NCP Visitation Rights/Tough Choices

[stealth2]

The court cannot "ORDER" her to have a relationship with him once he can no longer place it ALL on the mother via threats to bring legal action.

You'd be wrong here. As long as she is underage, the court most certainly CAN order her to have a relationship - even if it is only one where she sits in stony silence at his house for the weekend. But the court CAN order that.

And I'm sorry, but allowing a kid your son's age to make these choices is pretty silly. A cub Scout is.... 1st - 3rd grades, so.... 6-8 years old. (*) Sorry - kids that young do not make unilateral decisions like that. Well, they can if their parents allow them to. Wait 'til he's a teen and decides that hanging with the buds instead of being Confirmed is what he chooses. I'd like to be a fly on the wall for that one.

At 14? Sure, Dad should talk to her. But he is well within his rights to (and I personally think SHOULD) tell drama queen that he's made plans for the weekend and she told him about the horse show too late. She does not get to choose, and next time she'll make sure Dad gets ample notice. See, that's a lesson kids need to learn as well - the world does NOT revolve around them and the DO need to take other people into consideration.

Suppose your son's "choice" regarding grandma's birthday was to NOT give up his other activity. i.e. If he made the "wrong" choice. Would you go along with it? Or override it?

(*) I'm not including Webelos in Cubs. Technically they are, but realistically they're not.

 

[casa]

AnswerMeNow must be in the legal field. Mr. Kees--he is not providing you legal advice--he is providing input on how to be contentious.

LOL First you say he's IN the legal field, then you say he's not giving legal advice. Do you even read what you write??

I agree with haiku---the mother should simply pack her 14 year old daughter up, send her on her way and tell her to take the decision to attend/not attend the horse event or any other event that conflicts with the visitation up with the Dad.

First you say the kid should be able to miss the visit because of her activity(& Dad should understand)- then later in this thread you say you agree she should be packed up and sent on her way with the Dad making the decision?? Which one is it??

With my son, I advise the father of activities that take place on visitation weekend, advise the Dad on whether or not it is something my son wants to do or not do and then tell him to discuss it with our son. If he intends to do something different--the final decision if left with him and him communicaitng this to our son. Not MY trying to assert my opinions, desires or anything else on the Dad. If he wants to go to a "Paperclip Show" versus taking our son to a horse show--that is his decision and one that he will have to communicate to our son and live with the consequence. The father is quite capable of establishing rules, boundries and deciding how HE wants to interact in his children's life. The result is also his.

You can't even make up your own mind what you are saying

 

[ETG]

First--I do not present to my son--Cub Scouts or Dad--I advise Dad on the actitivy if it conflicts, I advise Dad that son wants to go to activity and then "suggest" Dad talk it over with our son (that might just provide insight to Dad on what is exciting about the activity to son OR might provide son insight on the things that Dad values and considers important). It is NOT a matter of a child making all the decisions. It is a matter of a parent putting a priority unless something prevents it on their children.

As far as the court "ordering" the relationship--you are right--as long as a child is under 18--the court can certainly "order" the relationship (and courts love to ORDER people to do all sorts of insane things) BUT when the child is 18--and off to make their own way in the world--they can either of learned to love and respect their parents becasue their parents loved, respected and valued them as people, they can choose to make their way in the world and "use" the court as a BULLY pulpit in their own lives, or THEY can say "enough of the crap" and make their way in the world MINUS the contentious input from their parents.

My son does not make the decisions in our home. I simply support his interests--there have not been hard decisions as yet--although I do anticipate them as you said (i.e. buds or confirmation) but I pray that I have raised my son correctly and raised him to have strong moral character.

As for being a "contol freak" as accused by someone else in this thread--Actually quite the contrary--I'm a woman who is terrified of an abusive man--who is using the court to nit pick every detail of my life. He would bring legal actions if my son was not a straight A student, he would bring legal actions if my son did miss school etc. He can and does bring legal actions not becasue there are any issues regarding our son's health and welfare--he brings legal actions BECAUSE HE CAN--and I think that is wrong. For an abuser--it is just a perpetuation of abuse when they can get to a person in no other way. He brings contempt actions for me allowing my son to use a piece of luggage with my name on it and for my son removing a label from a GameBoy. The courts allow anyone to bring court actions--so regardless of how ridiculous--he can bring legal actions and then use them to blackmail me for money etc--in my effort to simply avoid paying legal fees leading up to the hearings etc. The courts are not the place to settle issues involving children.

 

[stealth2]

As for being a "contol freak" as accused by someone else in this thread--Actually quite the contrary--I'm a woman who is terrified of an abusive man--who is using the court to nit pick every detail of my life. He would bring legal actions if my son was not a straight A student, he would bring legal actions if my son did miss school etc. He can and does bring legal actions not becasue there are any issues regarding our son's health and welfare--he brings legal actions BECAUSE HE CAN--and I think that is wrong. For an abuser--it is just a perpetuation of abuse when they can get to a person in no other way. He brings contempt actions for me allowing my son to use a piece of luggage with my name on it and for my son removing a label from a GameBoy. The courts allow anyone to bring court actions--so regardless of how ridiculous--he can bring legal actions and then use them to blackmail me for money etc--in my effort to simply avoid paying legal fees leading up to the hearings etc. The courts are not the place to settle issues involving children.

Join the club. My ex dictates what sort of underwear our 13 can wear to his house (we're talking boxers vs briefs). That's life.

 

[casa]

First--I do not present to my son--Cub Scouts or Dad--I advise Dad on the actitivy if it conflicts, I advise Dad that son wants to go to activity and then "suggest" Dad talk it over with our son (that might just provide insight to Dad on what is exciting about the activity to son OR might provide son insight on the things that Dad values and considers important). It is NOT a matter of a child making all the decisions. It is a matter of a parent putting a priority unless something prevents it on their children.

As far as the court "ordering" the relationship--you are right--as long as a child is under 18--the court can certainly "order" the relationship (and courts love to ORDER people to do all sorts of insane things) BUT when the child is 18--and off to make their own way in the world--they can either of learned to love and respect their parents becasue their parents loved, respected and valued them as people, they can choose to make their way in the world and "use" the court as a BULLY pulpit in their own lives, or THEY can say "enough of the crap" and make their way in the world MINUS the contentious input from their parents.

My son does not make the decisions in our home. I simply support his interests--there have not been hard decisions as yet--although I do anticipate them as you said (i.e. buds or confirmation) but I pray that I have raised my son correctly and raised him to have strong moral character.

As for being a "contol freak" as accused by someone else in this thread--Actually quite the contrary--I'm a woman who is terrified of an abusive man--who is using the court to nit pick every detail of my life. He would bring legal actions if my son was not a straight A student, he would bring legal actions if my son did miss school etc. He can and does bring legal actions not becasue there are any issues regarding our son's health and welfare--he brings legal actions BECAUSE HE CAN--and I think that is wrong. For an abuser--it is just a perpetuation of abuse when they can get to a person in no other way. He brings contempt actions for me allowing my son to use a piece of luggage with my name on it and for my son removing a label from a GameBoy. The courts allow anyone to bring court actions--so regardless of how ridiculous--he can bring legal actions and then use them to blackmail me for money etc--in my effort to simply avoid paying legal fees leading up to the hearings etc. The courts are not the place to settle issues involving children.

I have a nuttyX too~ One that has spent years filing anything and everything he could to harrass me. Which only reinforces the point that a CP cannot dictate what a NCP can or will do during visitations.

 

[critterperson]

ETG...this is a LEGAL ADVICE SITE -- not a site based on personal opinions on EMOTIONS!! May I suggest a few things:

1- learning to read AND understand (because you're clearly not understanding what the OP has written)

2- open your mind. You already bring bias to this discussion.

You are adding absolutely NOTHING to this thread. We don't need your anti-man attitude here. It adds absolutely nothing. I'm personally sick of reading your responses -- which ARE opinion and not legal advice.

Butt out!

How sad........... When children are involved what type of cold person would say that emotions are not to be involved??????????? Open your mind??? If I were you I would swallow that pill too!!!!!!!!! You may need Two

 

[stealth2]

How sad........... When children are involved what type of cold person would say that emotions are not to be involved??????????? Open your mind??? If I were you I would swallow that pill too!!!!!!!!! You may need Two

Because we ARE talking about the legalities. And those do leave the emotions out.

 

[critterperson]

Because we ARE talking about the legalities. And those do leave the emotions out.

stealth2

Lets be real here..........How many lawsuits involving contempt have you heard about that include children that are not based primarily on emotion.........I've been wronged, descriminated against, hurt, left and emotionally tramatized?? I have not heard of one lawsuit where both parents feel that they are being treated fairly and have no emotion at all.......... Its all part of the life that we have placed our children in when adults can't get alonge and behave like rational ADULTS for the love of our children..... You are right the courtroom doesn't care about emotion but loving parents should!!!!!!

 

[stealth2]

Actually, most suits regarding contempt involve legal issues - one parent defying a court order. That really does NOT have to do with emotions. What is to be done is written in black and white - one parent is not doing what they're supposed to.

PARENTING as a divorced parent is fraught with emotion. Contempt of court orders is not.

 

[casa]

stealth2

Lets be real here..........How many lawsuits involving contempt have you heard about that include children that are not based primarily on emotion.........I've been wronged, descriminated against, hurt, left and emotionally tramatized?? I have not heard of one lawsuit where both parents feel that they are being treated fairly and have no emotion at all.......... Its all part of the life that we have placed our children in when adults can't get alonge and behave like rational ADULTS for the love of our children..... You are right the courtroom doesn't care about emotion but loving parents should!!!!!!

Of course you haven't heard of such a lawsuit, because they both felt they were being treated fairlty- hence no lawsuit.

Lawsuits are for when one side does feel they are not being treated fairly. Courts frown on emotions being dragged into the courtroom. AND this situation is not about a lawsuit- it's about visitation issues. Court ordered visitation has been established and the CP does not want to follow it. It's fairly cut and dry. The CP would like to have the minor child believe she does not have to follow a court order~ What kind of parenting is that? "It's OK honey, you don't have to follow the law if you don't WANT to"??? That's not a caring or responsible parent. A caring and responsible parent would teach the child that societal laws have to obeyed or there are consequences- That you have to do many things in life you don't necessarily WANT to do.

As Stealth mentioned before, this can create a pattern of the child believing they don't have to do things they don't WANT to. If that were the case, my tomboy wouldn't get great report cards (she doesn't want to do homework). She wouldn't have a relationship with her father at all (after all, at first she didn't want to go). This is why ADULTS make decisions and children do not.

 

[critterperson]

Actually, most suits regarding contempt involve legal issues - one parent defying a court order. That really does NOT have to do with emotions. What is to be done is written in black and white - one parent is not doing what they're supposed to.

PARENTING as a divorced parent is fraught with emotion. Contempt of court orders is not.

Your funny stealth2......... are you always so analytical? I will put it this way..... I would have to be pretty pissed off to file contempt charges, therefore emotions would rule my actions

 

[stealth2]

Your funny stealth2......... are you always so analytical? I will put it this way..... I would have to be pretty pissed off to file contempt charges, therefore emotions would rule my actions

Generally only when people don't know the difference between "your" and "you're". Your reaction to the contempt may be emotional, but the contempt itself is a legal issue.

 

[critterperson]

Generally only when people don't know the difference between "your" and "you're". Your reaction to the contempt may be emotional, but the contempt itself is a legal issue.

Thanks for the grammar check.........I would Not want to be a child in your house...... kicking and screaming all the way......The law said I could do it so it must be correct.........Emotions don't matter.......When I see my children I prefer the running hug.........Love you mommy.....missed you........ and I had a great time with dad........I'm the CP, and even when they leave for a couple of hours, or the day I want them to be happy.....everyday..... If that means dad gets them longer or an additional day.... to see my boys happy makes my heart smile.......

 

[Chelle0511]

You'd be wrong here. As long as she is underage, the court most certainly CAN order her to have a relationship - even if it is only one where she sits in stony silence at his house for the weekend. But the court CAN order that.

And I'm sorry, but allowing a kid your son's age to make these choices is pretty silly. A cub Scout is.... 1st - 3rd grades, so.... 6-8 years old. (*) Sorry - kids that young do not make unilateral decisions like that. Well, they can if their parents allow them to. Wait 'til he's a teen and decides that hanging with the buds instead of being Confirmed is what he chooses. I'd like to be a fly on the wall for that one.

At 14? Sure, Dad should talk to her. But he is well within his rights to (and I personally think SHOULD) tell drama queen that he's made plans for the weekend and she told him about the horse show too late. She does not get to choose, and next time she'll make sure Dad gets ample notice. See, that's a lesson kids need to learn as well - the world does NOT revolve around them and the DO need to take other people into consideration.

Suppose your son's "choice" regarding grandma's birthday was to NOT give up his other activity. i.e. If he made the "wrong" choice. Would you go along with it? Or override it?

(*) I'm not including Webelos in Cubs. Technically they are, but realistically they're not.

~Exactly! Maybe dad should have "drama queen" ask mom why she chose to wait till the last minute to inform dad of the show! Maybe she should know that if mom would have informed him of the show in due time he could have worked it into their schedule! Moms who due this to the childs father are SICK! For once, I wish the CP's would step up and support a relationship that a child needs with their NCP! Its not a case of revenge people, it's a case of ..."we have a child together, let's make the best of it!"

 

[stealth2]

Thanks for the grammar check.........I would Not want to be a child in your house...... kicking and screaming all the way......The law said I could do it so it must be correct.........Emotions don't matter.......When I see my children I prefer the running hug.........Love you mommy.....missed you........ and I had a great time with dad........I'm the CP, and even when they leave for a couple of hours, or the day I want them to be happy.....everyday..... If that means dad gets them longer or an additional day.... to see my boys happy makes my heart smile.......

Actually, if you had even a miniscule clue, you'd pray to be one of my kids. So bite me.