Long...requesting objective opinions

[littlebit]

The following is e-mail correspondance word for word between me and my child's other parent (minus personal info of course).  I am hoping to get some objective feedback.  Basically, who is right and who is wrong, and who is being nice, who isn't, etc.  We have custody court in about a month.

Terry:
I need Child's Dental Insurance information. He has an appointment next week. A filling fell out. Thank you. Hope ya'll had a blessed Thanksgiving.

Pat:
Insurance carrier (XXXX) has not changed since 2001, has Child not been going to the dentist? would you like me to send a form in the mail? I will be glad to take him to Our Dentist if you would like, and also have his cleanings scheduled along with his brothers twice a year.
   Hope Child's tooth is ok, please keep me informed and let me know if I can be of assistance. When is Child's appointment and with whom?

Terry:
Yes, Child has been going to the Dentist. Since our move I can not find the dental insurance information. If you can please give it to me again, that would be very helpful.  

Pat:
When is Child's appointment and with whom?

Terry:
Dr. Specific and Dec.15 11:40. Now will you give me the needed info?

Pat:
Thank you kindly.  I will put the insurance form in the mail as I mentioned earlier.  
   We have an activity that I would like Child to be included in.  He would need to stay with me Sunday night and return to your house Monday afternoon.

Terry:
Last time you gave me the insurance info. over the phone. Why can't you just email it to me or give it to me tonight when you talk to Child?      
   What is the activity that you want to include Child in?

Pat:
I was simply trying to be nice by offering to mail the form that you need.  The insurance carrier is XXXX.  The policy is in my name and Child is listed as a dependant.  The form to use is called XXXX Company Dental Expense Claim Form.
   As for using my weekly phone call with Child for your needs, please refrain from doing so.  You allow such a brief time for communication between me and Child, I would prefer that that time not be spent on anything else.  You and I can communicate any other time.
   If there is an event Child is involved in that would be customary for his parents to attend (ball-games, plays, Scouts, ceremonies, etc.), I assure you that I would always make you aware of them.  That is not the case here, so I prefer not to give you our plans.  
    I would hope that your cooperation is not based on whether or not you approve of our plans.  I have never requested details about your activities before agreeing to your requests, and I would appreciate the same in return from you.  It is very important to me that Child be there, otherwise, I would not ask.

Terry:
First of all I was not asking you to use your phone call with Child for my needs. You have talked to me briefly numerous times during your phone call with him. It has never been a problem before. Also, it was the court that set the time allotment if you remember.  But that is fine.
   Thank you for the insurance info.
   As far as the other, I've already told you what my lawyer said.  If you have any other questions about  visitation, have your attorney contact my attorney.

Pat:
Yes, I have spoken to you before during those times.  It has only become an issue since you will not allow me & Child to talk to each other any other times.  
    I have also agreed to every request you have made of me to change scheduling for your benefit.  Attorneys were not necessary for you to make those changes that benefitted you, and you were even willing to discuss changes with me two hours ago when you wanted to know our plans.  
    I am making every attempt to be cooperative and nice.  Your welcome for the info.  Any time I can help I will.
    Yes, I do remember the court.  Will you allow me to talk to Child on the phone at times other that what the court has ordered you to?

Terry:
When I switched weekends with you, it benefited both of us and that has been the only thing I have asked of you. It did not interfere with Child's schooling. Your request have done that . I asked what your plans were because I thought if it was something Sunday evening then you could of possibly brought Child home later that night.

Pat:
I assure you, It did not benefit me to give up the only Halloween Child has had with me, or to allow you to pick him up early, or for him to miss out on our camp weekend we had scheduled.  There have also been times when we re-arranged schedules at your request during Child's "school hours".  I made these decisions based on what is good for Child.
    I'm confused about your requests regarding attorneys.  It is OK with you if we arrange your schedule changes between the two of us?  And if I only want to change the schedule by a couple of hours, that's OK too?  Please clarify.  
    Again, will you allow me to talk to Child on the phone at times other that what the court has ordered you to?
    I hate to hear that Child is sick.  Hope he gets better soon.  Please keep me up to date on his condition.

Terry:
First of, when I switched weekends with you in October, it was for Child's benefit. He wanted to go to my friend's wedding. I offered you the third weekend and that wasn't convenient for you. You took the Fifth weekend. As for Halloween and me picking him up at 5:00 on Sunday evening, you would have been driving for that hour until 6 anyway.  
As for your camping trip I don't know what you are talking about.
As far as you re-arranging your schedule during Child's school hours; I don't know what you are referring to.  You pick Child up every Friday at 3:00.
   You did not state in your email that you wanted to change visitation by a couple of hours, you stated a whole extra day. I will not let anything interfere with Child's education. That is where the attorney thing comes in.
   You continue to make caddie remarks in your emails and you continue to be disrespectful.  I do not consider that attitude as being cooperative.
If you can not email  me or talk to me without being caddie and disrespectful, then don't bother.
  Child is still sick. He has a cold. You will need to continue giving him medicine this weekend if he is not feeling better by tomorrow afternoon.

Pat:
>>>>First of, when I switched weekends with you in October.....    
>>>>As for your camping trip.....
>>>>As for Halloween....
We simply have opposite viewpoints here. I don't care to comment on those things further, unless you can point out something positive coming out of continuing with it.  

>>>>As far as you re-arranging your schedule during Child's school hours....
What are Child's school hours?

>>>>You continue to make caddie remarks.....
Whichever communications you view in a negative way, I sincerely apologize, as none were meant that way.  I feeI that an open line of communication is always best, and whatever it takes to do that, that is what we both need to do.  I will make every effort to watch how I word things.  Please do the same yourself.

>>>>You didn't state that you wanted to change by a couple of hours....
I agree.  You brought that up.

>>>>I will not let anything interfere with Child's education.
Interfere?  I have expressed my desires numerous times to help Child and you with his education, and for you to include me.  That is still my desire.  I want to be a part of his education just as you are.  As long as he is doing home-school, you and I could arrange it any way we wanted to. That is not interference, that is beneficial.
I mailed the insurance form to you.  Hope it helps.
Again, will you allow me to talk to Child on the phone at times other that what the court has ordered you to?

Terry:
You talk in circles. I will no longer banter back and forth with you. You are so concerned about Child having more time to talk with you during the week. Where was your concern for him during this summer? Don't you think he would of enjoyed talking to us more than once a week. You thought once a week was good enough then, then it should be good enough now.

Pat:
Child has no restrictions on his phone usage here.  
What are Child's school hours?

--no response--

Pat:
Child will be staying with me until Monday at 6:00 pm.

Terry:
I already told you no. Bring Child home at 6:00 Sunday like you are suppose to ordered by the court.

[Bolivar]

I read it.

First thanks for sharing you conversation with your eX.  That's a wing-dinger of a conversation.

My opinion from this conversation is.....................

Neither is right or wrong.  Nevertheless in this one conversation, NOT knowing the past:

I vote for - - - Pat: Child staying with him/her until Monday at 6:00 pm.

LOL
I hope I choose the right person, I wouldn't want my house egged. lol :-)


The conversation was tense from the start.  It got worse when Pat said "As for using my weekly phone call with Child for your needs, please refrain from doing so."  At this point the conversation went down hill.  Like a rock off a cliff.

I think if Pat would have stayed Focused on the issue of Child staying Monday until 6:00 I think the conversation would have gone better.

Why did I pick pat?  He/she is having the same problems as me and I am sympathetic to that side.

Some things pat said hits home:

1.You allow such a brief time for communication between me and Child, I would prefer that that time not be spent on anything else. You and I can communicate any other time.

2.I have never requested details about your activities before agreeing to your requests, and I would appreciate the same in return from you.

3. I have also agreed to every request you have made of me to change scheduling for your benefit.

4. It is OK with you if we arrange your schedule changes between the two of us? And if I only want to change the schedule by a couple of hours, that's OK too? Please clarify.

5. We simply have opposite viewpoints here.

[joni]

It's about control.  The same issues Bolivar brought up struck a chord with me as well.

I deeply resent having to get permission for issues regarding my SD.  Permission to go on vacation (BM comes and goes as she pleases with her, we have no idea where), permission to change our hours.  Limited phone conversations.  Permission to be involved in school.  Scheduling changes for BM on her whim.

I love those sexually ambiguous names as well.

If Terry isn't going outside of the court order, I don't know what other options that Pat has without court intervention.  Unfortunately, possession is 9/10's of the law.  Pat might as well take a deep breath and tell Terry what he needs the child for and kiss her fat ass.

And remember for the next time that Terry needs flexibility....don't give it to her.  Even if it does benefit the child....as she claims.

[jilly]

This communication started out with a request for dental information and degenerated into a fight about other issues not even related to the child going to the dentist.  As I've heard counselors say before "Fight about what you're fighting about and not things that have already happened."  I think both parties are wrong.

This is where things started going downhill: "Pat:
Insurance carrier (XXXX) has not changed since 2001, has Child not been going to the dentist? would you like me to send a form in the mail? I will be glad to take him to Our Dentist if you would like, and also have his cleanings scheduled along with his brothers twice a year.
Hope Child's tooth is ok, please keep me informed and let me know if I can be of assistance. When is Child's appointment and with whom?"

Instead of making accusations, Pat should have just given the requested information and left it at that. And there never was any mention of who the appointment was with!

I realize that concessions have been made in the past on other issues and it gets old being the only one playing nice but that's just how it goes sometimes.

This is just my opinion and we all know what opinions are like! LOL

[shawneetears]

For the record...this is my opinion...right or wrong it is mine and you asked for it.  I have tried to be objective... I've been on both sides so sex (mother or father) is not an issue here...

OK, synopsis....both wrong....  the previous commentors have the right of it...it started out as a request and quickly degenerated into a cat fight.

The initial email is ok but Pat should have left off with some of the comments...

>>Insurance carrier (XXXX) has not changed since 2001, has Child
>not been going to the dentist?

As the other person I woul feel this was a snide comment and rather antagonistic....  in short Pat accuses Terry of not caring for the child
now this might not have happened if Terry had been a little more forthcoming as to why the information was needed...ie that it had been misplaced in a recent move and that she wanted to be sure that the information was readily availale

>Pat:
 would you like me to send a form in the mail?

nice offer; shoulda been left at that.

I will be glad to take him to Our Dentist if
>you would like, and also have his cleanings scheduled along
>with his brothers twice a year.
>   Hope Child's tooth is ok, please keep me informed and let
>me know if I can be of assistance. When is Child's appointment
>and with whom?
>
Ok....this offer is only adding fuel to the fire set with the question about if the child was even getting his teeth taken care of.  It's ok to ask for the information but Pat has already put Terry on the defensive....not a good way to get the other side to give you what you want.

>Terry:
>Yes, Child has been going to the Dentist. Since our move I can
>not find the dental insurance information. If you can please
>give it to me again, that would be very helpful.  
>
>Pat:
>When is Child's appointment and with whom?
>
>Terry:
>Dr. Specific and Dec.15 11:40. Now will you give me the needed
>info?
>
>Pat:
>Thank you kindly.  I will put the insurance form in the mail
>as I mentioned earlier.  

This kinda sounds like Pat is holding the information hostage untill Terry gives the requested information...and that Terry knows it.

>   We have an activity that I would like Child to be included
>in.  He would need to stay with me Sunday night and return to
>your house Monday afternoon.

Who is we? This is not a request but a demand. Unfortunately things go downhill from here......
>
>Terry:
>Last time you gave me the insurance info. over the phone. Why
>can't you just email it to me or give it to me tonight when
>you talk to Child?

(you can hear how defensive Terry is....back a cat into a corner and they will scratch you...no pun intended)
     
>   What is the activity that you want to include Child in?
>
This is a reasonable question considering it wasn't even a request.

>Pat:
>I was simply trying to be nice by offering to mail the form
>that you need.  The insurance carrier is XXXX.  The policy is
>in my name and Child is listed as a dependant.  The form to
>use is called XXXX Company Dental Expense Claim Form.

Would have been a good time to try an apology....justification is not an apology.

>   As for using my weekly phone call with Child for your
>needs, please refrain from doing so.  You allow such a brief
>time for communication between me and Child, I would prefer
>that that time not be spent on anything else.  You and I can
>communicate any other time.

OUCH!  How bout this "If you wish to discuss this later this evening we can do that after I finish visiting with my child (or give a time that is after the alotted time) or at another time that is mutually convenient." Now Terry is being acused of interfering with visitation.

>   If there is an event Child is involved in that would be
>customary for his parents to attend (ball-games, plays,
>Scouts, ceremonies, etc.), I assure you that I would always
>make you aware of them.  That is not the case here, so I
>prefer not to give you our plans.
   
Double Ouch!!  Can ya be any more antagonistic?  

>    I would hope that your cooperation is not based on whether
>or not you approve of our plans.  I have never requested
>details about your activities before agreeing to your
>requests, and I would appreciate the same in return from you.

Yep...ya can.....  

>It is very important to me that Child be there, otherwise, I
>would not ask.
>
That is kinda obvious but instead of answering the question Pat has become defensive about the right to make own plans without "running them by" the other parent.  But Pat is the one requesting extra time.... if you want something you gotta be willing to give a little.  Sure, you might still end up with a no but put this way it's not just no it's H### NO!

>Terry:
>First of all I was not asking you to use your phone call with
>Child for my needs. You have talked to me briefly numerous
>times during your phone call with him. It has never been a
>problem before. Also, it was the court that set the time
>allotment if you remember.  But that is fine.
>   Thank you for the insurance info.
>   As far as the other, I've already told you what my lawyer
>said.  If you have any other questions about  visitation, have
>your attorney contact my attorney.

This is what I mean about the cat.....  Terry has been accused of not caring for the child, and basically not trying to cooperate.  The only positive part is(at this point at least) Terry took an "I wont' fight" attitude.... as we aren't privy to what has gone on before  we dont' know what the lawyer had said before .>

>Pat:
>Yes, I have spoken to you before during those times.  It has
>only become an issue since you will not allow me & Child to
>talk to each other any other times.
 >    I have also agreed to every request you have made of me to
>change scheduling for your benefit.  Attorneys were not
>necessary for you to make those changes that benefitted you,
>and you were even willing to discuss changes with me two hours
>ago when you wanted to know our plans.  

Ok when you are in a hole.....stop digging.

>    I am making every attempt to be cooperative and nice.

(are not....are too...are not....  )

>Your welcome for the info.  Any time I can help I will.
>    Yes, I do remember the court.  Will you allow me to talk
>to Child on the phone at times other that what the court has
>ordered you to?

(havent' gotten rid of the shovel yet)
>
>Terry:
>When I switched weekends with you, it benefited both of us and
>that has been the only thing I have asked of you. It did not
>interfere with Child's schooling. Your request have done that
>. I asked what your plans were because I thought if it was
>something Sunday evening then you could of possibly brought
>Child home later that night.

so much for not fighting...

 ok...obviously there is alot more going on beneath the surface than what this started out with....  

both are wrong.....  they might have legitimate gripes and concerns but this is NOT a productive conversation and it took both sides to get it that way.

Pat and Terry take turns at taking "pot shots"... a little tap here a whollop there..etc.  

As the NCP....Pat, gets exactly what the court says Pat can have...it is up to Pat to be sure that Terry doesn't short this...however,  that doesn't mean Pat has to give up what Pat has without a fair trade off.  If Pat wants something from Terry, Pat has to be willing to give in return and above all play nice.... the NCP doesn't  have the luxury of doing otherwise or it can go very hard on you.... it's not right and not fair but that's how it is.

If Pat wants to do something with the child that falls on Terry's time then Terry has every right to find out just what that something is before giving up that time....  BUT.... if it is somethiing that does NOT infringe on the  other parents time then there is no need for consultation...THAT is all the privacy you are entitiled to when it comes to making plans.  

Both sides must come up with a way to get along better.  
But for now....Pat needs to eat a little crow...a sincere apology.
Take a step back and try again....  sometimes a sincere apology without any justification will prompt the other side to see their own contribution to the problem...not always and if it doesn't just take a big swallow and let it go.... easier said than done but better to lose one battle than the whole war and who knows...maybe you can work out a truce.

wish you all the best life has to offer!  :)

[MixedBag]

Terry should have ASKED for the dental insurance information, said please, and acknowledged that this was an "again" situation.

"Could you please give me child's dental insurance information again?"

This recognizes that Pat has once given it before (becasue I think that Pat is expressing some frustration too) and geez, use please and thank you more often.

Then Pat goes what I think is overboard in asking too many questions before giving the actual information.

After that, I think everyone else already did a good job covering it.

I tend to try and get to the beginning of where things went wrong.....because it usually goes downhill from there.

And this conversation surely did just that...

[ocean]

I think they should stick to the order. I understand that Pat does not want to tell Terry everything but this is about a change in visitation and the child missing school. I think that out of respect, Pat should of told Terry what the deal was for Sun/Mon and if it really was a good reason to take a day off of school hopefully Terry would have seeen that.

[StPaulieGirl]

Do most of the email exchanges end up like this?  Sometimes it takes a superhuman effort to ignore the hostility and stay on the topic at hand.

You immediately fell back into a defensive position.  Apparently this has been going on for a long time, and he knows what buttons to push.  I realized that my ex was trying to provoke me, and maybe do or say something that he could use against me. Since our emails were unproductive, and really had nothing to do with the kids, I blocked sender.  They were that bad. For several reasons, I no longer communicate with him.  He has to either talk to the kids, or his adult daughter.  His visitation is not affected, and the little one has permission to call whenever she likes, and to receive his phone calls.  The court order never specified phone call time, just a reasonable amount.  Just so you (and others) know that he has access whenever he wants.

If there is an event Child is involved in that would be customary for his parents to attend (ball-games, plays, Scouts, ceremonies, etc.), I assure you that I would always make you aware of them. That is not the case here, so I prefer not to give you our plans.
I would hope that your cooperation is not based on whether or not you approve of our plans. I have never requested details about your activities before agreeing to your requests, and I would appreciate the same in return from you. It is very important to me that Child be there, otherwise, I would not ask.

Imo, he's trying to provoke you.  Watch out.  In this case, because the child would miss school, you have a right to ask what kind of activity is involved that is so important.  You might want to discuss this particular situation with your attorney to be on the safe side.

It's hard to tell if you have received the info you needed regarding the original point of the email....paperwork for the dentist visit.  I hope that is handled promptly.  Put a sticky note on your monitor to remind yourself not to fall into this type of situation again.  Just a word or two that will mean something to you, but your child won't think anything of it.  Always stay on topic.  If your ex hijacks the email exchange, politely ask the original question again, IGNORING THE ATTEMPT TO PUSH YOUR BUTTONS.  If the tone continues to be hostile, politely tell him that when he is able to answer the original question, to please reply to you with that answer, then ignore any hostile replies.

I hope my suggestions will be helpful, and good luck.

[Feelincrazy]

I agree...I wondered why Pat became accusatory:

This is where things started going downhill: "Pat:
Insurance carrier (XXXX) has not changed since 2001, has Child not been going to the dentist? would you like me to send a form in the mail? I will be glad to take him to Our Dentist if you would like, and also have his cleanings scheduled along with his brothers twice a year.
Hope Child's tooth is ok, please keep me informed and let me know if I can be of assistance. When is Child's appointment and with whom?"

Ibelieve that Pat made the conversation go downhill.  Although I do feel for Pat.

[4honor]

You did get condescending...
You did act superior...

And you didn't get what you wanted, did you?

BUT Terry should have said, "you know what, since it is your phone time, as long as littlebit wants to talk you go right ahead, but I am not comfortable interrupting a school day without knowing something about what the planned event is about. Since child is homeschooled, lesson plan can incorporate and prepare child for the event."

Terry should also have backed off and quit pushing buttons.  I really hate that line:
"I do not consider that attitude as being cooperative.
If you can not email me or talk to me without being caddie and disrespectful, then don't bother.
Child is still sick. He has a cold. You will need to continue giving him medicine this weekend if he is not feeling better by tomorrow afternoon."

First, don't tell me what my attitude is,

don't try and push my angry buttons and then tell me I am the one not being cooperative when I stand up for my piddly court ordered rights,

and after being caddie and disrespectful too, don't blame it all on me and diminish what little communication I have left,

finally go ahead Behemoth, tell me how to take care of my child that you are keeping hostage under the guise of a court order. - just my .02

Sometimes you have to waft incense at the CP's hiney to get them past the control stage and into the what-is-right-and-fair-to-my-child stage. Playing nice doesn't mean you have to be a door mat, just don't ask for something with a mental bat in one hand. Emails can be used in court... so ACT LIKE YOU ARE STANDING IN FRONT OF THE JUDGE EVERY TIM YOU INTERACT WITH YOUR EX. WHAT WOULD YOUR JUDGE LIKE TO SEE YOU DO IN THIS SITUATION?

REMEMBER: Snide remarks are not a mode of transportation they will rarely get you anywhere.