Joint legal, she has primary physical.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

Yeah, and if you and your wife go in with He rides on the back of an ATV and on a mini bike so what. It wont go as well, as if you say, yes we own a side by side, with roll bars and yes he rides his small bike around.

perception is far more important than reality.

He died cause he jumped out of a plane.

He died cause his parachute did not deploy.

both true, but perception of each is very different.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

Yup, there are morons everywhere. Forgive me for thinking that sphere is not one of those who lets their kids ride without supervision.

There is something to be said about allowing kids their ability to go screw around. That's idiotic ob a motorized anything. I'm giving sphere the benefit of the doubt that he and his wife are driving mostly, and if they're allowing the kids to drive, it's in a learning environment.

If I'm wrong, I have no problem retracting all that I've said.

However, I am in complete agreement that kids should not be allowed to operate anything in their lonesome - that's just bad (and lazy) parenting. But I don't believe that's what is going on here.
- Jeff

In a hearing of the magnitude, to relitigate the custody agreement, doesn’t the judge/court speak with the children? Maybe that isn’t always the case, but does your wife have the option to request?

I would think and hope this offers an opportunity to evaluate their perceptions of the experience thus far, to help determine what best for their well being?

"You're an idiot."
- windy, to anyone else who disagrees with him...

Stats are great, I could easily find ones to back up damn near anything I wish to spew forth, much like you always do.

So in 30 years, 3000 kids were killed on atvs?

How many were being operated by the kids with no supervision? Did they have helmets on or not?

How many were being operated by their parents? Was the adult operator impaired at all? Was speed a factor?

I hate to do this type of math, but that's only 10 [sorry, was late and bad math: should be 100 per year; my point is still valid, however, especially when looked at per the entire population] kids a year. More kids die of neglect from their parents each year. Sure as fuck doesn't make it right, but it also doesn't make it unsafe: it's only unsafe when their parents allow it to be unsafe.

More shit you just don't know or understand windy, yet continually verbalize diarrhea about.
- Jeff

No, this is incorrect. Dealing with an asshole sucks. Married people are assholes sometimes. Divorced people are assholes sometimes. The problem isn’t marriage or divorce. The problem is someone acting like an asshole.

Good people are assholes sometimes. They don’t meet the moment. It’s really hard to step up and be a good person sometimes.

I’m getting divorced right now. I, individually, and my ex, individually, are being assholes intermittently.

We’re not being assholes all the time.

You know how when you get married and you say your vows in front of everyone, and everyone is supposed witness your vows and help motivate you? You promise to everyone to try to love the person well.

I would like divorcing to be the same. I need to remember all those people who want us to succeed. Our friends and family want us to do a good job divorcing each other. They care about our kids. They care about us. I think my ex and I have many moments where we want to do it right, too. And then something happens— He is a legitimate idiot at times (like myself, I suppose). It is hard to not think his idiocy is my problem.

I believe we can have a successful divorce, and I appreciate the encouragement we have received from friends and family. That sounds weird! But it’s true.

You focused in deaths as opposed to injuries.

You think car seats and seat belts for kids is dumb big city nonsense too?

This, mostly. Some things are inherently unsafe, like riding bikes, hoverboards, skateboards, roller skates, etc. Some things have a higher capacity for catastrophic injury (ATVs, motorcycles, snowboarding) and some every day activities that are generally safe can be catastrophic if not done safely, like diving in a pool. The difference between safe and unsafe almost always comes down to not what, but how. Most people here understandably seem to be focused on the what, and it's reasonable to think a judge would focus on that as well. A jilted ex is likely to hammer that point as well, so that's a hill to climb if you're invested in those activities with kids. I am far less invested in the what than I am his ability to micromanage our everyday activities and having to ask permission for any number of hobbies or outings we may want to pursue.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

I think this is the vest thing you've ever posted; very well said.

I'm sorry that you're having to go through this, and I truly wish you the best. As a very good friend of mine gave for advice, years after he'd been through it: do not think of this as being aggrieved - think of this as an *opportunity*, one which you can do and achieve things which you'd inly dreamt about previously.

Good luck to you!
- Jeff

The people allowing their kids to be injured and killed on atvs due to piss-poor supervision and parenting, are the same ones that don't bother with car seats or seat belts.

I'm with you spere.

Maybe, if he brings up trying to regulate your activities with the kids, you guys can push back with regulating his speed and safety on the roads, while bringing up his driving record? Tit for tat.
- Jeff

I'm sorry to hear that. If I remember correctly it sounded like you two weren't exactly seeing the world through the same lenses so it's not entirely surprising but your post rings true. And it can be reasonably successful. My divorce went through with a mediator, no lawyers, no major issues that pushed us to court, and we get along fine. I think it probably bothers my kids how well we get along and makes them wonder why we ever split in the first place, or maybe that's projection. Either way, it's as amicable as I had hoped for despite the odd disagreements on parenting philosophy. We are both reasonable people who put the kids first and don't rock the boat needlessly. In all honesty I think it's hard for my wife to see how well we get along in divorce given what she has to deal with with her ex. I treat my ex with genuine respect and appreciation for what she does for our kids and so I always act accordingly, whereas my wife gets nothing but brow beatings and disrespect in her interactions with him. It takes a toll. Point is, it does take two mature and invested partners to divorce amicably and find peace in the new arrangement. I don't think you'll have any problem on your end, so I hope he can find the resolve to hold that line as well.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

All that said...


This is also true. It does suck. Hard. Even when you get along, divorce should take an emotional toll, especially with kids involved, if you're a normal human being who values bonds and vows and family and continuity and history and memories and all the things you may take for granted before it changes forever. I wish I never experienced divorce, even though I'm in a happy marriage. It has taken a toll and it's something I don't know if I'll ever fully heal from. It feels like the death of a part of you, and regardless of the percentage of blame it feels like you bear responsibility for killing it.

It gets easier but it's never easy. At least for me.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

I believe, and hope, it will be the same judge. She was not impressed with his arguments either time around, I think it's safe to say. Maybe I'm not judge material, but if a guy with three kids cheats on and abuses his wife for years, then petitions the court to require her to work full time while primarily raising the kids, so that her income absolves him of child support liability (while making upward of $200k himself), I don't think I could be unbiased in how I treated his future petitions.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

We’re mediating, but I just hired a lawyer and financial person because the stress from the divorce is exceeding my limits. When I can’t figure things out on my own, I look for help.

Lawyers are supposed to absorb a certain amount of stress for their client. They’re the legal expert. So I got my own. I can’t wait for her to tell me what she recommends. Even if it’s what I don’t want to hear— I just want to hear something that makes sense.

The money you pay to deal with these legal matters is money well spent, in my view. You don’t want to pay for car repairs or medical bills or lawyers. But sometimes you need to. You need a functioning car. You need a healthy body. You need legal advice.

I might have ideas about your situation, but I don’t know family law. I don’t know how to deal with a manipulating ex.

Generally speaking, I would say you should evaluate each of the ex’s concerns individually. What would be fair if the roles were reversed?

What steps might mitigate the risk of harm? How could the activities be performed differently? Could the kids get special training from someone? Maybe ATV or horseback riding lessons? Protective wear? There are probably a lot of ways to alleviate concern. As a lawyer, I’m frequently obligated to “meet and confer” with opposing counsel to avoid the necessity of filing a motion. Meeting and conferring is problem solving. It’s suggesting solutions, generating ideas. I think this is a good place for you to spend some time. Problem solving is a healthy activity, so even if it doesn’t solve the problem and avoid a hearing with the judge, it is good brain exercise. Plus judges like it.

I’m certain there is a process to identify vexatious or harassing motions. But I imagine a judge would be very reluctant to refuse to consider a dad’s motions about potential harm to the kids. If the ex lived a crazy lifestyle, you would find yourself filing a zillion motions to protect the kids. So just the number of motions filed doesn’t necessarily mean anything. Unless the ex’s motions are completely baseless and basically insane, I think a judge would want to hear them.

Ignoring your views on the ex's personality, to try and remain unbiased, my views are as follows:

*With respect to sport, I don't think it's unreasonable for parent 2, having shared custody, to be able to do what they want with their child when they have custody. Particularly if they only have the child for "5%" of the time. It should not be dictated by choices made by the primary caregiver (parent 1). I take onboard that the child may really want to participate in that activity every week, but I don't see that as being fair on parent 2 if several hours of their limited time requires them to stand on the sidelines and watch the child do something without them. The onus should be on parent 1 to explain to the child that yes they can do activity x, but they can only do it when at home. I don't think it's the judge's role (or frankly their right) to tell parent 2 that playing sport while they watch is better for the relationship than say sitting in a coffee shop talking over food for two hours.

*I don't know enough about the rights of each when it comes to selecting holiday dates. I can understand the frustration she would have not having the dates settled a reasonable time out from the holidays.

*I could understand why a biological parent would not like having another person being called dad (or mum) by another. It wasn't clear whether they started calling his partner mama before or after they learned of the dada referencing. In other words was it pure hypocrisy (they were doing it first) or retribution (in response)? Rhetorical question really, I'm not sure whether there are any rules against what adults can request they be called and therefore whether it has any validity.

*Agree that she should have no obligation to drive them there, if that's what the judge previously stated. Though I almost see this as an extension of the sport issue, just in her favour this time.

*I agree with his concerns regarding children and riding on ATVs. I've seen countless stories on fatalities or serious injuries involving children over here, both with and without adult supervision, some with the adult driving. Doctors are forever appearing on tv news pleading with people not to allow this to occur. With all due respect, I think you are allowing your bias to override common sense here. We never really have full control of our environment and that's a small, unprotected body relatively exposed to a lot of weight and (potentially) speed. If he were a qualified skydiving instructor, would you be ok with them taking the child tandem jumping every visitation? Just my opinion, but one that seems to be shared by leading doctors and police locally.

Seems to me that what the parent prefers is not the primary concern. The primary concern is what's good for the kid, and normal participation in sports shouldn't be curtailed because one of the parents refuses to accommodate that.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

My wife's friend recently went before this same judge, who ruled in similar fashion. The father lives in Charlottesville, some 45 minutes from the mother, and refused to take their son to his sporting events on his weekends. The judge said (paraphrasing) that it's not fair to the child to disrupt his participation in sports for the convenience of the father and that the mother and father were both obligated to that responsibility, not just mom on her weekends with the kid.

I don't know how that theory applies when the father moves 3h from the kids' primary residence, as in our case.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

I have the benefit of being on both ends of this arrangement which helps me keep my biases mostly in check. In other words, I don't apply a standard to what we expect of him any differently than I hold myself to as the father of kids who live primarily with their mother. I don't see it as "my" time with my kids, but their time that I bear primary responsibility for them, to run them to appointments, take them to games, sleepovers, birthday parties, etc. I make it about their time and their interests as much as possible. When they have events going on at home, I either stay in an area hotel to support those activities, or I allow them to stay with their mother that weekend if I can't break away from obligations at home. Their needs almost always come first, because it's their life and their developmental interests that matter most. My wife's ex sees it completely differently, that it's "his" time and that they need to be where he says they go and do what he plans, not them. It's a fundamentally opposite way of viewing your obligations as a parent who imposed divorce on the children we chose to have. So it is hard for me to see it from the other perspective, that the dad's time is just fun time with no actual work or mundane aspects of parenting involved.

But who knows. I'm sure there are plenty of family court judges who see it your way.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

What is ‘normal’? 1x, 2x, 3x per week? Are judges adequately qualified to determine the psychological benefits of playing more sport vs potentially bonding with a parent they don’t see that much; the child is already participating? I’d see it differently if the costody was the other way around and the sport takes a much lower percentage of time.

When a child wants to stay home so they can play sport rather than spend time with a parent that shows the relationship is broken. I’m not defending parent 2 here, but I’m not sure that allowing the relationship to further deteriorate is the best long term solution for the child. Certainly I’m not an expert so don’t pretend my views are correct.

Granted every case is different, but it seems like a lot of dads (parent 2’s) feel particularly aggrieved.

That's making a big and I think inaccurate assumption. At what age should a kid want to sit around with a parent playing Uno, rather than competing in a tournament with their friends playing a sport they love? If it were me, and my father forced me to choose, I'd feel resentful that he made me miss those events rather than showing up with me to cheer me on and share those moments together.

In my view, achieving the closest thing to normalcy is the goal and the obligation of the parent. If mom and dad were not divorced, dad wouldn't take the kid away from his soccer games every other weekend, so why should it be different in divorce if it's possible to maintain that continuity?

But again, that's my personal perspective.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

I suppose if mum and dad were not divorced, perhaps the sport chosen was a mutual decision including all three. Sorry if I missed something, but I’ve assumed the sport was something mum and son chose and bio-dad was advised of after.

All hypothetical, but what if P2 had another idea that son might otherwise have learned to love but never found that out because a judge told P2 that sport needs to be retained on his watch. Not playing that sport doesn’t necessarily mean son couldn’t have a great time doing something else.

Of course you probably know very well that is unlikely, regardless of the rose tint in the glasses.

The sports have been chosen by the kids, and mom being the custodial parent who played organized sports herself signed the kids up. Bio dad does not want them playing sports if they fall on weekends--which of course, they all do. So the option was to keep them out of all sports altogether, or enroll them and ask him to support their choice, as she does on their weekends at home.

Also worth noting, the only home he owns is in the same town where the children live. He rents it out as an AirBnB. The home he occupies out of state is a rental.



I don't know what you mean with the rose colored glasses comment.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

I don't know what you mean with the rose colored glasses comment.


That's my bad. Complete misunderstanding (and thus misuse) of the expression. What I was intending to say was that you would clearly be a better judge of the situation, even allowing for a degree of bias.

Ah. Gotcha.

We don't push the kids into any sports, but we do let them know what is available based on the season. Kids gravitate to screens and the couch so playing sports even half the time is better than none, so we would never keep them out of it because their father will require them to miss every other weekend. But at some point it was inevitable that they would want to make all of their games and we've had multiple issues with this already, where the kids wanted to stay home to attend the games rather than drive three hours north to their father's house, and have been disappointed when his answer is no. As far as whose job it is to break the disappointment, my personal opinion is that if me and mom can't take them on our weekend with them, for whatever reason, we'll tell them it's on us, and if he can't or won't on his custody weekend, it's on him to communicate that with the kids and not make mom the bearer of all bad news and cover for his unwillingness to support them in their activities. His decision, he has to own it just like we would and sometimes do.

You had mentioned the situation being reversed and their participation in sports potentially obviating their ability to do activities he may want to plan for them. I think home field advantage has to be considered here. They spend 90% of their time in their home town, where practices fall during the week, where their friends and classmates live etc, so it's not reasonable for the noncustodial parent to enroll them in longer term commitments that would require frequent trips back and forth to his home. If they're going to play in a sports league, it only makes sense that it be in the area where they live. Same goes for my sons who live with their mom; we chose divorce, I moved to a different town from where they live, and I encourage them to play sports, clubs, activities, anything that will support their development in a healthy way, and it's my job to support those activities where they live. It's the only sensible way to manage these situations when the parents live in two separate locations; custodial parent should be deferred to here since they do almost all of the heavy lifting, in my opinion.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W