Question...

[angeleyzad]

What is the name of your state? Maine

I have a question. If the intent of a court order does not happen, would I need to file a motion to amend? Here's the problem. The judge ordered our weekend schedule to change 3 times throughout the year - after Christmas vacation (essentially the beginning of January), after February or April vacation, and after the summer vacation. This is so that the kids are with their step-siblings more equally on both sides. However, due to the nature of the February/April vacation weeks, the way we are supposed to swap does not occur. The order is written so that after his vacation week, I have the following weekend, then we start alternating weekends from there. If I have the kids the weekend after the February/April vacation they spend with dad, it basically continues the weekend schedule that we had before the vacation, the swap does not occur.

My question - would I need to file a motion to amend to modify the wording so that the weekend change actually occurs?

 

[Ohiogal]

You would need to prove to the court that that was their intent. The swap as you put it does not necessarily have to happen. It sounds more like the intent was to make sure that your kids do not go too long without a weekend with you or your ex rather than stepkids. Step-siblings ARE NOT a LEGAL consideration in custody and/or visitation. The court does not look for ways to make sure step-siblings have a relationship -- they focus on the parents and sometimes half-siblings.

 

[LdiJ]

You would need to prove to the court that that was their intent. The swap as you put it does not necessarily have to happen. It sounds more like the intent was to make sure that your kids do not go too long without a weekend with you or your ex rather than stepkids. Step-siblings ARE NOT a LEGAL consideration in custody and/or visitation. The court does not look for ways to make sure step-siblings have a relationship -- they focus on the parents and sometimes half-siblings.

However, if you and your ex are in agreement, the two of you are certainly free to do whatever you like.

 

[angeleyzad]

You would need to prove to the court that that was their intent. The swap as you put it does not necessarily have to happen. It sounds more like the intent was to make sure that your kids do not go too long without a weekend with you or your ex rather than stepkids. Step-siblings ARE NOT a LEGAL consideration in custody and/or visitation. The court does not look for ways to make sure step-siblings have a relationship -- they focus on the parents and sometimes half-siblings.

He had wanted to move the weekend schedule by one week (essentially swap weekends) so that he has the boys on the same weekend as his step-daughter, I did not want the weekends changed due to the schedule of my step-son and my nephews (extended family). The judge ordered us to swap weekends 3 times throughout the year, so that we both have the kids at different times of the year along with the step kids and their cousins. He set the swaps to happen after the extended vacations, probably with the thinking that my weekend would have been trumped by his vacation. That happens for Christmas and for the summer vacations, but not for the Feb/April vacations. So, that was the intent. However, because both February vacation and April vacation fall on the same week as his weekend, by me having the next weekend, and we continue swaping after that, the intended change to the weekend schedule doesn't happen.

 

[angeleyzad]

However, if you and your ex are in agreement, the two of you are certainly free to do whatever you like.

He won't agree to it because the way it will happen now, if we follow the new order the way it's written, the kids are on his schedule from January through the end of June, when we start the summer visitations. After Summer, basically from September through December, they are on my schedule. (his schedule is what he had wanted everything switched to, my schedule is what we have had for the schedule for the past 6+ years).

He won't switch because it won't benefit him.