Does anyone have any experience in naming the other woman in the divorce proceedings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes OP. Just the threat of naming her was enough to get my ex to sign the papers I presented him with. Now, they were very fair papers. 50/50 on everything except, I wanted more control of custody and visitation. I got it.

That's the sort of effect I'm looking for. I want sole custody, transferring the house to my name only, child support and full waiver of his claims to any of my assets. I'm the breadwinner. In exchange for this, I could offer liberal visitation and preserving his good name, which is important to him.

OP, from a legal perspective, I join the others with the view that your expectations are likely to be unrealistic. It's tough to say without more facts, but I doubt it.

From a relationship perspective, if you were my spouse and tried to do to me what you want to do to your husband, I'd do my very best to destroy you, even if I had to live in a box on a steam grate to do so. Be prepared for an equal and opposite reaction to whatever you choose to do.

[Anonymous]

I support you, but don't really have any advice.
Good luck!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes OP. Just the threat of naming her was enough to get my ex to sign the papers I presented him with. Now, they were very fair papers. 50/50 on everything except, I wanted more control of custody and visitation. I got it.

That's the sort of effect I'm looking for. I want sole custody, transferring the house to my name only, child support and full waiver of his claims to any of my assets. I'm the breadwinner. In exchange for this, I could offer liberal visitation and preserving his good name, which is important to him.

OP, from a legal perspective, I join the others with the view that your expectations are likely to be unrealistic. It's tough to say without more facts, but I doubt it.

From a relationship perspective, if you were my spouse and tried to do to me what you want to do to your husband, I'd do my very best to destroy you, even if I had to live in a box on a steam grate to do so. Be prepared for an equal and opposite reaction to whatever you choose to do.

The relationship perspective is irrelevant here. It was destroyed four years ago when he decided to have a child outside of marriage, and maintain the relationship with its mother to this day. Had I known this at the time, I wouldn't have had another child with him (born after the lovechild), nor would I have sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars into building a house with him.

He can't destroy me because I'm an innocent party, and because my reputation cannot be ruined by this revelation to the extent his can. Remember, I've done nothing wrong. He is the one who went and got himself a sideshow. Plus, he makes little money and can't afford good representation. If he wants to avoid public disgrace, he can do so by separating on my terms.

[Anonymous]

Plus, if you have to live in a box on a steam grate, you are very unlikely to be seen as a good candidate for shared custody of young children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you want to blackmail your husband in order to prevent the court from ordering what's best for your children, which in most cases is joint custody?

Hopefully he has enough balls to fight back.

I will allow liberal visitation in exchange for sole legal custody. He has routinely brought my children into another woman's house so that "siblings could have a relationship", unbeknownst to me. This means he has placed the children into an unhealthy moral environment, allowing them to witness his adulterous behavior, and making them keep a secret from their mother. I don't think this will endear him to the judge...

The judge will not care.

You think a father who makes a six-year old lie to cover for him could possibly be a good parent? A benevolent influence?

Getting sole custody is virtually impossible. Unless he is abusing the children and/or shows a pattern of consistent negligence (and even then, that's not a slam dunk), no judge will sign off on giving you sole custody. Making your kid lie about seeing the other woman? Happens all the time, and judges award joint custody. Remember, the judge will have the final say in your divorce.

it is not true that "no judge will sign off on sole custody." It is true that if you and your H disagree on custody and come before the judge asking that he decide, it is unlikely that you will get sole custody.

If you and your husband both agree on custody and the other elements of the divorce settlement and you are just putting the completed agreement before the court, then no judge will refuse to sign it, even if the agreement gives you sole custody.

BTW, there is a difference between sole physical custody with visitation to the father. Legal custody is different than physical custody and involves sharing decisions about school, religion, medical, etc. You may be able to get sole physical by giving in on joint legal custody so that your Ex has the veneer of "joint" custody.

[Anonymous]

Wow, OP, you go. I'm the consult a lawyer person.

I think you might be able to out negotiate him, if he is afraid of publicity.

Remember "custody" is two things - legal custody and physical custody. Legal custody is where you get to make all the decisions. You could also go for joint legal cushy, but you have tie breaking authority. That way you're the decision make but you have to consult with him in some sort of reasonable fashion before decision is made (you can write this into the custody agreement - something like you will provide information via email communications and if no answer is received within 3 days you will proceed with your deiciosn, but overarching another provision that you have tie breaking authority in matters of schooling, religion, medical, etc.).

Then there is physically custody. You might come up with a 80/20 split or something that works. But remember he is their father so you want them to have some level of relationship with him. Don't be too short sighted here.

I think your legal consults are going to give you the best framework for what you can and can't reasonably get. What you need to do is learn ALL your options, line up ALL your ducks, and in sum box him into a corner where you know all the answers and possible outcomes and negotiate your way into the best deal you can. You probably do not want togo to court - the decision will be out of your hands. You will be far bette of negotiating him into the best deal for you. And if publicity is frightening to him, use it as the driver to get him to agree to an airtight custody agreement.

In the meantime, document, document, document. Allow him visitation in a reasonable manner and document the hell out of everything you can. Photocopy every document you can get your hands on before he has a chance to move anything around.

Are you the mom from the playground incident - where you met the AP and the chi,d at the playground? If so, hugs to you - your DH is scum.

There's a yahoo group called Go Mom Go - google it or search on yahoo - that is a support group for divorcing moms. It could be a big help to you.

[Anonymous]

I understand that. I prefer the opposite combo: sole legal to me, and joint physical custody. I have no interest in damaging his relationship with the kids; I want him to have ample time with them. But I want to have sole control over their schooling, medical, travel etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I understand that. I prefer the opposite combo: sole legal to me, and joint physical custody. I have no interest in damaging his relationship with the kids; I want him to have ample time with them. But I want to have sole control over their schooling, medical, travel etc.

That's very reasonable. you are getting spectacularly bad advice from some people on here based on their personal feelings of fairness rather than any understanding of the divorce process. You're also getting some good advice here too. you do what you need to do to make the best deal for you and your kids.

[Anonymous]

You won't get sole. I've seen guys abusive to their wife and kids get 50/50 in FxCo. You'll need to prove he is more harm than good to his children. Proof of adultery is not going to meet that burden.

As an aside, it sounds like you're blackmailing him and using your children as pawns. Step back and think about what's best for your children.

[Anonymous]

Yes, destroy the reputation and career of your children's father in a vindictive manner. That's definitely in their best interest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you want to blackmail your husband in order to prevent the court from ordering what's best for your children, which in most cases is joint custody?

Hopefully he has enough balls to fight back.

I will allow liberal visitation in exchange for sole legal custody. He has routinely brought my children into another woman's house so that "siblings could have a relationship", unbeknownst to me. This means he has placed the children into an unhealthy moral environment, allowing them to witness his adulterous behavior, and making them keep a secret from their mother. I don't think this will endear him to the judge...

The judge will not care.

You think a father who makes a six-year old lie to cover for him could possibly be a good parent? A benevolent influence?

NP: my ex cheated. But seriously the judge won't care and I would suggest you more gut mind in for a surprise and spend a lot of money. Plus he is the father and a co-parent. He can spend the next 10 + years making your life unpleasant as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, destroy the reputation and career of your children's father in a vindictive manner. That's definitely in their best interest.

He destroyed his own reputation when he did what he did. This is not about making things up; it's about exposing what has been done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You won't get sole. I've seen guys abusive to their wife and kids get 50/50 in FxCo. You'll need to prove he is more harm than good to his children. Proof of adultery is not going to meet that burden.

As an aside, it sounds like you're blackmailing him and using your children as pawns. Step back and think about what's best for your children.

Actually I'm not; I am committed to making sure he spends as much time as possible with the children. As for what is best for my children, it's a) financial security, and b) having a sane parent be in control of decisions that shape their life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes OP. Just the threat of naming her was enough to get my ex to sign the papers I presented him with. Now, they were very fair papers. 50/50 on everything except, I wanted more control of custody and visitation. I got it.

That's the sort of effect I'm looking for. I want sole custody, transferring the house to my name only, child support and full waiver of his claims to any of my assets. I'm the breadwinner. In exchange for this, I could offer liberal visitation and preserving his good name, which is important to him.

OP, from a legal perspective, I join the others with the view that your expectations are likely to be unrealistic. It's tough to say without more facts, but I doubt it.

From a relationship perspective, if you were my spouse and tried to do to me what you want to do to your husband, I'd do my very best to destroy you, even if I had to live in a box on a steam grate to do so. Be prepared for an equal and opposite reaction to whatever you choose to do.

The relationship perspective is irrelevant here. It was destroyed four years ago when he decided to have a child outside of marriage, and maintain the relationship with its mother to this day. Had I known this at the time, I wouldn't have had another child with him (born after the lovechild), nor would I have sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars into building a house with him.

He can't destroy me because I'm an innocent party, and because my reputation cannot be ruined by this revelation to the extent his can. Remember, I've done nothing wrong. He is the one who went and got himself a sideshow. Plus, he makes little money and can't afford good representation. If he wants to avoid public disgrace, he can do so by separating on my terms.

The relationship perspective IS still relevant. You WILL have a relationship with your ex (just not a marital one). You WILL have to interact with him, a lot, because you have kids. Doesn't make much sense to poison that relationship up front by going nuclear in the divorce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes OP. Just the threat of naming her was enough to get my ex to sign the papers I presented him with. Now, they were very fair papers. 50/50 on everything except, I wanted more control of custody and visitation. I got it.

That's the sort of effect I'm looking for. I want sole custody, transferring the house to my name only, child support and full waiver of his claims to any of my assets. I'm the breadwinner. In exchange for this, I could offer liberal visitation and preserving his good name, which is important to him.

OP, from a legal perspective, I join the others with the view that your expectations are likely to be unrealistic. It's tough to say without more facts, but I doubt it.

From a relationship perspective, if you were my spouse and tried to do to me what you want to do to your husband, I'd do my very best to destroy you, even if I had to live in a box on a steam grate to do so. Be prepared for an equal and opposite reaction to whatever you choose to do.

The relationship perspective is irrelevant here. It was destroyed four years ago when he decided to have a child outside of marriage, and maintain the relationship with its mother to this day. Had I known this at the time, I wouldn't have had another child with him (born after the lovechild), nor would I have sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars into building a house with him.

He can't destroy me because I'm an innocent party, and because my reputation cannot be ruined by this revelation to the extent his can. Remember, I've done nothing wrong. He is the one who went and got himself a sideshow. Plus, he makes little money and can't afford good representation. If he wants to avoid public disgrace, he can do so by separating on my terms.

The relationship perspective IS still relevant. You WILL have a relationship with your ex (just not a marital one). You WILL have to interact with him, a lot, because you have kids. Doesn't make much sense to poison that relationship up front by going nuclear in the divorce.

The relationship is already poisoned by lies and deceit. I don't want to have to go nuclear. My DH doesn't, incidentally, want to divorce at all. He would like nothing better than to continue things the way they were, except that now I know and he doesn't have to lie to me before going to see his other "family". He claims he can't choose. I don't want to play this game. Nothing can restore the marital relationship to what is was. What I CAN do is try to separate on the financial terms that are most advantageous to me and the children, using the leverage I have.