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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Looking at the entirety of the law, it sounds like the judge can order joint custody, and then the parents can agree to it.

I would think that if the judge orders joint, and one parent refuses, the other parent should get sole legal custody. But I am not a judge.

I would think that a mother asking for sole custody, who is offered a choice between joint and none, would become amenable to joint custody.

What is her basis for asking for a change?

Is there a current custody agreement or is it informal since there was no divorce.

There was no custody agreement prior to the mother filing earlier this year. Now there is a status quo/order of restraint that the parents can't change the schedule until a final order.

The mother filed a petition due to her increasing unhappiness with the coparenting situation after he started a new relationship and introduced the child to his new girlfriend without the mother's permission as well as a frustratingly steep drop in communication between the parents that coincided with the new relationship. The mother feels very strongly that it is best for the child that they have an amicable and close coparenting relationship with a large amount of flexibility, frequent contact between the two parents, and spending time together for the child's sake. The father disagrees and decided to move to a more parenting parallel style with only necessary communication about scheduling, major health/education decisions, etc, and wants to keep communication to text, email, or parenting app only. It all came to a head during the week of the child's birthday when he decided to throw his own birthday party for the child instead of attending the one the mother planned as he had in years past. The mother filed the petition later that week in hopes that it would spur the father to communicate more with her and have a sit down conversation with her.

[Anonymous]

The most likely scenario is that the judge will keep the status quo, which is 50/50.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at the entirety of the law, it sounds like the judge can order joint custody, and then the parents can agree to it.

I would think that if the judge orders joint, and one parent refuses, the other parent should get sole legal custody. But I am not a judge.

I would think that a mother asking for sole custody, who is offered a choice between joint and none, would become amenable to joint custody.

What is her basis for asking for a change?

Is there a current custody agreement or is it informal since there was no divorce.

There was no custody agreement prior to the mother filing earlier this year. Now there is a status quo/order of restraint that the parents can't change the schedule until a final order.

The mother filed a petition due to her increasing unhappiness with the coparenting situation after he started a new relationship and introduced the child to his new girlfriend without the mother's permission as well as a frustratingly steep drop in communication between the parents that coincided with the new relationship. The mother feels very strongly that it is best for the child that they have an amicable and close coparenting relationship with a large amount of flexibility, frequent contact between the two parents, and spending time together for the child's sake. The father disagrees and decided to move to a more parenting parallel style with only necessary communication about scheduling, major health/education decisions, etc, and wants to keep communication to text, email, or parenting app only. It all came to a head during the week of the child's birthday when he decided to throw his own birthday party for the child instead of attending the one the mother planned as he had in years past. The mother filed the petition later that week in hopes that it would spur the father to communicate more with her and have a sit down conversation with her.

So, she filed the petition asking for something she doesn't want?

It's not really clear from your description, I assume because you're trying to be neutral and really aren't, what happened. They had been coparenting well, Dad got a new girlfriend and suddenly stopped communicating? Or Dad got a new girlfriend, Mom reacted badly to the new girlfriend, and then Dad stopped communicating? Those are two really different scenarios.

Does Dad give a reason for no longer being willing to talk? That seems like a huge shift, but it's not clear why he made it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The most likely scenario is that the judge will keep the status quo, which is 50/50.

OP explained that legal custody is separate from parenting time/visitation and joint legal custody cannot legally be ordered by a judge where she lives unless both parents agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at the entirety of the law, it sounds like the judge can order joint custody, and then the parents can agree to it.

I would think that if the judge orders joint, and one parent refuses, the other parent should get sole legal custody. But I am not a judge.

I would think that a mother asking for sole custody, who is offered a choice between joint and none, would become amenable to joint custody.

What is her basis for asking for a change?

Is there a current custody agreement or is it informal since there was no divorce.

There was no custody agreement prior to the mother filing earlier this year. Now there is a status quo/order of restraint that the parents can't change the schedule until a final order.

The mother filed a petition due to her increasing unhappiness with the coparenting situation after he started a new relationship and introduced the child to his new girlfriend without the mother's permission as well as a frustratingly steep drop in communication between the parents that coincided with the new relationship. The mother feels very strongly that it is best for the child that they have an amicable and close coparenting relationship with a large amount of flexibility, frequent contact between the two parents, and spending time together for the child's sake. The father disagrees and decided to move to a more parenting parallel style with only necessary communication about scheduling, major health/education decisions, etc, and wants to keep communication to text, email, or parenting app only. It all came to a head during the week of the child's birthday when he decided to throw his own birthday party for the child instead of attending the one the mother planned as he had in years past. The mother filed the petition later that week in hopes that it would spur the father to communicate more with her and have a sit down conversation with her.

well I’m rooting for Father in this scenario. Mother sounds petulant, jealous, and foolish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at the entirety of the law, it sounds like the judge can order joint custody, and then the parents can agree to it.

I would think that if the judge orders joint, and one parent refuses, the other parent should get sole legal custody. But I am not a judge.

I would think that a mother asking for sole custody, who is offered a choice between joint and none, would become amenable to joint custody.

What is her basis for asking for a change?

Is there a current custody agreement or is it informal since there was no divorce.

There was no custody agreement prior to the mother filing earlier this year. Now there is a status quo/order of restraint that the parents can't change the schedule until a final order.

The mother filed a petition due to her increasing unhappiness with the coparenting situation after he started a new relationship and introduced the child to his new girlfriend without the mother's permission as well as a frustratingly steep drop in communication between the parents that coincided with the new relationship. The mother feels very strongly that it is best for the child that they have an amicable and close coparenting relationship with a large amount of flexibility, frequent contact between the two parents, and spending time together for the child's sake. The father disagrees and decided to move to a more parenting parallel style with only necessary communication about scheduling, major health/education decisions, etc, and wants to keep communication to text, email, or parenting app only. It all came to a head during the week of the child's birthday when he decided to throw his own birthday party for the child instead of attending the one the mother planned as he had in years past. The mother filed the petition later that week in hopes that it would spur the father to communicate more with her and have a sit down conversation with her.

So, she filed the petition asking for something she doesn't want?

It's not really clear from your description, I assume because you're trying to be neutral and really aren't, what happened. They had been coparenting well, Dad got a new girlfriend and suddenly stopped communicating? Or Dad got a new girlfriend, Mom reacted badly to the new girlfriend, and then Dad stopped communicating? Those are two really different scenarios.

Does Dad give a reason for no longer being willing to talk? That seems like a huge shift, but it's not clear why he made it.

Reading between the lines, the father got a new girlfriend and perhaps reasonably decided to create more boundaries between himself and the mother. Mother freaks out and decides that the best way to go back to a more “cooperative” coparenting relationship is somehow to bring in the courts and threaten to take away custody time from dad. It’s incredibly manipulative and hopefully the judge will see through it and mom will be the one who ends up with weekends and loss of legal custody.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at the entirety of the law, it sounds like the judge can order joint custody, and then the parents can agree to it.

I would think that if the judge orders joint, and one parent refuses, the other parent should get sole legal custody. But I am not a judge.

I would think that a mother asking for sole custody, who is offered a choice between joint and none, would become amenable to joint custody.

What is her basis for asking for a change?

Is there a current custody agreement or is it informal since there was no divorce.

There was no custody agreement prior to the mother filing earlier this year. Now there is a status quo/order of restraint that the parents can't change the schedule until a final order.

The mother filed a petition due to her increasing unhappiness with the coparenting situation after he started a new relationship and introduced the child to his new girlfriend without the mother's permission as well as a frustratingly steep drop in communication between the parents that coincided with the new relationship. The mother feels very strongly that it is best for the child that they have an amicable and close coparenting relationship with a large amount of flexibility, frequent contact between the two parents, and spending time together for the child's sake. The father disagrees and decided to move to a more parenting parallel style with only necessary communication about scheduling, major health/education decisions, etc, and wants to keep communication to text, email, or parenting app only. It all came to a head during the week of the child's birthday when he decided to throw his own birthday party for the child instead of attending the one the mother planned as he had in years past. The mother filed the petition later that week in hopes that it would spur the father to communicate more with her and have a sit down conversation with her.

So, she filed the petition asking for something she doesn't want?

It's not really clear from your description, I assume because you're trying to be neutral and really aren't, what happened. They had been coparenting well, Dad got a new girlfriend and suddenly stopped communicating? Or Dad got a new girlfriend, Mom reacted badly to the new girlfriend, and then Dad stopped communicating? Those are two really different scenarios.

Does Dad give a reason for no longer being willing to talk? That seems like a huge shift, but it's not clear why he made it.

It’s a combination of both I would say. Dad got a new girlfriend and Mom probably didn’t handle it as well as she could have. No egregious behavior but control issues and expressing anger. New girlfriend probably wasn’t comfortable with the coparenting relationship and there could be jealousy issues so Dad started to reduce communication and interaction and it was almost a positive feedback loop where Mom got upset, Dad withdrew, Mom responded by getting more upset and Dad withdrew more. Dad severely reduced communication over a period of a few months and unilaterally decided to start parallel parenting with limited communication and no face to face interaction. Mom doesn’t believe joint custody is realistic or healthy in this coparenting dynamic.

I’m not trying to be annoying in my poor attempt to keep it neutral. I just have found that it’s hard to get decent and relatively unbiased answers here when people know exactly whose side OP is on.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

Mom is a petty and vindictive b and is playing with fire by getting courts involved. She’s also delusional - the courts are not going to order that they all spend time together. If she wanted that she needed to persuade them; but she chose the nuclear option instead. Asking for the right of first refusal may be reasonable, but taking the child out of preschool is not. And based on everything else recounted by OP, it doesn’t sound like she’d exercise the right of first refusal in a way that prioritizes the child, who is likely perfectly happy to get picked up by grandpa.

[Anonymous]

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.

Mom is a petty and vindictive b and is playing with fire by getting courts involved. She’s also delusional - the courts are not going to order that they all spend time together. If she wanted that she needed to persuade them; but she chose the nuclear option instead. Asking for the right of first refusal may be reasonable, but taking the child out of preschool is not. And based on everything else recounted by OP, it doesn’t sound like she’d exercise the right of first refusal in a way that prioritizes the child, who is likely perfectly happy to get picked up by grandpa.

also LOL at mom trying to claim she’s the “amicable and respectful” one? she honestly sounds like she has a personality disorder. poor dad.

[Anonymous]

Both mom and dad sound like petulant children. That poor 5 year old!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Both mom and dad sound like petulant children. That poor 5 year old!

I don’t see anything that dad did. Everything OP listed sounds totally reasonable. It seems like he couldn’t avoid triggering the mom.

[Anonymous]

this must be in Oregon.

It does kind of make sense that if two parents can't agree to joint custody, it's not productive to order it and try to force those people to come to joint decisions. When they can't, they'll be back in court to decide on every matter. Easier for the court to give it to one or the other and put the emphasis on equal parenting time.

Anyway, I think this case would come down to who has better evidence and who has a better attorney to make the better argument.

Mom's lawyer could argue that Dad doesn't have the child's best interests in mind since he's not willing to foster the child's relationship with the mother during his parenting time, and that joint custody isn't possible when Dad refuses to communicate regularly so Mom had no choice but to request sole custody.

Dad's lawyer could argue that Mom doesn't have the child's best interest in mind as her intent to reduce father's visitation time from 50/50 is showing an unwillingness to foster the child's relationship with the father, and her continued requests on his parenting time could be construed as harassment that detract from his relationship and quality time with the child. Could also argue that mom's continued unemployment may harm the child.

[Anonymous]

On the bright side, I wonder if legal custody really matters that much in this particular case. All of the areas of disagreement appear to revolve around physical custody rather than legal custody. They both seem to be involved parents, both prefer the child attends preschool and there is nothing in the OP or subsequent follow ups about issues where legal custody would matter.

The OP should talk to their lawyer about physical custody but the 50/50 arrangement seems to be working for now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they are splitting costs including daycare 50/50, but one parent is unemployed, that seems very unfair. Why should a parent who is unemployed have to pay for half of daycare that they don't need? Even if they were working, it would be split by income in most states.

I wrote above that I would support the parent who isn't asking for the change, but then reread and realized that that parent seems to be failing to support their child.

Is that true, or are there other financial pieces I'm missing?

I realize I was not very clear.

The petitioner is the mother seeking sole legal custody and to change the 50/50 parenting time schedule. She is unemployed. The mother was willing to continue paying for half of preschool and was able to do so as she was collecting unemployment for 52 weeks. She has continued to utilize preschool during her parenting time as she was attending a certificate program in the hopes of starting a new career. Her unemployment recently ended and she is hoping to start a small business in the next few months to support her household.

The respondent who was willing to agree to joint legal custody and wishes to maintain the status quo 50/50 parenting time is the father and is employed full time and maintains health insurance for the child.

Is he paying child support? Unless her unemployment is equal to his income, or she has some other source of income, then he should be paying substantial child support.

There was no custody order or child support order prior to this case being filed. Prior to her unemployment, the two parents were making roughly the same salary and neither party felt the need for child support to be ordered. Child support will be calculated and ordered as part of the custody case.

It's pretty clear that she wants increased physical custody in order to get increased child support.