heading to court tomrorow

[momtara]

Well, I filed an emergency motion to 1) get a parent coordinator that ex pays 50 percent for, and 2) have my ex on supervised visitation until he provides proof of therapy and medication. We got word the court wants us in court tomorrow. His lawyer isn't representing him this time (probably too expensive). Mine will be there. My case for emergency supervision is fairly weak compared to some - my ex may just come in with letters from his therapists saying he's following their orders. My feeling is that my ex will oppose everything and we need a strong PC in place to help us coparent, and he should be supervised due to his summer of harassment although he calmed down in the last 2 weeks. If the judge asks how the kids are when they come home, well, they are generally fine, can't deny that. But ex is scary and intimidating. My lawyer told the court some of the things he said, and they're not on tape so that's kind of hearsay that he will deny. He will also plead poverty and say he can't afford a PC.

Livedandlearned gave valuable advice to me last year: If judge asks if I'm concerned, I should say I'm always concerned, your honor, the kids are young and (I forget the rest) but it was a valid point... .even if I can't say he's done anything violent since the divorce, he has erratic behavior and it's always a concern, esp until a new PC can work with us. I can't be weak or wishy washy.

I think in some ways it might be better for me not to go, because my L is tough and will make a case better than I can. But I feel like my ex is manipulative and I may be needed to straighten out a lie or provide some info.

Anyway, last-minute advice always welcome! Ultimately they may just convert the thing to a regular order and then we have to do this all again in a month. I can't see them forcing a PC on my ex. They may try to get us to stick with the current one who is weak. We shall see.

backstory in case needed: https://bpdfamily.com/message_board/index.php?topic=281762.20

[livednlearned]

The judge in my case never asked me a question like the one you imagine being asked (are the kids ok when they return from dad's) because that would just invite hearsay (I'm guessing).

More likely, the opposing L would ask a question like that, and then shoot down your answer to discredit you. Since there won't be an opposing L, the judge may allow your ex to get on the stand, where your ex will say all kinds of things -- probably hard for you to listen to (momtara is always on my case, the kids are fine with me, I see my doctor's, she is lying).

When there is not an obvious incident, the judge will probably default to procedural, technicalities, precedent, a lot of which is largely opaque for us. The judge is listening for things we don't even recognize as important -- like things that match with technicalities to help the judge make a decision. You have to remember that a lot of judges are ruling in the most conservative way possible to avoid having their ruling overturned in appeal. The good ones are genuinely using intuition and thinking about what is good for the child. If that is hard for them to determine (which is why documentation is so important, to eliminate the problem of hearsay), they will go with the technicalities.

Hopefully, the judge decides that it's best for the kids if there is a PC.

My hunch is that the judge will let you win something, and lose something. Like saying yes to the PC, then the dad pays according to his income, and no to the other request.

[momtara]

I'll be pretty much lucky to "win" anything at this point, as my L asked for supervised visitation until my ex presents letters from his doctors saying he's getting the right treatment. He emailed her those letters today and they're dated a month ago. So that kind of scuttles things. However, we still have a hearing at 3 and I kind of want to make it clear what's going on. Is that stupid? I don't know. I know clearly what I want: More frequent therapy notifications than once a year, notifications that say he's going every other week and not missing appointments, and a new PC that he pays half for.

My L said that those kinds of things are usually not decided on an emergent basis. So if the order gets converted to a regular order today, I still want that stuff even though I'll have to wait a month now. It will make my ex anxious while he has the kids, which worries me, but hopefully now his family is aware that he's having some problems.

The good news is, the letter from his psychiatrist said he is only going to him "every other month for medication management." (He also sees his psychologist every other week.) A year ago, my ex said he was going to psychiatrist once a month. So that seems to me a change in circumstance or status quo, from every month to every other month. His docs will say that's all he needs - to just check in 6 times a year that he's on his meds. They could make that case. But it worries me. What next, he goes once a year?

I think my L should have asked for a pscy eval or something that actually lets us know a diagnosis. I guess a good PC will get access to that. Or the judge can even ask for it possibly.

I feel good, though, because I'm not wimping out. Or am I inviting trouble? Most of my claims against ex are hearsay (he yelled at the kids on the phone, etc.) but it's documented that he complained about both PC's and scared them away. He's been harassing me on and off all summer.

I wonder if the judge will really care about the weakening of visits to psychiatrist. Both docs were obviously ok with that... .

[ForeverDad]

Is there some way to also seek a clause to be added that you can suspend visitation (or require supervised) if in your judgment you have concerns of his stability for parenting visits?  I mention this because you're always concerned about his overreactions during the time waiting for a court hearing.  He could always contest it later by taking it to court but I'm thinking he wouldn't turn to court as long as you allowed visitation to resume when he was better.

Courts have a hard time addressing people with erratic behaviors.  When a person is better the court wants to end restrictions, generally forcing the stable parent to go back to court for a fix yet again on the next erratic behavior.

By mentioning supervised, you can show the court you're not unilaterally trying to block.

[david]

Asking the court for specific time frames of ex's doc appointments such as once a week sessions, every other week, what you think is best for the kids and their safety. Having ex on the stand and asking him what he thinks is best may or may not work. That is something you may want your atty to consider. Ex, you are seeing a psychiatrist for meds ? what meds are you getting and for what ? shouldn't you also be getting therapy sessions ? If not why not ? I don't know if this is the correct path but something along those lines to show ex is not doing what he should be doing for the kids best interest. If you have diabetes and refuse to check your blood sugar levels that is on you but you shouldn't be driving a car or caring for kids until you start checking your blood sugar levels. It isn't safe otherwise.

[momtara]

Now his attorney got them to all do a phone conversation this afternoon.

He sent back a silly certification complaining about a bunch of stuff, saying I'm trying to interfere w/his relationship with the kids, and some nonsense that I can disprove. He wants me to have a psych exam. I'll have one if he has one. I think he will back off this, esp if he has to pay.

[david]

Chances are his atty understands his client and does not want to go in front of a judge.

My ex's atty started doing that a few years back. I don't know if it was  fishing expedition in the beginning but I simply said no to things that ex asked for when I thought they were not in our boys best interest. My atty understood my position beforehand so he would call me with the proposal and I would say no. I didn't need to explain myself since my atty already knew my position.  It is my atty's duty to call and talk to me about it since that is the rules of the game. We usually wound up in the court building and settled before the judge walked into court. My ex usually asked for something ( I don't know if I was her idea or her atty's / I suspect it was her atty's since what was asked for was insignificant ) I would agree so we both would "win" and everyone goes home happy. I found that standing firm and not backing down was my best strategy. My petitions asked for very easy to understand things and very specific. The last three years I left little wiggle room because what I was asking for was not unreasonable. I believe that her atty talked to ex and convinced her to agree.

I noticed that my ex lashes out with false allegations when she feels "cornered" or feels like she is being exposed. In those situations she prefers to settle then to be subjected with the reality she will be faced with in court. I could be wrong on that but I believe I have a good handle on how she operates.

My ex's usual fallback position is to say I am physically, verbally, emotionally, and spiritually abusive. I point out that since I started recording myself during all exchanges I haven't been accused of any kind of abuse. It's a win/win situation for both of us. I even told her atty once that I was simply protecting her client since nothing has happened since that time. Her atty "gets" the logic and keeps her client on a closer leash when these kind of things happen. I say little in meetings when ex is present and stick to facts. I rarely dispute ex's false allegations anymore unless we are in front of a judge. I let my atty do most of the talking during meetings and conferences. He knows my position and I think that is the key. I give ex's atty very little info for her to be able to use.

"He wants you to have a psych exam." I would point out, through my atty, that I haven't done anything to warrant such an exam and unless ex is willing to foot the entire bill I would decline. Ex, on the other hand, has a documented need for a better form of management of his situation since he still exhibits behavior that is not in the children's best interest. That is why you are going to court in the first place since he refuses to address the situation. He has been going through some form of therapy or at least taking some meds on a regular basis but his behaviors are still harmful for young children to be exposed to on a regular basis.

[momtara]

Yes, it's true that they don't want him in court. You are very insightful.

I haven't heard from my attorney what happened. I am guessing this means we didn't get much out of it. But I am still glad we tried.

My atty described his response as "ridiculous."

She also asked if I'd agree to be evaluated if he is. I said fine, and it shoudl be in front of a forensic evaluator and give the MMPI-2 or whatever it is (that's the one we're usually encouraged to suggest here, right? something like that)

She's on vacation, so probably is not too thrilled to spend half of it dealing with my stuff.

Anyway, I'm guessing that she and my ex's atty (who intially told her yesterday that he wasn't being retained this time) sparred and ultimately we'll have to deal with this again as a regular motion in a month.

My ex said he doesn't want a pc at all. What if they don't let us have one and I have to keep dealing with him alone? I'm not ready for that yet. He's just too intimidating. I can sent boundaries, but I want someone there just in case he goes off the deep end, truly. If he really is bipolar as our first pc said, I think we need a little help a little longer, at least 'til my kids are older.

[david]

Having reasonable concerns and a solution for the courts works best. You have a reasonable concern. Ex doesn't want a pc but also seems to not want real therapy. The therapy is his choice and the consequences of his actions should be better safe guards for the kids. That is where/why you can ask for supervised visits, feedback from psychologist, psychiatrist, etc regarding how often he is attending therapy. When should supervised visits be changed to unsupervised ? If you have a good answer for that then you may want your atty to present that to the judge.

A big problem with therapy is that the client must trust the therapist for things to really progress. My ex and I went to "marriage counseling". That was according to ex. After about 6 meetings the T said she couldn't see me because ex was her client. That confused me at first until I realized ex had been seeing the T prior to us going to "marriage counseling". During a separate meeting the T said that she was trying to get ex's trust and that was her most important task.

Since his response is "ridiculous" then I would think he has nothing and realizes that. If his atty can convince him to do what you are seeking then things may not go in front of a judge. Settlement may occur right before the judge enters the court. That is what seems to happen for me now. It happens a lot so always be prepared. It is cheaper then going in front of a judge too.

[momtara]

The lawyers finally had their phone conference this morning.

The judge denied my request for supervised visitation (not surprising) but converted it to a regular motion to be heard in September. I am asking for two things: 1) a pc that we pay 50/50 for, and 2) monthly therapy notifications since he goes to his psychiatrist only every 8 weeks now instead of 4 last year. And the notifications must say he is going at the same rate as a year ago, no change in circumstance.

So I just gotta wait.

He will likely get letters from his shrinks stating he sees them enough and he's wonderful and whatever. I will get stuff from our last PC I suppose, just saying we need a new one. I could subpoena our first PC too, but that could get expensive. Plus she doesn't seem to be responding to me since ex filed a complaint against her.

I am a little nervous because he is making a bunch of allegations about me ruining his relationship with the kids, etc. But really, unless he submits a motion asking for something, that's just whining. Um, right?

He also has asked me to reduce child support, so perhaps that could be a carrot to dangle in front of him in terms of him signing a consent order to avoid going back to court.

[ForeverDad]

In my divorce decree the settlement was for me to pay her short term alimony for 3 years and that she would waive receiving CS (child support) during that time.  (Both were similar amounts, basically a wash.)  My lawyer warned me it was unenforceable, that she could return at any time to have CS reset, so he included a protective clause in the settlement that if she sought CS then we would return to court to reconsider the alimony amount.

Your situation is the reverse of mine, I was the payer, you are the payee.  I don't know the laws and procedures in your local area, but it's likely that courts may not like linking lowered CS to deals.  Of course, that's orders, not settlements.  Their orders usually separate other matters from CS, usually the major deciding factors are the schedule percentages and incomes.

I would be very cautious about creating such a link.  Lowered CS is a concrete matter, easily enforceable, whereas compliance with terms of a parenting order are much harder to enforce, especially with a difficult ex, especially over time.  Think boundaries... .does it help or hinder your boundaries?

[livednlearned]

I don't know the laws and procedures in your local area, but it's likely that courts may not like linking lowered CS to deals. 

When N/BPDx tried to link the two, my L responded that she could not ethically do that. By ethically, I believe that meant she could lose her license to practice law.

Which I think N/BPDx knew... .

[momtara]

Just to be clear, I wouldn't link anything like that in that sense. What I meant was that if he wants us to agree on a reduced support payment out of court, that would probably have to be codified in an order. If we work on an order for some other stuff to avoid court, maybe he'd like that included rather than go through the process separately. So there may be an incentive for him to work out an order for a few things.

He is asking for less CS because one of our kids is leaving day care for school now that it's fall, which means lower costs for me. In our original agreement, we are supposed to adjust cs downward at that time, but never agreed how much. however, costs will go way up in summer for camp when school's out, so we'll have to discuss that too. I think we'd have to set the rules for both at the same time.

Wondering if anyone has any thoughts on the rest of it - I'm only asking for two things, but my L isn't sure court will compel him to pay for a PC if he doesn't want one. Regarding more specific therapy notifications, his shrinks will cover for him, and if the judge isn't given a diagnosis, he may just say he's getting therapy for depression and surely won't admit to bipolar. I have evidence of his harassing phone calls, complaining about all of our professionals, etc., etc., and most recently, yelling on the phone when he calls the kids. I just want to strengthen his psychiatry notifications to more than once a year, and keep the status quo. Giving us a PC who can keep tabs would be just as good or better. I wonder how much courts care if he goes from seeing his psychiatrist every 4 weeks to every 8?

By the way, he claims the reason he had to call me 53 times in a row a few weeks ago was to discuss a school meeting. There is no school meeting in July.

[david]

Judge set a regular hearing for supervised visitation. It sounds like there was not enough evidence or reasons in the petition to convince the judge that made sense. The hearing would produce the evidence, in his mind, of whether supervised visitation the way to go. This is where everything he is doing will be brought out. Is it enough to order supervised visitation ? I would think the court would have to see evidence that the kids are in physical danger or he is yelling at them all the time. Your concerns, justified or not, are not enough.

Monthly therapy notifications may work since he changed his therapy from 8 to 4 weeks. That, I believe, is why you are concerned. The problem I see is forcing someone into therapy rarely works and the courts may view it the same way. The person must want to get help for it to work. All the psychiatrist is doing is medicating him at this point.

Another thing to think about, his actions are causing you to react. Negative engagement is still engagement. He is getting what he wants by his actions. If you stop engaging this way he will have extinction bursts to get the engagement he is seeking. Eventually that will subside but it takes a while. My ex loves being in court. I think it gives her a sense of importance.

Harassing phone calls and yelling on the phone are issues that can be addressed by saying you will hang up if/when that happens and doing so. You may have to do that 50 times or more and months before it sinks in. Hanging up ends the engagement. When his behavior changes your behavior will change.

[livednlearned]

By the way, he claims the reason he had to call me 53 times in a row a few weeks ago was to discuss a school meeting. There is no school meeting in July.

To add to david's point -- this is the kind of thing that worked in my case. Having evidence that documents this kind of thing. Write down every thing and look for patterns. Count things. Have pounds of paper on your desk. Print out phone records and circle them. Print out his texts. Write down the time he calls, how long it takes before he says something, the reaction of the girls.

"Your honor, Mr. N/BPDx has sent over 10K emails to my client since filing for separation. There are over 200 emails where N/BPDx just says one word, with that one word being either: *swear word, *derogatory word for woman, *insult.

There are over x number of emails where he makes a threat.

There are over y number of emails where he attempts to stonewall or obstruct.

There are over z number of emails where my client believes he has been drinking to the point he does not finish sentences and accuses her of different offenses that are not grounded in reality. 

There are over x number of emails where he suggests he is watching her, either at the supermarket, her home, or out driving with her son.

He has hinted at legal action toward x number of professionals who are doing their job to provide S14 with education services he is legally eligible to receive. I have an email thread that includes my client, S14's psychiatrist, and Mr. N/BPDx that makes clear the kind of stonewalling and confusion Mr. N/BPDx is using in order to prevent the psychiatrist from doing her job without fearing legal action. My client ceased trying to get services for S14 because Mr. N/BPDx threatens legal action to every professional trying to provide care to S14.

That kind of thing. You have the documentation and evidence. What is your L planning to do with it? You may need to arrange it for her, and explain how you want it used. Make sure you understand the strategy your L is planning to use -- be firm and assertive about it. Talk to her associates if she won't talk to you, and find out what evidence will be entered, and if you can, ask to see the binder with evidence/exhibits that will be entered into court.

[livednlearned]

I also agree with david that you are asking the court to enforce boundaries that you can handle yourself -- understandably, you are worried about doing that, and want the court to enforce those boundaries. The problem is that even when court sets a boundary, you still have to enforce them... .by going back to court.

It's cheaper to enforce boundaries on your own.

What you are doing is creating a legal record of your concerns, and asking for more oversight of your ex.

I do think you have to take seriously what he has said, that you are ruining his relationship with the kids. Be really careful with that one. Make sure that your lawyer says, "My client supports Mr. momtara having a good relationship with the kid, which is why she has done xyz, and feels that monitoring his medication is key to preserving that relationship."

It has to all point back to you wanting him to have a relationship with them, and you wanting the kids to be safe. You are asking the court to help make sure the kids are safe, first and foremost, and that they can have a safe relationship with dad.

[ForeverDad]

He is asking for less CS because one of our kids is leaving day care for school now that it's fall, which means lower costs for me. In our original agreement, we are supposed to adjust cs downward at that time, but never agreed how much. however, costs will go way up in summer for camp when school's out, so we'll have to discuss that too. I think we'd have to set the rules for both at the same time.

If he pays you directly, reducing CS during school and then raising it back up for the summer recess each year may be possible.  If done through the state child support enforcement agency then that might be harder, do they require a court event for each change?

How about this alternative?  Average out the annual expenses across the year.  That way he would pay a little extra during the school year and a little less during the summer but the agency can handle the fewer changes better and he would be triggered less.

By the way, for the school age child are you using daycare for before school and after school care?  If so then that child's care costs would be reduced but not zero.

[momtara]

There are still after care costs, babysitters on school holidays, and camp, so yeah, not reducing it to zero. Your thoughts on that are helpful. Thanks, David.

Livedandlearned, you also made some good points that I will have to remember. I do want to tread carefully on this idea that he says I am ruining their relationship, but the only one ruining it is HIM. It is difficult to prove because so much of the proof would have to be recordings - him yelling at pickups, him yelling on the phone or sitting there and not saying anything. I have calendars, notes, journal, etc. and a timeline.

I think one of your best suggestions is to boil it down to hard numbers. On such and such dates, he called 63 times, 57 times, etc... .I do have screenshots of my phone showing the # of times. It can't just be hearsay because he can make up the same things.

Yes, I will have to set boundaries too, but I don't want to be left in the lurch if one day he goes off the deep end.

His therapists will say that it's fine for him to check in once every 8 weeks. He intimidated our first PC so she probably won't testify as to what she's seen. The second one is very diplomatic. She said she'll write a letter saying we need a PC. Not sure what else she might write or what we might ask her to write. My ex told her a few months ago that our pediatrician never calls him back. She talked to the doctor, who told her that isn't true at all, and that ex doesn't return her calls. So I have all these professionals who know he lies, who know I'm not hurting his relationship with the kids - I just have to figure out how a judge can see that.

My L doesn't really understand that I have to be specific in orders about consequences. He can retain a PC and then never see her unless it's at really difficult times for me, and then I have to go back to court. I have been trying to tell her that.

[livednlearned]

I think one of your best suggestions is to boil it down to hard numbers. On such and such dates, he called 63 times, 57 times, etc... .I do have screenshots of my phone showing the # of times.

Your ex basically told you what his argument is going to be -- that's the nice thing about angry BPD people. They usually tip their hand.

And yes, quantify things. Make it neutral -- present all the facts and make it as easy as possible for the judge to decide whether the behavior is excessive or not. Normal people don't call 63 times, 57 times. Normal people don't call and then say nothing. Normal people don't cancel appointments for their kids repeatedly. You don't tell the judge what to think, you show the evidence and make it as easy as possible for him or her to come to the same conclusion anyone would, looking at the documentation.

You have grave concerns.

There is documentation of a mental illness.

You are doing everything in your power to support the relationship with the father.

The children are young and until they are older you request supervised visitation.

Some of the behaviors that concern you are:

# of times called

# amount of time spent not saying anything to the kids

reaction of the kids

# of times there has been yelling at exchanges

# times ex cancels appointments you make

# of PCs your ex rejected

# of PCs he has intimidated

You are requesting that visitation continue as is contingent on regular reports filed in a timely manner to indicate the father is seeing his medical providers. If those reports are not filed in a timely way, the first visit following that missed report will be supervised by (fill in the blank). If that person cannot supervise, visitation will occur at the next available time, so that the total hours are not depleted. Meaning, the hours will be honored even if it may not be possible for visitation to occur at the prescribed time. This is to avoid unsupervised time in the event an approved supervisor cannot be found while still maintaining that time.

Something like that.

It has to be watertight since it sounds like the courts aren't entirely swayed to your concerns -- you need to persuade them.

[momtara]

The original order was meant to try to get emergency supervised visitation, so those consequences and things aren't in it. I'd probably have to scrap it and submit another one in order to make it more specific. All of those suggestions are terrific.

Right now, it basically says, we want X appointed as our PC and she can contact [his 2 therapists] and other treating professionals. We also want monthly notifications that he's seeing Dr. Y every other week and Dr. Z once a month like he was last year. 

My L is so hard to reach, and will be getting back from vacation Monday, I'm afraid she'll be pissed off if I start asking for a bunch of changes, but on the other hand, waiting for court and approving a weak order isn't helpful either.

Not sure whether to communicate my concerns or not. Perhaps I will wait until Tue or Wed and email my L.

The order focused on potential harm to the kids and left out any of the harassment of me and anything before the last month or so.

[livednlearned]

Write her and apologize for your concerns, then ask if there is a way you can see the order in drafts, maybe there is a paralegal helping to prepare things, and you can work with that person.

So you're a squeaky wheel -- this is your number one concern, you've been on this hamster wheel forever, if you don't get your L to work with you, you'll be paying yet again for a watered down version of what you want.

It will feel awkward -- that happens a lot when we're assertive. Part of becoming assertive is feeling those feelings and doing the thing anyway.

[momtara]

Thanks. I feel a little more empowered now. Yes, her paralegal/assistant is pretty helpful, actually.

I posted obliquely on avvo and found that we can ask for more things when we respond to my ex's response.

I have some work to do this weekend. I am going to write a response and include some key points.

[livednlearned]

Good luck momtara! I am here in the peanut gallery pulling for you 

[david]

Years back our court order had summer at 50/50 and during school I had EOW. I also had a dinner on Monday. Ex actually gave me Monday sleepover because she worked Monday nights and didn't want to pay for a sitter. Our two boys were struggling in school. Basically they were not doing their homework. I tried emailing ex about several times and it always came down to me trying to control her at her residence ? That was according to ex. I started calling the boys every night and doing their homework with them on the phone. That really didn't work that good. I then filed a petition in 2010 or 2011 for more custodial time during the school year. Ex used the legal system to postpone and drag it out as long as she could.

During this time (two plus years ) I copied every homework that our youngest ( 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th grade ). I had one piece of paper with the facts : Our youngest did over 93 % (I think that was the number) of all homework when with me. The ones he did at his mom's were grossly incorrect or incomplete even though she signed off on them. I had a copy of them too. I also had son do corrections when with me. He fought that but I stuck to my position. It took an entire school year and the beginning of the next before he stopped fighting me about it. He is very strong willed. I had percentages and raw numbers on a single paper. I gave it all to my atty. The pile of homework was over four inches thick. Our oldest was in middle school and high school during this time and his grades were slipping.

Finally, in the beginning of the last school year we had a trial date that ex could no longer stop. We settled before the judge walked into the courtroom and I achieved 50/50 during the school year. It was what I was asking for because I didn't think I would get more than that. Last year our youngest still did the majority of homework when with me. In addition, his mom hired a tutor ? when he was at her place. I know the person and we talk all the time. Ex doesn't know that. Yes, that is twisted but it works. Our oldest went from an A, a B, and C's to all A's and one C (in Spanish). He also took AP math, AP chemistry, and AP Computer Science last year over the objection of mom because she didn't believe he was capable.

I also had to fight (have many meetings with the staff) about our youngest because his mom convinced them back in kindergarten that he had a learning disability. He was tested and the results were inconclusive so they gave him an IEP in first grade. It took until third grade and the staff getting to know me and ex much better to realize I knew what I was talking about. They removed his IEP in third grade, after testing him again, and placed him in their accelerated program where he is flourishing.

Yes, it was a lot off fricking work on my part but it also helped me realize ex is never going to change.

I thought for sure that she would start helping our youngest with his homework when I first filed the petition. I was amazed that she continued doing things exactly like she did before. My petition asked for more time during the school year because I was helping them more. For three years she never changed her ways ? She did complain, several times in emails, that she knew I was copying homework but never did anything besides that.

Like livednlearned says you need to prepare all that stuff for your atty and then have it all explained. Number of calls during a certain time period, yelling incidents written down, etc. If you are writing it all down as it occurs you have something the courts will look at since no one in their right mind would take the time to fabricate something like that. Dating each entry and a brief description. That was one of the reasons I went to email only communication. It made it easier for me since I don't like to journal.

[momtara]

Yup. I remember well your homework battles, and your kids are lucky to have you as a dad. I know your kids' schoolwork improved a lot under you. I am going to get together emails and other stuff all weekend. I don't know when the court date will be, but it's some time in Sept. My guess is when ex's lawyer sees our pile of evidence, they'll try to settle. It may drive ex crazy, but so be it.

[momtara]

Working on my response now to ex's assertions. It's funny - when I am here on the boards, all of you are so good at boiling down what has happened. When I try to write it, i feel like I have to add three paragraphs of explanation and background! I have to keep whittling it down to lists. I write "ex called 17 times during the workday" but then I imagine that he'll say I never answered his important questions, so I have to add that I answered them 4 times, and he claimed the doctor wouldn't call him back, but she would, etc., etc... .gotta stop overexplaining. But I guess I am trying to head off his manipulative 'explanations.'

I've become fond of this possible response: "While his scenerio sounds plausible, it's contrary to the documentation."

[livednlearned]

The goal is to make stick the entire volume of your documentation -- he can plausibly deny everything, but he can't deny the volume.

Also, you want him to focus on each individual item (being on the defensive) instead of focusing on his own narrative: momtara is trying to ruin my relationship with the kids (being on the offense).

[david]

One thing I learned is that judges are required to base their decision on the evidence presented. Oral testimony is one thing. Presenting facts on paper and formally introduced as evidence has a lot more weight in court. It takes longer since each piece must by presented to the judge and then to opposing counsel before it is considered evidence.  This gives opposing counsel an opportunity to object. After that, they assign a number to it and it becomes a formal piece of evidence which is then filed somewhere after the hearing. That evidence holds much more weight then oral testimony. At least, that has been my experience. Lawyers don't like it and neither do judges since it takes time. You need three copies of everything:  one for the file and one for each atty.

[Panda39]

Hi Momtara,

I just posted this on someone else's thread but thought it would piggyback nicely on what david was saying about written documentation hope it helps... .

When my SO was putting together his evidence he arranged it in terms of how things affected his children. His uBPDxw had primary custody at the time and she was what I would describe as neglectful and alienating.

So he put things together like... .

A summary of the issue

(for example not getting daughter to the dentist for a toothache)

Behind that summary page he put all of his documentation

(Email correspondence with stbxw... .about daughters pain, appointments, uBPDxw's failure to get daughter to dentist,  SO's offer to take her to the dentist,  daughter's pain, changed appointments, uBPDxw's failure to get daughter to the dentist, SO's offer to take her to the dentist, daughter's pain, rescheduled appointments, uBPDxw's failure to get daughter to the dentist, SO's offer to take her to the dentist, daughter's pain, changed dentist, uBPDxw's failure to get daughter to the dentist, daughter's tooth pain, lack of transportation, uBPDxw's failure to get daughter to the dentist, daughters pain, daughter's tooth extraction due to lack of treatment, and bounced check to the dentist written on joint account of uBBDxw and other daughter  ... .)

Guess who was awarded Dental Care decision making? (and Education decision making and medical decision making?) My SO!   

It did take time to get the book (he called it the book of doom  ) together (full 3" binder) and get it copied for all the parties so the earlier you start on this the better.

As Joe Friday used to say on Dragnet "Just the facts ma'am" if you have the facts you don't need to do a lot of explaining it's all there. 

Good Luck,

Panda39

[momtara]

Thanks.

Some of the things seem less dire than at the time. He canceled the kids' doctors' appointments unilaterally four times in two years. It shouldn't have ever happened, but just saying it happens twice a year doesn't sound as dire. Then again, I'm add ing how he harassed me to cancel many of the others, and I have to tell each office not to cancel if someone else calls.

I've been told that I minimize, but compared to what judges see, some of this sounds tame. Still, as several of you have said above, it's the volume. I am numbering my parts and then attaching an exhibit to each.