Question regarding shared-parenting and SSI

[ER]

I was wondering if anyone can give me advice or direction as to what is correct regarding shared-parenting that me and my ex have for our son.

Our case was settled in Mar 05. In the shared-parenting plan ordered it states that "father to be residential parent" "mother to have visitation from ....day to ect..." In that phrase a line was sort of crossing over father is to be but above the residential parent. It appears to look like my ex's attorney was doing somthin intentional but if questioned it could be looked at as a mistake. Now, I questioned the mark to my attorney who went back and go another motion or admendment to the parentin plan that states "father is residential parent for school purposes." This brings about quiestions as my son who has disabilities is entitled to SSI benefits. My ex refuse to talk to me via her parenting plan ordered or have anything to do with discussing our child. Needless to say she wen to the SSI office and file for benefits foru out son so that she could get the funds. The SSI office informed me that we both have to come to discuss who will receive the benefits. In my questioning as to why they need to know, they commented that my ex only said we have shared-parenting and did not present any court papers. SSI told me that they need to determine who is residential parent to give the funds to but thye gave me the impression that I was the one who was untruthful.

My concern is the two orders from court in regards to me being the residential parent. I am in Ohio and I was curuious is residential and custodial parent have the same or mean the same but residential is the term used. Also my son lives with me 9 months out of the year until summer break when he goes one week on/off with each of us. our shared parenting is not a true 50/50 custody since my ex gets Wed, EOW, and EO Mon for visitation.  

The orignal order says I am residential parent but the newer one say for school purposes. What can happen with this set-up and how can it effect custody? Does being the residential parent for school purposes also qualify as well as just being a residential parent? I guess I see a play on words here that may or may not come into play with SSI. My ex pays CS, insurance but will not help with what insurance does not cover. I think she feels entitled to take the SSI benefits for herself to an extent because of the deal she made in court with me. I just want peace and quiet. My son goes to many therapy's which she became invovled with over the summer because she had no chioce but will stop once shcool starts. I was told by SSI that the residential parent receives the benefit for the child. Is it possible that my attorney screwed up? Or... deos by being a residential parent for school purposes still raise the question on who really is the residential parent? Sorry to go over and over, but I seriously beleive the attorneys screwed up or more so screwed me.

[socrateaser]

The SS Administration will generlaly pay the benefits to the parent who is awarded primary custody. If you are the residential parent for school purposes, and you exercise more than 50% of the available parenting time, then you will almost certainly be deemed the residential parent and you will receive the SSI benefits.

If there's something in your orders that is contradictory, and your ex doesn't bring it to the agencies attention, then they will probably find for you. If she does, and the agency is confused, then they will have in-house counsel attempt to resolve the issue, after which if you aren't satisfied with the outcome, you can demand a hearing.

Or, you can go back to court, and ask the judge to clarify the issue by expressly ordering that for purposes of issues relating to Federal law and/or benefits available to the child, that you are to be considered the residential parent.

Don't try to find someone to blame for screwing up. Just decide if you want to get it ordered expressly, so as to avoid the controversy at the start, and then go do it.

Other thoughts just cloud the issue and waste time.

[ER]

>The SS Administration will generlaly pay the benefits to the
>parent who is awarded primary custody. If you are the
>residential parent for school purposes, and you exercise more
>than 50% of the available parenting time, then you will almost
>certainly be deemed the residential parent and you will
>receive the SSI benefits.

Yes, this is what the rep told me but they need to know who gets the tax right off (my ex) as well but he could not give me why or what that has to do with determining who receives the benefits. As for my son, he does live with me 10 months out of the year with his mother getting visitation and EOW visits. I have school records to show proof to SSI, what else might I bring besides court papers?

>
>If there's something in your orders that is contradictory, and
>your ex doesn't bring it to the agencies attention, then they
>will probably find for you. If she does, and the agency is
>confused, then they will have in-house counsel attempt to
>resolve the issue, after which if you aren't satisfied with
>the outcome, you can demand a hearing.

The only thing I see is that on Feb 7, 2005 the parenting plan states
Father is to be residenial parent" Again as I said it was slightly marked as if to cross it out by her attorney. The second additiona was on Mar 7, 2005 and that just read  "Father to be residential parent for school purposes" I just see problems because my attorney says I am residential/custodial parent by both orders, but since I fired him, my new attorney agrees but warns that it is very contradictory and weak. I am sure I will have to file a motion to clarify due to my ex and other issues. I live in Ohio.

>
>Or, you can go back to court, and ask the judge to clarify the
>issue by expressly ordering that for purposes of issues
>relating to Federal law and/or benefits available to the
>child, that you are to be considered the residential parent.
>
>Don't try to find someone to blame for screwing up. Just
>decide if you want to get it ordered expressly, so as to avoid
>the controversy at the start, and then go do it.
>
>Other thoughts just cloud the issue and waste time.

I should have went back to court right away with my new attorney but hopefully, I still can to get clairification before any more problems arise.

Thanks for the advice!