I wanted to know, do you guys have telephone access with your children on the holidays that they are with the other parent? For instance, I don't have my child for Thanksgiving but I am going to send a letter to her attorney (in NY) to ask Satan (aka: BM) for telephone contact on Thanksgiving. I just wanted to make sure that this is not uncommon. Personally when I had DD for thanksgiving last year I made sure she called her mom. I am also planning to have her call her mom on X-mas (if I actually get her for the holiday break....that's still up in the air).
Also, my DD's birthday is coming up (prior to my next court date) so I am going to also request to have time access to her on her B-day as well.
Let's see if that psycho b*tch allows me contact. It would be nice to see my DD, since it's been so long (although something tells me not to get my hopes up). BTW, there's nothing in the order that says I am allowed contact....remember, I have a crappy CO that says "frequent communication."
Thanks!
I think most orders generalize the telephone contact or state exact days. When you go back ask for specific times and days of the week you get to speak to child without interference and then you can add..each parent will be allowed phone access on all holidays that are listed under the holiday schedule plus birthdays of child and parents.
I think that going through lawyer would be good....then her lawyer can be the one to tell her it would look good if she did this (and who cares as long as you get to speak to child). At the same time, ask her lawyer when you can see child for her birthday. Should be interesting what her lawyers response will be....
Just wanted to add...that when you are asking for specific telephone times in your new orders (and I would definitely specificy holidays and specify times for those dates because it is likely that will not follow your normal call times) also ask that non holiday telephone calls made and not answered must be returned within 24 hours. As your child gets older, there is undoubtedly going to be times when she isn't home, you want it that calls have to be returned.
This topic just baffels the heck out of me. I'm CP of 2 children and if their Dad wants to call them...he can....any time he feels like it. If we're not home, I tell them "Hey...your Dad called...why don't you call him back." Likewise, if the kids want to call him, they know where the phone is...
Now my DH has this issue...sigh. I can see the frustration when he tries to call his son..the BM tells him "It's not your CO'd time to call...then hangs up"...It's just WRONG!!!
It's all about power and control to theses PBFH's......... (http://www.deltabravo.net/forum/Smileys/default/angry.gif)
It sure is a control thing.....and they use the kids as their weapons because it's the only thing they can control you with.
I sent the letter to the attorney. Kept the emotion out of it. Stated the dates and times I wanted and alternatives if those times were not available. Asked for confirmation on whether or not she was in agreement by a certain date. Let's see what happens.
I personally don't care if she allows me to talk to DD because her attorney told her to do it....I just wanna see her.
Most of the time that desire for power and control is birthed out of fear.
UPDATE- I wanted to let you guys know that BM did NOT allow me to talk to DD for Thanksgiving. However, she is allowing a monitored conversation on her birthday. Although it's retarded that my conversation is going to be monitored by a "third" party, I am not going to argue as I get to talk to DD which I haven't had contact with in almost 2 months.
Of course this was a result to my sending a letter to her attorney....so thanks for your suggestions on that. It seems like her attorney in NY has more sense than her attorney in TX.
Anyway.....I'm excited about getting to see DD soon. X-mas and Jurisdiction not yet finalized.....but a week more and we'll see. BM's attorney is submitted her motion in which she's asking the court in NY to give up jurisdiction because TX is a better forum as the child has more significant connections. We'll see.
Quote from: NYParent on Nov 27, 2009, 04:32:13 PM
UPDATE- I wanted to let you guys know that BM did NOT allow me to talk to DD for Thanksgiving. However, she is allowing a monitored conversation on her birthday. Although it's retarded that my conversation is going to be monitored by a "third" party, I am not going to argue as I get to talk to DD which I haven't had contact with in almost 2 months.
[/FONT]
What??? Monitored by who? And why?? I have never heard of such a thing. Is it being monitored by a neutral third party? Like supervised visiation?
She didn't say who was monitoring the call (well actually video conference). She just said that it was being monitored by a third party (probably her mother). There is no such thing as a "neutral" party in TX.
She did that because she wants me to argue. My attorney told me not to pick a fight with her, instead he wrote back saying that the call would be accepted but that it would be monitored from my end as well.
Of course you've never heard of such a thing because it doesn't make sense. Especially when I've never had a problem with calls to DD. She's just trying to aggravate me right before court. Plus in her mind I call to talk to her......no matter how many times I've told her that I do not, she's convinced that me asking to talk to DD is just a cover up to wanting to talk to her.....talk about CRAZY!
That is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. Of course I'm not shocked - because after a few years of this nothing's shocking anymore. (http://www.deltabravo.net/forum/Smileys/default/undecided.gif)
Hopefully the court will see through this and take into account that she is not willing or able to support your child's relationship with you. I think it's awesome that you have it documented in writing.
We've been through the phone call thing too. Now it's in the order. Of course, psycho still doesn't allow phone calls on occaision (like when she's mad at my husband for some imagined slight). It's always all about them.
No one should be shocked ... there's a lot of real estate between the monster dad and his child that necessitates the video conference in the first place. Hence the term "parental kidnapping" and the evidence continues to mount.
I feel certain monster dad will naturally be all peas and carrots for the conference but my hope is that, for the sake of the child, the mother/MIL don't use the occassion as a forum to demonstrate their obnoxious behavior.
Moreover, I hope the courts don't use this occassion to establish a status quo considering this is normal and it works for everybody. It is not and it doesn't. Especially the child.
Thanks NYP for keeping us posted !!
I wanted to share with everyone that I just saw/talked to DD. It was great. She looks so big!!!! She told me a few times that she "really missed" me and loved me very much.
I think it's horrible that BM hears something like that and it still doesn't click that withholding communication is not good for her. Everything went well with the conversation.....BM nor third party (if there was even one) did not get involved at all.
But anyway, wanted to share some good new with everyone.
Way to go, NYP! It's at least a step in the right direction! And considering how open your DD was with her feelings, it doesn't sound like the BM was there at all, as I would think your DD would be intimidated to show you any affection at all if she were present.
That's awesome. I am so glad that you got to talk to each other!!
It just breaks my heart that a child should have to go without one of their parents because of the willful intent of another, or that anyone would be deprived of a relationship as primary as that between a parent and their children. It's so wrong, and it's so heartbreaking. I am so happy that your daughter got to see you and talk to you, and that she knows her Daddy loves her.