Mediation Coming soon

[midwayusa]

I don't know the date of mediation. Her lawyer has to sign off on the paper work, then the judge. The fianl hearing will depend on whether and agreement can be reached in mediation.

There is nothing wrong with the community she moved to. I really have nothing there. The only thing I have is that her behavior hasn't reflected the best interests of either child. If she were to choose to move back to our home town now that would be different but I need to get something in temporary orders or the final orders to prevent any further moves.


I'm not sure I understand why a judge would take shared custody away from me when I wasn't the one who moved. We were living in the same school district right after she moved out then she chose to move based on finances. I don't want to lose shared custody and the courts and judge that we have favor shared custody. I have cooperated with the order, I have stayed in the home, what more can I do?

It is very discouraging that the burden of proof seems to always be in the fathers lap.

Doesn't she also have to prove that the move was in the best interests of our son?

Or is it just a given because she is mom and there is a half brother involved?

I am not arguing with what you are saying. I understand that moms don't seem to have to prove anything but fathers always do. The sahred thing has worked so well and all she has done from the beginning is sabotage it. I have not changed my position one time and I bear all the risk now. Where is the justice in that?

[socrateaser]

>I'm not sure I understand why a judge would take shared
>custody away from me when I wasn't the one who moved. We were
>living in the same school district right after she moved out
>then she chose to move based on finances. I don't want to lose
>shared custody and the courts and judge that we have favor
>shared custody. I have cooperated with the order, I have
>stayed in the home, what more can I do?

Do nothing. Maybe I misunderstood when you stated that she moved into low income housing, I assumed that you found the relocation to be harmful to the child because of the community that she had chosen was substandard. Now you're telling me that's not true. So, my opinion is now changed completely. From what I can tell, the bottom line is that both of you have shared custody, she moved 10 miles away to a substantially similar neighborhood, you never objected and you both still have shared custody. In short, nothing much has actually changed.

Frankly, your case is about dead even and it could go either way. I suggest that you go to the mediation, try to come to an agreement, but don't agree to give her primary under any circumstances, unless you eventually want to lose a substantial amount of your parenting time, because the primary custodian will get to choose where the child goes to school.

That's really the only issue that I see at the moment.

[midwayusa]

I wouldn't say I never objected to the move. I tried to talk to her about it and I pointed out to my attorney that I was concerned about the move. As far as the school issue my attorney says that since the child won't start school for another almost 3 years beause of his bday, it is irrellevant at this point.

1. If we don't cover it now then will we have to go back to court later to decide where he goes to school?

Technically it wouldn't be dificult for me even if he did go to school in her distirct. We can probably still manage 50/50 split since we both work in the town where the school would be. I would still rather he go to school here since this has been his home since birth. I know that a matter of my preference or hers are irrelevant and we will have to prove why he should go to our respective school over the other.

My concern is keeping her from moving 6 hours away as she did in her first marriage. I believe if she gets primary designation she will move regardless if it is allowed or not. She knows it will be tough for me to fight once the final orders are in place. She is also fighting for primary because she knows that once the 50/50 is in place that will also be hard to change the longer it is in effect and working.

2. How tough will it be to get something in the agreement or final orders keeping her from moving a considerable distance?

I know she can move anytime she likes but it's a matter of whether she will be able to take the child if she does move.

3. So you don't think things she said at the first hearing concerning the older boy spending time with me will have much merit?

My attorney and I had the transcript printed with plans to use that and some info on child support either in mediation or in the final hearing whichever happens. She agreed to a lot of things in that hearing concerning the older boy, the property, and child support. She later did a 180 on all of them.

4. Won't this matter in the final outcome?

[socrateaser]

>1. If we don't cover it now then will we have to go back to
>court later to decide where he goes to school?

Yes.

>2. How tough will it be to get something in the agreement or
>final orders keeping her from moving a considerable distance?

The court may make such an order, but either one of you can return to court and challenge it, if you can show a substantial change in circumstances. This issue of relocation is always up in the air, no matter how hard parties try to reign it in.

>3. So you don't think things she said at the first hearing
>concerning the older boy spending time with me will have much
>merit?

Already asked and answered.

>
>My attorney and I had the transcript printed with plans to use
>that and some info on child support either in mediation or in
>the final hearing whichever happens. She agreed to a lot of
>things in that hearing concerning the older boy, the property,
>and child support. She later did a 180 on all of them.
>
>4. Won't this matter in the final outcome?

Unless the court orders otherwise, or you have relied to your detriment on her previous statements, and the court agrees that the child's interests are harmed by her prior actions, she is permitted to change her mind.

The bottom line is that it's all about the child, and not about you or the other parent. If you leave mediation without a settlement, then the judge will recognize that shared parenting will not succeed, because your failure to find a settlement proves that you cannot cooperate towards the child's interests. So, I can practically guarantee that the judge will then make one of you the primary caretaker.

Now, you live in Kansas, which is a very conservative jurisdiction (some might even call it "regressive"). I very much suspect that your judge has a strong preference for women raising very young children, and that, if push comes to shove, that the court will come down against you and in favor of the mother, because of the child's youth.

If I were representing you, and I found out that she had moved, I would have been in court the same day, trying to get the judge to change the temporary orders on grounds that the mother is intentionally feigning cooperation while simultaneously acting to thwart it, and that my client (you) are to be preferred as primary caretaker because you will facilitate cooperation.

I might not win the argument, but I'd damn certain have it before the status quo changed against my client permanently

[midwayusa]

My attorney assured me today that we are covering the move in the best manner. Since she notified me well after the move he feels a motion wouldn't have done much for us. He is of the position as you posted early on that we will hit it hard in mediation. His plan is to use the move to show that she is unwilling to cooperate with shared custody. That coupled with her trying to say at the pretrial hearing that it isn't working should hammer the point home to the judge or the mediator either one. She has tried to sabotage shared custody from day one.

I realize I pushed on the issue of the older boy but I'm not sure you understand where I am coming from on the issue. My attorney and I realize that the court cannot and will not award me anything concerning the older boy. I have pretty much given in to the fact that I will not see much of him till he gets older. I don't hold out much hope for that either as her and her mother are working hard to tear down the close relationship I had with him.

I can't give up on him completely but will move on from this the best I can. He does afterall have a half brother in my son so there will be contact at certain times whether she likes it or not. All I can do is conitinue to tell him I love him and let him know I would like to be a part of his life.

Our stand on it is to use her bahavior concerning him as an example of how she will probably act concerning our son if she is given residential. I asked my attorney if anything concerning the older boy would be relevant at all. He assured me that he has been before this judge many times and that the judge will take it into account. He said the judge will more than likely speak to the older boy in chambers and that his testimony will weigh heavily on what happens.

As you can imagine I trust no one and I am trying very hard to cover all bases in this matter. I don't even trust my own attorney but I do have a reasonable amount of faith in what he is telling me. I just want to look at this from every possible angle so I can go in with a good idea what to expect.

I don't think this woman is a bad mother but she is selfish and will take my son from me in a heartbeat. All she has ever been after is that big child support check and I think she is reacting to the fact that shared custody took that away from her.

[midwayusa]

>Now, you live in Kansas, which is a very conservative
>jurisdiction (some might even call it "regressive"). I very
>much suspect that your judge has a strong preference for women
>raising very young children, and that, if push comes to shove,
>that the court will come down against you and in favor of the
>mother, because of the child's youth.

Just out of curiosity where did the info on Kansas being regressive come from? I have read and researched so much lately that I am sick of it. Most statistics I found showed Kansas overall to favor shared custody and equal time. There are several cases here in my area where shared was the norm and no child support. My income campared to hers is 58% vs 42% so I pay $150 per month. This is with us paying daycare on the weeks we have the child and her paying for insurance through her employer.

The magistrate judge actually didn't seem to care about the age of the child in his judgement. The biggest factor was that we lived a mile apart and she has since blown that out of the water. Not sure how the other judge will see it. He did say in the pretrial that he wouldn't change the custody even though they asked. My attorney says this judge takes a "If it aint broke don't fix it" attitude to these matters. He seems to leave things alone unless one party can show serious reasoning to change it. I hope he follows this attitude in the end.

This 58%/42% split has also applied to mediation fees as well. As far as attorney fees we each pay our own. This mess has gotten very expensive and I hope all ends well for the investment. Kind of hard to raise a child when you are dead broke from something that could have been worked out outside of court.

[socrateaser]

>Just out of curiosity where did the info on Kansas being
>regressive come from?

School of hard knocks, and some other anecdotal and statistical info that I prefer not to divulge. Regressive suggests a throwback to the past, which is not necessarily a derogatory remark, although the connotation may be viewed as such. If Kansas were a little "more" regressive, the legislature could decide that fathers were the preferred parent, because prior to about 1900, fathers had sole authority over any disposition of the children.

Regardless, none of this will affect the outcome of your case. My position is that settlement is always better than litigation, because in settling, you can control what you will get, whereas in litigation, the judge controls.

PS. You're thinking way too much about irrelevancies. Try to figure out how to get your case resolved in mediation.

[midwayusa]

I'm sure my attorney and I will meet before mediation to go over some material to work things out in mediation. She has at least said she has no problem with the every other week setup. Now we just have to convince her that the primary residency will not be agreed upon and go from there. She seems to be more hung up on her appliances that she agreed to lend me till I could get my own.

I know that the irrelevant stuff can trip you up. All I can do at this point is document things and let the lawyer decide what to use or not use. I just want to cover it all and keep my shared custody arrangement intact.

Thanks for your insight. You have pointed things out and I will keep all of it in mind. I'll let you know which direction things go.