Parenting Plan advice please

[huntersmommy06]

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state? Florida
My son’s father and I have decided to work out our own parenting plan. I gave my husband the pp that I had designed and he returned the plan back today. I need some advice as to wording, definitions, etc……

Under Purpose and Intent of PP section: Absence, consistency, and conflict are opposed the best interests of the child. Husband replies with, “If I am inconsistent due to work, that would place me a risk.” “I don’t like the wording.” Is there a way I could better define inconsistency? I my mind, it refers to child rearing (discipline, schooling, etc…)

Under Extended Family section: The parties will reasonably accommodate visits with extended family by adjusting their parenting time to allow child with family members. Any time taken away from the other parent’s regularly scheduled parenting time for such visits shall be considered vacation time. However, each parent will attempt to schedule these visits during their own parenting time. Husband replies, “NOBODY SUPERCEEDES ME!” WOW! I don’t see this as unreasonable as both of our families live out of state. Could I word this differently?

First Right of Refusal section: Husband wants this section removed entirely as he lives two hours away and “it is not realistic”. Are there any different definitions/or wording to this as I would like to be able to pick up my son if he has to work during his time? Could I explain it differently to him as an advantage?

Approved list of childcare providers section: The opportunity to care for child shall always be first given to the other parent before anyone on list is called. No one can be added to this list unless approved in writing by both parties. Each parent may interview and approve any party on this list. Husband writes that he wants to add, “Any such disapprovals require sound reasons or will be punishable by law.” HUH????? What could be defined as a sound reason??? Would a judge even place his addendum to that section?

Any responses or advice would be greatly appreciated!!!

 

[abstract99]

Under Purpose and Intent of PP section: Absence, consistency, and conflict are opposed the best interests of the child. Husband replies with, “If I am inconsistent due to work, that would place me a risk.” “I don’t like the wording.” Is there a way I could better define inconsistency? I my mind, it refers to child rearing (discipline, schooling, etc…)

Just put in there that the children may be out of dads care while he is at work as long as they are at an approved daycare providers house.

Under Extended Family section: The parties will reasonably accommodate visits with extended family by adjusting their parenting time to allow child with family members. Any time taken away from the other parent’s regularly scheduled parenting time for such visits shall be considered vacation time. However, each parent will attempt to schedule these visits during their own parenting time. Husband replies, “NOBODY SUPERCEEDES ME!” WOW! I don’t see this as unreasonable as both of our families live out of state. Could I word this differently?

All this means is that if mom or dad want to take the child to go and visit family and it is not during their scheduled visitation time then they will have to take out of their vacation time. Both parents shouls be allowed 2 weeks (14 days) of vacation time a year. Dad's not gonna get his way here, almost every parenting plan has this in it.

First Right of Refusal section: Husband wants this section removed entirely as he lives two hours away and “it is not realistic”. Are there any different definitions/or wording to this as I would like to be able to pick up my son if he has to work during his time? Could I explain it differently to him as an advantage?

You could just take it out. If you want to go drive to his house to watch the kids then it might be fair but I think that what dad is concerned about here is that if he gives you the option to watch the kids and he has to be at work at 8:00 in the morning he will have to be on the road by 4 in the morning to have the kids to your house and and get back in time for work. With the distance that you two have apart I see no need to have this.

Approved list of childcare providers section: The opportunity to care for child shall always be first given to the other parent before anyone on list is called. No one can be added to this list unless approved in writing by both parties. Each parent may interview and approve any party on this list. Husband writes that he wants to add, “Any such disapprovals require sound reasons or will be punishable by law.” HUH????? What could be defined as a sound reason??? Would a judge even place his addendum to that section?

See above part. Whether dad wants it there or not it is still punishable by law

 

[FLFamof5]

Under Purpose and Intent of PP section: Absence, consistency, and conflict are opposed the best interests of the child. Husband replies with, “If I am inconsistent due to work, that would place me a risk.” “I don’t like the wording.” Is there a way I could better define inconsistency? I my mind, it refers to child rearing (discipline, schooling, etc…)

Can you explain further what you are trying to word here about inconsistency?

Under Extended Family section: The parties will reasonably accommodate visits with extended family by adjusting their parenting time to allow child with family members. Any time taken away from the other parent’s regularly scheduled parenting time for such visits shall be considered vacation time. However, each parent will attempt to schedule these visits during their own parenting time. Husband replies, “NOBODY SUPERCEEDES ME!” WOW! I don’t see this as unreasonable as both of our families live out of state. Could I word this differently?

IMO... Just make it a little more clearer by stating that any visits to extended family (ie..grandparents, etc) would have to be scheduled on that parties parenting time and will not conflict with the current scheduled parenting time.

First Right of Refusal section: Husband wants this section removed entirely as he lives two hours away and “it is not realistic”. Are there any different definitions/or wording to this as I would like to be able to pick up my son if he has to work during his time? Could I explain it differently to him as an advantage?

Most people fight to get the FROR in their CO, it would be in your best interest if you keep this in your CO. If you can't agree to it, then bring it in front of a mediator or the judge. I have it in my CO (in Florida as well) and I have exercised it on many occassions. One thing... add a specific amount of time (ex. 4hours).

Approved list of childcare providers section: The opportunity to care for child shall always be first given to the other parent before anyone on list is called.

This would be the FROR.

No one can be added to this list unless approved in writing by both parties.

Be careful with this one. I know that you are going through a divorce now, but down the line you meet someone and remarry. What if EX doesn't like your new hubby? Then he will not be able to pick up from daycare.

Each parent may interview and approve any party on this list.

Interview and approve any party? For pick-up's and drop-off's? It sounds like a control factor here. "MOST" parents are responsible enough to decide whom they want to pick up their child, why would the two of you want so much interference with one another's lives after the divorce? I understand that you are looking out for the best interest of the child but as I stated above, both of you will meet other people in your lives and it's going to be a constant battle in this aspect.

Husband writes that he wants to add, “Any such disapprovals require sound reasons or will be punishable by law.” HUH????? What could be defined as a sound reason??? Would a judge even place his addendum to that section?

Hmmm... I like this one! "Punishable by law"...by whose law, your STBX? Another control factor IMO.

 

[stealth2]

Under Purpose and Intent of PP section: Absence, consistency, and conflict are opposed the best interests of the child. Husband replies with, ?If I am inconsistent due to work, that would place me a risk.? ?I don?t like the wording.? Is there a way I could better define inconsistency? I my mind, it refers to child rearing (discipline, schooling, etc?)

Then specify what you mean. Something along the lines that "Both parents agree that consistency with respect to parenting issues and school attendence is in the child's best interests. The parents agree to provide as consistent an environment as possible between the two households while recognizing the unique needs of each household." I suspect his concern is that, if he's got to work, he may have trouble p/u the child at a consistent time and doesn't want hat to bite him in the a$$. No judge will buy his keeping kiddo out of school (and I mean real school, not preschool) 'cause of his schedule.

Under Extended Family section: The parties will reasonably accommodate visits with extended family by adjusting their parenting time to allow child with family members. Any time taken away from the other parent?s regularly scheduled parenting time for such visits shall be considered vacation time. However, each parent will attempt to schedule these visits during their own parenting time. Husband replies, ?NOBODY SUPERCEEDES ME!? WOW! I don?t see this as unreasonable as both of our families live out of state. Could I word this differently?

"Both parents recognize the value of extended family to the well-being of the child. Therefore, both parents will make every attempt to make reasonable accomodations to allow the continued interaction of the child with extended family living out of the immediate area."

First Right of Refusal section: Husband wants this section removed entirely as he lives two hours away and ?it is not realistic?. Are there any different definitions/or wording to this as I would like to be able to pick up my son if he has to work during his time? Could I explain it differently to him as an advantage?

Put in some sort of time. 'Cause yeah, it would be pretty unrealistic if it's only for an hour or two. Or if he's got kiddo and is called in to work ASAP - no way you can get there in less than two hours and what does he do in the meantime? Especially if he's only got to go in for three? I'd suggest something more along the lines of "If either parent or family member is unable to care for child for longer than 6/8 hours, the other parent shall have the right of first refusal." However, what if grandma's in town and Dad has to go to work for 8 hours? You don't want to preclude that possible bonding opportunity.

Approved list of childcare providers section: The opportunity to care for child shall always be first given to the other parent before anyone on list is called. No one can be added to this list unless approved in writing by both parties. Each parent may interview and approve any party on this list. Husband writes that he wants to add, ?Any such disapprovals require sound reasons or will be punishable by law.? HUH????? What could be defined as a sound reason??? Would a judge even place his addendum to that section?

This is slipping into control territory with both of you. Your stbx is concerned that you will disapprove of (for example) a girlfriend or new wife caring for the child just 'cause you don't like her. He's looking for verbiage that would give him recourse should you decide to refuse for that reason, as opposed to "she's a convicted child molester who smokes crack and gives it to my kid!" On the otehr hand, you're effectively saying that you don't trust him to make reasonable choices for the well-being of the kid.

Also check out www.deltabravo.net for ideas.

 

[huntersmommy06]

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntersmommy06
Husband writes that he wants to add, “Any such disapprovals require sound reasons or will be punishable by law.” HUH????? What could be defined as a sound reason??? Would a judge even place his addendum to that section?



Hmmm... I like this one! "Punishable by law"...by whose law, your STBX? Another control factor IMO.

He actually wrote that if I remarry in the future, I will turn over custody to him. I X'D out that one!

 

[haiku]

I think Stealth gave you excellent suggestions.

 

[huntersmommy06]

This is slipping into control territory with both of you. Your stbx is concerned that you will disapprove of (for example) a girlfriend or new wife caring for the child just 'cause you don't like her. He's looking for verbiage that would give him recourse should you decide to refuse for that reason, as opposed to "she's a convicted child molester who smokes crack and gives it to my kid!" On the otehr hand, you're effectively saying that you don't trust him to make reasonable choices for the well-being of the kid.

Also check out www.deltabravo.net for ideas.

Thank you!!! Sometimes I forget to look at the other side's perspective I did follow your advice!