Visitation Denial

[CNTD]

The order in effect states timesharing should be EOW, for 3 hours, one hour before the child's therapy in my town of residence at a McDonald's, 2 hours afterwards, in mother's town of residence at a destination to be chosen by Mother. Also it states that no other parties shall be present during the timesharing except the parents and the child.

Sunday's are when the timesharing occurs. Today, we had the timesharing in my town of residence prior to the child's therapy. Mother supervises the timesharing, in both locations. Mother is obviously not able to be objective or neutral about the timesharing.

Today at the timesharing in my town of residence, the child (age 5) was whining and not wanting to play (it's at McDonald's play-place), and said that her Mommy loved her, my response was that Daddy loved her too. The child proceeded to tell me she didn't need a Daddy.

I contemplated terminating the timesharing, because of the child's attitude towards the time we shared together. I'd thought of giving her a choice in whether or not I should stay so we can play, or for me to go if she didn't want me there. I phoned my wife asking her opinion, she clarified for me that as a 5 year old child, she does not know what she wants, she's only mirroring the comments/attitude made by her mother and her family, and that I should remain in the timesharing until it's scheduled end.

I remained until the scheduled end.

Then at the timesharing scheduled to occur in the Mother's town of residence, the timesharing proceeded for 48 minutes, until Mother spotted my wife on the other side of the park (over 100 yards away) and physically removed the child, halting the timesharing. My wife traveled with me to the timesharing, and plays with our shared children during my timesharing. This was the second time my wife was present in the town of Mother's residence, for my timesharing. Mother's choice of location, a park where her co-workers do some sort of pretend "fighting," with other's in medieval costumes. Mother had knowledge of their presence, prior to designating the location.

I telephoned the state police, the office of Mother's town of residence. I explained the situation, the officer telephoned Mother, and Mother's version of the story is that by my wives presence, she was interfering with the timesharing. Mother failed to inform the officer that her co-worker friends were present within 5 feet of the playground area where the timesharing occurs, and Mother conversed with them throughout the timesharing. As expected the officer would not assist me in filing custodial interference charges.

This is the 7th timesharing that Mother had denied, 6 of them completely, this one partially. The first one April 23 of this year, and this one today, August 6. There's a hearing (summary hour) set for September 7, on my motion to modify custody and timesharing.

1. How do I get an emergency hearing to appoint a neutral party to supervise the timesharing (should the judge deem it still necessary)?

2. How do I get an emergency hearing to address timesharing?

3. Will the issue of timesharing denial be addressed or will the judge just let it slide, because the Mother is well the Mother and current primary custodian?

[socrateaser]

>1. How do I get an emergency hearing to appoint a neutral
>party to supervise the timesharing (should the judge deem it
>still necessary)?

I don't know what your existing orders provide, but if they were set up to make the other parent the supervisor, then she's in charge, and it's unlikely that you will be able to change that situation...

...unless you've been recording these visitations so that you have some evidence of the other parent's failure to cooperate and facilitate.

You have been doing that, right? ;-)

>
>2. How do I get an emergency hearing to address timesharing?

You need some credible proof that the other parent is frustrating your reasonable access to the child, and it needs to be more than just your word against the other parent. What proof do you have?

>3. Will the issue of timesharing denial be addressed or will
>the judge just let it slide, because the Mother is well the
>Mother and current primary custodian?

You are exhibiting the standard, "I'm the man, and so I get shit on," viewpoint. If you're intent on keeping that view, then that is exactly what you will receive.

The judge needs OBJECTIVE proof to modify the existing orders. You must show that a change is necessary to advance the child's best interests.

Objective proof is evidence or testimony from a source with no stake in the controversy. You and your new wife are not objective. The other parent isn't objective, either, but at the moment, she has primary custody, so you have the burden of proving that a change is required.

An emergency hearing requires a showing that you will suffer irreparable harm if your relief is not granted immediately. Otherwise, the court will deny the emergeny relief and deterime whether sufficient proof exists to warrant an ordinary hearing on the matter.

As yet, you have stated lots of things which could demonstrate the need for a change in the parenting plan, but you have not told me what PROOF you have of these things, other than your own assertions.

And, you don't actually need to tell me what proof you have. You just need to ask yourself, if you were a person who didn't know either yourself or the other parent, would you accept the evidence and testimony that you propose to present as sufficient to change the parenting plan.

If your answer is no, then you can pretty much depend on the fact that the judge will also answer no. If your answer is yes, then you may have a case, assuming you can remain objective about this matter.

[CNTD]

...unless you've been recording these visitations so that you have some evidence of the other parent's failure to cooperate and facilitate.

How would I record the visitations? Video, audio?

[socrateaser]

>...unless you've been recording these visitations so that
>you have some evidence of the other parent's failure to
>cooperate and facilitate.
>
>How would I record the visitations? Video, audio?

You can use whatever method you wish. A microcassette recorder works fine. Just make sure it's in plain sight whenever it's running. You don't need to tell her why you're making the recording. You can say that you just want to be able to have it as objective evidence for the court in the event that you are ever accused of some bad behavior while visiting with the child.

I wouldn't directly state that your intention was to demonstrate that the other parent is trying to frustrate your access to the child or manipulate the child's opinions to your disadvantage. The result of that will be that the other parent will completely cut off any further contact.

Remember, that the overriding goal is to advance the child's interests -- NOT YOURS. This may annoy you, but that's just the way it is. Whatever rights you may have, they are balanced by the other parent's rights. The only thing that allows the court to decide for or against is the child's interests, so that's what you must concentrate on.

It's all about the child, and no one else. Whenever you act contrary to this concept, you are losing ground.

[CNTD]

If she sees the recording device, she will terminate the timesharing immediately. In fact when she left the timesharing on Sunday, she said "I don't know who it is, I don't need to be watched." Indeed she did know who it was, because my wife was there the prior timesharing and was making snide remarks about her to our child.

I really wished that if she chose to have the timesharing supervised, that it would have been ordered to be done by a professional, or a neutral party. I think the judge was attempting to do it without there being a fee involved.

This is a vicious cycle.

[CNTD]

The order in effect states timesharing should be EOW, for 3 hours, one hour before the child's therapy in my town of residence at a McDonald's, 2 hours afterwards, in mother's town of residence at a destination to be chosen by Mother. Also it states that no other parties shall be present during the timesharing except the parents and the child.

Sunday's are when the timesharing occurs. Today, we had the timesharing in my town of residence prior to the child's therapy. Mother supervises the timesharing, in both locations. Mother is obviously not able to be objective or neutral about the timesharing.

Today at the timesharing in my town of residence, the child (age 5) was whining and not wanting to play (it's at McDonald's play-place), and said that her Mommy loved her, my response was that Daddy loved her too. The child proceeded to tell me she didn't need a Daddy.

I contemplated terminating the timesharing, because of the child's attitude towards the time we shared together. I'd thought of giving her a choice in whether or not I should stay so we can play, or for me to go if she didn't want me there. I phoned my wife asking her opinion, she clarified for me that as a 5 year old child, she does not know what she wants, she's only mirroring the comments/attitude made by her mother and her family, and that I should remain in the timesharing until it's scheduled end.

I remained until the scheduled end.

Then at the timesharing scheduled to occur in the Mother's town of residence, the timesharing proceeded for 48 minutes, until Mother spotted my wife on the other side of the park (over 100 yards away) and physically removed the child, halting the timesharing. My wife traveled with me to the timesharing, and plays with our shared children during my timesharing. This was the second time my wife was present in the town of Mother's residence, for my timesharing. Mother's choice of location, a park where her co-workers do some sort of pretend "fighting," with other's in medieval costumes. Mother had knowledge of their presence, prior to designating the location.

I telephoned the state police, the office of Mother's town of residence. I explained the situation, the officer telephoned Mother, and Mother's version of the story is that by my wives presence, she was interfering with the timesharing. Mother failed to inform the officer that her co-worker friends were present within 5 feet of the playground area where the timesharing occurs, and Mother conversed with them throughout the timesharing. As expected the officer would not assist me in filing custodial interference charges.

This is the 7th timesharing that Mother had denied, 6 of them completely, this one partially. The first one April 23 of this year, and this one today, August 6. There's a hearing (summary hour) set for September 7, on my motion to modify custody and timesharing.

1. How do I get an emergency hearing to appoint a neutral party to supervise the timesharing (should the judge deem it still necessary)?

2. How do I get an emergency hearing to address timesharing?

3. Will the issue of timesharing denial be addressed or will the judge just let it slide, because the Mother is well the Mother and current primary custodian?

[socrateaser]

>1. How do I get an emergency hearing to appoint a neutral
>party to supervise the timesharing (should the judge deem it
>still necessary)?

I don't know what your existing orders provide, but if they were set up to make the other parent the supervisor, then she's in charge, and it's unlikely that you will be able to change that situation...

...unless you've been recording these visitations so that you have some evidence of the other parent's failure to cooperate and facilitate.

You have been doing that, right? ;-)

>
>2. How do I get an emergency hearing to address timesharing?

You need some credible proof that the other parent is frustrating your reasonable access to the child, and it needs to be more than just your word against the other parent. What proof do you have?

>3. Will the issue of timesharing denial be addressed or will
>the judge just let it slide, because the Mother is well the
>Mother and current primary custodian?

You are exhibiting the standard, "I'm the man, and so I get shit on," viewpoint. If you're intent on keeping that view, then that is exactly what you will receive.

The judge needs OBJECTIVE proof to modify the existing orders. You must show that a change is necessary to advance the child's best interests.

Objective proof is evidence or testimony from a source with no stake in the controversy. You and your new wife are not objective. The other parent isn't objective, either, but at the moment, she has primary custody, so you have the burden of proving that a change is required.

An emergency hearing requires a showing that you will suffer irreparable harm if your relief is not granted immediately. Otherwise, the court will deny the emergeny relief and deterime whether sufficient proof exists to warrant an ordinary hearing on the matter.

As yet, you have stated lots of things which could demonstrate the need for a change in the parenting plan, but you have not told me what PROOF you have of these things, other than your own assertions.

And, you don't actually need to tell me what proof you have. You just need to ask yourself, if you were a person who didn't know either yourself or the other parent, would you accept the evidence and testimony that you propose to present as sufficient to change the parenting plan.

If your answer is no, then you can pretty much depend on the fact that the judge will also answer no. If your answer is yes, then you may have a case, assuming you can remain objective about this matter.

[CNTD]

...unless you've been recording these visitations so that you have some evidence of the other parent's failure to cooperate and facilitate.

How would I record the visitations? Video, audio?

[socrateaser]

>...unless you've been recording these visitations so that
>you have some evidence of the other parent's failure to
>cooperate and facilitate.
>
>How would I record the visitations? Video, audio?

You can use whatever method you wish. A microcassette recorder works fine. Just make sure it's in plain sight whenever it's running. You don't need to tell her why you're making the recording. You can say that you just want to be able to have it as objective evidence for the court in the event that you are ever accused of some bad behavior while visiting with the child.

I wouldn't directly state that your intention was to demonstrate that the other parent is trying to frustrate your access to the child or manipulate the child's opinions to your disadvantage. The result of that will be that the other parent will completely cut off any further contact.

Remember, that the overriding goal is to advance the child's interests -- NOT YOURS. This may annoy you, but that's just the way it is. Whatever rights you may have, they are balanced by the other parent's rights. The only thing that allows the court to decide for or against is the child's interests, so that's what you must concentrate on.

It's all about the child, and no one else. Whenever you act contrary to this concept, you are losing ground.

[CNTD]

If she sees the recording device, she will terminate the timesharing immediately. In fact when she left the timesharing on Sunday, she said "I don't know who it is, I don't need to be watched." Indeed she did know who it was, because my wife was there the prior timesharing and was making snide remarks about her to our child.

I really wished that if she chose to have the timesharing supervised, that it would have been ordered to be done by a professional, or a neutral party. I think the judge was attempting to do it without there being a fee involved.

This is a vicious cycle.