has anyone tried for supervised visits?

[kyoko]

Hi everyone,

Hope everybody had a nice holiday.  Haven't been on for awhile-so much chaos.  Especially since our mediation is on Tues.  Stress and holidays brings out the worst in stbxh.  Just wondering if anyone has tried for supervised visits and if it is too extreme to ask for it. 

[Matt]

I asked my lawyer about supervised visits but she counseled me not to ask for that so I didn't.  I think she was right, in my case.

Can you tell us more about where you're at, and what you think the big issues probably are for your mediation Tuesday?

[kyoko]

Thanks Matt for always replying so quickly.  Thank you for your advice from other posts also.  Sometimes it's hard for me with my girls and difficult stbx to get on the computer. 

My lawyer advised me to try for supervised visits according to my documentation, some recordings and for letters sent from his lawyers office.  However, there hasn't been physical abuse towards my children.  I have also heard and researched that it could backfire on me.  So do I settle with having him possibly getting them half the time and be comforted that at least they are not with him 24/7?  Another (however), my oldest has been brainwashed by him and is now twisting scenarios around and is a parrot of him.  He is trying to turn both my girls against me.  So far it's working on my oldest.  It is so scary and heartwrenching.

[Matt]

Well usually lawyers are conservative about this stuff - they usually advise moderation - so if your lawyer thinks the documentation is adequate to support a request for supervised visits, that's pretty encouraging.

One way to minimize the risk is to keep the focus on what is best for the kids - not "He's so mean to me!" but "I'm concerned about the kids and I think supervised visitation would reduce that risk and still let them see their dad."  The kids safety is #1 and seeing their dad is #2 (and your own personal preferences don't even get mentioned).

Another way I've heard some of our members have done it, is to say, "Well I think supervised visits would be the safest way for the kids to see their dad - maybe try it that way for six months and see how things go.  But if the court decides he should have unsupervised time with them, I'll comply with that and do my best to make it work."  Showing that you are moderate and sensible and ready to comply with the court's orders, not motivated out of hostility toward the other party.  You want the court to see you as a sensible and honest person.  Then if it goes "against you" - no supervised visitation - at least you won't be punished for trying.  (If, on the other hand, the court perceives that you're extreme and unfair, that's when you might have more risk - the judge might decide to teach you a lesson.)

About half the time vs. 24/7 - what to settle for - it seems to help if you put forward a pretty well-thought-out "parenting plan" - not just "I think they should be with me all the time", but a schedule... .

Start with "regular weeks" and say how you think that will work best.  "Kids with Mother every night and with Father from noon to 4:00 Saturday and from noon to 4:00 Sunday.  That way they will see him a lot on weekends but come home to the same bed every night." or something like that.

Then go to holidays:  "With Father from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on July 4 and Christmas of even-numbered years, and on Easter and Thanksgiving of odd-numbered years.  With Mother other holidays." or something like that - specific about days and times.

Then vacations:  "With Father for up to 14 days each summer.  Father will specify which days, at least 30 days in advance, with Mother's agreement." or something like that - your lawyer should know the way to do it - as clear and specific as possible.

Give reasons, like "This will allow each parent to have the kids for a summer vacation every year." or "This will allow kids to be with each parent on alternate Christmases."

Work out a strategy with your lawyer, and be prepared for the other side to push back.  Decide in advance, with your lawyer, which issues you want to be very firm about, and where you will be willing to give a little, so you aren't completely inflexible, but you don't give in on the issues that are most important to you.

One of our members got the court to agree to a plan for the other parent to have supervised visits for a period of time, and then to appear before the judge, and explain what she had learned in counseling.  She should have gone to counseling all that time, and then told the judge, "I've learned why I did those things and now I'm better able to control my behavior."  But instead she just repeated stuff she had said before - false accusations - so the judge ruled she had to continue to have supervised visitation.  That may be a good approach - set up a bar for him to clear, and if he doesn't clear it, he doesn't get unsupervised time with the kids.

[kyoko]

Thank you Matt for the great advise.

[Deep Impact]

Hi everyone,

Hope everybody had a nice holiday.  Haven't been on for awhile-so much chaos.  Especially since our mediation is on Tues.  Stress and holidays brings out the worst in stbxh.  Just wondering if anyone has tried for supervised visits and if it is too extreme to ask for it. 

Yeah, I'm on the waiting list to get supervised visits, apparently I am an alcoholic.

God bless the system.

[ogopogodude]

My trial hasn't started yet, but soon. I am definitely going for supervised visits as my ex's behaviour is far, far too bizarre to let her parent  (our teenagers) as her alcohol abuse is WAY out of control. She drinks and drives (easily proved by letters from neighbours, friends, even our kids themselves).  By putting the "thumbscrews" to her, ... just maybe she will want to get the badly  needed therapy she so resists.

[suffering_parent]

I wanted supervised visits, but I didn't bring it up.   I just let the evidence unfold.   After a couple months the GAL suggested it and my L agreed.

I go to court in a week.   The biggest issue for me is the cost of supervised visits.

[Matt]

I go to court in a week.   The biggest issue for me is the cost of supervised visits.

I think the cost is usually paid by the parent whose behavior has caused the need for the supervision.

[Waddams]

One thing I always recommend to people dealing with this is to google "ex's name" plus the words "mug shot" and the name of the state you are in.  If they've gotten an DUI or something, it will show up.  Lots of times you can also find links to their court's online case records and search their names in the databases and find records of cases that way.  I think you still have to have officially stamped court transcripts of the case records to present in court as evidence, but it lets you know exactly where to get the copies.

You never know what a judge will rule, but if you think the kids are not safe with the other parent unsupervised, then document your concerns and go to trial.  Lots of people get the supervised visitation orders, at least on a temporary basis.

I also understand Matt's approach to seeming like the reasonable parent in court, but I also think you should not be timid in stating your case to the court.  I see a potential to the judge hearing "I'd like supervised visits, but I'm okay without it too."  I think it can come across as too wishy washy, and the judge could say "well then since you're okay without it, I'm not ordering it."  Try to remain steadfast and stand firm and strong on the request for it to the judge.  Be respectful, don't be rude or insulting towards the other party, and stay focused on the need as it relates to the children's best interest, but I'd stay away from saying anything about be willing to try to make unsupervised work if the court orders it. 

As always, just my humble opinion.

[Matt]

To Waddams's point... .

Where I live, if you know the county where the person lives, you can find that county's web site online - the sheriff's office has a web site, and the court has a web site, and both of those have records you can look up by the person's exact name.  The sheriff's web site probably only has records for somebody who is currently in jail.  The court probably has records for every case, even one that is over and done with.

So... . you can pretty easily look up the person's name on the court's web site, and see everything they've ever been charged with, and how the case was resolved.  Some of the information isn't clear - you have to know what a lot of abbreviations mean - but with a little research you can find it all out, and print out that court record.  As Waddams says, if you want it to be accepted by the family law court, you might have to get an official copy of the record from the justice court, but at least you can find the information online pretty easily, and then you'll know if it's worth your time to dig deeper.

Waddams' other point is good too - I agree that one of the things many of us fail to do is to make a strong case for what we believe to be in the kids' best interests.  Any way you soften that - like agreeing to abide by whatever the court rules - shouldn't take away from a very clear explanation of what you believe is best for the kids, and why.  If you can do that, and also project a very reasonable and fair approach, I think that will serve you well.

[livednlearned]

Is there substance or alcohol abuse involved? And good documentation about those issues? That seems to be what the court wants to see. If you have that, and your L is encouraging you to go for supervised, I would do it.

My ex was a raging alcoholic, but only in our home. No DUIs, and he was able to function at work. So my L said it would be hard to get supervised visitation. I ended up fleeing the marital home with S12 and lived somewhere that we did not disclose to N/BPDx. The Ls created a temporary visitation schedule that allowed S12 to see his dad for 6 hours a week outside the home unsupervised (home had been a traumatizing place for S12 leading up to the date of separation). I also agreed that S12 could talk to his dad every night at 7pm. Over time, N/BPDx stopped calling. I think because that's when he was generally pretty loaded, and he didn't want to talk to his son drunk -- probably his L told him to cool it on the alcohol and N/BPDx couldn't. We did that for about 3 months, and then had mediation.

In mediation, I agreed to let S12 be in the home with N/BPDx but under the condition that N/BPDx would not consume alcohol before or during the visit. Schedule was set to 70/30, including overnights. Eventually, N/BPDx did get drunk when S12 was there, and sent a bunch of crazy messages that got him in trouble. His behavior was so disordered that I filed an ex parte emergency visitation order that prevented him from seeing S12 for 3 months. When we went back to court, the court agreed to 16 hours unsupervised a month. No overnights. I ended up with full custody.

If your L is telling you to ask for supervised, and you have documentation, then I would start with that. Aim as high as you think is right for your kids. And get them into therapy with a reunification therapist if possible -- maybe ask that the court orders that for your kids. Because parental alienation is wicked after divorce. If it's starting now, it will be even harder to combat after the two of you split, especially if you don't get supervised visitation.

I've been out 3 years and read Divorce Poison (by Richard Warshak) a few years ago. I had to re-read it again because N/BPDx just discovered that I was dating, and is starting a brand new campaign of parental alienation. It's insidious, toxic brainwashing that is terribly abusive to the kids.

[catnap]

One of the benefits of supervised visits is that if the visiting parent is trying to talk badly about you, the case, etc. the visit will automatically terminate.  They also send reports to your L and/ or the court as to how the visits are going.  So if you have a chance to get it, I would try.  How the supervised visits are handled where you live my be different, but you could ask your L or Google supervised visitation and your county and state.  If drugs are an issue, they can also be required to take a drug test (administered by the visitation center) prior to the visit.  

[kyoko]

Thank you everyone for your replies.  Very helpful to me! I went to mediation yesterday.  Stbx accused me of being unstable, domestic violence, and delusional!  He denied everything that I told the counselor he is saying to try to bring my girls against me, family and friends.  The mediator I think saw right through it.  I decided to ask for supervised visits until he goes to counseling until he can learn to say and do things that are not emotionally damaging to children.  I wish I could have told her much more as to what happens at the home with him.  I asked her to look at all of my documentation of incidents that happen almost every other day.  She didn't take it.  She said to give it all to lawyer.  What does that mean? 

At the end of it she asked me to bring children in to speak with her later on in afternoon.  Stbx was not allowed to come.  He tried to argue with the mediator saying that he is their dad he should be able to come but she got upset and told him he can't.  I'm a little worried though because my oldest now often defends her dad and treats me as he does.

I have no idea what to think.  But I do know that stbx's "off" behavior showed at the mediation.  Just wanted to know what anyone thinks it means if mediator wanted to speak with kids but from now until court date nothing is decided.  So I feel like she doesn't think supervised visits are necessary.

When mediator was through talking to the kids she did tell me to make sure I tell lawyer that she talked to the kids.  Any thoughts?

[Matt]

Mediators don't want to act like judges.  They don't want to decide who's right and who's wrong, or who did what when.  They want to find solutions.

I'm not saying it was wrong to offer documentation to her, and I wish she had looked at it, but it's not surprising that she didn't.

My suggestion would be to follow through and cooperate with the mediator's approach as long as it seems reasonable, but not to expect mediation to produce results.  Even if the mediator sees that your StbX has problems, she probably won't (or can't) do anything about it - she can't make him get help if he doesn't want to, and she can't diagnose him.

Talking to the kids was surely to get an idea of how they are doing, and to give them a chance to say if there is any violence going on that affects them.  If the kids say, ":)ad hit me!", that will be a game-changer.

Telling you, "Tell L I talked to the kids." was probably nothing more than a courtesy - letting L know that step was done - just checking off the boxes of the steps in the process.

What are the next steps?

[kyoko]

Thank you Matt for your reply.  Next step is court date in couple of weeks.  I also am supposed to be receiving stbx's response declaration in a few days.  Will be very interesting to see what he writes!

[Matt]

What is the purpose of the court date in two weeks?

How will that court date be done - who will speak first, and what do you need to prepare?

[livednlearned]

Thank you Matt for your reply.  Next step is court date in couple of weeks.  I also am supposed to be receiving stbx's response declaration in a few days.  Will be very interesting to see what he writes!

Is this like the counter claim? If so, prepare to read a lot of fiction. I didn't know about BPD when I read N/BPDx's counter claim, and it really upset me to see all the lies he wrote (and it was literally him writing the counterclaim, not his L. N/BPDx is an attorney). But those documents are not significant. As far as I can tell, the judge doesn't even read them. And people seem to assume during a divorce that the claim and counter claim are going to be nasty he-said, she-said. More important are the orders and agreements signed, and what those docs say.

[kyoko]

I think it is a counterclaim because I asked for supervised visits temporarily until he gets counseling (I used your advise Matt) and can stop his PA and telling kids all about why I am destroying them and don't really love them.  He asked to have the kids 3 days/wk. 

I can't believe how they could lie so easily still and fabricate things to take the blame off of them.  Although I've been living with it for yrs, it still amazes me.  Silly me thought that after the mediation he would realize how damaging it could be to tell children awful, untrue things about their mother.  But today he is saying things in a sneakier type way to still brainwash kids to think that I don't really love them and that love is not an emotion or feeling? but doing what's best for kids.  And I'm not doing that by divorcing him.  He also says that he still has 3 wks to convince me that

I need to keep the family together because only a christian would do that not a lost, of the world person.  So frustrating.

[Matt]

My own view is, every false statement or accusation he puts into court papers, you should quote and deny.

In Mr. Kyoko's response, page 2 line 10:  "Ms. Kyoko did X, Y and Z."   This is false.  I have never done X, Y, or Z, and Mr. Kyoko has given no evidence to support these accusations.  Making false accusations against me is part of his pattern of hostile and alienating behavior.

(Or something like that.)

The point is to let no accusation go, or the judge might assume it is true;  and to shift the focus from what he says you did, to what the judge can see for herself he is doing - in the court process - making accusations without evidence.

can stop his PA

I like this phrasing a lot!  Because it isn't whether he will stop the PA, it's whether he can;  getting therapy will enable him to change his behavior, and without therapy it's not reasonable to expect his behavior to stay good for long.

[kyoko]

I am so suprised and upset, with his demeanor and accusations during mediation, the mediator recommends he go to only a coparenting class.  The mediation process I think needs to be changed to having it being recorded or having a court reporter there to record every word said.  The mediator left out very important comments, as well as, writing some things that were not said (she heard wrong maybe).  The mediator wrote about stbx "she was at first concerned with his comments, but as she further asked she realized that the comments were benign.  They are not benign when it's being fed to my children continuously to instill his thinking as their own. 

I am  just very upset that mediators, without ever knowing the people and interviewing them for maybe 20- 30 minutes each can recommend to the court what they think should be done.  As everyone knows here you can't explain exactly what goes on behind closed doors if you've never experienced it yourself, let alone in less than 1/2 hr when the other stbx is interrupting all the time.  Stbx also didn't fill out the paperwork or even look at it before mediation so that shortened our time with mediator over 1/2 hr. 

I'm sorry, just needing to vent frustrations.  I'm so glad that this site is available to do this!

I will take your advise Matt when we go to court.  I'm wondering, though,if I should even further bring up all incidences still happening.  I feel it will give stbx more ammunition to tell my children how I "lied" in court and twist things around so I'm the one in the wrong. 

Thank you again Matt for your advise.  I hope all is well with you. 

[Matt]

I think the key is whether you will be able to back up what you say with some form of evidence.

If you say, "StbX is telling the kids X, Y, and Z.", how will you be able to convince the court?

[Waddams]

Can you get him deposed?  All that could be recorded in a deposition.

The mediator's job is find a middle ground.  Unfortunately, that means they have to skew their report and suspend their own disbelief with these wack jobs.  They don't have experience in dealing with PD's and don't understand what they are doing or what the impact they have later is.  You don't get exactly what you want, he doesn't get exactly what he wants, you both get drawn to a middle ground.  The mediator is just doing what a mediator does.

What's your L think?

[Matt]

Can you get him deposed?  All that could be recorded in a deposition.

Great idea!

I did this - filed a motion to have my wife deposed (questioned under oath).  My wife's lawyer responded by doing the same thing, so we were both deposed.

My wife went first - my lawyer had 4 hours to ask her anything relevant to the case.  Her answers were recorded.  I had prepared my lawyer by giving her a bunch of questions divided into topics, so she could spend a while asking about each topic and then move on.

My wife made more than 40 false statements and accusations during those 4 hours.  We got the transcript and went through it, and found those which were easiest to prove.  My lawyer then talked with my wife's lawyer:  "If we go to trial, we are prepared to put your client on the stand and prove that she made a number of false statements and accusations under oath - a crime."  My wife's lawyer was ethically obligated to advise her client how to avoid criminal charges - which means she had to tell her client, "You better settle."

So we got a settlement the day before the trial was scheduled.  We forced the other side into a very weak position and they agreed to stuff they had opposed before.

What I learned from that was that when the other party is making false statements and accusations, deposing them can be a very effective way to use that in your favor.

(By the way, when I was deposed, after my wife, it was no big deal - I just answered what they asked truthfully - took only an hour or so because I had no reason to lie.)