Anyone’s exDH try to use family caregiving for custody?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP hasn't said she's in DC. Feel free to google-I'm not doing your legwork.

DC is just one example. You’re the one who made the assertion so you need to support it.

What exact place are you looking for? MD? FL? Alaska? Can you be more specific?

I’m not the one making the claim and OP hasn’t said where she is. So discussing the DC law seems reasonable. The person who claimed that the DH’s work travel is irrelevant should back that statement up.

The PP said that, depending on where the OP lives, the work travel may not matter as far as custody. It really is dependent on where they are, which has not been disclosed. A quick Google search would be helpful to you, PP.

NP. I’m in Virginia. Pre-divorce, my (then-) husband was gone 3-4 nights/weekends a week. While divorcing, he said he had changed his schedule to accommodate 50/50. As soon as the ink was dry, he went back to the old schedule, but did move things around so he was on overnight travel on my custodial nights.

Which is to say, pre-divorce behavior isn’t nearly as relevant as we might want it to be.

Right - the key is he changed his schedule so he didn’t travel on his custodial nights, right? That is not OP’s situation.

Well OP isn’t divorced yet so who knows what her ex will put in practice. And as PP said, the travel now occurs on her custodial time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP hasn't said she's in DC. Feel free to google-I'm not doing your legwork.

DC is just one example. You’re the one who made the assertion so you need to support it.

What exact place are you looking for? MD? FL? Alaska? Can you be more specific?

I’m not the one making the claim and OP hasn’t said where she is. So discussing the DC law seems reasonable. The person who claimed that the DH’s work travel is irrelevant should back that statement up.

The PP said that, depending on where the OP lives, the work travel may not matter as far as custody. It really is dependent on where they are, which has not been disclosed. A quick Google search would be helpful to you, PP.

NP. I’m in Virginia. Pre-divorce, my (then-) husband was gone 3-4 nights/weekends a week. While divorcing, he said he had changed his schedule to accommodate 50/50. As soon as the ink was dry, he went back to the old schedule, but did move things around so he was on overnight travel on my custodial nights.

Which is to say, pre-divorce behavior isn’t nearly as relevant as we might want it to be.

Right - the key is he changed his schedule so he didn’t travel on his custodial nights, right? That is not OP’s situation.

They are not divorced yet. So we have no idea what her situation will be.

Well according to OP, her ex is not planning to change his work schedule but still wants 50-50. So that’s what she has to go on. I’m really unclear on why people are advising her to cave before she needs to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP hasn't said she's in DC. Feel free to google-I'm not doing your legwork.

DC is just one example. You’re the one who made the assertion so you need to support it.

What exact place are you looking for? MD? FL? Alaska? Can you be more specific?

I’m not the one making the claim and OP hasn’t said where she is. So discussing the DC law seems reasonable. The person who claimed that the DH’s work travel is irrelevant should back that statement up.

The PP said that, depending on where the OP lives, the work travel may not matter as far as custody. It really is dependent on where they are, which has not been disclosed. A quick Google search would be helpful to you, PP.

NP. I’m in Virginia. Pre-divorce, my (then-) husband was gone 3-4 nights/weekends a week. While divorcing, he said he had changed his schedule to accommodate 50/50. As soon as the ink was dry, he went back to the old schedule, but did move things around so he was on overnight travel on my custodial nights.

Which is to say, pre-divorce behavior isn’t nearly as relevant as we might want it to be.

Right - the key is he changed his schedule so he didn’t travel on his custodial nights, right? That is not OP’s situation.

They are not divorced yet. So we have no idea what her situation will be.

Well according to OP, her ex is not planning to change his work schedule but still wants 50-50. So that’s what she has to go on. I’m really unclear on why people are advising her to cave before she needs to.

People are encouraging her to be flexible if all she wants is more time with her kid. Whatever restrictions she puts on her ex can be applied to her. If her whole point is more time with her kid, then be flexible and get what she wants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP hasn't said she's in DC. Feel free to google-I'm not doing your legwork.

DC is just one example. You’re the one who made the assertion so you need to support it.

What exact place are you looking for? MD? FL? Alaska? Can you be more specific?

I’m not the one making the claim and OP hasn’t said where she is. So discussing the DC law seems reasonable. The person who claimed that the DH’s work travel is irrelevant should back that statement up.

The PP said that, depending on where the OP lives, the work travel may not matter as far as custody. It really is dependent on where they are, which has not been disclosed. A quick Google search would be helpful to you, PP.

NP. I’m in Virginia. Pre-divorce, my (then-) husband was gone 3-4 nights/weekends a week. While divorcing, he said he had changed his schedule to accommodate 50/50. As soon as the ink was dry, he went back to the old schedule, but did move things around so he was on overnight travel on my custodial nights.

Which is to say, pre-divorce behavior isn’t nearly as relevant as we might want it to be.

Right - the key is he changed his schedule so he didn’t travel on his custodial nights, right? That is not OP’s situation.

They are not divorced yet. So we have no idea what her situation will be.

Well according to OP, her ex is not planning to change his work schedule but still wants 50-50. So that’s what she has to go on. I’m really unclear on why people are advising her to cave before she needs to.

People are encouraging her to be flexible if all she wants is more time with her kid. Whatever restrictions she puts on her ex can be applied to her. If her whole point is more time with her kid, then be flexible and get what she wants.

He’s not being flexible. She doesn’t need to start out being flexible. She needs to start out asking for what she could feasibly get based on the law in her jurisdiction with the advice of her lawyer. She likely has a good argument for more than 50% custody and right of first refusal that does not end up meaning her kids cannot ever stay home alone with her mom.

[Anonymous]

Her “flexibility” is why women earn less than men.

OP has been abandoned by her husband nd she’s supposed to just wait “on standby” and not working for when she is granted the pleasure of picking up his slack? Nah brah. Not unless each night mom covers is paid (pro rated to child support) at month end- maybe. No way otherwise

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP hasn't said she's in DC. Feel free to google-I'm not doing your legwork.

DC is just one example. You’re the one who made the assertion so you need to support it.

In a different state- Colorado which is strongly pro dads rights and 50/50 state. I still got primary custody because I’d been primary parent for a decade plus while dad travelled 100 documented nights a year. Father had willingly missed a third of the kids lives judge game him a third of parenting time. He had EOW Thursday- Monday and off week dinner visits.

Divorce doesn’t rewrite history - especially if dad is still in his same job.

Good luck, OP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[img]

Anonymous wrote:OP you and your ex seem very similar in terms of being spiteful people who care more about winning than your child. It doens't seem either parent is really focused on the child - both are too caught up in getting back at the other.

Keep fighting and being spiteful and nasty and he will be the same in return and you can both continually focus on all the wrong things and forget there is a child in the middle of this who you are both prepared to drag around and ruin any stability he has to prove your own points and to be right. You don't come across as a better person or parent than your ex in any way.

Come to my house a year ago, listen to him scream at my child, go through discovery and look at his financial deception, and then maybe be there the day he had me served out of nowhere in person in front of our child.

Those details were really not helpful when I was just trying to get advice about how family caregiving and custody work, but they are now when people are going late night angry troll on me.

If he was such an awful parent, you should have left him years ago. But then again all these extra “facts” are likely lies to get more people to side with your POV.

Bolded above is the classic ignorant dumb comment and viewpoint from people who have ZERO clue about the dynamics of being in an abusive relationship. Take your ignorance elsewhere, PP.

STFU. OP started this thread wanting to control her ex and what he does with his custody. When she didn’t get the support she expected she decided to start bread crumbing details to gain more sympathy. There’s no abuse here, just someone scorned that her ex surprised her with a divorce.

I am the PP you are responding to and you continue to double down on your ignorance. Gaslighting too. You're a real jerk, it seems.

Grow up. The only jerk is the one who has to resort to name calling.

Nah, telling me to "STFU" is worse. You come off as a very angry person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[img]

Anonymous wrote:OP you and your ex seem very similar in terms of being spiteful people who care more about winning than your child. It doens't seem either parent is really focused on the child - both are too caught up in getting back at the other.

Keep fighting and being spiteful and nasty and he will be the same in return and you can both continually focus on all the wrong things and forget there is a child in the middle of this who you are both prepared to drag around and ruin any stability he has to prove your own points and to be right. You don't come across as a better person or parent than your ex in any way.

Come to my house a year ago, listen to him scream at my child, go through discovery and look at his financial deception, and then maybe be there the day he had me served out of nowhere in person in front of our child.

Those details were really not helpful when I was just trying to get advice about how family caregiving and custody work, but they are now when people are going late night angry troll on me.

If he was such an awful parent, you should have left him years ago. But then again all these extra “facts” are likely lies to get more people to side with your POV.

Bolded above is the classic ignorant dumb comment and viewpoint from people who have ZERO clue about the dynamics of being in an abusive relationship. Take your ignorance elsewhere, PP.

STFU. OP started this thread wanting to control her ex and what he does with his custody. When she didn’t get the support she expected she decided to start bread crumbing details to gain more sympathy. There’s no abuse here, just someone scorned that her ex surprised her with a divorce.

I am the PP you are responding to and you continue to double down on your ignorance. Gaslighting too. You're a real jerk, it seems.

Grow up. The only jerk is the one who has to resort to name calling.

Nah, telling me to "STFU" is worse. You come off as a very angry person.

Nice try, but you’re the name calling rageaholic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[img]

Anonymous wrote:OP you and your ex seem very similar in terms of being spiteful people who care more about winning than your child. It doens't seem either parent is really focused on the child - both are too caught up in getting back at the other.

Keep fighting and being spiteful and nasty and he will be the same in return and you can both continually focus on all the wrong things and forget there is a child in the middle of this who you are both prepared to drag around and ruin any stability he has to prove your own points and to be right. You don't come across as a better person or parent than your ex in any way.

Come to my house a year ago, listen to him scream at my child, go through discovery and look at his financial deception, and then maybe be there the day he had me served out of nowhere in person in front of our child.

Those details were really not helpful when I was just trying to get advice about how family caregiving and custody work, but they are now when people are going late night angry troll on me.

If he was such an awful parent, you should have left him years ago. But then again all these extra “facts” are likely lies to get more people to side with your POV.

Bolded above is the classic ignorant dumb comment and viewpoint from people who have ZERO clue about the dynamics of being in an abusive relationship. Take your ignorance elsewhere, PP.

STFU. OP started this thread wanting to control her ex and what he does with his custody. When she didn’t get the support she expected she decided to start bread crumbing details to gain more sympathy. There’s no abuse here, just someone scorned that her ex surprised her with a divorce.

I am the PP you are responding to and you continue to double down on your ignorance. Gaslighting too. You're a real jerk, it seems.

Grow up. The only jerk is the one who has to resort to name calling.

Nah, telling me to "STFU" is worse. You come off as a very angry person.

Nice try, but you’re the name calling rageaholic.

Haha, "rageaholic" Because "jerk" is a real incendiary word. Are you a teenager? Or early 20s?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP hasn't said she's in DC. Feel free to google-I'm not doing your legwork.

DC is just one example. You’re the one who made the assertion so you need to support it.

What exact place are you looking for? MD? FL? Alaska? Can you be more specific?

I’m not the one making the claim and OP hasn’t said where she is. So discussing the DC law seems reasonable. The person who claimed that the DH’s work travel is irrelevant should back that statement up.

The PP said that, depending on where the OP lives, the work travel may not matter as far as custody. It really is dependent on where they are, which has not been disclosed. A quick Google search would be helpful to you, PP.

NP. I’m in Virginia. Pre-divorce, my (then-) husband was gone 3-4 nights/weekends a week. While divorcing, he said he had changed his schedule to accommodate 50/50. As soon as the ink was dry, he went back to the old schedule, but did move things around so he was on overnight travel on my custodial nights.

Which is to say, pre-divorce behavior isn’t nearly as relevant as we might want it to be.

Right - the key is he changed his schedule so he didn’t travel on his custodial nights, right? That is not OP’s situation.

They are not divorced yet. So we have no idea what her situation will be.

Well according to OP, her ex is not planning to change his work schedule but still wants 50-50. So that’s what she has to go on. I’m really unclear on why people are advising her to cave before she needs to.

People are encouraging her to be flexible if all she wants is more time with her kid. Whatever restrictions she puts on her ex can be applied to her. If her whole point is more time with her kid, then be flexible and get what she wants.

He’s not being flexible. She doesn’t need to start out being flexible. She needs to start out asking for what she could feasibly get based on the law in her jurisdiction with the advice of her lawyer. She likely has a good argument for more than 50% custody and right of first refusal that does not end up meaning her kids cannot ever stay home alone with her mom.

OP’s lawyer told her that her desired ROFR outcome is unlikely. OP herself admits she needs to give to get. So no, she should not start mediation by asking for what she could feasibly get. She should make a list of non-negotiables for her, a list of things she is willing to give up, and a list of things her stbx wants, and pair them accordingly.

When this mediation fails, OP can ask the judge for everything she can feasibly get. And she should expect her husband to do the same. Which means 50/50, likely with the promise that his work schedule will change.

[Anonymous]

In my experience judges weigh actual past and present circumstances more than one parents refusal to deny the actuality of his (continuing) work travel. The. Hold is young enough that any judge is going to consider historical precedent.

Apologies as I read the OP days ago so if OP was working too was she both caregiving during sTBX travel and working? Or was she SAH? If SAH alimony and child support should allow her to be primary custodial parent for continuity for the child. Just because dad peaced out doesn’t mean the child’s entire routine needs to change and if OP has a good lawyer they’ll use his travel reimbursement or rewards statements to prove his hotel nights. They’ll show that mom was home. They’ll show that mom is the one who goes to teacher conferences and takes the kids to all sick visits and well visits. Was pretty easy from there to get primary custody amd joint decision making. That was great for me. Our routine continues and every other weekend I had to regroup and relax without some gross beast getting drunk and yelling at all of us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP hasn't said she's in DC. Feel free to google-I'm not doing your legwork.

DC is just one example. You’re the one who made the assertion so you need to support it.

What exact place are you looking for? MD? FL? Alaska? Can you be more specific?

I’m not the one making the claim and OP hasn’t said where she is. So discussing the DC law seems reasonable. The person who claimed that the DH’s work travel is irrelevant should back that statement up.

The PP said that, depending on where the OP lives, the work travel may not matter as far as custody. It really is dependent on where they are, which has not been disclosed. A quick Google search would be helpful to you, PP.

No, there is no “quick google search” that supports that. On the other hand there is specific DC code (and likely in other states) that contradicts it.

There is. Try it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP hasn't said she's in DC. Feel free to google-I'm not doing your legwork.

DC is just one example. You’re the one who made the assertion so you need to support it.

What exact place are you looking for? MD? FL? Alaska? Can you be more specific?

I’m not the one making the claim and OP hasn’t said where she is. So discussing the DC law seems reasonable. The person who claimed that the DH’s work travel is irrelevant should back that statement up.

The PP said that, depending on where the OP lives, the work travel may not matter as far as custody. It really is dependent on where they are, which has not been disclosed. A quick Google search would be helpful to you, PP.

NP. I’m in Virginia. Pre-divorce, my (then-) husband was gone 3-4 nights/weekends a week. While divorcing, he said he had changed his schedule to accommodate 50/50. As soon as the ink was dry, he went back to the old schedule, but did move things around so he was on overnight travel on my custodial nights.

Which is to say, pre-divorce behavior isn’t nearly as relevant as we might want it to be.

Right - the key is he changed his schedule so he didn’t travel on his custodial nights, right? That is not OP’s situation.

They are not divorced yet. So we have no idea what her situation will be.

Well according to OP, her ex is not planning to change his work schedule but still wants 50-50. So that’s what she has to go on. I’m really unclear on why people are advising her to cave before she needs to.

People are encouraging her to be flexible if all she wants is more time with her kid. Whatever restrictions she puts on her ex can be applied to her. If her whole point is more time with her kid, then be flexible and get what she wants.

He’s not being flexible. She doesn’t need to start out being flexible. She needs to start out asking for what she could feasibly get based on the law in her jurisdiction with the advice of her lawyer. She likely has a good argument for more than 50% custody and right of first refusal that does not end up meaning her kids cannot ever stay home alone with her mom.

OP’s lawyer told her that her desired ROFR outcome is unlikely. OP herself admits she needs to give to get. So no, she should not start mediation by asking for what she could feasibly get. She should make a list of non-negotiables for her, a list of things she is willing to give up, and a list of things her stbx wants, and pair them accordingly.

When this mediation fails, OP can ask the judge for everything she can feasibly get. And she should expect her husband to do the same. Which means 50/50, likely with the promise that his work schedule will change.

You have zero basis to say that and OP has not said that about her lawyers advice, unless I missed it. If he has a documented schedule of last minute and frequent travel then that is going to be very material in the amount of parenting time he gets. And per OP he is not saying his schedule will change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In my experience judges weigh actual past and present circumstances more than one parents refusal to deny the actuality of his (continuing) work travel. The. Hold is young enough that any judge is going to consider historical precedent.

Apologies as I read the OP days ago so if OP was working too was she both caregiving during sTBX travel and working? Or was she SAH? If SAH alimony and child support should allow her to be primary custodial parent for continuity for the child. Just because dad peaced out doesn’t mean the child’s entire routine needs to change and if OP has a good lawyer they’ll use his travel reimbursement or rewards statements to prove his hotel nights. They’ll show that mom was home. They’ll show that mom is the one who goes to teacher conferences and takes the kids to all sick visits and well visits. Was pretty easy from there to get primary custody amd joint decision making. That was great for me. Our routine continues and every other weekend I had to regroup and relax without some gross beast getting drunk and yelling at all of us.

Thanks for an actual description of how this can work out if women are not scared into being “flexible” ie sabatoging themselves from the get go. Judges are not fooled by men with “big careers” and SAHW who all of a sudden claim that they are going to be 50% time parents.

I don’t know the actual facts of OP’s case so maybe she won’t be able to show the same things you did. But it is absurd to claim that her ex’s plan to travel frequently on his custody days is something she just has to accept.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP hasn't said she's in DC. Feel free to google-I'm not doing your legwork.

DC is just one example. You’re the one who made the assertion so you need to support it.

What exact place are you looking for? MD? FL? Alaska? Can you be more specific?

I’m not the one making the claim and OP hasn’t said where she is. So discussing the DC law seems reasonable. The person who claimed that the DH’s work travel is irrelevant should back that statement up.

The PP said that, depending on where the OP lives, the work travel may not matter as far as custody. It really is dependent on where they are, which has not been disclosed. A quick Google search would be helpful to you, PP.

No, there is no “quick google search” that supports that. On the other hand there is specific DC code (and likely in other states) that contradicts it.

There is. Try it.

lol there is not. If anything a “quick google search” turns up reams of support for the fact that a parent’s work travel can be taken into account to reduce custody time. What exactly are you googling?