overnights with boyfriend

[lquid_user]

Minnesota,

The ex has been having the boyfriend overnight at her house during visitation for the duration of this ordeal. Now, as of last night, they all stayed overnight at the boyfriends house.

The boyfriends house is s two bedroom and houses three early 20's males. tends to be littered with trash and beer cans, and drug paraphenalia. Other friends with children would never bring their kids there. I wouldn't either. I'm wondering, what conditions actually merit child endangerment? filthy?broken glass?? pot pipes??bicycle parts scattered haphazardly? I have a two year old and a three year old. I know that there are not apropriate sleeping requirements per firecode for that number of individuals in that size house.

I am planning to have a person knock on the door when a resident is home so they can get a look inside as I have not been in the house for months. I can request that the police do a welfare check on the kids, but I wouldn't want it to reflect negatively on me (harassment etc). I do think that it would be apropriate though to prove that the kids are staying there overnight, so the custody evaluation will take this into consideration.

how do I legally prove that my kids are being housed in an unsafe environment without ?(cops at the door etc.)

any comments will be appreciated and considered

thanks
lquid

 

[stealth2]

Hiring a PI would be more productive.

 

[CJane]

Is there a co-habitation clause in the court order?

If there's no co-habitation clause, and she's not actually LIVING with the BF (a night or two spent there is NOT worth freaking out over) you probably have nothing to go on here.

There's probably nothing wrong with the BF spending nights at her house either - whether or not you LIKE it, or it's 'morally ok' is irrelevant.

Unless you have solid PROOF that the children are being endangered, I'd let it go.

 

[acmb05]

cjane

I have to disagree with you on this one. I see no problem with BF spending the nite at the moms but there is no way they should be spending the nite anywhere that drugs are just laying around for them to get into.

I would think if he could show proof of this he would have a very good case.

 

[CJane]

I have to disagree with you on this one. I see no problem with BF spending the nite at the moms but there is no way they should be spending the nite anywhere that drugs are just laying around for them to get into.

I would think if he could show proof of this he would have a very good case.

And if you'll read my post, you'll see that I said

Unless you have solid PROOF that the children are being endangered, I'd let it go.

 

[betterthanher]

I have to disagree with you on this one. I see no problem with BF spending the nite at the moms but there is no way they should be spending the nite anywhere that drugs are just laying around for them to get into. I would think if he could show proof of this he would have a very good case.

There is no "think". If one makes an accusation like that, they MUST show proof.

 

[CJane]

And besides that, OP states that he hasn't been in the house in 'months'. He has no clue what it looks like on the inside NOW, only then - and we don't know the circumstances of 'then' either.

From a personal perspective... my BF is a former narcotics officer. My ex, had he ever been in current BFs house in the 'months' before I moved in, he could very easily be here posting about the guns 'laying around the house', the 'very aggressive dog', 'evidence of drugs/paraphenalia' and 'bikers in and out of the house'. Nevermind that the guns were for work and were locked up long before I moved in/brought the kids over, the dog was a police dog, the evidence of drugs were training aids for the dog and the bikers are his FBI agent buddies and several fellow deputies.

Context is important in these things, and OP has offered NO context in his post.

 

[casa]

And besides that, OP states that he hasn't been in the house in 'months'. He has no clue what it looks like on the inside NOW, only then - and we don't know the circumstances of 'then' either.

From a personal perspective... my BF is a former narcotics officer. My ex, had he ever been in current BFs house in the 'months' before I moved in, he could very easily be here posting about the guns 'laying around the house', the 'very aggressive dog', 'evidence of drugs/paraphenalia' and 'bikers in and out of the house'. Nevermind that the guns were for work and were locked up long before I moved in/brought the kids over, the dog was a police dog, the evidence of drugs were training aids for the dog and the bikers are his FBI agent buddies and several fellow deputies.

Context is important in these things, and OP has offered NO context in his post.

And as your BF will tell you...odds are NOT that OP's X's b/f is a narcotics officer with k-9 and therefore needs controlled substance(s) for training purposes. lol

 

[CJane]

And as your BF will tell you...odds are NOT that OP's X's b/f is a narcotics officer with k-9 and therefore needs controlled substance(s) for training purposes. lol

LOL

That's NOT what I'm saying. I'm simply saying that OP doesn't KNOW there there is even paraphenalia still in the house. OP doesn't know MONTHS LATER what condition the house is in. OP doesn't KNOW anything at all and he needs PROOF of what is going on before he makes a stink about a couple of nights spent in someone's house.

From OP's previous threads, we know that mom habitually used pot throughout their relationship including when breastfeeding the children. We also know that mom supposedly lives in a boathouse on the river in Minnesota in November with no electricity or running water. Apparently OP is mostly ok with all of THAT because 1) he stayed with her and 2) didn't file for custody until he lost his job 'because she abandoned the children' and he decided he wanted to move the kids to Missouri with him.

Claiming that alleged drug paraphenalia lying around SOMEONE ELSE'S house when it was most likely lying around the house he shared with his ex when they were together just strikes me as silly, and something that was ok then and suddenly isn't since custody has been filed for.

 

[lquid_user]

certainly.

right, I have no "PROOF" but like I said I intend to have someone go and look to see what it's like, and based on this I am considering having the police visist in the interest of having very official documentation concerning the conditions inside the house.

I am sure that there are no narcotics agents in the house.
I just want to know what really constitutes endangerment and what conditions would prompt the police to remove the children form the house. so that I know what specifically to have my friend keep his eyes open for.

I have bluntly asked a police dispatcher that question and was told "I can't really answer that.". I would really like to get the police involved here but am hesitant until I know that I would really be justified and that the effort would result in some official action.

I am not interested in the "moral" dilemmas involved with the new boyfriend.I am concerned about my children being in a provably dangerous environment.
I can see broken glass and bicycle parts and trash ofall sorts in the yard from the sidewalk. In the past the inside easily topped the outside in so far as the "my kids cannot play here" meter was concerned. Broken windows, rotting food, week old half beers. This is not a place I or anyone I regularly assosciate with would be comfortable in and I think my children shouldn't be exposed to such an environment.

thanks again

 

[lquid_user]

also

c-jane
the drug use was kept very discreet when I co-habited with the mother (never just lying about) because it was always a problem with me. I really thought that she was about to grow up. I wanted desperately to make things work because I would rather have helped her through difficult times than fight through court.
I realize now that this situation was inevitable.
I also had a direct hand in managing the kids welfare when I was at hand. and I had a say then about what houses my kids were or were not allowed into. I definitely had more control over their personal safety when the ex and I were together.
I regularly helped the mother make safer decisions. example: I use bike helmets for the kids when they are in the bike trailer/ she does not.

I filed for custody over a month before I lost my job.

thanks again

PS: how is kc these days? finished with I-70 yet??

 

[CJane]

This is not a place I or anyone I regularly assosciate with would be comfortable in and I think my children shouldn't be exposed to such an environment.

thanks again

Well, your ex is clearly comfortable there.

And according to you, HER yard is the Mississippi river.

Sending a friend over to look at the house and then calling the cops is probably the stupidest thing I've ever heard, but if you're convinced that it's what you want to do, go for it.

But bear in mind - the kids don't LIVE THERE, they spend a night (or two) there. So you don't even really have that much to stand on - especially considering what you've posted about mom's current living conditions (no electricity or water).

 

[CJane]

I definitely had more control over their personal safety when the ex and I were together.

PS: how is kc these days? finished with I-70 yet??

And you don't now. It sucks - i know that it does. My ex repeatedly makes really bad decisions re: the kids' welfare - but there's nothing I can do about it unless/until actual harm is done. And likely nothing you can do about it either.

If they finished I-70, they'd have to actually maintain the other streets here - and that's just not gonna happen. Thankfully, I don't have to venture south of the river all that often.

 

[shell007]

if your really worried about your children's welfair.....who cares if you look like a troublemaker.

 

[stealth2]

Again, a PI would be more productive.