Just wanted to let you know I'll be back...

[kells76]

Hey, I'm still around    Sorry it's been a while. Thanks for still being here. I'll try to post some more in the next few weeks, but for now, here's a short version.

Things were going OK for a few months -- after round 1 of mediation the kids got in to counseling. DH wasn't sure the counselor would be a good fit but it seems like she at the very least understands that SD10 has pretty big communication issues with Mom, not just DH. SD10 has been relaxing a lot with us and now can (sometimes) tell DH she loves him, even in front of Stepdad. Kids are back at the school that Mom took them out of last year (it's a long story buried in the Coparenting board). Even when Mom gave SD10 a "choice"    about whether to spend a day with DH when SD10 was sick, she wanted to be with him. So, some good things going on.

After round 2 of mediation almost 2 months ago, where both parties reached an agreement, which DH signed there (but not Mom, uh oh), Mom finally came back yesterday with a complain-y official response about how DH isn't sharing certain costs (where "If he'd only asked, he could have found out how to pay" and how he should be "earning up to his potential". Guess who doesn't want a judge to reassess CS. Also how Mom is totally OK with having  PT coordinator but shouldn't have to pay 100% of it (which, OK, fair enough, but if she wanted a split, all she had to do was ask... .    )

DH has had it. All he wants is for the same rules to apply to each of them. This is not how Mom sees it. Court is in 3 weeks. We're pretty nervous but at this point my attitude is as long as the judge applies the rules equally, s/he can decide LITERALLY WHATEVER. Well, not literally whatever, but you get it, right? It's the double standard that's the sticky wicket. DH should "earn up to his potential" but Mom, who has worked before, doesn't have to. Mom doesn't send the kids to school last year because "they can't afford it", but she doesn't take DH's offer to pay for ALL of it for both kids. If two people have such different ways of solving problems (Mom: Solve problem by doing it my way, DH: Solve problem by applying same standards to each of us), nothing's gonna get resolved; not CS, not PT, not activities, nothing.

There's another legal detail that Mom's L wants to use -- that DH via his L applied for a modification in PT (change to 50/50) too soon after the first mediation. I think it was something like 2 weeks after. This was after SD10 had a blow up (literally the first day the new plan was to go into effect, wonder how she knew) and refused to go with DH when he picked her up from practice. DH had tried the "I know you don't want to, but my hands are tied, this is what the judge said" part, which then Mom heard about from SD10. Mom sent this long email about how she couldn't believe DH said that, how scared SD10 was, and how nobody was going to get in trouble. So yeah, filing for the modification was really soon. DH's L recommended the move as a way of pressuring Mom to walk the talk. Not sure how that is going to play out -- any thoughts? Does it matter that Mom said in email essentially that the new PP didn't matter?

I'm frustrated, anxious, almost feeling relieved, but ultimately I don't want to get bitter and resentful and focus on all the stuff Mom is doing and lose focus on what's actually good for the kids. Help me keep on track there please!  I'll fill in more legal stuff as it comes. Thank y'all again.

[ForeverDad]

It's often been remarked that having the court to make a decision or ruling may turn out to be unfair but almost surely it would be less unfair than the crumbs we could get in mediation or settlement conferences.  So yes, be prepared for court but don't fear it.  The problem is that court really, really loves settlements and deals since they can't be appealed or contested.

Be sure DH presents himself as a problem solver seeking practical solutions.  She'll be the complainer and though posturing to be concerned for her daughter, he should help the court discern that she's making it about herself, she's not seeking equitable solutions.

Will daughter's therapist be making any recommendations or observations to the court?

As for the timing of of his return to court, I doubt it's an issue but it could also go the other way.  Court isn't about being fair, sometimes it seems they're more concerned with procedure and technicalities.

My lawyer had always said that courts took Contempt actions more seriously after divorces.  This was right after my divorce decree and it seemed to me the magistrate performed astounding legal gymnastics:

It's about time I tell you what happened with my first post-divorce Contempt of Court motion.  Filed in April, it was rescheduled from June to July to August.  Yes, it was heard nearly 4 months after initial filing... .  At court my lawyer told me that we would be proceeding only on her failure to properly notify me of her vacation with our son.  He said her behaviors at school causing the officials to deny my open enrollment there, her coming with police trying to track me down one weekend, her trading days with me and then not following through on the agreement, etc, were not enough for contempt.

Sounded like such a strong case.  Well, after going into the hearing room, out, in, lawyers in and out, the magistrate made a ruling.  No contempt of court... .technically.

Huh, you say?  Well the court's reasoning went this way:

The mother admitted she didn't provide any written notice.  (She tried to make it seem I agreed with her verbal comments to me but she glossed over the fact that she never told me any dates whatsoever.)  The initial settlement approved by the court on aborted trial day defaulted to the county's rules that Spring Break vacations be notified in writing by February 15.  A few weeks later the Final orders and Shared Parenting Plan were approved by the court.  The SP plan made vacation requests less restrictive, only 30 days advance written notice is required.  Then she took her vacation 3 weeks later.  The court reasoned that she was in violation of both provisions, but the first one no longer applied since the SP plan modified the date requirement and the second didn't apply since she had an "inability to comply" with the 30 day requirement with an order only 3 weeks old.  Therefore, she was not "technically" in contempt.

Oh, and the kicker?  She took him on her vacation the week following his school's Spring Break.  Yes, he also missed a week of school.  Okay, it was just kindergarten, but it won't be any surprise to you all that I wasn't the only one she left in the dark, she left and didn't tell the school either, I had to inform them belatedly.

Notice that the court wrote she had an "inability to comply" (its words) and "technically" not in contempt (court's words and court's quote marks) yet never faulted her for failing to meet a required feature, vacation notices, of nearly all parenting orders.  It didn't give emphasis that she failed to even try to comply.

[kells76]

Thanks FD, I appreciate your reply.

DH talked w/ L & L pointed out that even splitting the cost for PT coordinator would be less than trial. Which is a fair point.  I think my biggest concern was that we'd go through this whole back & forth process & end with NO third party eyes on Mom. So if that is solved by compromising on $ but still getting a PT coord, then that is a win, trial or no. But you're right, we're not afraid of going to trial, if Mom doesn't accept DH's forthcoming offer. He's thinking of suggesting a little over guideline on CS, 50/50 for counseling $, & something like 50/50 for PT coord $. This seems 110% reasonable to me, and very problem-solvey. So if Mom doesn't go for it (i.e. still wants DH to pay 100% of PT coord), that says more about her position going in to trial than about DH.

Also, the stuff Mom was complaining that DH wasn't doing was stuff from the most recent mediation outcome, which Mom hadn't signed. LOL

Doubt that SD8/SD10's counselor will appear in court. Side note, she does now have contact info for our marriage counselor who (long story) also has seen Mom & Stepdad (& sees behind the curtain, as it were). Even if SDs' counselor won't be part of court process, she's been good for the kids thus far, which is really important on its own.

Wouldn't be surprised, if this does go to trial, if Mom's side is all about complaints, personal attacks, & trying to get DH on technicalities.

[livednlearned]

I'm frustrated, anxious, almost feeling relieved, but ultimately I don't want to get bitter and resentful and focus on all the stuff Mom is doing and lose focus on what's actually good for the kids.

It is the hardest thing in the world to not get dragged into the minutiae. As my dad liked to say about my ex, you can't win a pissing match with a skunk.   

Your gift is that you are one ring removed from the deeply personal nature of the battle. Meaning, it will be easier (though not easy) to take a step back and see the 30,000 foot view. People with BPD tend to have a really hard time seeing the big picture, and spend a lot of time looking at things an inch off the ground, especially when triggered.

She is stonewalling and obstructing because she is losing control, and stonewalling coping mechanisms are all she has. You have the big picture, and can keep zooming back out so people stay focused there.

I saw my L do this many times in court. I felt threatened by the counter arguments and behaviors of my ex. My L kept taking things back to the bigger view. Something like:

"Your honor, these issues are important and we want to get them resolved. However, the bigger picture here is that my client needs to have equal access to the kids -- we know this is in their best interests. We have made some progress, and don't want to get mired in stonewalling. This is expensive for my client and we had an agreement with mom -- she has not signed it. Things have been very one-sided and my client was snowed into thinking that his good faith gestures would be returned in kind. This did not happen for years, and is why we are here. We believe 50/50 on all expenses is a good faith sign that mom is willing to coparent and let dad be involved in the kids lives, for their benefit."

Also, it seems like mom really needs consequences for not doing things. If you do go to trial, make sure that stuff is baked in there so any future rulings aren't contingent on what the judge thinks that particular day. Mom has already shown that she will stonewall, so that gives you a clue what will happen going forward. So, if she doesn't sign something, have there be a consequence for not signing. Maybe something like, "If my client has to come back to court because mom won't sign, she pays for legal expenses."

Or, if mom is expected to pay for half of everything, have there be a consequence like "My client will deduct any funds owed for counseling, PT coordinator from child support beginning day/date."

I'm not a lawyer, this is just sharing what my L did -- the tactics, not necessarily the details about what works best with someone who is high-conflict by nature. BPD mom does not see DH as an authority, she was able to weaken him and doesn't trust him, so only the judge or some other kind of authority matters to her, and even then she will struggle to comply.

She is disordered and unskilled, and cannot problem-solve when she is emotionally dysregulated, which happens even to the best of us when expensive lawyers and judges are involved 

[kells76]

Thank you LnL, good to hear from you 

And thanks for the advice about keeping the big picture in mind. You're right; that is one skill that Mom doesn't seem to have right now. Her filings bounce all over the place on minutae of things DH has done wrong (more on that in next post), but don't seem to look at a big picture. So that is where DH & L (& me, too, in a way) will need to step up -- be the ones who can keep that in mind.

That is a good point that Mom's un/willingness to split expenses can be extrapolated to her un/willingness to be an equal coparent with DH. I'll see if DH wants to ask L about that approach.
 I'll also see if DH can talk to L about building in more consequences.

OK, time for a fresh post, as Mom sent a very telling response last night.