Enforcement Order

[awaitingjustice]

My issue regards a recent enforcement oirder, in which the judge seemed to change some items and I need to know if this should have happened and how to handle.

I am in TX , child and CP live in NJ.  I have joint legal custody.

The original order was for the CP(mom) to attend counseling and for the child to attend counseling.  The CP was to pay 75% of the cost of the child's counseling.

The CP refused.

The CP would only take our child to counseling IF I agreed she could pay $30 and I pay the balance- so I did so that he would get to counseling (after 8 months of her dragging feet)-

I then filed contempt/enforcement motion with NJ courts- here is what the enforcement says


Plaintiff's application to enforce AUG 24 2005 order, with respect to Defendant paying 75% of the cost of counseling of the minor child, and reimbursement of fees paid by the Plaintiff, is hereby DENIED.  This court finds that the parties executed an agreement for the child's out of network therapist whereby Defendant agreed to pay $30 per session, while Plaintiff was responsible for $55.00 per session.  Defendant shall pay 75% of the unreimbursed costs for any in-network service providers for the son's counseling.

Question-How did I argue it wrong- when I tried to show the court that she twisted my arm to sign the document to get him counseling- and refused- I thought I was being the bigger person by taking the hit then- to get him the counseling- and dealing later with the contempt motion- but now it appears I was wrong...in the future how should I handle her refusal to do, unless I....?

Qurestion- In my previous orders from years ago it stated that CP was responsible for ALL out of pocket expenses for medical, due to her refusal to cover the child on insurance.  Does the most recent order in anyway change that past order??? (to me it seems it is just referring to counseling)


Second issue- same motion regarding counseling.  CP took son to counselor, without my consent some 5 years ago.  I learned of it last year and requested the child's medical records.  The CP and the counselor refused.  The court ordered in 2005 that the CP advise the counselor to turn over the records.
The CP refused.  And stated so to the court.
In the enforcement order the judge now states the following:  Plaintiff's application to enforce the DEC 22, 2005 order, with respect to Defendant providing written authorization for the son's healthcare providers to communicate with Plaintiff regarding son's health care is hereby GRANTED.  Defendant shall provide written authorization to the son's healthcare providers so that they may provide treatment information about the son to Plaintiff. (HERE IS WHERE HE CHANGED THE ORDER) However, the son's counselors shall not be required to disclose information about the son's treatment to the parties, uneless the parties' son specifically permits his counselors to do so.


I have joint legal custody.

I thought, in NJ, that  meant equal say and information re medical, yet this order seems to be saying I need the CP' OK on anything..

QUESTIONS-.is that just the way it is?  And when filing for an enforcement action is it normal/ accepted practice for the judge to change the terms of the previous order- as he has done on these two matters?

[socrateaser]

>>Question-How did I argue it wrong- when I tried to show the
>court that she twisted my arm to sign the document to get him
>counseling- and refused- I thought I was being the bigger
>person by taking the hit then- to get him the counseling- and
>dealing later with the contempt motion- but now it appears I
>was wrong...in the future how should I handle her refusal to
>do, unless I....?

When she refused to pay as required under the order you should have filed a motion for contempt -- period. During the pendancy of the contempt action, you could have paid the therapist so as to permit counseling to continue and then ask the court to force her to reimburse you or credit your support obligation.

>Qurestion- In my previous orders from years ago it stated that
>CP was responsible for ALL out of pocket expenses for medical,
>due to her refusal to cover the child on insurance.  Does the
>most recent order in anyway change that past order??? (to me
>it seems it is just referring to counseling)

Nothing but what you agreed to with the other parent is changed. Everything else remains in full force and effect.

>
>Second issue- same motion regarding counseling.  CP took son
>to counselor, without my consent some 5 years ago.  I learned
>of it last year and requested the child's medical records.
>The CP and the counselor refused.  The court ordered in 2005
>that the CP advise the counselor to turn over the records.
>The CP refused.  And stated so to the court.
>In the enforcement order the judge now states the following:
>Plaintiff's application to enforce the DEC 22, 2005 order,
>with respect to Defendant providing written authorization for
>the son's healthcare providers to communicate with Plaintiff
>regarding son's health care is hereby GRANTED.  Defendant
>shall provide written authorization to the son's healthcare
>providers so that they may provide treatment information about
>the son to Plaintiff. (HERE IS WHERE HE CHANGED THE ORDER)
>However, the son's counselors shall not be required to
>disclose information about the son's treatment to the parties,
>uneless the parties' son specifically permits his counselors
>to do so.
>
>
>I have joint legal custody.
>
>I thought, in NJ, that  meant equal say and information re
>medical, yet this order seems to be saying I need the CP' OK
>on anything.

The court is protecting the child's personal privacy, and the therapist's duty to not disclose records. If the other parent fails to provide her consent to obtain the records, you go back and ask the court to find CP in contempt and have the CP jailed until the consent form is signed.

>
>QUESTIONS-.is that just the way it is?  And when filing for an
>enforcement action is it normal/ accepted practice for the
>judge to change the terms of the previous order- as he has
>done on these two matters?

This is NJ you're asking about. If you've been around here for even a short while, you know that my opinion of NJ family law is that it operates on the extreme fringe between Constitutional due process, and Soviet/Chinese style communism.

Moral: never sleep with a woman within the physical borders of the Great State of New Jersey, unless you seek to test the winds of fate.

Having said the above, your order is actually pretty reasonable, even for a more even handed jurisdiction. For NJ, it's a great ruling.