old son since he turned 18, and to continue to have DH provide her with child support. She came to our home with two huge binders full of documents. And she has been back to our house 4 more times with documents that she missed.

SS25 was diagnosed last year with BPD plus other issues. UBPDx has decided he has had BPD for years and can’t possibly work so therefore DH has to pay for her expenses. SS25 is an addict and she has enabled him off and on for years.

Her binders included tons of info - most more useful for DH than for her. We have been in this situation before when uBPDx tried to get sole guardianship of SS23 who has special needs. She provided tons of ‘evidence’ without realizing she was doing her case more harm than good. She dug her own holes in her affidavit and in her testimony.

She is not using a lawyer - which is both good and bad. It means no one is regulating her distorted thinking so her submissions are confusing and conflicting. But it also means that she uses the wrong forms, which we need to correct, plus she provides inaccurate information that DH has to clarify. For example, she claims SS25 has lived with her for 5 years since he was an adult, and her evidence includes one piece of mail correspondence with her address for each year. So we have to provide evidence that shows SS25 wasn’t living with her most of those years.

It is going to take a bunch of time to pull all of the stuff together. She made sure she dropped off the documents just prior to us going away for 2 weeks, so now we have a week and a half before we have to file everything. Sadly she is allowed to ask for DH’s financial information for all these years, and DH has to provide it, even though it is unlikely a judge will award her anything. The courts have tried to streamline child support proceedings by having the financial information available at the hearing.

DH is using a lawyer because we need to do this right. DH is debating whether he will represent himself on the day in court, or if he will get his lawyer to do that. Anyone with experience one way or the other? The lawyer is recommending DH represent himself, saying that a judge may look at DH having a lawyer as being at an unfair advantage. But DH will be super nervous and tends to shut down when attacked by his ex.

Thoughts?

[GaGrl]

Pay for the lawyer to appear - this is no time for DH's nerves.

And shut her down.

[livednlearned]

I agree with Gagrl.

It is much easier for an L to say things about the ex, than it is for DH to say those things (if they need to be said).

I wonder, too, if having his L shields DH a little from the negative engagement payoff that his ex might be seeking.

[Panda39]

Yep, I'm with the other ladies, keep the lawyer.

By the time (2 year divorce) my SO & his ex got to the final divorce hearing, neither could afford a lawyer (as you might guess lots of frivolous stuff from the ex wasted resources) . My SO didn't know the rules of the game barely got his evidence in on time.  It sounds like the judge didn't have time to review the info but at least it was in evidence and did get referred to in court.

The custody evaluator who was also an attorney was assigned by the judge to write up the order and did a horrible job, lots of omissions, and incomplete info.  My SO had to go back to court later to get a clarifying order to end alimony for example.

Stick with the lawyer, she doesn't have one then she doesn't have one... .not your problem.

Panda39 

[ForeverDad]

Your lawyer ought to know of your state's laws or case law addressing child support for adult children, under what circumstances and whether there can be retroactive claims.  I'm not even sure what the criteria would be to allow exceptions for her to do so years later.  Most laws end CS at age 18 or additional months later for completion of high school.  Anything past that, such as college assistance, would have to have been previously included in the prior orders, not retroactive.

Is H's lawyer up to the task?  What answer would H get if he asked "If you were facing this case instead of me, who would you hire to defend yourself?"

The normal process might be to file all responses before appearing in court.  Is it legal to not file everything beforehand but appear with your documentation in hand, such as the sensitive income information?  Then ask for a summary decision whether her claim is even valid before submitting the sensitive income numbers?

It's not up to the judge to try your case, it's your lawyer's responsibility.  Ex can file whatever she wants, valid or not.  Judge may not rule whether the case has any basis unless you or your lawyer ask the court to do so.  "Your Honor, motion to dismiss summarily, based on these facts, etc."

Another example, when I filed for divorce we had already been separated for several months.  We had a hearing with the judge a couple months later and in my county mother always get temp custody.  She did get retroactive child support but only back to the beginning of our case.  I'm thinking that H's ex can't seek past child support (for an adult child) long after it ended.  At worst she can't go back farther than when she filed this claim.  Maybe someone can declare SS25 a ward of the state but sticking H with a surprise retroactive responsibility 7 years later (with her evidently setting herself up as the primary beneficiary) is a huge stretch.  IMO and of course we're peer support, not lawyers.

[NorthernGirl]

Thanks everyone. Always nice to know I have you in my corner. 

We met with DH’s lawyer yesterday. She is definitely up to the task and has done her homework on precedence. She will speak in court. UBPDx speaks first, then DH’s L. They only have 1/2 hour each to present their case and it must all pertain to the filed affidavits.

We are now focused on drafting the affidavit. DH’s L says the judge will likely be frustrated with the volume and irrelevance of uBPDx’s filing. We will try to make DH’s clear and simple to follow by comparison. The judge should read all material before the time in court, and could make a decision once the two present, or a few days after.

The L said the judge needs to first decide if SS25 is a ‘child of the marriage’. It is unlikely given that SS25 has lived on his own, sent horrible blaming emails to DH and he is an addict. There is a slight chance the judge might say he still is a child of the marriage because DH and his ex have a provision in their divorce agreement about supporting their children if they have mental health issues where they can’t support themselves. Also, there are some cases where judges have awarded additional child support when the child has been impacted by the parents separating. It has never been awarded for an adult or an addict.

If the slight chance happened, then uBPDx has to convince the judge that she should get retroactive child support, and some amount going forward. But she hasn’t suggested any amount for either in her submission. She just filed a bunch of bills, hand written notes, bank statements, etc. It’s quite a mess. She will likely portray herself as the poor single mother (unable to pay for a lawyer) who has carried the load for years while DH has neglected SS25 since he was little. Garbage but it is what she wants to believe.

DH’s L wants to ensure the judge doesn’t somehow feel sorry for uBPDx and believe all her garbage. She is claiming SS25 has BPD, PTSD, and substance abuse issues (she refuses to say he is an addict) because SS27 bullied his brother when they were young and DH protected their older son. Her claim is that his recent diagnosis is what SS25 should have been diagnosed with years ago, so DH should pay child support since he was 18.

We are pretty confident the judge will see uBPDx’s isn’t the model parent she imagines and that her claims are irrelevant just reading the two submissions. But of course it is frustrating that we have to go through all of this to get this out of the way.

[flourdust]

Does your lawyer think the judge is going to make a ruling or instead order an evaluation? With the stipulation in the divorce agreement that you'll support an adult child with mental health issues, plus the extremely messy filing from the ex, the judge may want to have an expert do an in-depth review of the case.

[ForeverDad]

And which parent contributed the most to the now-adult's dysfunction by poor and disordered behaviors?

The retroactive possibility is a scary part, court is usually careful to limit retroactive actions.  He's 25 now, not 19 years old.  At some point the parenting legal obligations have to end.  I mean, will domestic court be overstepping itself for a 25 year old, what should it do when he's 30 or 40 years old?  At what point does he stop being a child, legally?

[NorthernGirl]

And which parent contributed the most to the now-adult's dysfunction by poor and disordered behaviors?

The retroactive possibility is a scary part, court is usually careful to limit retroactive actions.  He's 25 now, not 19 years old.  At some point the parenting legal obligations have to end.  I mean, will domestic court be overstepping itself for a 25 year old, what should it do when he's 30 or 40 years old?  At what point does he stop being a child, legally?

Exactly - DH’s lawyer wants to make it clear that the issues are based on choice and he can’t be responsible for his adult child’s choices. His ex is trying to say that DH ‘caused’ SS25’s addiction and mental health issues, and she just figured it out.

The L has tons of experience, knows about BPD and has met uBPDx before, so I think she will look at all angles. DH was relieved after spending a few hours listening to the L. We tend to focus on what his ex has said or put in writing. The L is focused on the law and stating DH’s case clearly to ensure the judge makes the right call.

Thanks ForeverDad

[livednlearned]

His ex is trying to say that DH ‘caused’ SS25’s addiction and mental health issues, and she just figured it out.

That's some fascinating projection going on there.

[NorthernGirl]

That's some fascinating projection going on there.

UBPD is a master at projection. I think she is terrified to realize what she has done - so she twist everything bad she has done as though it was DH. Unfortunately now SS25 has started doing the same. It is so unhealthy for him to be around her all the time.