I Probably want limited contact after divorce.

[SamwizeGamgee]

Hello,
Things for me have gone from standstill to tornado. :-)
I _finally_ decided to file formally in court.  Settlement talks are not going well.  STBX is ramping up her Adult-toddler behavior. The kids are going to be getting pulled at by mom, the accusations continue. We have major hurdles.  STBX is becoming more retaliatory, certainly after learning that I have filed.  She’s avoiding legal service at the moment.

At the end of the day, what I’m learning is that I believe what I want is a parallel parenting plan.  I had anticipated that we could work out a more amicable friendly parenting plan.  But, like the finances and everything else in this divorce, contact and entanglements mean conflict and usually, me losing or the kids suffering. 

Given that, what are the feelings and advice about creating a parenting plan that’s working for not so much combative ex spouses, but, passive aggressive, manipulative, blackmailing ex spouses?

I have gotten to the point that just the idea of having as little contact as possible with STBX almost brings tears of joy and relief.

What are good legal clauses to include, if this is a good idea?

Thanks.

[ForeverDad]

"My parenting time is my time, your parenting time is your time."  If a child is ill, the exchange still happens.  Mother doesn't get to cancel my time for some claimed illness.  I too am capable of caring for a sick child.  I too can take a child to a doctor or other appointments.

Also, defogging just wrote an  excellent post:

I recommend reading about parallel parenting.  It's a different way to "co-parent" with a high conflict ex.  If your situation is anything like mine, traditional co-parenting won't work since the ex won't be agreeable to anything and will generally be working against you with every move, even if they act like they agree with you on something. 

With parallel parenting you set the rules at your house, make the best decisions you can for the kids, and let your ex parent how they wish (usually dysfunctional parenting) {on ex's time}.  It's worked well for me.  I have minimal contact with my ex, we only talk about activities, school, medical stuff, etc. related to the kids.  One important thing is to only allow written communication, don't give them the opportunity to spin a different narrative just because the conversation wasn't documented.  My exPDw still tries to control how things happen at my house but I've made it clear to the kids that Mom has no jurisdiction at my house and we do things how we think is best.  Over time Mom has tried less and less to control my house.  That's a hard boundary I've had to set, including telling exPDw in front of the kids that she needs to stop telling them what to do during my parenting time.  The kids have responded really well to that boundary.  At first they were confused by two different environments, but now they know my house is relaxed and a safe place to be themselves, and they are much happier.

One thing though — everyone in the outside world will talk about co-parenting as if it's the only real way to approach it.  In my case, specifically the kids' therapists.  It can be frustrating when they see the conflict as two healthy adults who just can't get along, when in reality one person is causing 99% of the drama.  But they don't see what's really going on, because the PD is on their best behavior in front of them.  Just be aware of that and don't let it frustrate you.

Notifying your ex of any vacation (time away) plans and dates does not require ex's approval or permission.  It is a notice, just follow your county's rules for advance notice and other details.

Review your county's list of holidays to alternate between parents.  Strike out any that don't apply to either of you.  Generally, any holidays she gets this year means you get them next year.  Essentially you alternate years for each holiday.  If there is one holiday she wants every year, then you get to pick one as well that you get every year.

Typically only the children's birthdays are observed in the parenting schedule.  If you two want to include the parents' birthdays — or not — then good to have that clearly stated.

Parenting schedules have these priorities:
  (1) holidays, per schedule
  (2) vacations, per notice
  (3) regular scheduled times
You can include a holiday in your vacation, it just has to be your holiday that year.

Right of First Refusal (ROFR) ... A parenting plan can include times when a parent might have to offer the other parent time to care for the children before selecting other options.  Ponder all the ramifications, it can help bolster your parenting, or it could just as easily hinder your parenting.  Usually it is phrased that if one parent has to be away from caring for the children for more than a certain number of hours then the other parent has a right of first refusal before the kids can be offered elsewhere.  Exceptions would be school or daycare — imagine a day where school is closed and you want them in daycare — that would be an invasion of your standard parenting time.  Other exceptions could be if the kids are with grandparents, on a trip with grandparents, outings with kids' friends in those parents' care, special occasions with friends and neighbors, etc.  Why?  Imagine your ex claiming your time because your kids are having a sleepover with their friends or your relatives and the ROFR is triggered.

[CoherentMoose]

My GF used CustodyXChange software.  It has standard inputs you can modify.  Search in here too.  There are many threads on what to include in custody sharing agreements.  I suggest it's best to be as detailed as possible now and in the formal agreement.  If things improve down the road, it's easier to relax tight restrictions than it is to go back to court and tighten things up.   CoMo

[SamwizeGamgee]

Thank you everyone.  I think we (STBX and I) covered a lot of the groundwork.  We used Custody XChange - in as much as we could .  We got to our impasse, after some back and forth.  Ended up going to lawyers.

I have beat the drum for "my time, my rules." Try as I might, it seems insurmountable to get to the point of creating this separation in parenting. She can't let go of RoFR - but for her she extends it to school, daycare, etc. It's intrusive to say the least. My kids can be home with siblings and not a parent for after school and other stretches. STBX sees being there with the kids as a right, obligation, and her divine mission as a mom (apologies for my sarcasm). I really think a judge would give me much more fair deal. I guess I could get matter-of-fact and say that if I'm paying child support (and I will pay quite a bit) then, I want my time protected.

[SamwizeGamgee]

I've been reading around on this.
I think a gap in my plan is about how to regulate cancellations of time.  I think certainly each of us will have time in which we can't take the kids for a day or more.  Given that I'm trying to make some boundaries, and write it all ahead of time (not count on "we'll working it out" goodwill at the time), what are good phrases or arrangements?

I am thinking of:
  If a parent is unable to [have normal visitation / custody], s/he must notify the other parent [time period, or as soon as possible].  Cancelling parent can [have parenting time] to make up for missed time by arranging [some or all of the missed days] within 30 day period, if the other parent agrees...

I'm trying to think of how this would play out either way.  So many of these parenting clauses cut both ways. But, the question of how to handle this situation is important, since it's certain to happen, and must be written beforehand.

Thanks!

[ForeverDad]

"If the other parent agrees..."  Um, yeah, you'd be likely to agree to reasonable make up time, you know she wouldn't ever agree, right?

As for RoFR, you've met an impasse with her on this, her view is too one-sided.  Well, if it goes to court you can stand firm for what you see as right and reasonably fair.  Unless she caves or you cave, a judge will order some terms that, while not necessarily "fair", are almost surely "less unfair" to you than what she demands.

[mart555]

Hello,
Things for me have gone from standstill to tornado. :-)
I _finally_ decided to file formally in court.  Settlement talks are not going well.  STBX is ramping up her Adult-toddler behavior. The kids are going to be getting pulled at by mom, the accusations continue. We have major hurdles.  STBX is becoming more retaliatory, certainly after learning that I have filed. 

So pretty much the tornado we forecasted.   It sucks but seems to be par for the course.

My advice: don't give in too much.  She will feel entitled to everything but be careful what you cave on because that gives her control. And she'll try to gain more and more control over time..    We cannot tame their inner beast.   

[kells76]

Good question about having to cancel time.

I'm with FD -- she's going to see "the rules" as applying to you ("You are REQUIRED to send the kids to me if you're not with them for 30 minutes or more, blah, blah, blah, entitlement"), but not to her ("I'm an amazing mom with equally amazing, brave, stunning friends, who are better for the kids than you, and they will watch them when I'm gone for 5 days doing whatever I want").

DH's kids' mom was out of town for a week or so a few years ago. She decided to send a mass email to neighbors, friends, and -- oh -- I guess she remembered to include DH, amazing. It basically put that time "up for grabs" for anyone who would write back that they could do child care. DH called her out on it, for treating him as no different than a next door neighbor, but she's still the same.

So -- hmmm.

At least one thing I would be doing now, ahead of time, is gauging the support level of family who can do child care for you on your time. Ask around and see who is available for last-minute day or overnight care, either at your place or theirs. Same with kids' friends families that you trust, church friends, etc. So, when the time comes that you need to be gone for a day, you already know who you can call FIRST to cover your time. Don't flaunt that to her, though.

It may be that you would need to ask her to cover a day or two for you, if nothing else pans out. I would do that 2nd after trying to manage it yourself first, and I wouldn't expect any reciprocity from her. Don't ask to trade... or do, but don't expect her to follow through, or do expect her to make it a HUGE complicated deal. Don't ask her to cover after explaining that your sister couldn't do it after all.

Expect she may do weird stuff -- like maybe digging her feet in, saying she can't take the kids, it's not her problem, you're so irresponsible, she's not doing it. That's where you need to be prepared ahead of time to be pretty flexible and have Plan C, D, and E. I would never make her your "last possible plan". Don't get in a position where you're desperate for her to take the kids. This may mean that when you see "I need to take a trip out of town" coming up on your radar, you are SUPER planful -- (A), call your parents, see if they can come to the house and stay. (B), if they can't, see if kids' mom can cover. (C), assuming she's difficult and weird and doesn't agree, call church friends to see if they can help. (D), that doesn't work, so you ALREADY checked to see if the kids can come with you on the work trip and chill at the hotel room.

See what I mean? I guess what I've learned over the years is that the more legwork you do in the background, the less you "have to" rely on what she will/won't do in order for you to move forward with your plans. Yeah, it's a lot. But imagine (as you are doing) the blissful freedom of not having to "make her" do something, not having to "wait for her to get back to you", not having to "explain why it's better this way" and arguing... just one text "Hey can you take the kids Thurs 4pm to Fri 4pm, let me know by noon today or I'll assume it's a no go". She says Yes, great! Problem solved. She says No or stonewalls... no problem, you already built in a "move forward" mechanism.

...

I will note that maybe this seems two-faced or like doing the same thing she would do. Planning on anyone else to watch the kids but her.

Well... she's disordered, you're not. And you won't be flaunting all the other child care options to her, or treating her as "less than" in front of others. You're just quietly in the background planning your own life, not making a public show of "she's no better for the kids than Neighbor Bob".

...

OK, looking at some of your thoughts:

STBX sees being there with the kids as a right, obligation, and her divine mission as a mom (apologies for my sarcasm). I really think a judge would give me much more fair deal.

Yes. If your line in the sand is "no ROFR for brief after school stretches/no school days", then stick to it. You are just as capable of finding appropriate care settings (whether home alone with oldest sibling, or grandma, or whatever) as her. Unless there's something you want WAY more than ROFR (I think FD often mentions tie breaker status for education, medical, etc), don't feel like you have to give in.

Unless she caves or you cave, a judge will order some terms that, while not necessarily "fair", are almost surely "less unfair" to you than what she demands.

Less unfair than her... yes.

I could get matter-of-fact and say that if I'm paying child support (and I will pay quite a bit) then, I want my time protected.

It's fine to think this... though I would recommend against saying it on the record anywhere. At least in our state, PT and CS are seen as "firewalled". You get PT even if you aren't paying CS. Nonpayment of CS can't be used to withhold PT. Paying more CS does not equate to "paying" for more or less PT. I'd be concerned that if any kind of equation was verbalized or written in a documented way, that that could be held against you.

...

If a parent is unable to [have normal visitation / custody], s/he must notify the other parent [time period, or as soon as possible].  Cancelling parent can [have parenting time] to make up for missed time by arranging [some or all of the missed days] within 30 day period, if the other parent agrees...

That's fine, as long as you recall what we talked about up top -- I would expect her to never follow through on giving you makeup days. You could have this clause in there as backup, and in a way it could be good to document her nonagreement with giving makeup days. I guess I would use it more as "documentation generator" than "guarantee that SamwizeGamgee gets makeup days with the kids". Does that make sense? That is -- I'd see any time that she actually complied with it as "an amazing bonus". Expect to never get your makeup days, and then be pleasantly surprised when you do. Don't expect the fact that YOU gave HER makeup days for her cancellations as leverage to get yours, if that makes sense.

But DO see including that clause as a way to generate LOTS of documentation of her unfairness, withholding, manipulation, etc.

...

So, putting it all together:

Yeah, have a makeup days clause in there. Look through a few boilerplate ones online, though yours is pretty fine, and get something on paper. But don't expect the fact that it's on paper to mean anything to her, and don't expect her to follow through on allowing you makeup days. Plan ahead in your own life to minimize the need for this clause however you can, but have it there to generate examples of her noncompliance.

At least, that's been our experience.

You're doing the right things in thinking ahead to get as good a PP as you can, before it's signed. That's so smart to do, and it will save you grief down the road. Maybe that sound counter to what I've mentioned above, but we started with DH's PP saying "DH can be with the kids whenever he's not at work". Yes, that was the whole thing. Guess how well THAT went 

So, like mart555 mentioned:

My advice: don't give in too much.  She will feel entitled to everything but be careful what you cave on because that gives her control. And she'll try to gain more and more control over time..

get "as good" of a PP now as you can, AND at the same time expect her to fight it, bicker, complain, not follow it, "follow" it technically but not in practice... etc. And know that ahead of time, so you can right off the bat start documenting her inability to comply with the plan she agreed to.

OK, that's a lot! Let's keep talking if you want.

kells76

[CoherentMoose]

ROFR is a serious boundary issue and can provide a path for your ex to intrude into your parallel parenting.  Guard your boundary well.  CoMo

[ForeverDad]

Beware of standard boilerplate clauses that assume and presume sincere cooperation.  Some are "mutually agreed exchange location" or "reasonable telephone contact".  Can you see how those vague phrases could be twisted to put you at a disadvantage?

[SamwizeGamgee]

Good points everyone.  Thanks!

In my gut, I knew that phrases like "reasonable" mean two different things!

I'm looking through my counter offer now, and trying to close loop holes and see how it's going to be used against me.  And yes, she will find ways just to irk me.  All with a "poor me, I'm doing everything I can" attitude. She'll be late when she wants to.  She already tried to play things both ways to her advantage (too long of a story for here).  I sense what you are all saying. 

I am hoping for a level-minded judge.  If I come across as too much a controller, trying to cut mom out of my weeks, and her kids, it could play out badly for me. 

I am glad that I finally filed.  It feels so much better that at least someone will hear my side.  I'm so used to STBX's interrogations and being cornered.  It will be a relief to go to trial.  That sounds weird!

[formflier]

Perhaps I missed it.

What is the ROFR that she is wanting?

Sounds like something about you not being in house while they are with siblings.

Best,

FF

[SamwizeGamgee]

Her version is if kids (one or more) would be alone, or in child care over 4 hours, she gets ROFR.  My version used to be if overnight care is required. But, after reading up a bit, I want to toss out the entire concept.  The kids are 10, 13, and 16. The 16 y.o. is not a nurturing caretaker kind of kid, although he's self-sufficient. The younger two can handle things.  

I am trying to think of when ROFR would apply.  On regular school days, I don't foresee much need. At best, I'd have a caretaker get them from school and land them at home and start light homework. Then be alone for an hour or so.  There will be days I work and the kids aren't at school, but, the kids can be resilient enough, and I can be creative enough to obtain care under my own power. I think ROFR might apply mostly in the summer, or when I go on trips.  Thankfully, I can steer most of that to my non-custodial weeks, so that will be good for me and the kids. I am assuming the responsibility of getting them to camps, or having adult care for summer days if I can't be there.

ROFR has become a symbolic principle for me. I need a line and a limit she can't cross. I don't want her snooping around, or getting the kids to snitch who was the babysitter either.  Let me be the dad I can be. I think that sums up my last stand in this battle for what I can salvage from my family life, and that's why it's important.

[ForeverDad]

Considering the kid's ages, I agree that any idea of ROFR, if it ever happens, be limited to overnights at most.  Some states consider "responsible" children as young as 8 to be okay as latchkey children, that is, going to and coming from school, etc.

And many daycares have an upper age limit.  My son stopped going to before/after-school daycare when he entered middle school's 6th grade, 12 years of age was their age limit.  I guess they didn't want to deal with teenagers.

Your goal is to limit all post-divorce communication to only the necessary child-related information.

[GaGrl]

I think the idea of ROFR has more negatives than positives, when dealing with BPD.

Just say no.

[kells76]

Beware of standard boilerplate clauses that assume and presume sincere cooperation.  Some are "mutually agreed exchange location" or "reasonable telephone contact".  Can you see how those vague phrases could be twisted to put you at a disadvantage?

Just to touch on this (good) point, because it may have seemed like I was suggesting "add a boilerplate clause about cancellations":

It's a "both true at once" thing for me.

(A): On the one hand, the most perfectly worded language and airtight PP won't stop your kids' mom from doing what she does. So, in a sense, "it's not about the specific wording".

(B): On the other hand, and at the same time, tighter wording can "make" her act "less bad", or incentivize her to be a little more controlled. Looser wording is an invitation to her to abuse boundaries. So, it IS about the wording, too.

I guess if I were to rephrase my suggestion, it'd be:

Get the best, most airtight wording on a cancellation clause that you can... DON'T include "if both parents agree". AND, at the same time, assume she will balk, disagree, stonewall, etc, and be ready for that, with backup plans, and document her inability to cooperate with specific language in the order.

Ideas for tweaks:

If a parent is unable to have the children on his/her scheduled time, s/he must notify the other parent at least 24 hours in advance. The cancelling parent shall schedule equivalent parenting time to be used within a 30 day period following the date of the last cancelled day. The cancelling parent shall notify the other parent of the dates of the makeup days at least 48 hours in advance of the first makeup day.

Plusses: if you're the cancelling parent, this really protects your PT. It doesn't depend on whether your kids' mom agrees with you having makeup time or not.

Minuses: she could abuse this to perpetually cancel her time, then reschedule during stuff you'd already planned to do with the kids.

Ideas for further tweaks:

"Three strikes" cancellation policy: if there are 3 or more cancellations in a 30 day (or 90, or whatever) period, no makeup time is available any more for the 30 (or 90 etc) days following the date of the last cancellation.

"Three no's" policy: Non-cancelling parent can decline 3 offers of makeup days, as long as they suggest alternatives.

This could also be "two strikes" and "two no's".

Pluses of these tweaks:

She can't keep cancelling her time to reschedule during your vacations or special times with the kids. You can say No to her unreasonable makeup day announcements.

Minuses of these tweaks: it's getting REALLY detailed. She might have selective incompetence and "refuse" to understand the details. Increases communication back and forth between you two. She might suggest 3 "decoy" makeup days that you say No to, then wait for her 4th suggestion of makeup days to "really get what she wants".

...

I'm thinking I'm with GaGrl & FD on just not bothering with ROFR at all, especially if your youngest is 10 now, and you haven't even gone through the whole process yet.

REALLY proud of your assertiveness here:

I can be creative enough to obtain care under my own power.

Yes!   This is the right headspace to be in as you move forward to parallel parenting.

Consider, before you make it clear to her through your email posture/hints/whatever that you're totally against ROFR, whether she "has something you want" where you could "dangle" a modified ROFR to her, in exchange for what you want. A modified ROFR could be HEAVILY modified to ultimately be in your favor (or at least "not bad" to you), but could still have the title "ROFR", so she perceives it as getting what she wants or getting the upper hand.

IDK exactly the details, but it could hinge on age of youngest, so you wouldn't have to put up with it for very long. I.e., ROFR shall be in effect for parties' children until all children are at or over age 11. Maybe put in some documentation from your state about "at age 11, State considers children to be sufficiently capable of being home alone overnight, see Link and Website". Or, "ROFR shall apply to any of parties' children home alone overnight (i.e. passing the 12:00am hour) for 8 hours or more, unless one or more children of at least age 13 is also at the home."

Gotta go but just some ideas of how to leverage "something named" ROFR to your favor, IF it is effective leverage to get something you really want. If there isn't something she's holding on to that you really want (i.e. tiebreaker), then I'm with FD & GaGrl, don't bother.

[formflier]

 

Hey...while I've never lived the life of divorce, I've generally thought of ROFR as a good idea.  So...I'm scratching my head a bit about how this could go south.

I would suppose it would be all about the length of time that would trigger it and couldn't that be specifically written in.

So...I'm running to the store for 30 min and need to let kids stay at home or someone else watch them...well...that seems intrusive on both sides.

I'm going away for a weekend, well it would seem like that would be a good thing either way..to at least have the option.

Most likely I'm missing part of the story here...

Best,

FF

[kells76]

So...I'm scratching my head a bit about how this could go south.

Not me!     

SamwizeGamgee wants his kids to have a nice 3 day weekend with his parents -- a fun "grandparents' time" -- while he is on a work trip. It's important that the kids see his parents and have quality time with them.

Some ROFR's would mean that it doesn't matter that he has planned care for the kids when he can't parent for 3 days... they go to Mom's, end of story. Or, at least, "he has to ask her first"... and if she's anything like my DH's kids' mom, it won't matter that SG has it all planned out with safe fun family. She will take the days to be in control, spite him, and keep the kids from having a good relationship with SG's parents.

[formflier]

So...why not write that in the agreement.

X number of times per year kids can be left with the following relatives.  Custodial parent will inform the other.

A couple times a year makes sense...half the weekends...probably not.

Just like cancellation policy...write in the detailed procedures.

Best,

FF

[ForeverDad]

My ex, by the end of our 15 years together, hated everyone in my family.  Typical story around here.  When it came time for the settlement, she insisted my parents not care for our son, then about 6 years old.  Well, mom was in her 80s virtually house-bound and dad was even older and bedridden so that wouldn't have happened anyway.  However, I didn't want an order that sounded one-sided and even could have painted my parents wrongly.  I knew she seldom saw her mother in another state, her stepfather was dead and she hadn't seen her father since her teen years.  So the order stated that no grandparents would care for our son.  Quandry addressed.  She was satisfied.

We had a 4 hour ROFR for a couple years.  That was to prevent her from reclaiming son from school or daycare saying I was not yet there.  But as he got older it became problematic and somehow I got it dropped.  My big concern was what if he wanted a sleepover at his friends' home or a weekend trip with another family.  (For years his friends came here for overnights at my home.)  My ex was super hyper-vigilant, imagining abusers and abductors anywhere and everywhere, that only she could protect our son.

[worriedStepmom]

I'm a firm NO to ROFR.

Look at the long-term.  As you said, your kids are older and getting to the age where they can be left alone for the day with no issues.  Then there are sleepovers with friends and family - your ex could object to those.   And what if you remarry?

My (non-pd) ex and I coparent together very well.  Still, when I go on a business trip, it's my responsibility to figure out what to do with the kids.  Normally, they stay home with my H and stick to their routines.  Sometimes H and ex work it out to split the responsibilities.  (When ex goes on a business trip, he tends to just announce he can't pick them up and it's still my responsibility to figure it out.)

Once, we dropped the kids off with a friend for a few hours and went to see H's grandmother in the hospital.  She declined rapidly, and we were there until very late.  The friend offered to keep the kids overnight and take them to school in the morning. It would have been so much more stressful if I'd had to call my ex and negotiate a RFOR.

With H's uBPDex, we try very hard not to deviate from the schedule ever.  She can't handle the uncertainty. 

If you want to limit contact, I highly encourage you to write into the document that you have to communicate via a parenting app.

[ForeverDad]

With H's uBPDex, we try very hard not to deviate from the schedule ever.  She can't handle the uncertainty.

My ex is similar in this respect.

I found that giving my ex choices triggered her.  For example, at one exchange I mentioned an upcoming exchange problem.  I think it was that a holiday and an exchange were almost side-by-side and we'd be at the exchange twice in just a matter of hours.  I had a brainstorm, offer her two favorable options, more favorable to her than what she was rolling around in her head.  Ouch, she replied, "Then I just won't bring him!"  It eventually worked out but I've always remembered that she can trigger/object just because I suggested something logical.  My common sense logic usually doesn't win over her emotional perceptions and triggers.

...if you make it clear This Is The One then it might very well work, um, even if not at first.

[defogging]

I would also say a strong NO to ROFR.  I've only heard horror stories.  exPD constantly harassing that stepMom or Grandparents can't watch the kids so the kids have to go to exPD, and then on the flip side exPD has other people watch the kids and never notifies the other parent.  You know how PD's operate, they act like they're above any agreement and don't need to follow it, but they will expect you to.  In a nutshell, it gives them too much ability to exert control over your parenting time and who cares for your kids.

I personally don't have it, and I'm so glad I don't.  Hadn't even heard of it until after my agreement was signed.  I can assure you that my ex tries to weave her way into my parenting time however she can, and if we had ROFR it would be an absolute mess.

If there is no way to get it out of the agreement completely, I would suggest phasing it out at some point.  That's what we did with a couple things I wasn't crazy about and it's worked fine.  Maybe put it in the agreement that ROFR expires when the youngest turns 10 or 12 or something.

[SamwizeGamgee]

Thank you all!
This is a great source of experience and tips.

Thus far, I am doing away with ROFR - which for her would be used not only as interference but a control tool.

It is almost top of her list for "must haves." So, I'm working on a presentation and context.  I don't think "if you are on my property I'm calling the police" is the right approach - but it wants to be said ;)  I'll try being practical.  For example, if we live farther apart, it would be a lot of travel time, kids want friend time, etc. Mainly, I don't mind offering STBX opportunities to have the kids on "my time" but, it has to be by choice when it's right, not by contract terms. It takes them a day to normalize after mom sometimes.

I am also crafting adding time and cancelling time phrases.  I have gotten along the suggested lines you provide.

Thank you all for expanding my view on this!

[kells76]

It is almost top of her list for "must haves."

This is really good info to have.

Am I remembering correctly that you guys are doing mediation first?

What do you want that you think she might give you, in exchange for "something called ROFR"?

Do you think she would go for "something called ROFR" that is not actually her idea of ROFR?

What I'm getting at is:

You know she REALLLLYYYYY wants it, and you know why (control, micromanagement, etc). This is leverage for you. Can you "trade" for something mission-critical, like tiebreaker status, decision maker on medical/therapy, address for school purposes, etc? But... can it be NOT ROFR as she envisions it, but "ROFR" as you have put it together (that includes helpful wording like "until youngest child reaches age 11, then not in effect")?

...

So, I'm working on a presentation and context.  I don't think "if you are on my property I'm calling the police" is the right approach - but it wants to be said ;)  I'll try being practical.  For example, if we live farther apart, it would be a lot of travel time, kids want friend time, etc.

Am I tracking here that you are working on presentation and context, to "convince" her that ROFR is not a good idea?

[formflier]

You know she REALLLLYYYYY wants it, and you know why (control, micromanagement, etc). This is leverage for you. Can you "trade" for something mission-critical, like tiebreaker status, decision maker on medical/therapy, address for school purposes, etc? But... can it be NOT ROFR as she envisions it, but "ROFR" as you have put it together (that includes helpful wording like "until youngest child reaches age 11, then not in effect")?

 

I second this. 

Just as I would strongly encourage you to refuse an unlimited ROFR I would push you to sign up for one with a couple carve outs.

1.  One or two times a month you can schedule someone else.  (friends, relatives...whatever)
2.  Age they age out of this.
3.  Also what triggers the ROFR.  15 minutes versus 2 hours is a big difference.

There can be power (for you) in giving her what she wants.

Best

FF

[mart555]

What do you want that you think she might give you, in exchange for "something called ROFR"?

Can you really negotiate on things like this with a BPD? They feel entitled to everything.  It's not really mediation, it's more "limiting damage by hopefully making them understand that they cannot get it all"

[kells76]

Can you really negotiate on things like this with a BPD? They feel entitled to everything.  It's not really mediation, it's more "limiting damage by hopefully making them understand that they cannot get it all"

And in a way, that could be where Samwize Gamgee gets some strength -- by deciding/knowing/accepting ahead of time that she will stonewall, object, argue, be unreasonable, etc... so he can prep ahead of time to be strong and have a stance of "it's this, or nothing and we progress to court".

Knowing ahead of time that she will be entitled, selfcentered, etc can help him "let go" of a sense that "mediation HAS to work, it just HAS to, so I guess I will bend and cave and let her erode away at anything that empowers me as a dad, because we HAVE to settle here." Instead, my hope for him is that while she might "imagine" that Samwize is desperate to resolve things in mediation, and therefore she has the upper hand... instead, he's NOT desperate, he DOESN'T need her to cooperate, and he's totally prepared to say "You don't want to trade? OK, you have decided that we are done here and moving to court. And I am VERY OK with that."

[formflier]

Can you really negotiate on things like this with a BPD? They feel entitled to everything.  It's not really mediation, it's more "limiting damage by hopefully making them understand that they cannot get it all"

I'll add another idea as well.  In writing the ROFR, make it sound good for the pwBPD at the start.  Put the exceptions almost as an "oh by the way" at the end.

I would not explicitly discuss the "carve outs" verbally, perhaps "point them out" is a better term.

If all this gets shot down, then start discussing and quickly move the the "I'm ready to go to court" position.

Best,

FF

[defogging]

Can you really negotiate on things like this with a BPD? They feel entitled to everything.  It's not really mediation, it's more "limiting damage by hopefully making them understand that they cannot get it all"

I agree with your statement, you can't really "negotiate" with a BPD.  They won't see reason and logic, and won't compromise.  However, it is possible to trade some things in order to get other things you feel are critical.  What I noticed with my exPDw is that she thinks in a small world, doesn't see the big picture, so I was able to get some things in the agreement that I think were most beneficial for the kids in the long run.

For instance, I allowed a clause to remain in the agreement that the kids would be allowed to participate in a specific activity.  (Mom is controlling, and won't allow the kids to try anything else which is what I have heartburn with)  I initially said no to that clause because I could easily picture Mom forcing the kids to remain in that activity all through high school against their wishes.  My attorney suggested to leave it in and cap it so it ends in a year.  That was no problem for me, because the kids were currently enjoying said activity.  In return, I was able to keep language in the agreement that I am in full control of their college education funds.  I felt the college funds were far more important than an activity, and saw the possibility of Mom exerting a lot of control over money when they went to college, so I felt it was a great trade off to save the kids some pain in the future.  As it stands currently, that clause about the activity has expired and it was no biggie to comply with it for awhile.

In that context, I think Samwize could craft something about ROFR for the agreement that he can live with for awhile, but also needs to make sure that he knows his "must haves" and get something back.  Just be careful with ROFR, and be aware of all the ways it could be abused.  Get language in there to try and get it to work for you, not against you.