Concern about privacy of religion

[DecentDad]

Soc,

Biomom claims to be a devout Catholic, has said so in deposition.  In 2004 deposition, biomom declared that she encourages me to expose daughter to Judaism (i.e., lying through forked tongue, since she made anti-semitic remarks to me in private; but there it is in sworn testimony).

We have joint/joint with no primary caretaker assigned.  Final judgment.

No orders address anything regarding religion.

No orders address anything regarding extra curricular activities.

Biomom regularly involves daughter in extracurricular activities during her custodial time without discussing with me nor providing exact details.

Regarding education, orders state that biomom can "select THE school" and also pay for it.  (emphasis added, and this is relevant in my question below).

Orders state that parents may both attend "school" events.

My wife and I joined a synagogue in 2004.  Daughter regularly joins us at temple services during my custodial time.  In fall 2005, daughter began Sunday morning activities (i.e., commonly called "Sunday School" at temples and churches).

Biomom had daughter baptized in 2005, no notice to me nor discussion of it.  I feel biomom established the expectation that religion is private for each home.  Biomom now claims she didn't invite me because she knew I wouldn't want to come.

Biomom has repeatedly demanded to know details about the temple (i.e., daughter apparently tells her about it).  Biomom has said she wants to be a part of it (though I never invited).

I repeatedly told her to please respect my privacy and my place of worship, as I do to her when daughter is with her.  I've confirmed to her that daughter joins me in temple, that daughter engages in activities for kids her age, and that biomom can read books about Judaism if she wishes to learn more.  I've refused to disclose which synagogue we joined.

My desire to keep it private is because whenever biomom and I are togehter with daughter, biomom forces a "tug of war" for daughter's attention, takes control, and attempts to push me to sideline.

Hence my desire to keep just ONE TINY PLACE sacred and insulated for my family during my custodial time.  Particularly a place that's supposed to be peaceful and holy.

TODAY, the synagogue told me that someone claiming to be my daughter's mother was asking all sorts of questions about my daughter's involvement.  Somehow, biomom tracked it down.


1.  Would a court find it reasonable that I'd want biomom (declared to be a different faith) to simply let me pray and worship with my family in peace, during my custodial time, and without having to deal with her at my temple?

2.  Biomom's emails have attempted to get me to confirm that daughter is in "jewish school".  Would a court interpret "Sunday School" as part of its intent when it states that regarding education, biomom shall "select the school"?  Or any extracurricular activity that may have "school" in the name (e.g., Ballet School)?

3.  If biomom appears at the temple during my custodial time, do I just have to deal with it or else find another temple?  Or would it be apparent to a court that the Catholic biomom's only intent would be to control/dominate daughter while with me in my place of worship?

[socrateaser]

>1.  Would a court find it reasonable that I'd want biomom
>(declared to be a different faith) to simply let me pray and
>worship with my family in peace, during my custodial time, and
>without having to deal with her at my temple?

The court will attempt to ascertain the best interests of the child, not yours or the other parent's. This should give you an idea of how to approach the matter from a legal perspective.

The court cannot mandate one religious exercise in preference to the other because that would violate the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment. Under the Lemon Test, government cannot (1) perfer a particular sect, (2) advance or inhibit religion, or (3) create any unnecessary entanglements with religion. If the court were to restrain either of you from practicing your faith or introducing the child to that faith, this would almost certainly be viewed as giving preference to a sect, and that would be unconstitutional. Nor could the court restrain you both from practicing or introducing, because that would inhibit religion.

The court must balance your need against the other parent's hardship. You have a need for privacy and the other parent will suffer no hardship if she is restrained from investigating into the child's religious life with you. So, the court could restrain the other parent from contacting your temple/rabbi, etc., on grounds that such action may cause irreparable harm to the child, because she may become afraid of repercussions resulting from an adoption of your religious values over the mother's.

However, it would be very difficult to enforce such a restraint, unless you intend to have the rabbi come to court and testify as to the harrassing nature of the other parent.

I wonder if it wouldn't be better to actually encourage the mother's involvement at temple. She might agree at first, and then realize that by agreeing, she loses all of her leverage for bad mouthing judaism, because she's actively engaged in it.

She may just get annoyed and then start looking for a different front on which to fight the war against you.

>2.  Biomom's emails have attempted to get me to confirm that
>daughter is in "jewish school".  Would a court interpret
>"Sunday School" as part of its intent when it states that
>regarding education, biomom shall "select the school"?  Or any
>extracurricular activity that may have "school" in the name
>(e.g., Ballet School)?

School is a place where children are educated in the basic subjects necessary and prerequisite to taking their place as a productive adult in society. Religious education is not a necessary prerequisite, although one may argue that it is certainly desireable. Nevertheless, Sunday School is not "school," as contemplated in your court orders, and any attorney would would attempt to advance this argument deserves to be disbarred for stupidity.

>3.  If biomom appears at the temple during my custodial time,
>do I just have to deal with it or else find another temple?
>Or would it be apparent to a court that the Catholic biomom's
>only intent would be to control/dominate daughter while with
>me in my place of worship?

It's a free country. Without a restraining order, your ex can go to any place of worship she desires. I strongly suggest that you try to use a little reverse psychology, rather than meeting this battle head on. The court will not be very helpful, because you're treading onto 1st Amendment Establishment Clause grounds, where the court cannot make orders that might advance or inhibit religious participation.

[DecentDad]

>It's a free country. Without a restraining order, your ex can
>go to any place of worship she desires. I strongly suggest
>that you try to use a little reverse psychology, rather than
>meeting this battle head on. The court will not be very
>helpful, because you're treading onto 1st Amendment
>Establishment Clause grounds, where the court cannot make
>orders that might advance or inhibit religious participation.

It's still getting into first amendment issues if the court says, "Practice whatever you want in nearly any of the thousands of churches/temples/mosques in L.A.... but just stay away from the one place where the father has joined"?

I don't care what she practices, and I'm not asking at all to restrain her in religion.  I just want privacy for family bonding time that would be disturbed by her presence (i.e., in her own failed shot for sole custody last summer, she claimed we have a high conflict case).  And I've always offered her the same privacy during her custodial time.  It's the reality of separate parenting, so I'm not understanding why a court would have difficulty ensuring each parent can parent in peace.

[socrateaser]

>It's still getting into first amendment issues if the court
>says, "Practice whatever you want in nearly any of the
>thousands of churches/temples/mosques in L.A.... but just stay
>away from the one place where the father has joined"?

OK, by the numbers, then...in order to obtain injunctive relief, you must show:

1. Inadequecy of legal remedy, or that the petitioner will suffer irreparable harm if their relief is not granted.

There is no legal remedy for your problem -- you want to be let alone when with your child, and your ex won't allow that, so you want the court to order it. However, you won't suffer irreparable harm if your motion for an order isn't granted, because the worst that will happen is that you will need to select a different temple of worship, which is reparable.

On balance, one point for your side.

2. That the order is necessary to maintain the status quo.

The status quo is that you are worshiping in private, and so the order definitely solves this problem, and appears to be the only reasonable means of achieving this except for finding a different temple, where your ex can follow you.

Two points for your side.

3. That the harm to the petitioner from not making the outweighs the harm to the respondent by making it.

You are harmed in worship if you don't get your order -- she appears to suffer no harm by being refused, unless she successfually argues that you are manipulating the child's religious values to thwart the mother's. This is a viable argument and I'd say that the hadships are equal here.

When the petitioner fails to tip the scale in his direction, he loses that point.


4. That petitioner is likely to be successful on the merits of the complaint at trial.

This will not be an issue, because there will be no trial, unless one of you argues that the child or you are suffering some concrete injury in fact that can be proven more successfully at an evidentiary hearing.

No points here.

5. That the order is enforceable.

The order is enforceable by sanction for contempt.

Final Score: You:3; Her: 1.

If judges were computers, you would get your order. However, I doubt the judge will be so methodical. I'm concerned that you will so annoy the court for raising this issue for judicial resolution that you could lose substantially all of your parenting time.

I would wait until the mother does something really stupid to the point where a rabbi is prepared to testify that he's being harrassed by your ex, and so HE wants a restraining order.

Then you'll have a case. Until then, I think you're gonna make a big mistake if you try to litigate this.

Too much tsuris for one life.

PS. My mother was jewish.

[DecentDad]

Yeah, I understand that mother needs to do something before taking any action in the courtroom.  Loud and clear on that.

My biggest concern is keeping my holy place holy.  This is the mother who has tried numerous move-aways, who has twice tried (and failed) for sole custody, who has put me in jail on false accusation, who has approached my past employers and landlords to try to get them to testify against me, who has tried to get preschool director and teachers to testify against me, who has tried to get pediatrician and dentist to testify against me (none of them did, though none of them were willing to get involved either way).  

If mother gets involved with temple, it brings so much underlying chaos into my sanctuary.  Defeats the entire purpose.

My further argument...

Mother claimed under oath to be devout Catholic.  Convinced evaluator that she's SO Catholic, she should get all X-mas and Easter breaks with daughter every year.  Baptized daughter.  Enrolled daughter in K-8 Catholic elementary school (i.e., not Sunday school).

Hearsay, but daughter claims mother says Jews don't believe in God.  I had to remind daughter about the prayers we hear the rabbi say.   Daughter claims mother told her that daughter isn't jewish.

1.  Irreparable harm

I wish to have freedom to expose daughter to my religion during my custodial time, and I have likewise embraced daughter's exposure to Catholicism as well (i.e., we celebrate both Catholic and Jewish holidays in my home, and mother has admitted her awareness of such in deposition).

Through her actions, mother's CLEAR INTENT is to have a Catholic daughter.  Mother has never before embraced Judasim nor introduced any aspect of it in her home.  Further, mother currently has 65% custodial time-- the vast majority of time to influence daughter-- so my minority 35% time is hardly intrusive on mother's ability to share religious beliefs.

Mother's mere presence at temple causes irreparable harm for my ability to expose daughter to Judaism, due to the potential loyalty conflicts introduced on daughter.  Judging by her past, mother's presence would be arguably out of wanting to control, not out of sharing and supporting daughter's exposure to the faith.

2.  Freedom to switch temples not in child's best interest

It is in daughter's best interest to have stability.  Jumping temples every 6 or 12 months (trying to stay ahead of mother) is a solution to have privacy, but is arguably against daughter's best interest to have a stable community (i.e., beyond those in other areas).

3.  Interference with extracurricular activities not in child's best interest

I view religious class (i.e., Sunday school) as akin to an extracurricular activity.  Each parent should have freedom to schedule activities during their respective custodial time without fear of interference or influence by the other parent.  Else, it introduces conflict, which is not good for the child.

4.  Mother has not expressed desire to get involved with temple during her own custodial time

Mother's emails have solely been about getting involved with temple when I will be there with daughter.  If her motive were child-centered, her emails would arguably have read, "...because I wish to take daughter there during my time too for continuity."  Instead, the emails were more, "...because I want to be involved with every activity daughter has."


I'm just not feeling that my position is so far off-base here... to simply want to pursue family bonding time in a family-oriented congregation we worked to find and joined (for significant dues) and without stress or conflict-- at a place of worship especially.

1.  So, you think a court would find my position so outrageous to believe it's in a child's best interest to have such special moments with each parent, individually (particularly when one parent's history has been so venomous)?

2.  If I send mother correspondence, very nice, respectfully requesting that we respect each other's desires to have special one-on-one bonding experiences with our daughter to share our respective religions with her (and encouraging daughter to do such with the other parent), while concurrently recognizing that we can mutually attend non-religious special events regardless of whomever's custodial time... and then mother still imposes her presence at temple during my custodial time... would that count for anything later?

[socrateaser]

>1.  So, you think a court would find my position so outrageous
>to believe it's in a child's best interest to have such
>special moments with each parent, individually (particularly
>when one parent's history has been so venomous)?

Objection: argumentative. I didn't say your argument was outrageous. I said your argument is of the kind that will annoy the judge, because courts don't like to get into this mushy religious area, and that the fallout could be something completely unexpected, like: "

Mr. decentdad, it is obvious from the court record that you and Ms. X cannot co parent this child and that this inability undermines the child's best interests. So, I'm thinking that this is a substantial change in circumstances, and that we need to reevaluate whether or not the child should be in joint custody."

Now, I didn't say that I was gonna take custody from you, but if you close your eyes, I think you can imagine the statement I just made appearing from the lips of a judge who's just tired of dealing with you and the other parent in a continuous struggle for control over the child's existence.

And, I'm suggesting that you try to restrain your enthusiasm for a litigated settlement of this problem.

>
>2.  If I send mother correspondence, very nice, respectfully
>requesting that we respect each other's desires to have
>special one-on-one bonding experiences with our daughter to
>share our respective religions with her (and encouraging
>daughter to do such with the other parent), while concurrently
>recognizing that we can mutually attend non-religious special
>events regardless of whomever's custodial time... and then
>mother still imposes her presence at temple during my
>custodial time... would that count for anything later?

It's a crap shoot, unless the mother does something seriously harrassing. That's my position and I'm sticking to it -- for now.

[DecentDad]

.