Negotiations

[VIDEO: "What is parental alienation?"]

We're in the middle of our divorce right now. Mediation has failed, no surprise there! Visitation is the speed bump, and by speed bump I mean brick wall. Finances will be another huge issue, but as much as B/NPDh hates it and will try to stop it, I don't think there's any fighting that part of things for him - I'm not worried at all.

N/BPDh seems to have shifted all his energy to parenting because he can't handle not looking like a super-parent... .even though he's had minimal and/or harmful involvement (his choice, of course) up until he filed for divorce. Despite a consuming addiction, working full time (he now has the personnel skills to hold on to a job thanks to me), and school he is channeling everything he's got to putting on this show. As a result, he's demanding wayyyyyy more time than both of us know is feasible. The frustration builds after about 2-3 hours, and in the past that's been about the time he gets physical. It doesn't always happen, but in three years in aware of at least 8 incidents - none of which have been severe enough to warrant a CPS call - at least nine that I was aware of at the time. I found some stuff out after the fact that would qualify.

Anyway, I need to get an agreement on visitation, if possible. I have a bit of leverage right now, enough to where N/BPDh has sent me a schedule and reluctantly asked me to respond - where previously he shut down all negotiations and said he would send me his minimums and I could accept or go to court.

My question here, after all that, is - how in the h-e-double hockey sticks do you negotiate with a terrorist? Oops, I mean pwN/BPD? ;-) He hates "discussion" because he thinks I'm "lawyering" him - he thinks I'm getting one over on him. After the court ordered parenting class, he dropped his act for maybe the fifth time in as many years and we hashed out an agreement. Them things happened, he dysregulated, and I realized the opportunity had passed, as we sat down to finalize and he ripped the thing to shreds (verbally). When I try to give him what he wants or at least work with him, he tends to take extreme advantage. It seems like my best outcomes have occurred when I rise up and mirror him. Since he took our original agreement and tightened it up a ton (to suit his needs), should I do the same (to keep the kids extra safe) and present it, as backwards as it sounds?

He originally agreed to take an anger mgt course as long as ":)V" was nowhere in the title or description, but that has since magically vanished too.

[lizzie458]

We're in the middle of our divorce right now. Mediation has failed, no surprise there! Visitation is the speed bump, and by speed bump I mean brick wall. Finances will be another huge issue, but as much as B/NPDh hates it and will try to stop it, I don't think there's any fighting that part of things for him - I'm not worried at all.

N/BPDh seems to have shifted all his energy to parenting because he can't handle not looking like a super-parent... .even though he's had minimal and/or harmful involvement (his choice, of course) up until he filed for divorce. Despite a consuming addiction, working full time (he now has the personnel skills to hold on to a job thanks to me), and school he is channeling everything he's got to putting on this show. As a result, he's demanding wayyyyyy more time than both of us know is feasible. The frustration builds after about 2-3 hours, and in the past that's been about the time he gets physical. It doesn't always happen, but in three years in aware of at least 8 incidents - none of which have been severe enough to warrant a CPS call - at least nine that I was aware of at the time. I found some stuff out after the fact that would qualify.

Anyway, I need to get an agreement on visitation, if possible. I have a bit of leverage right now, enough to where N/BPDh has sent me a schedule and reluctantly asked me to respond - where previously he shut down all negotiations and said he would send me his minimums and I could accept or go to court.

My question here, after all that, is - how in the h-e-double hockey sticks do you negotiate with a terrorist? Oops, I mean pwN/BPD? ;-) He hates "discussion" because he thinks I'm "lawyering" him - he thinks I'm getting one over on him. After the court ordered parenting class, he dropped his act for maybe the fifth time in as many years and we hashed out an agreement. Them things happened, he dysregulated, and I realized the opportunity had passed, as we sat down to finalize and he ripped the thing to shreds (verbally). When I try to give him what he wants or at least work with him, he tends to take extreme advantage. It seems like my best outcomes have occurred when I rise up and mirror him. Since he took our original agreement and tightened it up a ton (to suit his needs), should I do the same (to keep the kids extra safe) and present it, as backwards as it sounds?

He originally agreed to take an anger mgt course as long as ":)V" was nowhere in the title or description, but that has since magically vanished too.

[maxen]

Hi lizzie. It sounds like you're not using lawyers, is that right?

[lizzie458]

Actually we are. And neither of us makes a move without consulting them, for the most part.

[lizzie458]

 All the advice I've gotten, professional and otherwise, has been that anything we can agree to will be better than whatever a judge comes up with. Obviously if my ex won't deal at all and he stands firm in his  demands, then we will have to have a judge decide.

[Matt]

I think if you assume that any negotiated agreement will be better than what the court decides, you are weakening your position a lot.

There are some other things you can do to strengthen your position:

* Double-check to make sure you have the right lawyer.  Does your attorney have experience dealing with people like your husband?  Can she give you some examples of similar situations, and how she handled them?  Have you and your attorney both read "Splitting" by William A. Eddy and maybe discussed it - kind of the handbook for cases like yours.

And above all - have you shared your objectives with your attorney, and does she buy into them?  Or does she (like my first attorney) spend more time trying to talk your expectations down, than she spends trying to meet them?

* Check how your state figures custody time in cases like yours.  There may be law or precedent that will give you a good idea of the results if you go to court.

There may even be specific criteria.  Many states use 9 criteria developed in Minnesota - stuff like if you have a safe and clean home for the kids and if you encourage the kids to spend time with the other parents.  You can "score" yourself and your husband - using evidence if possible - to see how the court might see you both.

* Make sure you can answer all the questions the court (or a court-appointed Custody Evaluator) is likely to ask, to figure out who does most of the parenting.  My attorney told me to make sure I knew the names of all the kids' teachers - current and past - and their doctor, dentist, etc.  And sure enough, I was asked exactly that - and I answered very calmly because I had received that good advice from my (second) attorney.

Long story short, you should position yourself strongly so that if you go to court you will get a good outcome - and your attorney should let the other attorney know how strongly you are positioned.  My (second) attorney told her counterpart, "If we go to court, I am prepared to show that your client lied under oath and made false criminal accusations - which is a crime.  She'll have to either admit she lied, or continue lying - and then I can prove she is lying under oath again.  Now... .do you really think it's in your client's interest to go to court... .?"  It worked very well - my wife caved in and settled the day before the trial.

[Matt]

Regarding negotiations per se, here are some suggestions:

* Make sure you are clear about what you believe will be best for the kids - take everything into account including your own work schedule and your husband's work schedule - and put forward a specific plan that you can explain and defend - so well-thought-out that it will be clear you are working through the issues in a practical way and not just trying to win at your husband's expense.

* Put that in the form of an offer to settle and give it to the other party.

* If they don't respond at all, or if their response isn't helpful - stop.  Don't "counter your own offer."  Just prepare for trial.  (But it's likely they will come back with a better response shortly before the trial.)

* If they come back with a counter-offer which is reasonable - then negotiate.  Do it through the attorneys, and make sure the opposing attorney understands that if there are any shenanigans - if they withdraw their proposal and go to a worse position, or if your husband communicates directly with you, for example - then you will end negotiations and go to trial.  It is your husband's attorney's job to manage her client's behavior;  if she can't do that you shouldn't pay your attorney to be jerked around.

* Make sure your original proposal has some wiggle room - some stuff that you will be willing to give up.  For example, you might put in there, "Husband must agree to go to anger management classes at least once a month for two years.", but if he objects, you can take that out, because it doesn't mean anything anyway - it won't be enforced so if he wants to go to those classes he will and if he doesn't want to he won't.  You put it in there because it's a good idea but it's also something you can give away if needed, to protect other, more important stuff.

(In my last offer, I put about ten key issues - five of which I didn't really care about.  The other side objected to four of them, and I gave in on three - so I got all five of the ones I cared about plus two I cared less about.)

* Above all, do not be afraid to go to trial!  Instead, have a solid plan to go to trial and win - and then you probably won't have to, because the other side will see they are going to lose, and your husband's attorney will advise him to settle.

[lizzie458]

I think I misunderstood you! So we both have L's, but all of these attempts at negotiations are being done between the two of us, not through the L's. I like the idea of going through them, although I'm a little worried that our original agreement and what I'm asking for might not have enough proof to back it in court (so his L could mention that). Although, neither of us is signing anything without our L looking at it, so he's going to see it anyway. I can't believe none of us came up with the idea to negotiate through the L's! Like you said, this would expose his bad behavior to his L if nothing else... .

I've read Splitting and have one of the best L's in the area - he's very familiar with PD's and high conflict cases. I feel disconnected though - I'm in the dark because I've never done this before, and I'm having trouble understanding what's going on (timelines, etc). I wonder if I asked him to do the negotiations through him, if he'd push it back onto me.

Can you give me some examples of things you wanted and things you were willing to sacrifice? My one big point is the anger mgt (or domestic violence- but he absolutely won't do a DV course) course because our T (and I) thinks a rigorous course, approved by the court and agreed upon by me (and H), is the kids' best shot at safety. We'd originally said he needs to complete the course before any overnights and/or visits over 3 hrs. This is because his frustration peaks at 2-3 hrs and that's when the kids are in hot water. I might be repeating myself, forgive me - I'm stressed out and sleep deprived! ;-)

I'm not sure what I could wiggle on. Any ideas?

[Matt]

Negotiating directly with the other party can work well and save money - if both of you are not too crazy.  For the rest of us, it's more likely to create problems.  (I have a sad but funny story about negotiating with my wife during halftime of the Super Bowl - I was convinced we could work out a few simple issues without missing any of the game.  We lived very close, so I literally ran from my house to hers with each draft - she changed her mind - I sprinted back and made the changes and printed out the next draft - checked the TV to make sure the halftime show wasn't over - back to her house - she changed her mind again... .you get the picture.  What a dope I was... .)

I wouldn't worry about your "original agreement" - unless it was signed by both parties and blessed by the court it's probably not binding.  You can use it as a starting point, or start from scratch and make something even better.  What counts is that it meets the kids' needs first and foremost, and also takes into account your schedule, your husband's schedule, and other practical factors.

The disadvantage of letting the lawyer negotiate is the cost.  So you should supervise carefully - make sure you put it in writing that your attorney should not send anything to the other side without your approval first - and if the process isn't productive - like if the other side's counter-proposal isn't reasonable - tell your lawyer, ":)on't spend any more time on negotiations - I won't pay for you to waste your time.  Prepare for trial."

Some attorneys - my second one for example, who was experienced in situations like this - push work back onto their clients, in order to save the client money.  I made copies, researched some stuff, and hand-delivered documents to the court and the other attorney - because it would have cost me a lot if the lawyer or one of her people did that stuff.  I also rough-drafted documents, which my lawyer then put into final form - hundreds of $ saved and it was her idea.

But the actual face-to-face (or phone) negotiations will probably go badly so long as you do them directly with your husband, because of his psych disorder(s) (BPD or whatever) and because of the dynamics between the two of you.

Here's my list of issues at the last meeting to settle (after many other issues had been resolved):

1.  Ex should acknowledge her formal diagnosis (made by the Ph.D. psychologist appointed by the court as Custody Evaluator) and should get psychotherapy as he recommended;

2.  Kids with each of us 50/50 (which was not what I thought best, but my lawyer correctly predicted that Ex would not actually want them 50/50 and I would end up with "de facto primary custody"

3.  Each parent can call the kids any time while they are with the other parent (or they can call the parent);

4.  Ex will claim both kids as dependents the first year, and I will claim them every year after that;

5.  Neither parent will enter the other's house without prior written permission;

6.  Money in their college accounts "belongs" to them and neither parent will get any of it;

7.  Parenting coach - Ph.D. psychologist - meetings quarterly with both parents together;

8.  If either parent violates parts of the agreement that impact the kids, that can be revealed to the court in a request for a change in custody;

9.  Something else I can't remember;  and

10.  Something else I can't remember.

The ones I really cared about were 2, 3, 5, and 7.

1 made sense but I knew it wouldn't be enforced.  (It was agreed to and has been ignored.)

2 and 3 together I believed would protect the kids pretty well - 8 and 10 at the time and I had given them both phones.

4 and 6 made sense but the amounts of money involved weren't big.

In the end I got all except (if I remember correctly) 8, 9 and 10.  My lawyer said not to sweat about 8 because that's what the law already says anyway.  Several of them I put in only to have something to give away - like #8.

The anger management classes (or DV):  This is a big subject!

I assume you never reported DV to the police... .?  If you didn't, then your position on this is very weak - you will be seen as making accusations that aren't supported by evidence.

And if you claim that he has been violent with the kids - but you haven't filed anything with the police or the Family And Child Services Agency (or whatever it's called where you live) then you may be hurting yourself more than you will be helping the kids.

Your lawyer should have good advice about this.  You may need to keep your powder dry and try another approach - like for example getting the kids into counseling - parents splitting the cost - so if and when something bad happens they will have someone (other than you) to talk to about it.  This has other advantages - it's likely your husband will fight this, and/or won't take them when they are with him, and the court will see that it's you who are looking after them not him.

[Matt]

One more thought for you - about time... .

I wanted to settle the case quickly - most of us do.

But my lawyer advised me just the opposite:  move things as slowly as possible.

The reason is, time was on my side.  My wife was claiming that she was the primary parent and I didn't do much - but I had evidence to the contrary and I was building more evidence while the case was pending - more logs of the time the kids were with me, plus receipts from the doctor, plus taking them to a counselor, etc.  By the time the trial got close, it was impossible for my wife to claim she was the primary parent - too much evidence showing otherwise.

Similarly, if the kids are with you most of the time, and assuming they are doing well - getting good grades in school for example - the longer the process takes, the more clear it will be that you are the primary caretaker and you are doing a good job.

Dads have the burden of proof - he has to prove you aren't fit to be the primary parent.  (That's not what the law says but how it works in many cases.)  So if the status quo is good, drag your feet.

[Matt]

One more comment on the anger/DV classes:

My wife was diagnosed with BPD and other stuff - formally diagnosed by the Ph.D. appointed by the court.  As close to fact as this stuff gets.

The psychologist recommended "psychotherapy to help her deal with her diagnosed disorders", so that's what I asked for.  Under pressure, my wife agreed to it, and the court blessed it.  Failing to follow through meant she could be found in contempt, and could lose all custody (we settled for 50/50).

I'm pretty sure she never got psychotherapy.  I talked to my lawyer about it and she said the only practical remedy would be to file for full custody and cite this as one reason - but that it would be wiser to just let my wife get tired of being a parent and allow 50/50 to morph into more-or-less full custody - which is what I did.

Basically, where I live (and other places too I think) such order have no teeth and won't be enforced.  So it's a fine battle to fight, but probably not worth much.

[lizzie458]

Lots of good stuff here! The DV for us was always "gray area" with several incidents reported to T's. I finally reported to CPS something I found out way after the fact - they documented but haven't investigated bc it's an old claim. My kids are babies, so not able to verbalized the abuse that's likely to happen - that's why I'm thin on options. My ex has also made it clear he won't "allow" me to move more than 15 miles away from him - especially not out of state. Far as I know my hands are tied on leaving the state, even though I can't work right now (not sure when that will change) and I'll have to live with my parents out of state unless he can pay all my bills (which he's flat out refused, although spousal support will be ordered... .just probably not enough).

From the beginning I've stressed "let's do what's best for the kids" and B/NPDh has made it all about him, of course. The mediator even went with it ("it makes sense why he wants xyz) when I was saying, I understand why he would want xyz, but can we please bring this back to what's best for the kids? Sheesh. I'm worried about the custody eval, because H is a T and his parents are both physchologists, one of whom makes "big bucks" doing custody evals :-/

[Matt]

Moving will complicate things, but if it's something that could come up, might be best to figure it out now.

We left it vague to keep things simple, and a couple years later I needed to move about 250 miles - but in the same state - for work.

I talked with my wife and our parenting coach several times, but nothing was resolved.  So I had to prepare a very hard message:  "I need to move soon so the kids will be ready for the new school year.  I've tried to work this out with you but we're out of time.  I'll reiterate my offer - I'll pay your moving costs - but if we don't settle this by the end of the hour, I'll file tomorrow for full custody, and I'll disclose the laws you broke - physical violence, lying under oath, etc. - and I'll win.  So... .let's settle this now - OK?"

The parenting coach helped a lot - basically told her, "You don't want that stuff in the public record do you?"

It worked - we settled and I moved (with the kids), and she followed several months later.

If I had it to do over again, I would put something into the agreement, stating how we would handle it if either of us needed to move for work.  Could be tough, but if you think it's likely to happen, maybe best to figure it out now.

As for moving to live with your parents... .is that your plan?  If they are good people and supportive, and if they have lots of space, that could be a good plan.  But you need to show that it's what is best for the kids.  (And I wonder if the court will like you moving out of state - could make legal stuff more complicated.)

Your focus on what's best for the kids could be a big strength.  When you put things in writing, or when you speak with a judge or custody evaluator, you can say, "I think we should do X because here's how it will be best for the kids." - always linking your proposals to how they will help the kids.

[ForeverDad]

My question here, after all that, is - how in the h-e-double hockey sticks do you negotiate with a terrorist? Oops, I mean pwN/BPD? ;-)

Boundaries, firm ones.  Yes, he won't recognize them, at least not at first, but at least they set some limits to the chaos, etc.

All the advice I've gotten, professional and otherwise, has been that anything we can agree to will be better than whatever a judge comes up with. Obviously if my ex won't deal at all and he stands firm in his demands, then we will have to have a judge decide.

Settlements generally do happen, yes, even in our cases.  However, typically that is near the end of the divorce case, not at the beginning since the pwBPD starts out far too entitled.  But the lawyers' advice that a settlement is better than a judge's decision does not apply to high conflict cases.  Frankly, having a judge decide - with the facts documented to the court so decisions are based on information and not disinformation - isn't that bad of a prospect for the majority of us here.

My ex has also made it clear he won't "allow" me to move more than 15 miles away from him - especially not out of state. Far as I know my hands are tied on leaving the state, even though I can't work right now (not sure when that will change) and I'll have to live with my parents out of state unless he can pay all my bills (which he's flat out refused, although spousal support will be ordered... .just probably not enough).

Millions of divorced parents have moved over the years.  Courts have procedures, policies and typical ways to handle them.  More or less, it's not up to ex to set a 15 mile limit.  Ex may totally believe he calls all the shots but Court is The Real Authority.  If you have good reasons for a move and he doesn't agree, then the court will consider them.  Odds are the court's various decisions won't be worse than ex's ultimatums and probably better.  While it would be harder to move out of state with the children, it's not an impossibility.  For example, if you get the children majority time, if ex is not viewed as an abusive, neglectful or endangering parent and if the court allows you to move away beyond a day's commute distance, then it might also order that ex get more of the longer school vacations and additional time during the summer school vacations.  So, no, he can't automatically block moves, although he can get the court to decide yes or no and whether additional conditions are set.

[lizzie458]

My question here, after all that, is - how in the h-e-double hockey sticks do you negotiate with a terrorist? Oops, I mean pwN/BPD? ;-)

Boundaries, firm ones.  Yes, he won't recognize them, at least not at first, but at least they set some limits to the chaos, etc.

Can you think of any examples of boundaries? When he flipped out at our last face to face and stormed off, I should have just left too. I was too nervous to get the thing signed, I thought I didn't have much time before he dysregulated big time (I was right, I just didn't realize he was already too far gone). I did tell him I would wait, but only until 3, as that would leave us enough time to finish. He asked if we could change locations (he hadn't eaten all day) and I said no, I would wait the extra 15 min or whatever and then leave. He returned just in time, I told him it would be reasonable to take a walk if he gets frustrated, but you have to come back in 5-10 and let me know how long you're taking. It's not reasonable to storm off and expect negotiations to continue - next time it happens we are done. We continued to try to go through the agreement to put the final touches on, but he refused to take off what I call his "eff you face" and the thing just devolved to where I gave up on it and left.

Later, he said he was done negotiating and sent me his list (which was highly entitled, to say the least) and I did not respond... .as the way it was worded, no response was required. He'd used what I imagine his dad's template looks like for visitation (H is highly disorganized in thought and action, no way did he come up with that on his own), and tried to resolve all the issues over property and finances, etc in this one list. Ha! We can't even get past our separation agreement (he refuses to leave or "let me" leave by agreeing to visitation. I told him we couldn't sell the house without a separation agreement (I could see a deal getting held up and falling through as he plays these games after we get an offer - this is consistent with L's advice), so now I have a new, slightly less entitled list to deal with because he's dying to sell the house. I don't know what to do with it because it's still way unmanageable.

ForeverDad, I appreciate your comments on moving and on courts' decisions. That's kinda what I was thinking anyway, as long as a court wouldn't grant him more than what he's asking, I couldn't see how it could be worse to go with a judge's decision.

It's interesting, B/NPDh is obsessed with movies and has had very few relationships outside of his nuclear family (even friendships), so he's definitely got this grandiose picture of divorce. When they said in the class that only 3% of cases make it to court because the spouses couldn't act like adults, he was surprised and (momentarily) humbled. That's all worn off now though, back to dysregulating!

[maxen]

I think I misunderstood you! So we both have L's, but all of these attempts at negotiations are being done between the two of us, not through the L's.

ok, that's what i got from your OP.

When he flipped out at our last face to face and stormed off, I should have just left too. I was too nervous to get the thing signed, I thought I didn't have much time before he dysregulated big time (I was right, I just didn't realize he was already too far gone).

it's one of my themes that everything should be done through lawyers. now, i know that there are people who have a better sense of self than i did after the end of my marriage, and who can deal with the SOs. at first i thought that we could go through mediation too but it's clear to me now that i would have been outdone by the exw, who went into an insanity of narcissism and viciousness after she bolted. i've done almost everything from behind the L and it was the right decision. (i've also learned from her by watching her deal with the difficult personalities not only of my exw but her L too.) this of course means a bigger L bill. but do you think that would help?

[ForeverDad]

Many courts require that mediation be one of the first steps in the divorce process.  That's okay, we can sincerely try (and when we return to court we can confirm if asked that we really did try).  But we have to be aware that mediation early in a divorce finds the dysregulated ex far too entitled, dictatorial and whatever.

So mediation itself is not bad, we just need to know in advance that it is at high risk to fail miserably early in a divorce.  We have to be careful not to "pin our hopes" or "hitch our horse" to an expectation - or desperation - that mediation has to work.  We can't sacrifice ourselves, our futures or our parenting just to 'force' mediation to work, not when the ex is so extremely entitled.

[Matt]

There's one big advantage to mediation early in the process:  It can reveal a lot.

Mediation was mandatory in our case - where we lived.  Just my wife, me, and a very good mediator - very patient and skilled.  I had low expectations, but I took good notes, and my wife said a lot of things that were helpful to me later.  She pretty much laid out the accusations and arguments she would make later in the case - for example, she accused me of violence (but I was able to get the police report which showed her accusations were false), and she said she was the kids' primary parent (but I was able to keep a log showing they were with me more than with her).  She tipped her hand.

With these insights as to how the other party is thinking and what they are likely to say if you go to court, you can gather evidence and form your arguments, so you will be in good shape if you go to trial.  And the stronger your case is, the less likely you'll have to go to trial, and the more likely you'll be able to get a good settlement.

[Matt]

Examples of boundaries:

* During our marriage, my wife often called me - usually at night when I was traveling on business - and ranted and raved and accused me of stuff.  I usually listened - sometimes when I should have been sleeping - I thought it would be wrong to hang up on her and I never found a way to calm her down.

In time I learned to hang up when she started in - I would answer the call, and if she talked sensibly I would keep talking with her, but if she spoke to me inappropriately I would just hang up the phone.  It took a long time and lots of focus to learn to do this, but it paid off - she quit calling when she was mad, even before we separated, and after we separated she almost never called, unless it was something important about the kids.

I never said to her, "My boundary is that if you call me and speak inappropriately to me I'll hang up." - I just did it.  But that's how I thought about it:  "If you do X I will do Y." - the way I was taught to form a boundary.

* Similarly, since the worst moments of our marriage were when she got violent with me, I decided, after we separated, that she wouldn't be in my home.  It took me a couple years to get this clear in my head, and when I moved to a new town, I signaled to her - by not giving her my address - that she was not welcome at my home.  I've softened a bit over the years, but she has still never set foot in my new home - and I haven't entered hers either.  That way, there is little risk she will become violent or (much worse!) accuse me of violence.

Again, I never said the words, "If you try to come in my home I will close the door to keep you out, or call the police if I have to." - I've just acted on it and she got the message.

For you, I would certainly suggest a boundary around how he deals with you.  I would suggest avoiding any face-to-face or phone contact - e-mail only, and legal stuff through attorneys.  Exchanging the kids can be done at a neutral site, like a Starbucks or even a bank or police station, where there are people around;  or you can bring the kids to his home and he can come get them at the curb.

And when you are around him, or talking on the phone, you can decide what you will put up with, and when he crosses that line, you can hang up the phone, or leave the room.  If there is a mediator involved - I had to do this once - you can address her directly:  "I will not be spoken to that way - that's a ground rule I need you to enforce.  If I am spoken to disrespectfully I will leave and the session will be over."  It's the mediator's job to enforce reasonable ground rules, so she'll probably accept the boundaries you set (and of course they can apply both ways).

[lizzie458]

That all sounds good. It makes it so difficult with stbex still living in the house!  Constantly accuses me of restricting his access to the kids, which of course is not true.  I have emails where he is "requesting" ( demanding)  specific days and times, all of which I have agreed to with the exception of one day over the last 2 months.  And then there is all the time he spends with them that is technically undocumented because it happens early in the morning and is  pretty much a given.  He tends to do whatever he wants in the house, and I am at a loss as to what boundaries I can enforce there.   He stopped raging at me a few months before he filed for divorce because our therapist helped me develop and enforce those boundaries. Ironically, I think that's one of the reasons he filed-he couldn't control me with his anger anymore.  And I did email him  recently to enforce another boundary. So maybe I'm not doing so bad on the boundary front, I think it's just really horrible having to live in the same place still.

Another thing that really bothers me is he has gone through all of my things multiple times, snoop through my phone and my computer, he also hacked into my email account and deleted all the abuse of emails he sent me over the years, well about 40 or so that I had saved.   Unfortunately, he does know where I will be staying, but he does not know the apartment number at least. He absolutely will not be allowed in my house, that much I definitely decided already!   I feel so very fly out late it by him. I only found out about his pathological lies, snooping, paranoia, etc. in the last few months.  I'm fairly certain he has/had listening devices in our house, spyware on my devices, it really creeps me out and I feel like he still has eyes on my stuff.   I don't even have anything to hide, it just feels so gross.  I can't think of any more boundaries, maybe someone else can. I told him I know about the emails and I've told him multiple times to knock off  The snooping. That seems to get his attention, but of course he can't stop himself.

[Matt]

Staying in the same house once you have both given up on the marriage is something you really want to avoid, for a bunch of reasons - the biggest one maybe being that it's just super stressful.

You may have some options.

Talk to your attorney about filing a motion to have your husband leave the house.  You probably don't have to make any accusations, but say that you are not comfortable, or even that you are afraid (if that is true).  Maybe a TRO (temporary restraining order) - could be one that goes both ways - you both stay away from each other and live in different places.

Where I live, these kinds of orders are usually granted.  The two attorneys might be able to work it out so it's not a big fight, or your attorney might know the way to get it done.

[lizzie458]

That's a good idea, though we've been down that road and apparently this one is best right now :-/ I don't think I have enough to get him kicked out, and mutual TRO's are not the norm here, either. I absolutely agree that this is beyond stressful right now. I dream of the day we move out!

[ForeverDad]

Courts recognize that divorces are stressful and your court might agree living in the same house where confrontations and conflict occur is not good.  Are you able to ask for possession of the home during the divorce, that he move out during that time and provide interim support?  Yes, it would force the court to set a parenting schedule if you two haven't mutually agreed on one, but odds are that with him working outside the home and you at home most of the time (?) that the court would set a temporary order giving him an alternate weekend schedule, with an evening or overnight in between.  If he can't handle having the children for more than a few hours at a time, then you could ask the court that he have only day visits at first and progress from there depending on how that goes.  Once you (probably?) have temp custody and temp majority schedule ordered, then he will be the one with an uphill struggle to undo that.

What I'm saying is that more and more time is passing in an effort to reach a mutual agreement and that just isn't possible, not unless you relent and Gift away too much of your parenting and Ignore too much of his parenting issues.

What is your state's process for divorce?  Does it require you two to live together during the divorce?  My state set a temp order before doing anything else, though we were already separated by that time.  And in my case there was NO agreement unless her back was against a wall so to speak or her lawyer talked her into it.  So our orders were mostly made by the court or pushed by son's lawyer (Guardian ad Litem).  I the Father was given minimal time at first and had an uphill struggle but over time the orders got better and better for me the stable parent and our child.

If neither of you can afford the home after the divorce, then it would have to be sold at some point.  In that case then moving out is not a question of IF but WHEN.

[Matt]

Temporary orders can help in lots of ways - not just deciding which parent will live in the home during the divorce:

* Parenting schedule (so that won't be something to fight over)

* Temporary financial support

* "Restraining order" without a separate, formal TRO

* Less stress for everybody because things are decided - temporarily - and that sets a precedent which the permanent order usually follows on most issues