Custody Issue - Pendente Lite VS. Divorce Decree - Help!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Daddy didn’t parent 50/50 when they were married so hows he’s going to suddenly do it now? Make mommy do 90% of the work and just who up to play on his days? Riiight.

Your time to parent, teach and raise your children well have past. You failed. If you were so involved and influential to your kids it would be very provable.

Well, as always, it depends. Was Mommy a completely over-controlling parent that did not like the way daddy did things or was daddy a total incompetent buffoon. If the latter, yeah, I can understand not giving 50-50. But if it's the former, time for mommy to let go. And you know what? I bet you that for MOST folks, having a 50-50 split actually HELPS you become a better parent because you don't have the overbearing/controlling other parent looking over your shoulder disapprovingly.

Isn’t that funny how some slackers don’t step up until they are the only adult in the house? Pathetic. Get some respect.

Mom wants dad to earn lots of money and stay home or work part time - look at PP comments. So, then she claims Dad doesn't want to be involved or do his half but in order for him to make the income she wants to keep her lifestyle he has to work that many hours and not be involved with the kids. So, sometimes Dad's cannot win.

Clearly you are very bitter about whatever situation you are in. Most posters are referring to parenting outside of work. Does Dad step up and do things around the house, take kids to practices/lessons, help with home work, doctor's appointments, etc.? Plenty of households now have female breadwinners and those breadwinners are often STILL doing more than 50% simply because they are women and it is still expected of them.

[Anonymous]

Where is OP? Didn't like people calling him a cheater?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where is OP? Didn't like people calling him a cheater?

I thought he said already that the reason for the divorce was NOT an affair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is OP? Didn't like people calling him a cheater?

I thought he said already that the reason for the divorce was NOT an affair.

There have been a lot of inconsistencies in OP's story, I think the only thing we know for sure is that we don't have the real story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I'm a divorced father with a vindictive ex who tried a scorched earth approach during a custody modification. She was caught lying in court and submitting a false affidavit and even admitted on the sand to it lying. There was evidence the judge stated showed she had violated the custody agreement. The judge even stated that she had misused child support funds in violation of a previous court order.

The judge however openly stated that he was NOT going to issue any finding or judgements against the ex wife for lying to the court, violating the custody order, or miss using child support funds. Bottom line is that judges do not want to be seen punishing women. Further, there is an underlying prejudice that women are better parents although that is untrue. They say that the tender years doctrine is no longer informing the courts but that is simply not true.

As for the child support, I'm sure it is based on a formula according to the approximate 75%/25% parenting time split resulting from the court's order that you only get to see your child every other weekend (I.e., 1,3, 5th weekends). The bottom line is that court has turned children into a commodity.

Her income is irrelevant to the calculation of what the non-custodial parent pays in child support. In effect you are paying your ex wife to babysit your child for the 25% difference between the 50/50 split you want and the 25% you got.

The real kicker is that given your ex's level of hate towards you she will 100% work toward alienating your child from you.

This is completely wrong. It is so completely wrong it is probably the stupidest thing I've read on this forum in awhile and there is some grossly inaccurate information on this forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I'm a divorced father with a vindictive ex who tried a scorched earth approach during a custody modification. She was caught lying in court and submitting a false affidavit and even admitted on the sand to it lying. There was evidence the judge stated showed she had violated the custody agreement. The judge even stated that she had misused child support funds in violation of a previous court order.

The judge however openly stated that he was NOT going to issue any finding or judgements against the ex wife for lying to the court, violating the custody order, or miss using child support funds. Bottom line is that judges do not want to be seen punishing women. Further, there is an underlying prejudice that women are better parents although that is untrue. They say that the tender years doctrine is no longer informing the courts but that is simply not true.

As for the child support, I'm sure it is based on a formula according to the approximate 75%/25% parenting time split resulting from the court's order that you only get to see your child every other weekend (I.e., 1,3, 5th weekends). The bottom line is that court has turned children into a commodity.

Her income is irrelevant to the calculation of what the non-custodial parent pays in child support. In effect you are paying your ex wife to babysit your child for the 25% difference between the 50/50 split you want and the 25% you got.

The real kicker is that given your ex's level of hate towards you she will 100% work toward alienating your child from you.

This is completely wrong. It is so completely wrong it is probably the stupidest thing I've read on this forum in awhile and there is some grossly inaccurate information on this forum.

Maybe it depends on the state because in Texas they absolutely do not care about BOTH parents incomes... see the calculator: https://csapps.oag.texas.gov/monthly-child-support-calculator

Notice there is only one input for income and it is for the non-custodial parent not the custodial parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I'm a divorced father with a vindictive ex who tried a scorched earth approach during a custody modification. She was caught lying in court and submitting a false affidavit and even admitted on the sand to it lying. There was evidence the judge stated showed she had violated the custody agreement. The judge even stated that she had misused child support funds in violation of a previous court order.

The judge however openly stated that he was NOT going to issue any finding or judgements against the ex wife for lying to the court, violating the custody order, or miss using child support funds. Bottom line is that judges do not want to be seen punishing women. Further, there is an underlying prejudice that women are better parents although that is untrue. They say that the tender years doctrine is no longer informing the courts but that is simply not true.

As for the child support, I'm sure it is based on a formula according to the approximate 75%/25% parenting time split resulting from the court's order that you only get to see your child every other weekend (I.e., 1,3, 5th weekends). The bottom line is that court has turned children into a commodity.

Her income is irrelevant to the calculation of what the non-custodial parent pays in child support. In effect you are paying your ex wife to babysit your child for the 25% difference between the 50/50 split you want and the 25% you got.

The real kicker is that given your ex's level of hate towards you she will 100% work toward alienating your child from you.

This is completely wrong. It is so completely wrong it is probably the stupidest thing I've read on this forum in awhile and there is some grossly inaccurate information on this forum.

Maybe it depends on the state because in Texas they absolutely do not care about BOTH parents incomes... see the calculator: https://csapps.oag.texas.gov/monthly-child-support-calculator

Notice there is only one input for income and it is for the non-custodial parent not the custodial parent.

So I just looked it up and some states do in fact ONLY care about the obligators income. I think your statement above about the posters comment being stupid is snarky. It is true that some states (see the list) don't care at all about the custodial parents income.

http://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/guideline-models-by-state.aspx

http://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/guideline-models-by-state.aspx

[Anonymous]

Sounds familiar - I got a similar bullshit proposal from my STBX. For some reason women think they’re entitled to the kids and your money. Get an attorney. If you’re in VA it’s a no-fault state so that doesn’t matter. Fight it out

[Anonymous]

Op keeps saying he is a very involved father, but what does that mean, really? was he involved in the daily care, doctors appts, extracurricular activities, making meals/lunches, shopping, school meetings, putting her to bed, etc.? or is he a vacation dad and just does only fun stuff with her? because if it's the latter, i can see why the judge would not give him primary custody.

Also, if you read his first post (which he linked to on page 2 or 3), there is something very odd sounding....I think OP might be from another culture ( I am, and something sounded familiar - maybe it was all the talk about 'brainwashing away from his side of the family' - that's like classic immigrant Asian drama right there). I could be wrong. But I'm not sure OP is being 100% sincere....He must have done something wrong to not only turn his wife against him, but also his daughter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op keeps saying he is a very involved father, but what does that mean, really? was he involved in the daily care, doctors appts, extracurricular activities, making meals/lunches, shopping, school meetings, putting her to bed, etc.? or is he a vacation dad and just does only fun stuff with her? because if it's the latter, i can see why the judge would not give him primary custody.

Also, if you read his first post (which he linked to on page 2 or 3), there is something very odd sounding....I think OP might be from another culture ( I am, and something sounded familiar - maybe it was all the talk about 'brainwashing away from his side of the family' - that's like classic immigrant Asian drama right there). I could be wrong. But I'm not sure OP is being 100% sincere....He must have done something wrong to not only turn his wife against him, but also his daughter.

Yeah, for sure. OP is sidestepping this issue. Don't know if it's relevant to the issue but this is an anon board - why not fess up the real reason for the divorce? I'm guessing it's something pretty unique that perhaps may out him IRL?

That said, if a person is claiming to be an "involved father", I think that's pretty clear that it's not a vacation dad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Daddy didn’t parent 50/50 when they were married so hows he’s going to suddenly do it now? Make mommy do 90% of the work and just who up to play on his days? Riiight.

Your time to parent, teach and raise your children well have past. You failed. If you were so involved and influential to your kids it would be very provable.

Well, as always, it depends. Was Mommy a completely over-controlling parent that did not like the way daddy did things or was daddy a total incompetent buffoon. If the latter, yeah, I can understand not giving 50-50. But if it's the former, time for mommy to let go. And you know what? I bet you that for MOST folks, having a 50-50 split actually HELPS you become a better parent because you don't have the overbearing/controlling other parent looking over your shoulder disapprovingly.

Isn’t that funny how some slackers don’t step up until they are the only adult in the house? Pathetic. Get some respect.

Mom wants dad to earn lots of money and stay home or work part time - look at PP comments. So, then she claims Dad doesn't want to be involved or do his half but in order for him to make the income she wants to keep her lifestyle he has to work that many hours and not be involved with the kids. So, sometimes Dad's cannot win.

Being a “good father” is a lot more that going to the office during the day and passing out on the TV couch at night.

[Anonymous]

To me, an involved dad is someone who shares parenting equally. Now, I realize in some cases, there may be a SAHM, but in cases where both people work full time, it should be equally shared. Otherwise that's not an "involved dad". In most cases of two working parents that I know, the mom is doing the lion's share of child care, emotional labor, etc. And this is true for the moms who I know that are teachers and writers but also physician specialists, big law attorneys, investment bankers, etc. The moms know what's going on at school, who the friends are, what class they need tutoring in.... whatever. I know people are going to come on here saying that their marriage is not like that. Which is great for you. But in my circle of upper income, highly educated friends living in a large city, that's absolutely the case in 90% of the couples. Which is why I question the dad's involvement. And maybe think the judge is just continuing what's been the status quo arrangement from day 0. And FWIW, in my large city (not DC), courts are definitely moving away from 50-50. Two of my friends got divorced in 2018 and both have similar arrangements to OP. Noone had an at fault divorce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP - you may want to step back and figure out what truly is better for your daughter.

1. You are not being barred from spending time with her at all. You can't claim you are being driven out. Every other weekend is normal and you need to be prepared to spend your time with her when you have her. You also have visitation during the week just not an overnight.

2. You described yourself as a very involved father. This is nice but you never described yourself as a primary parent. Spending time and bonding with your child is very important but at least one souse and sometimes two takes on the role of caregiver-which means all the not so fun stuff like doctors appointments, school activities, sickness, clothing shopping, finds the summer camps, setting up play dates and activities, etc etc. Think about this one.

3. Too often judges see one parent fight for more time only to later start drawing back on the time they won because they aren't the primary parent. This usually happens with the dads and its very damaging for kids. The kids get dumped because Dad has a date or Dad's new girl friend wants to go out of town. When you don't act like a primary parent, it is easier to set the kids aside and reschedule them. If you are the primary parent, kids come first. Before you fight for more time, you better be sure that you will live up to that commitment.

4. Child support is about making sure the child's needs are met. You seem miffed that your wife makes 100K more than you, yet you have to pay some child support. You probably are realizing that you may not get any alimony. It sounds like you were banking on not paying anything toward your child and possibly getting alimony from your wife.

Make sure that your desire for 50/50 isn't to get your wife to fund you. Judges also see this a lot where one spouse who has never been the primary parent is driven more to acquire more custody to get access to more money.

This is very sound advice. If the PP above is correct, the wife had a hard life. Imagine making over twice as much as your H and also being the primary parent and taking care of everything while your H is doing something bad enough to require are fault divorce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To me, an involved dad is someone who shares parenting equally. Now, I realize in some cases, there may be a SAHM, but in cases where both people work full time, it should be equally shared. Otherwise that's not an "involved dad". In most cases of two working parents that I know, the mom is doing the lion's share of child care, emotional labor, etc. And this is true for the moms who I know that are teachers and writers but also physician specialists, big law attorneys, investment bankers, etc. The moms know what's going on at school, who the friends are, what class they need tutoring in.... whatever. I know people are going to come on here saying that their marriage is not like that. Which is great for you. But in my circle of upper income, highly educated friends living in a large city, that's absolutely the case in 90% of the couples. Which is why I question the dad's involvement. And maybe think the judge is just continuing what's been the status quo arrangement from day 0. And FWIW, in my large city (not DC), courts are definitely moving away from 50-50. Two of my friends got divorced in 2018 and both have similar arrangements to OP. Noone had an at fault divorce.

Its funny as our kids are in a lot of activities and its the Dad's we see, not the mom's doing the transportation and being involved. So, what happens when you have a dual working couple working similar hours and have 1-2 nannies or day care providing more care than either parent. Do both lose custody?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To me, an involved dad is someone who shares parenting equally. Now, I realize in some cases, there may be a SAHM, but in cases where both people work full time, it should be equally shared. Otherwise that's not an "involved dad". In most cases of two working parents that I know, the mom is doing the lion's share of child care, emotional labor, etc. And this is true for the moms who I know that are teachers and writers but also physician specialists, big law attorneys, investment bankers, etc. The moms know what's going on at school, who the friends are, what class they need tutoring in.... whatever. I know people are going to come on here saying that their marriage is not like that. Which is great for you. But in my circle of upper income, highly educated friends living in a large city, that's absolutely the case in 90% of the couples. Which is why I question the dad's involvement. And maybe think the judge is just continuing what's been the status quo arrangement from day 0. And FWIW, in my large city (not DC), courts are definitely moving away from 50-50. Two of my friends got divorced in 2018 and both have similar arrangements to OP. Noone had an at fault divorce.

Its funny as our kids are in a lot of activities and its the Dad's we see, not the mom's doing the transportation and being involved. So, what happens when you have a dual working couple working similar hours and have 1-2 nannies or day care providing more care than either parent. Do both lose custody?

I see plenty of dads at my kids’ activities too. It’s more fun to be the person who sits on a bench and surfs the internet on his phone while his wife is at home wrangling two other kids while also making dinner and supervising homework.