Geographic restrictions in divorce decree

[VIDEO: "What is parental alienation?"]

Hey everyone,

It's been a long time since I've posted; I have an issue & I'm wondering if anyone else has dealt with this successfully.

I'm divorced from uBPDxw.  She has primary custody of our daughter, although I see her once a week, plus every other weekend and most holidays, per our agreement (I have extra time, but not 50%).

We have a geographic restriction in our decree restricting us to two counties, and also very detailed language about where and when I pic my D up..  Recently my XW moved to one corner of the area, basically as far as she was able to under the decree.  

This has the effect of reducing my time with my D, as I have further to travel to get her.  

My XW of course lied about the move and her intentions until it was already in process, and when I expressed concern about losing time with my D, she basically said "Too bad" and suggested maybe I should just skip the once-a-week visits so our D isn't in the car so late at night.  

I don't know what to do now... I'm not sure about getting an attorney involved since *technically* my XW didn't violate the decree, although she did fail to give notice of the move until it was already in process.  I can't see a court finding that fact alone to be particularly important

I'm also concerned that my XW will do this again if/when she changes jobs (she does that on avg. once a year) or I move somewhere and buy a house, and figure out the commute and what not, just for her to wheel all the way across the county again to put as much distance between us as possible

So my specific question:  Has anyone else managed to narrowly tailor geographic restrictions or added some other sort of legal language to keep one party from taking advantage of space & time to restrict the other party's custody?  

our two-county area is very large, such that it could easily mean a 1.5 hour drive each way to pick up my D on a school night, even if I live in a relatively central part of the overall area

[PeteWitsend]

Hey everyone,

It's been a long time since I've posted; I have an issue & I'm wondering if anyone else has dealt with this successfully.

I'm divorced from uBPDxw.  She has primary custody of our daughter, although I see her once a week, plus every other weekend and most holidays, per our agreement (I have extra time, but not 50%).

We have a geographic restriction in our decree restricting us to two counties, and also very detailed language about where and when I pic my D up..  Recently my XW moved to one corner of the area, basically as far as she was able to under the decree.  

This has the effect of reducing my time with my D, as I have further to travel to get her.  

My XW of course lied about the move and her intentions until it was already in process, and when I expressed concern about losing time with my D, she basically said "Too bad" and suggested maybe I should just skip the once-a-week visits so our D isn't in the car so late at night.  

I don't know what to do now... I'm not sure about getting an attorney involved since *technically* my XW didn't violate the decree, although she did fail to give notice of the move until it was already in process.  I can't see a court finding that fact alone to be particularly important

I'm also concerned that my XW will do this again if/when she changes jobs (she does that on avg. once a year) or I move somewhere and buy a house, and figure out the commute and what not, just for her to wheel all the way across the county again to put as much distance between us as possible

So my specific question:  Has anyone else managed to narrowly tailor geographic restrictions or added some other sort of legal language to keep one party from taking advantage of space & time to restrict the other party's custody?  

our two-county area is very large, such that it could easily mean a 1.5 hour drive each way to pick up my D on a school night, even if I live in a relatively central part of the overall area

[formflier]

Good to hear from you again.

Is this about the daughters extra time in the car?  Yours?  both?

Is this an extra 30 minute per week or 3 hours?  or?

What if you didn't respond at all?  No complaints..just did the extra driving and let your D and ex figure out how to make up the daughters time?  (this may or may not be possible...me trying to ask and understand)

So..is there a "consequence" already in the decree about what happens if a parent does not adhere to it?

If not..what would you have to do in order to enforce the proper notice?

What is the practical impact of her not giving notice? 

Again...good to see you around again. 

Best,

FF

[formflier]

I think I would add to my questions.

Any other issues since the decree? 

There is a possibility that "giving her a reaction" makes it worse...there is a possibility that doing nothing "gives her the greenlight" for more bad behavior.

Which camp do you think your ex will fall into?

Best,

FF

[PeteWitsend]

Hi FF, hope you've been well.

To answer your questions in order:

1) yes, it's mainly about my D's extra time in the car.  The trip to pick her up was ~5 mins before (not counting the time I waited for her to come out), now it's more like 40 mins-1 hr each way, and around 60 miles total.

to answer your other question, that adds up to around 200 miles of travel on the weekends I have my D (back and forth in the evenings twice, plus another back and forth to take her to school in the mornings

But it's also about being surprised my X would pull my D out of school in the middle of the year to move for no reason, and how to I put some guardrails in the Decree to limit her ability to do this again.

And of course, being uBPD during this whole time, the XW has been bad mouthing my parenting, and told my D that they moved solely because of me which is absolutely not true.  I had no idea she was moving, because when I asked her about it, after hearing a rumor from my D's doctor that he heard they were moving, she denied it in writing.

2) If I didn't respond at all, nothing happens, I suppose.  I just have to drive a lot more.  

I'm concerned that if I don't take a stand, this will enable her more to try to push me out of my D's life.  

3) there's no automatic penalty for this (i.e. not giving notice in the decree; I suppose she would argue until the transaction closed, she didn't know if she was moving or not.  

and there's really not a practical impact of her failing to give notice in this case; it just makes my life more difficult.  but I have no intention or desire to move to the area she did, which would make my daily commute miserable.  

[formflier]

Why doesn't she have to do the driving?

or at least half of it?

Hmm...so you have proof she denied it in writing?  If so..that would kinda push me to do "something".

Best,

FF

[GaGrl]

I was thinking the same thing...who is picking up and who is dropping off? Is there a provision in the court order for that?

Ex should be doing half the transportation.

[P.F.Change]

So my specific question:  Has anyone else managed to narrowly tailor geographic restrictions or added some other sort of legal language to keep one party from taking advantage of space & time to restrict the other party's custody? 

That certainly sounds frustrating having to spend so much extra time in the car that could have been good quality time with your daughter. It sounds like you may be feeling it's a deliberate attempt by your ex to make things unpleasant for you and/or reduce time with your child. I can certainly relate to some of those feelings. It's hard having to continually decide whether I need to go into another battle or accept that there is yet another thing outside the scope of what I have the power to control.

The question I hear you asking is essentially whether you could convince the court to further restrict your ex-spouse geographically when she is technically following the current orders. The short answer is, I think probably not, but you can ask your attorney if it's worth your time and money to try. Yes, some custody orders have tighter geographic restrictions than yours (mine require me to stay within my children's school feeder), so it's definitely possible to do--but that's not often done from the bench apart from an agreed settlement. Trying to go back and get tighter restrictions after-the-fact rather than as part of the original court order isn't likely to succeed, IMO. Courts generally don't like to take away people's rights when they haven't broken laws or defied a judge's order.

From what you describe, it sounds like your ex-spouse is technically following the terms of the decree, and you understand that the court won't want to hear a complaint about someone who isn't violating its orders. You mentioned your decree has specific language about pickup/dropoff locations and times, which is normal. I'm not sure where you are, but in my state, the default order for parents living within 100 miles of one another is that the receiving parent picks up. I'll echo other people's question here: Does the language in your decree require you to do the driving on both ends?

Practically, there are a few other solutions that might make better sense for you than court (but which would be good to have to show if you do end up there, that you did try in good faith to come up with an agreement before taking up a spot on the docket), such as asking in writing to agree on a half-way point for exchanges, or for different days or times for pickup/dropoff that might restore some balance. Parties should be free to mutually agree on different terms at any time (just do it in writing). If that doesn't work, you could also think about whether it would work for you to spend some of your weeknights with your daughter somewhere closer to your ex's house (restaurant, park, etc.) so your daughter isn't in the car all night.

Framing things in terms of cost and benefit to your child is going to be important, not just in the event that you do go back to court, but for your own sake. This can't be about trying to control what your ex can and can't do, where she can or can't live, when she can or can't change school zones.  And it can't be about whether it's causing *you* hardship or whether your ex cares about *your* time (spoiler alert: you can't expect empathy for yourself from an ex with BPD/NPD). This issue is about what's in the best interest of your daughter and how the two of you work together to get there. You're more likely to succeed in getting a request met when the other person sees how it benefits their child rather than how it benefits you.

If you go back to court, you will have to demonstrate that you really tried everything and that your ex is not just inconveniencing you (spoiler alert: the courts don't care about your convenience, either) but that she is truly acting in ways that are harmful to your child and/or defying the existing orders. There's a greater burden on you as the petitioner to prove that. Families move all the time. Kids change schools all the time. One mid-year move within the same county is probably not going to be enough on its own to convince a court that its existing order isn't in the child's best interest.

I do know it sucks and you have my sympathy. I'm concerned about the possible parental alienation you mentioned and sorry that's happening, too.

[worriedStepmom]

She's technically within her rights and there's probably nothing you can do about it.

My ex and I also have a geographic restriction that covers a LARGE metro area.  He moved an hour away from me.  Before that, he had the kids overnight one day during the week.  After, he had them during the evening instead.  They spent time at parks, at restaurants, at the mall (oldest did her homework at the food court).  They loved it.

I remarried and moved closer to ex because my new H's BPDex lived within 10 miles of my ex.  We decided it made more sense for me to commute a long distance than for the kids to spend so much time in the car.  That may make sense for you.  It may not.

If you move to be closer and ex moves again...you now have something to show the court.  You're doing everything you can to help your daughter, and ex isn't stable.

[livednlearned]

I agree with others about trying to come up with solutions before going to court, with the understanding that you may be building up to court. By solutions, I mean finding podcasts or activities or favorite albums to sing together -- something that turns the drive into fun traditions for you and D. It isn't the best activity in the world to be in a car, it's also time the two of you have together.

If you do go to court, and it has to be for something substantive in order to modify the existing court order, maybe ask to be residential parent because of your employment stability and ability to maintain a stable school presence for D.

I can't remember which country you're in, so there may be important differences, but my experience has been that "best interests of the child" that many courts care about includes consistency in their school.

You may be able to argue that mom moves and that's ok. What isn't ok is D being uprooted mid-year or repeatedly, and that you would like to give mom the freedom to move often, as is her right and her preference, while you take on the role of consistent parent for D's schooling.

[ForeverDad]

When I arrived at court on Trial Day I learned my ex was finally, after two years, ready to settle.  Here's what went down:

Minutes before my Trial Day started at court I was informed she finally, after some two years obstructing and sabotaging, was ready to settle.  Both sides expected a settlement to accept the CE's recommendation for equal time parenting.  However, I had one term to make or break the settlement... that I would be the Primary Parent for school purposes.  My ex and her lawyer (and mine too!) had assumed she would retain primacy at school, despite both lawyers knowing she was a problem parent.  Yes, even my lawyer said who was Primary Parent at school didn't make a difference!  I held firm and got it.

Since the final decree was issued 3 months before the end of the school year, I asked her school to allow our child to remain there in kindergarten for the remainder of the school year.  About 1.5 months later her school gave me one day to enroll him in my own school district, she had caused incidents there.  The fact was that they would have suffered silently if she had retained the official contact and primacy.  But she didn't and they dumped their problems with her onto my school.

What happened during the following year was that she moved to a neighboring county.  Imagine if I didn't have the leverage of my child attending school in my area, I would have had to follow her during her subsequent moves post-divorce.

I had leverage to get school priority.  I'm assuming you didn't have that ability, especially if you're currently limited to alternate weekends.  Keep documenting any school related issues because odds are you'll be back in court to settle some dispute or other, and you may be able to press to be Primary Parent for school matters.  Then you would be the stable parent with a bit more authority and have to worry less about the other's antics.

[PeteWitsend]

thanks all.

I am in the US for reference.

I am accepting that I'm going to be screwed here, but I did talk to an attorney and he felt that some of the behavior I've documented is troubling enough that I had a shot at custody, but not a good shot.

I'm not sure if it makes sense to file or not.  

I really wish now I had pushed for more custody rights, or at least split on things like school, which would have prevented this.  I just had no idea my XW would make such drastic changes and pull my D out of school like that.

I blame my attorney... I got some bad legal advice during the divorce (not using her again)