How does a judge decide custody when all the factors to be considered seem equal?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the child is 5, she's probably starting K. If you agree to ROFR, for say 4 hours, the gf can watch her after school, because dad said he gets home at 6 and school usually gets out at 3.

If Dad is working on a non school day, and Mom is available, she would have her. This applies both ways btw, if Mom was not available Dad could have her.

Why would OP agree to this when the mom is erratic and vindictive? I these circumstances it’s better for the parents to have fewer points of friction and more boundaries.

It's in the best interest of the child to have time with both parents. It's not all about the adults.

I think you’re confused. The custody order would provide for each parent to have time with the child. “Best interests” does not mean that the non-custodial parent gets to take the child during the custodial parent’s time. In fact this could be needlessly disruptive and bad for the child.

Why do people keep saying this? The girl can be with mom from 3-8 or with GF 3-6, then dad 6-8. What am I missing here??? I feel like I am taking crazy pills. Is this happening basically every day and if mom got the kid on the days dad was working dad would basically never get the daughter M-F? Is dad doing this because mom has a stronger argument for custody because she has more availability?

You’re missing the fact that OP’s ex appears to be a nutcase, and in those cases, it’s better to have clearer boundaries.

You also misunderstand the pitfalls of ROFR. OP needs childcare to cover the few hours before he gets home from work. What happens when his erratic ex agrees to take the kid then backs out at the last minute?

The point of a child custody agreement is in part to reduce conflict by making everything very clear. ROFR introduces a huge amount of variability that can cause conflict. Moreover, it’s not clear that it’s bad for the child to spend a few hours a day with a grandparent or step-parent figure. That should be the decision of a custodial parent. Also ROFR can lead to ridiculous results, like a kid not being allowed to go to a sleepover or stay overnight with beloved cousins.

There are some good scenarios for ROFR. I’d probably want some version of it if I had shared custody of a baby. But overall it introduces a lot of complexity. There’s plenty written on it: https://www.bryanfagan.com/blog/2024/may/ask-yourself-is-including-a-right-of-first-refus/

If the mom flakes out for a pickup she agreed to, that is not a ROFR issue, that is an unfit parent issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the child is 5, she's probably starting K. If you agree to ROFR, for say 4 hours, the gf can watch her after school, because dad said he gets home at 6 and school usually gets out at 3.

If Dad is working on a non school day, and Mom is available, she would have her. This applies both ways btw, if Mom was not available Dad could have her.

Why would OP agree to this when the mom is erratic and vindictive? I these circumstances it’s better for the parents to have fewer points of friction and more boundaries.

It's in the best interest of the child to have time with both parents. It's not all about the adults.

I think you’re confused. The custody order would provide for each parent to have time with the child. “Best interests” does not mean that the non-custodial parent gets to take the child during the custodial parent’s time. In fact this could be needlessly disruptive and bad for the child.

I think you're confused. The OP already has 50/50. The mom isn't going to get to reduce his time, especially considering that this status quo has been established for years already according to OP. But he also doesn't have an argument for there not to be reasonable rofr in their parenting plan. He should consult with his attorney as to what is reasonable, most likely that would be 4 or more hours, not any time like mom wants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op, I think some advice here you are getting about rofr it's not good and could be detrimental to your case. You should probably discuss it with your attorney before you decide to refuse or accept it.

OP here. I will not be agreeing to any ROFR clause under 12 hours and I won't agree to a clause that doesn't exempt family members or my girlfriend who lives in the home. My coparent will use it to try to control my parenting time. She and her lawyer are welcome to argue their case as to why it's not in the child's best interest for my girlfriend to take care of our daughter for a couple of hours at our home, or for our daughter to have sleepovers with her grandmother during my parenting time. If the court orders it, so be it.

Ohhhhh.... have you spoken to your attorney about this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the child is 5, she's probably starting K. If you agree to ROFR, for say 4 hours, the gf can watch her after school, because dad said he gets home at 6 and school usually gets out at 3.

If Dad is working on a non school day, and Mom is available, she would have her. This applies both ways btw, if Mom was not available Dad could have her.

Why would OP agree to this when the mom is erratic and vindictive? I these circumstances it’s better for the parents to have fewer points of friction and more boundaries.

It's in the best interest of the child to have time with both parents. It's not all about the adults.

I think you’re confused. The custody order would provide for each parent to have time with the child. “Best interests” does not mean that the non-custodial parent gets to take the child during the custodial parent’s time. In fact this could be needlessly disruptive and bad for the child.

Why do people keep saying this? The girl can be with mom from 3-8 or with GF 3-6, then dad 6-8. What am I missing here??? I feel like I am taking crazy pills. Is this happening basically every day and if mom got the kid on the days dad was working dad would basically never get the daughter M-F? Is dad doing this because mom has a stronger argument for custody because she has more availability?

You’re missing the fact that OP’s ex appears to be a nutcase, and in those cases, it’s better to have clearer boundaries.

You also misunderstand the pitfalls of ROFR. OP needs childcare to cover the few hours before he gets home from work. What happens when his erratic ex agrees to take the kid then backs out at the last minute?

The point of a child custody agreement is in part to reduce conflict by making everything very clear. ROFR introduces a huge amount of variability that can cause conflict. Moreover, it’s not clear that it’s bad for the child to spend a few hours a day with a grandparent or step-parent figure. That should be the decision of a custodial parent. Also ROFR can lead to ridiculous results, like a kid not being allowed to go to a sleepover or stay overnight with beloved cousins.

There are some good scenarios for ROFR. I’d probably want some version of it if I had shared custody of a baby. But overall it introduces a lot of complexity. There’s plenty written on it: https://www.bryanfagan.com/blog/2024/may/ask-yourself-is-including-a-right-of-first-refus/

If the mom flakes out for a pickup she agreed to, that is not a ROFR issue, that is an unfit parent issue.

And then they have to go back to court. Which is exactly why ROFR is a bad idea except in a few cases. Especially in high-conflict coparenting, it creates a dynamic ripe for conflict, control, and tying up the court with BS. It's a bad idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op, I think some advice here you are getting about rofr it's not good and could be detrimental to your case. You should probably discuss it with your attorney before you decide to refuse or accept it.

OP here. I will not be agreeing to any ROFR clause under 12 hours and I won't agree to a clause that doesn't exempt family members or my girlfriend who lives in the home. My coparent will use it to try to control my parenting time. She and her lawyer are welcome to argue their case as to why it's not in the child's best interest for my girlfriend to take care of our daughter for a couple of hours at our home, or for our daughter to have sleepovers with her grandmother during my parenting time. If the court orders it, so be it.

Ohhhhh.... have you spoken to your attorney about this?

Of course. The attorney recommended that I not agree to a ROFR clause and it's unlikely a court would include it in the order without both parties' agreement unless the opposing party has evidence that I'm leaving the child with paid childcare providers for extended periods of time, which I'm not. I've never even hired a babysitter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the child is 5, she's probably starting K. If you agree to ROFR, for say 4 hours, the gf can watch her after school, because dad said he gets home at 6 and school usually gets out at 3.

If Dad is working on a non school day, and Mom is available, she would have her. This applies both ways btw, if Mom was not available Dad could have her.

Why would OP agree to this when the mom is erratic and vindictive? I these circumstances it’s better for the parents to have fewer points of friction and more boundaries.

It's in the best interest of the child to have time with both parents. It's not all about the adults.

I think you’re confused. The custody order would provide for each parent to have time with the child. “Best interests” does not mean that the non-custodial parent gets to take the child during the custodial parent’s time. In fact this could be needlessly disruptive and bad for the child.

Why do people keep saying this? The girl can be with mom from 3-8 or with GF 3-6, then dad 6-8. What am I missing here??? I feel like I am taking crazy pills. Is this happening basically every day and if mom got the kid on the days dad was working dad would basically never get the daughter M-F? Is dad doing this because mom has a stronger argument for custody because she has more availability?

You’re missing the fact that OP’s ex appears to be a nutcase, and in those cases, it’s better to have clearer boundaries.

You also misunderstand the pitfalls of ROFR. OP needs childcare to cover the few hours before he gets home from work. What happens when his erratic ex agrees to take the kid then backs out at the last minute?

The point of a child custody agreement is in part to reduce conflict by making everything very clear. ROFR introduces a huge amount of variability that can cause conflict. Moreover, it’s not clear that it’s bad for the child to spend a few hours a day with a grandparent or step-parent figure. That should be the decision of a custodial parent. Also ROFR can lead to ridiculous results, like a kid not being allowed to go to a sleepover or stay overnight with beloved cousins.

There are some good scenarios for ROFR. I’d probably want some version of it if I had shared custody of a baby. But overall it introduces a lot of complexity. There’s plenty written on it: https://www.bryanfagan.com/blog/2024/may/ask-yourself-is-including-a-right-of-first-refus/

If the mom flakes out for a pickup she agreed to, that is not a ROFR issue, that is an unfit parent issue.

And then they have to go back to court. Which is exactly why ROFR is a bad idea except in a few cases. Especially in high-conflict coparenting, it creates a dynamic ripe for conflict, control, and tying up the court with BS. It's a bad idea.

The OP hasn't said that the mom has ever flaked out on rofr. The mom is requesting rofr, for any time ( which is not likely to be seen as reasonable by a court).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op, I think some advice here you are getting about rofr it's not good and could be detrimental to your case. You should probably discuss it with your attorney before you decide to refuse or accept it.

OP here. I will not be agreeing to any ROFR clause under 12 hours and I won't agree to a clause that doesn't exempt family members or my girlfriend who lives in the home. My coparent will use it to try to control my parenting time. She and her lawyer are welcome to argue their case as to why it's not in the child's best interest for my girlfriend to take care of our daughter for a couple of hours at our home, or for our daughter to have sleepovers with her grandmother during my parenting time. If the court orders it, so be it.

Ohhhhh.... have you spoken to your attorney about this?

Of course. The attorney recommended that I not agree to a ROFR clause and it's unlikely a court would include it in the order without both parties' agreement unless the opposing party has evidence that I'm leaving the child with paid childcare providers for extended periods of time, which I'm not. I've never even hired a babysitter.

Oh, I see, that's good that you spoke to them. Do think ahead to school years and schedules, and remember that if you aren't subject to ROFR, neither is she, and how that might play out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op, I think some advice here you are getting about rofr it's not good and could be detrimental to your case. You should probably discuss it with your attorney before you decide to refuse or accept it.

OP here. I will not be agreeing to any ROFR clause under 12 hours and I won't agree to a clause that doesn't exempt family members or my girlfriend who lives in the home. My coparent will use it to try to control my parenting time. She and her lawyer are welcome to argue their case as to why it's not in the child's best interest for my girlfriend to take care of our daughter for a couple of hours at our home, or for our daughter to have sleepovers with her grandmother during my parenting time. If the court orders it, so be it.

Ohhhhh.... have you spoken to your attorney about this?

Of course. The attorney recommended that I not agree to a ROFR clause and it's unlikely a court would include it in the order without both parties' agreement unless the opposing party has evidence that I'm leaving the child with paid childcare providers for extended periods of time, which I'm not. I've never even hired a babysitter.

Oh, I see, that's good that you spoke to them. Do think ahead to school years and schedules, and remember that if you aren't subject to ROFR, neither is she, and how that might play out.

I have no interest in controlling her parenting time in that way or what she chooses to do for childcare. If the court gives her parenting time, that means she's a fit parent and able to make those choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the child is 5, she's probably starting K. If you agree to ROFR, for say 4 hours, the gf can watch her after school, because dad said he gets home at 6 and school usually gets out at 3.

If Dad is working on a non school day, and Mom is available, she would have her. This applies both ways btw, if Mom was not available Dad could have her.

Why would OP agree to this when the mom is erratic and vindictive? I these circumstances it’s better for the parents to have fewer points of friction and more boundaries.

It's in the best interest of the child to have time with both parents. It's not all about the adults.

I think you’re confused. The custody order would provide for each parent to have time with the child. “Best interests” does not mean that the non-custodial parent gets to take the child during the custodial parent’s time. In fact this could be needlessly disruptive and bad for the child.

Why do people keep saying this? The girl can be with mom from 3-8 or with GF 3-6, then dad 6-8. What am I missing here??? I feel like I am taking crazy pills. Is this happening basically every day and if mom got the kid on the days dad was working dad would basically never get the daughter M-F? Is dad doing this because mom has a stronger argument for custody because she has more availability?

You’re missing the fact that OP’s ex appears to be a nutcase, and in those cases, it’s better to have clearer boundaries.

You also misunderstand the pitfalls of ROFR. OP needs childcare to cover the few hours before he gets home from work. What happens when his erratic ex agrees to take the kid then backs out at the last minute?

The point of a child custody agreement is in part to reduce conflict by making everything very clear. ROFR introduces a huge amount of variability that can cause conflict. Moreover, it’s not clear that it’s bad for the child to spend a few hours a day with a grandparent or step-parent figure. That should be the decision of a custodial parent. Also ROFR can lead to ridiculous results, like a kid not being allowed to go to a sleepover or stay overnight with beloved cousins.

There are some good scenarios for ROFR. I’d probably want some version of it if I had shared custody of a baby. But overall it introduces a lot of complexity. There’s plenty written on it: https://www.bryanfagan.com/blog/2024/may/ask-yourself-is-including-a-right-of-first-refus/

If the mom flakes out for a pickup she agreed to, that is not a ROFR issue, that is an unfit parent issue.

Given that the mom is flaky and only wants ROFR because she is jealous, that’s why OP should not agree to a ROFR. The whole point is to head off issues at the path.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the child is 5, she's probably starting K. If you agree to ROFR, for say 4 hours, the gf can watch her after school, because dad said he gets home at 6 and school usually gets out at 3.

If Dad is working on a non school day, and Mom is available, she would have her. This applies both ways btw, if Mom was not available Dad could have her.

Why would OP agree to this when the mom is erratic and vindictive? I these circumstances it’s better for the parents to have fewer points of friction and more boundaries.

It's in the best interest of the child to have time with both parents. It's not all about the adults.

I think you’re confused. The custody order would provide for each parent to have time with the child. “Best interests” does not mean that the non-custodial parent gets to take the child during the custodial parent’s time. In fact this could be needlessly disruptive and bad for the child.

Why do people keep saying this? The girl can be with mom from 3-8 or with GF 3-6, then dad 6-8. What am I missing here??? I feel like I am taking crazy pills. Is this happening basically every day and if mom got the kid on the days dad was working dad would basically never get the daughter M-F? Is dad doing this because mom has a stronger argument for custody because she has more availability?

You’re missing the fact that OP’s ex appears to be a nutcase, and in those cases, it’s better to have clearer boundaries.

You also misunderstand the pitfalls of ROFR. OP needs childcare to cover the few hours before he gets home from work. What happens when his erratic ex agrees to take the kid then backs out at the last minute?

The point of a child custody agreement is in part to reduce conflict by making everything very clear. ROFR introduces a huge amount of variability that can cause conflict. Moreover, it’s not clear that it’s bad for the child to spend a few hours a day with a grandparent or step-parent figure. That should be the decision of a custodial parent. Also ROFR can lead to ridiculous results, like a kid not being allowed to go to a sleepover or stay overnight with beloved cousins.

There are some good scenarios for ROFR. I’d probably want some version of it if I had shared custody of a baby. But overall it introduces a lot of complexity. There’s plenty written on it: https://www.bryanfagan.com/blog/2024/may/ask-yourself-is-including-a-right-of-first-refus/

If the mom flakes out for a pickup she agreed to, that is not a ROFR issue, that is an unfit parent issue.

And then they have to go back to court. Which is exactly why ROFR is a bad idea except in a few cases. Especially in high-conflict coparenting, it creates a dynamic ripe for conflict, control, and tying up the court with BS. It's a bad idea.

The OP hasn't said that the mom has ever flaked out on rofr. The mom is requesting rofr, for any time ( which is not likely to be seen as reasonable by a court).

I wonder what the court will think about the kid being in preschool all day, followed by GF for three hours, then dad for two hours apparently M-F when child is in dad's custody. Guess that doesn't matter because she will be entering formal schooling soon. I feel like dad doesn't want ROFR because he doesn't want to pay childsupport, while mom wants it because she wants to use her kid to be a professional bum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op, I think some advice here you are getting about rofr it's not good and could be detrimental to your case. You should probably discuss it with your attorney before you decide to refuse or accept it.

OP here. I will not be agreeing to any ROFR clause under 12 hours and I won't agree to a clause that doesn't exempt family members or my girlfriend who lives in the home. My coparent will use it to try to control my parenting time. She and her lawyer are welcome to argue their case as to why it's not in the child's best interest for my girlfriend to take care of our daughter for a couple of hours at our home, or for our daughter to have sleepovers with her grandmother during my parenting time. If the court orders it, so be it.

Good for you OP. You should also add in sleepovers with friends for when your DD gets older. I’m not sure I’d even agree to 12 hours if I were you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the child is 5, she's probably starting K. If you agree to ROFR, for say 4 hours, the gf can watch her after school, because dad said he gets home at 6 and school usually gets out at 3.

If Dad is working on a non school day, and Mom is available, she would have her. This applies both ways btw, if Mom was not available Dad could have her.

Why would OP agree to this when the mom is erratic and vindictive? I these circumstances it’s better for the parents to have fewer points of friction and more boundaries.

It's in the best interest of the child to have time with both parents. It's not all about the adults.

I think you’re confused. The custody order would provide for each parent to have time with the child. “Best interests” does not mean that the non-custodial parent gets to take the child during the custodial parent’s time. In fact this could be needlessly disruptive and bad for the child.

I think you're confused. The OP already has 50/50. The mom isn't going to get to reduce his time, especially considering that this status quo has been established for years already according to OP. But he also doesn't have an argument for there not to be reasonable rofr in their parenting plan. He should consult with his attorney as to what is reasonable, most likely that would be 4 or more hours, not any time like mom wants.

Did you not read the thread? Currently there is no custody order. The OP’s ex is going to court to get full legal custody and reduce his time from the current informal arrangement. There’s zero reason for OP to agree to ROFR but yes, there will be some custody sharing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here are some examples of the conflicting coparenting philosophies between the parents.

Mom thinks she should be able to take the child to birthdays, family events, etc during Dad’s parenting time if Dad is working and child would otherwise be spending time with other family, Dad’s girlfriend, at preschool, or other play dates etc arranged by Dad. Dad thinks that Mom should provide the information about the event and Dad can choose to facilitate the child’s attendance or decline the child attending.

Mom thinks she should have right of first refusal so that any time that the child is not with Dad she should be offered the time. This would mean the child transitioning between households several times a week due to Dad’s slightly unconventional work schedule making him unavailable for preschool pickup. Mom thinks it’s unfair that the girlfriend (who is now living with Dad and child) or the Dad’s parent does pickup when Mom is available and would love the extra time. Dad thinks the back and forth would be too disruptive to everyone.

Mom thinks that Mom, Dad, and girlfriend should all spend time together occasionally with the child to show that everyone is amicable and respectful. The child has requested this to Mom. Dad is not interested and insists that he only has a duty to be civil and polite during any brief face to face interactions. He continues to say no to these requests.

Is dad's girlfriend doing childcare when mom is available? If so that is weird.

Mom should have right of first refusal but dad has no obligation to spend time with mom socially.

OP said the girlfriend lives with them. Not weird at all for a live-in partner to spend time with the child when Dad is unavailable instead of making the kid go back and forth between households.

No, a girlfriend doesn't get parenting time when an actual parent is available (within the time frame specified by the plan). This also applies to the mom, so Dad would get parenting time before a boyfriend.

I really don't get the reasoning as to why it is less damaging for the kid to hang out with dad's girlfriend over mom for a few hours after school. Dad's gf is basically a stranger.

Did you not see that they live together? She is not a stranger in any sense of the word.

Transitions between households can be HARD for little kids. Saying goodbye can be very upsetting. Different rules, expectations, food, routines...it takes time to adjust and going back and forth is stressful for them. There's no reason to make a little kid go through that more than necessary just because Mom hates that her ex's girlfriend gets to spend a couple hours of time with her child, even if it's every day. It's normal and healthy for the two to develop a relationship and bond if the woman will be the child's stepmother.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the child is 5, she's probably starting K. If you agree to ROFR, for say 4 hours, the gf can watch her after school, because dad said he gets home at 6 and school usually gets out at 3.

If Dad is working on a non school day, and Mom is available, she would have her. This applies both ways btw, if Mom was not available Dad could have her.

Why would OP agree to this when the mom is erratic and vindictive? I these circumstances it’s better for the parents to have fewer points of friction and more boundaries.

It's in the best interest of the child to have time with both parents. It's not all about the adults.

I think you’re confused. The custody order would provide for each parent to have time with the child. “Best interests” does not mean that the non-custodial parent gets to take the child during the custodial parent’s time. In fact this could be needlessly disruptive and bad for the child.

Why do people keep saying this? The girl can be with mom from 3-8 or with GF 3-6, then dad 6-8. What am I missing here??? I feel like I am taking crazy pills. Is this happening basically every day and if mom got the kid on the days dad was working dad would basically never get the daughter M-F? Is dad doing this because mom has a stronger argument for custody because she has more availability?

You’re missing the fact that OP’s ex appears to be a nutcase, and in those cases, it’s better to have clearer boundaries.

You also misunderstand the pitfalls of ROFR. OP needs childcare to cover the few hours before he gets home from work. What happens when his erratic ex agrees to take the kid then backs out at the last minute?

The point of a child custody agreement is in part to reduce conflict by making everything very clear. ROFR introduces a huge amount of variability that can cause conflict. Moreover, it’s not clear that it’s bad for the child to spend a few hours a day with a grandparent or step-parent figure. That should be the decision of a custodial parent. Also ROFR can lead to ridiculous results, like a kid not being allowed to go to a sleepover or stay overnight with beloved cousins.

There are some good scenarios for ROFR. I’d probably want some version of it if I had shared custody of a baby. But overall it introduces a lot of complexity. There’s plenty written on it: https://www.bryanfagan.com/blog/2024/may/ask-yourself-is-including-a-right-of-first-refus/

If the mom flakes out for a pickup she agreed to, that is not a ROFR issue, that is an unfit parent issue.

And then they have to go back to court. Which is exactly why ROFR is a bad idea except in a few cases. Especially in high-conflict coparenting, it creates a dynamic ripe for conflict, control, and tying up the court with BS. It's a bad idea.

The OP hasn't said that the mom has ever flaked out on rofr. The mom is requesting rofr, for any time ( which is not likely to be seen as reasonable by a court).

I wonder what the court will think about the kid being in preschool all day, followed by GF for three hours, then dad for two hours apparently M-F when child is in dad's custody. Guess that doesn't matter because she will be entering formal schooling soon. I feel like dad doesn't want ROFR because he doesn't want to pay childsupport, while mom wants it because she wants to use her kid to be a professional bum.

you’re confused. ROFR is unrelated to child support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the child is 5, she's probably starting K. If you agree to ROFR, for say 4 hours, the gf can watch her after school, because dad said he gets home at 6 and school usually gets out at 3.

If Dad is working on a non school day, and Mom is available, she would have her. This applies both ways btw, if Mom was not available Dad could have her.

Why would OP agree to this when the mom is erratic and vindictive? I these circumstances it’s better for the parents to have fewer points of friction and more boundaries.

It's in the best interest of the child to have time with both parents. It's not all about the adults.

I think you’re confused. The custody order would provide for each parent to have time with the child. “Best interests” does not mean that the non-custodial parent gets to take the child during the custodial parent’s time. In fact this could be needlessly disruptive and bad for the child.

Why do people keep saying this? The girl can be with mom from 3-8 or with GF 3-6, then dad 6-8. What am I missing here??? I feel like I am taking crazy pills. Is this happening basically every day and if mom got the kid on the days dad was working dad would basically never get the daughter M-F? Is dad doing this because mom has a stronger argument for custody because she has more availability?

You’re missing the fact that OP’s ex appears to be a nutcase, and in those cases, it’s better to have clearer boundaries.

You also misunderstand the pitfalls of ROFR. OP needs childcare to cover the few hours before he gets home from work. What happens when his erratic ex agrees to take the kid then backs out at the last minute?

The point of a child custody agreement is in part to reduce conflict by making everything very clear. ROFR introduces a huge amount of variability that can cause conflict. Moreover, it’s not clear that it’s bad for the child to spend a few hours a day with a grandparent or step-parent figure. That should be the decision of a custodial parent. Also ROFR can lead to ridiculous results, like a kid not being allowed to go to a sleepover or stay overnight with beloved cousins.

There are some good scenarios for ROFR. I’d probably want some version of it if I had shared custody of a baby. But overall it introduces a lot of complexity. There’s plenty written on it: https://www.bryanfagan.com/blog/2024/may/ask-yourself-is-including-a-right-of-first-refus/

If the mom flakes out for a pickup she agreed to, that is not a ROFR issue, that is an unfit parent issue.

And then they have to go back to court. Which is exactly why ROFR is a bad idea except in a few cases. Especially in high-conflict coparenting, it creates a dynamic ripe for conflict, control, and tying up the court with BS. It's a bad idea.

The OP hasn't said that the mom has ever flaked out on rofr. The mom is requesting rofr, for any time ( which is not likely to be seen as reasonable by a court).

I wonder what the court will think about the kid being in preschool all day, followed by GF for three hours, then dad for two hours apparently M-F when child is in dad's custody. Guess that doesn't matter because she will be entering formal schooling soon. I feel like dad doesn't want ROFR because he doesn't want to pay childsupport, while mom wants it because she wants to use her kid to be a professional bum.

I think the court will think its fine. Many people work, and use childcare/after care. I haven't gotten the impression that op is resisting child support.

He says he's ok with her parenting choices, I guess including possibly leaving their child with a future boyfriend/s and other people.