SPARC Forums

Ok, DH is going to a re-hearing on Thurs. for CS.  BM/NCP is trying to get her CS stopped and/or postponed.  Kind of a strange situation, but she has a letter from one therapist that says she can't work and as soon as she got that letter she stopped therapy.

As some of you may or may not remember, she and I were in an altercation and charges were brought and since then you can't IMAGINE the trauma I have caused her, (even though she pushed me down a flight of stairs.) Exactly 9 days later she resumed her therapy and sucessfully had another therapist write a letter that she was unable to work due to her having re-occuring panic attacks everyday lasting 1 to 1 1/2 hrs....although she went 6 months before obtaining therapy again.
There is no tests that were included or mentioned in the letter other than "BM reports" she is having these episodes.

Ok, judge reserved judgement to see "how she felt" in the time frame she was asking for the postponement.  We know this is all a load of crap and she is just trying to get out of paying CS, always has and always will, currently her license is suspended, but she drives anyway etc. etc.. rules do not apply to this woman.

She is also trying for SSI benefits, it is my understanding that DH will receive child support from that if she is suppose to pay that...is that correct?

Help, we have a lawyer...and he will go with us if we ask him to, but DH did well last time he went by himself, and we would like to keep the lawyer costs down.

Anyone, anyone at all have any suggestions?????

Ah yes, the lovely things that get me in the middle of the night. The things that are manageable enough for me to forego the medication... but if it were keeping me from being able to work (instead of it being just plain old unemployment and poor opportunities) I would be in both therapy AND be taking the medication - side effects or not.

Can you suggest that the therapist's diagnosis is JUNK SCIENCE?   No proof, just the therapist reporting that BM is reporting... the letter is heresay... is it not? Her "letter" shouldn't be best evidence... so if she brings the letter, he (DH) should be objecting to its admissibility... he can't cross examine a letter.

Also, I would think - And I am NOT A LAWYER -- that her mental health condition should throw wide open her records to discovery... since her condition is her defense to not paying her obligations to her child(ren).

I'm done thinking out loud now.