Parenting plan - looking for advice and key elements.

[kells76]

Another question.  I'm considering which parent should be the one getting the kids.  In my mind it would seem to be better for the on-coming parent to go get the kids.  But, I read in a parenting book a recommendation that the sending (off-going) parent should deliver the kids.  It's supposed to make the kids life flow better having the custodial parent deliver the kids.  But, I see that as a chance to "run late" or make excuses, and passive aggressively cut into the other parent (my) time.  Even to the point of "gee, if you only gave me a better car, I could get the kids to your house for sure..."  Or, get the kids so frazzled by hurrying them, (or not herding them promptly) the time drop off happens it will upset them for a long time after the exchange.  Whereas, if it's on me to pick up the kids, then I can be where and when I should be to get the kids.  "say bye to mom, and let's go."  I'm not a hardliner on punctuality, but, the kids time, and my time, is important, and quick smooth exchanges will reduce the stress.

Tips?

It depends on what kind of dysfunction your kids' mom is more likely to tend towards.

For us, it has been tough at times going to Mom's house to pick up the kids. DH might be on time every time, but then "SD12 is in the shower" or "SD12 doesn't want to come over" or whatever. It can put the picker-upper in what feels like a down position -- to be begging to take the kids, but "they don't want to go camping and they can tell you how they feel in the doorway here", or "we forgot the schedule and are out running errands, will be back in half an hour". Been there, done it all.

That being said, the kids' mom has also pulled stuff when she drops them off, too. My "favorite" was a Father's Day (I think?) or maybe just a weekend where it was 20 minutes past drop off and she finally pulls up. They were at a movie and "it went later than they thought". Plus, "they were just having so much fun". Who tries to squeeze in a movie in a theater right before a transition time?

Though, she does WAY fewer dropoffs (and pickups) these days. Most of the transport is on DH. Whatever.

I guess that does end up sounding like both options are bad options. Truth be told, both have pluses and minuses. If you think she'll tend more towards "forgetting", disorder, running late, and being frazzled, but not fighting you on actually being with the kids, then you can lean towards taking the reins on pickups. If you think she might pay lip service to the kids being with you, but would covertly fight it or try to enlist them to "tell you how they really feel", you might want to lean towards her doing drop offs -- so she at least has to get the kids out of her house into a car, which is a good start.

Either way, the more you can arrange to be at school/daycare/lessons/summer camps, the better, generally speaking. Stuff where if Mom withholds the kids from school just so you can't pick them up, that's a huge red flag and you won't be the only one complaining, if that makes sense.

[kells76]

Update.  We had a virtually failed mediation session.  STBX couldn't overcome some trust issues, so we couldn't progress.  I think we might be back on for tomorrow.  But, as this separation and divorce unfolds, I think I am leaning more and more towards a plan that you would use for parallel parenting.

My week my problems, her week her problems.

I can see her interpreting and making a mess of ROFR, as well as the phone call issue.  I might prefer vague language for phone calls now, something like, each parent can make reasonable phone / video contact not more than once a day.  I will call the kids when I can, and at reasonable times.  There's a phrase I picked up that goes "the juice ain't worth the squeeze" meaning, that the stipulations and rules and interpretations involved won't gain more than you lose by fighting it. Not to mention the trouble I'm having figuring it out.

You can also add language to a parenting plan, "Parties will do xyz as kids adjust to separate households. By day/date, parties will revisit and make adjustments as needed."

That might lessen some of the stress about getting it right immediately.

And maybe that's the overall message of this whole thread -- whether you really get into the details with a microscope, or keep it broad, the point is to give you leverage to do what is best for your kids. That can look like a super detailed, all contingencies nailed down, zero loophole plan -- which is where I tend to go, based on my "trees not forest" mindset plus our experiences -- or, a plan that "seems" general, but has a couple of "levers" built in: "as long as both parents agree by email, the PP can be modified", "reassessment of PP due on December 11th 2020; if both parties don't agree on proposed changes, will progress to mediation", etc.

Whether microdetailed or general, the point is that you have actions built into the PP where you aren't stuck pointing at it and waving and telling her "but, but, but, you can't do that, because the PP says not to" and she just comes back with "well I think it says I can, and you're the one not interpreting it correctly, so what are you gonna do about it" and there's nothing you can do.

Build in those levers for yourself. Give yourself a way to address differing interpretations, because they will happen, and she will not recognize your interpretation as valid.

LnL's phrase above was good (Parties will do xyz as kids adjust to separate households. By day/date, parties will revisit and make adjustments as needed.) I think David's was something like "at any time the parents may change/modify the PP as long as both of them agree by email". Hopefully other members will be along in a bit to contribute more "lever" phrases to build in.

[Ulysses]

Regarding exchanges, I found that picking up my children was easiest.  My exH would "forget" important items - e.g. coats in the winter, instruments, school books, antibiotics, etc.  I spent some time feeling quite angry that every single time he forgot, I had to drive to get it (lasted a few years).  He also told me he didn't forget an item - the child forgot it.  Yep, the 7 year old forgot to pack her antibiotics. 

So I pick up my children and can ask, do you have X, Y, and/or Z?  They still sometimes forget things, but it really doesn't happen as much.

ExH sometimes now will drive if the children forget something.

[SamwizeGamgee]

Update; we are meeting with a mediator - her pick, but, I'm happy to have STBX want something that is not litigation.  I know STBX is afraid of court, but, once she gets a taste of the power and control she can exert, it might be terrible to behold.

That said, this mediator is taking very much the approach of writing as little as possible if it would just lead to lawyer bait.  She wants to exclude so many of the phrases that a lawyer would pick up on to take back to court.  I think we're going towards an agreement that should keep things civil.  If STBX hears something like "it's not worth making a rule about ..." then STBX believes it.  If I say it then I'm the devil.  So, we'll keep going with the mediator. She seems even handed and appears to protect dad's rights too - a concern I have.

[mart555]

Update; we are meeting with a mediator - her pick, but, I'm happy to have STBX want something that is not litigation.  I know STBX is afraid of court, but, once she gets a taste of the power and control she can exert, it might be terrible to behold.

Don't count on it until it's signed...  if she's like my ex, she can change her mind instantly.  It's all about control, she wants to maintain control.  "I want a good divorce, I don't want to waste the kid's money on lawyers" is all nice until they realize they aren't getting what they feel entitled to.

Watch out for giving too much.  Be fair, but don't get walked over.  It can feel like feeding a beast: the more you give the more it wants so at some point make sure to put your foot down.  Be ready to walk out.


What troubles me the most with these parenting plans is the fact that our ex's have BPD and by nature well their behavior isn't really predictable.  What happens if they get triggered when they have the kids and they cannot lash on us?   Yet that flexibility in a parenting plan would be abused by the ex..  not easy.

[ForeverDad]

And it happened at least once here that when a mediation settlement was presented to the judge, the parents were quizzed, "Do you agree with this signed settlement?"  Sort of speak up now or forever hold your peace.  What you think you had signed, sealed and delivered never makes it to being entered into the record and officially docketed.  So don't count your chicks until it's docketed.  Maybe a small risk but strange things happen in our courts.

[SamwizeGamgee]

This process has been enlightening.  Sort of a high stakes tour through a BPD psychology text.  I'm glad I've read numerous books, and have been following these support forums. 

I have found it to be true that the divorce process goes smoothly as long as STBX thinks she's getting everything she imagines.  Sadly funny, and true.

I would like to proceed with the mediator, mostly to avoid litigation and starting that up.  However, I am keeping an eye open to the likelihood that we'll end up in litigation anyway. 

When we were working with a family counselor making the parenting plan, we covered a lot, but then she has several no-go issues that may end up killing the deal.  Anything that I would get to have as sole/ultimate decision making, not having her get ROFO when I'm working, getting child care she doesn't approve of, and me having a live-in girlfriend at some point (probably not ever going to happen, but it's a principle), are some of the deal killers.  Even swapping years to keep the kids' passports almost tanked it - and we are hardly international travelers. So, I see that anything that she perceives as me having control is an issue.

By nature, I tend to negotiate from the middle, meaning I present what I've considered fair and equitable.  But, I realize I have to start off to my side, even if it seems biased towards me.  Then I should "give to get" as I move to the middle ground.  Skills like this shouldn't be needed in a healthy relationship, or a healthy negotiation. I should keep to my "selfish" interests and bring her to the middle.  But, how?

In  spite of the friction, we are still basing our parenting on 50/50 custody, which was the holy grail as far as I was concerned.  I don't want to lose that by forcing it into litigation and making a bigger mess of it.  Just like I tried to avoid divorce by suffering for years, and now end up in divorce, I may suffer through the time and money of mediation only to end up in litigation. But, I can't say I'm taken by surprise. I'm keeping pace with preparations for court.

[livednlearned]

By nature, I tend to negotiate from the middle, meaning I present what I've considered fair and equitable.  But, I realize I have to start off to my side, even if it seems biased towards me.  Then I should "give to get" as I move to the middle ground.  Skills like this shouldn't be needed in a healthy relationship, or a healthy negotiation. I should keep to my "selfish" interests and bring her to the middle.  But, how?

What if, as an exercise, try to see what is driving the control issues (I'm sure those are front and center  ) and reframe them. What is she trying to say?

she has several no-go issues that may end up killing the deal.

Here's an example of reframing. She is afraid to introduce strangers she hasn't vetted into the kids' lives.

I can see with the live-in GF that there is a reasonable middle ground. For many professionals, waiting a reasonable period of time to cohabitate is better for the kids and the stabilization of the new family structure. What if you offer a reasonable period of time that you won't cohabitate so she gets a small win that also happens to be a win for the kids. You can still date. You can have a GF. You just agree that for x months, this won't be something for the family to deal with while adjusting to the new normal.

Here's another example.  With the ROFR, maybe you agree to have one with a trade built-in. Meaning, if she gets the kids for an extra 4 hours when you can't care for them because of work, then you swap those hours for something else later that week. If she can't or won't swap, then you find someone to care for the kids. Add something about how much time she has to respond, and if you haven't heard within that time frame, you can find someone else. I don't know if this kind of arrangement is even a thing, it's more the habit of mind to think through future/potential stonewall situations so that you can move forward.

If she is at all even remotely able to reason with you, she will budge on some of these issues. If not, the lawyer will likely start to work on her with things like, "This is better than what you'll get from a judge."

Some high-conflict people can't budge an inch and in those cases, it's really hard to avoid court. If your spouse is afraid of court, then you have a little bit of leverage there.

[mart555]

From what you posted in the other thread, the two oldest kids you don't have to worry about: they'll live where they want.  The 15 can pretty much decide, so that leaves you with the 12 and 9 whom soon enough they'll do what they want as well.  I don't think there's a need to put a paragraph about phone calls, babysitters and things like that in the agreement.  The kids will have their own phone soon and can opt to answer or not.  Hint: once they realize they have a choice, they don't answer as much.. 

[SamwizeGamgee]

I hear what you're saying, and it seems reasonable - to a reasonable person.

I give the GF example as one point.  right now it seems like an astronomically small chance of happening, but, I've got at least nine years left of parenting pans, and I can't make a promise that far out.

Our therapist explained the idea of not having the revolving door of SOs.  I totally agree.  If in doubt, I would over-protect my kids in every case. It's not like I'm looking for another relationship soon.  The T gave us a phrase "that no parent will introduce a partner until the relationship has endured for over a year."  That seemed like a good balance.  For STBX that was still a , no-go, deal killer.  She's also insisting on mutual agreement on child care providers (read as: she picks).   I can ease those concerns I think, but, it's just a sample.  

Fortunately, it seems like the mediator we are working with is even less into making "lawyer bait" phrases (over-controlling, vague, subject to abuse), and emphasizes that after divorce, it's two adults living their own lives. In my mind that makes me think that the wife will bail out of mediation.  After spending a good amount of money too.

Right now it's fluid, I'll see how it goes.

[SamwizeGamgee]

Mart555 - I'm seeing that too.  I think I'm leaning towards a much less restrictive parenting plan. 
From a court perspective, STBX is adequate - the kids won't starve, or freeze, and they will get the homework done.  They will get to hear lots of blame and badmouthing of me, but, even the strictest parenting plan can't be enforced about that, especially since it's almost subliminal.  She's going to be her, I'm going to be me.