daycare question

[spshell]

I'm a NCP in Washington state.  This summer my children's mother is going to put the kids in daycare while she's at work three days a week.  I am responsible for 56% of daycare expenses per our child support order.  I don't agree with her putting them in daycare, mainly because she works three days a week, but the daycare only offers five days a week, so the cost for two kids is $1256 a month.  My share will be approximately $700 a month!  

Plus, my fiance has offered to watch the kids for me 56% of the time.  I'd rather the kids be with someone who loves them rather than be with total strangers.  My ex-wife won't agree to that even though she has asked my fiance to watch the kids for her on numerous other occassions!  

The court order says we have joint decision making.  If we can't agree on daycare, then what do we do?  What are my rights?  Is she in contempt of court if she puts them in daycare when I have told her that I don't agree?  If I refuse to pay child care costs and she takes me to court will the judge rule with her?  Or will the judge see that I have offered other arrangements for our children to offset the daycare costs.  My kids have expressed that they would rather be with my fiance than at the daycare.

If you ask me the logical solution would be that my fiance watch the kids 56% of the time and she put the kids in daycare 44% of the time.  Unfortunately my ex-wife isn't logical.  

Thanks for all your help!

[socrateaser]

>If you ask me the logical solution would be that my fiance
>watch the kids 56% of the time and she put the kids in daycare
>44% of the time.  Unfortunately my ex-wife isn't logical.  

Spare us all the vent. Family Law and logical thinking are about as compatible as Palestine in Israel. All that matters is the child(ren)'s best interests, in the opinion of the judge. So get over your personal view of justice or your opinion of your ex-wife's reasoning abilities and climb on board with the rest of the crazys! If you don't, you will drown in your own dispair.

>The court order says we have joint decision making.  

This tells me very little. What EXACTLY does the order state concerning the issue of daycare, decision making, joint custody, physical custody, visitation, etc?

>If we can't agree on daycare, then what do we do?  

If you really have joint decision making about the child(ren)'s day-to-day care (highly doubtful), then whomever makes the last decision wins, unless the other person files a motion to clarify daycare decisions with the court.

>What are my rights?  

To not be denied life, liberty or property without due process of law. Wait, that's a little too broad. In family court, the NCP has the right to shut up and pay his/her support. That really doesn't sound like much of a right, now does it? Oh well, so much for the Bill of Rights. Nex question.

>Is she in contempt of court if she puts them in daycare when I have told her that I don't agree?  

Once again, assuming that you actually have "joint decision making authority" over all issues concering the child(ren)'s health, education and welfare, including day-to-day care and control, then you both have an undivided joint interest in the whole, which means that either one of you has 100% decision making authority -- consequently, the last decision wins, because it overrides the prior decision.

Since contempt requires willful and conscious disregard for the court's order, it is impossible to be in contempt where parents have joint decision making authority, because a parent is always doing exactly what the court allows, as long as the parent is acting in what he/she believes is in the child(ren)'s best interests.

>If I refuse to pay child care costs and she takes me to court will the
>judge rule with her?  

Assuming this wonderous joint decision making authority that you claim is part of your orders, then yes, the court will rule with her, because if she puts the child(ren) in daycare, and you don't pull them out before the daycare can send a bill, then her decision will prevail, as she has accepted a service and is bound to pay for it. Last decision wins with joint decisionmaking.

>Or will the judge see that I have offered other arrangements for our children to offset the daycare costs?

Eeew. You're trying to use some of that "logical" thinking, here, now aren't cha? That's just not gonna work, so go stick your tongue into an electrical outlet every time you have a logical thought surrounding family law. Pretty soon you will rid yourself of this burden -- or, you'll be dead, which is a very reasonable alternative, in my view.

Anyway, now that I'm done being incredibly sarcastic, if you want to make an argument that your fiance is prepared to provide daycare for the child(ren) at a cost below fair market value, and you are further willing to get a therapist to testify that in his/her expert opinion, the child(ren) have not been coerced into preferring this alternative to the daycare that the other parent intends to use, then you could actually win that argument.

But, if you think that you can walk into court and get the judge to order this arrangment purely on your personal say so and the testimony of your fiance -- well, then sir, you are just not bein' "logical," because it ain't gonna happen.

The judge knows that what you are suggesting is fraught with peril, because the other parent will resent the fact that your fiance is caring for the other parent's child(ren)! Now, if you were MARRIED to this woman, that would be a little different. But, at this particular moment, your finace is a legal stranger to the child(ren) and to this case, so the court has no personal jurisdiction over her, and can't order her to do things.

In short, unless your fiance is prepared to marry you now, or get a license to operate a daycare business, then this is a loooooooser case, so break open your piggy bank.

Of course, if you can convince your ex to go with your idea, like by begging her on hands and knees, and offering to fly her to Cabo for a free week at the "One and Only Pamilla Resort," then maybe you can get your way in all this.

Otherwise...foregetaboutit!

Damn, I am in a mood today!

[spshell]

Yes, you ARE in a mood!  Thanks for your honesty.

> This tells me very little. What EXACTLY does the order state concerning the issue of daycare, decision making, joint custody, physical custody, visitation, etc?

The court order states:

4.2 Major Decisions

Major decisions regarding each child shall be made as follows:

Education decisions                     Joint
Non emergency health care         Joint
Religious upbringing                    Joint
All other major decisions             Joint

>In short, unless your fiance is prepared to marry you now, or get a license to operate a daycare business, then this is a loooooooser case, so break open your piggy bank.

So if we were married that would make a difference?  It'll be good to know for the future.

> Assuming this wonderous joint decision making authority that you claim is part of your orders, then yes, the court will rule with her, because if she puts the child(ren) in daycare, and you don't pull them out before the daycare can send a bill, then her decision will prevail, as she has accepted a service and is bound to pay for it. Last decision wins with joint decisionmaking.

So, basically I'm screwed, huh?

One last thing, if I don't pay her for the daycare costs I suppose the next step would be for her to take me to court.  When I get served can't I just pay her then?  At least I will get some satisfaction knowing it cost her money and time to file.  I guess if she was to file, then chances are she'll also file to try to raise the support and God knows what else she'll be able to get away with.  So, I think I just answered my own question... I'm screwed.

[socrateaser]

>The court order states:
>
>4.2 Major Decisions
>
>Major decisions regarding each child shall be made as
>follows:
>
>Education decisions                     Joint
>Non emergency health care         Joint
>Religious upbringing                    Joint
>All other major decisions             Joint

This is important. A "major" decision is one that affects the long term interests of the child, NOT the day-to-day issues (i.e., choice of clothes, food, wake up and sleep time, etc.). Daycare is generally left up to the obligee parent, since it is supposed to be work or job training related -- otherwise the obligor parent does not have to contribute to it.

So, based on the above, I believe that you do not have the power to argue over a daycare provider, regardless of your joint decision making authority.

>So if we were married that would make a difference?  It'll be
>good to know for the future.

It's a factor for something like this, because it represents a commitment that goes beyond mere money. It is NOT dispositive on this issue. In fact, if the fiance were actually licensed to operate a daycare business, that would be a superior argument than marriage, because if your daycare is more convenient, more competent and of similar or lower cost to a competitor, then the child(ren)'s best interests would be better served by your daycare.

>> Assuming this wonderous joint decision making authority that
>you claim is part of your orders, then yes, the court will
>rule with her, because if she puts the child(ren) in daycare,
>and you don't pull them out before the daycare can send a
>bill, then her decision will prevail, as she has accepted a
>service and is bound to pay for it. Last decision wins with
>joint decisionmaking.
>
>So, basically I'm screwed, huh?

Pretty much.

>
>One last thing, if I don't pay her for the daycare costs I
>suppose the next step would be for her to take me to court.
>When I get served can't I just pay her then?  At least I will
>get some satisfaction knowing it cost her money and time to
>file.  I guess if she was to file, then chances are she'll
>also file to try to raise the support and God knows what else
>she'll be able to get away with.  So, I think I just answered
>my own question... I'm screwed.

Well, I can't encouarge your action, because you are suggesting you intend to commit the tort of "abuse of legal process," which is to use a device of litigation for a purpose other than for what it was originally intended.

And, if she hires an attorney, she'll probably get the court to order you to reimburse her attorney fees, because the litigation was unnecesary.

Get married, or start your own daycare (or do both) and you'll have a case. Otherwise, yes you're screwed -- in my opinion.

[hagatha]

Soc,

In this situation would it benifit the father to research other day care facilities in the area to compare costs, and also to compare contracts.

Since the mother really only needs to have the kids in day care 3 days a week, there must be other facilities that would offer that kind of contract. Wouldn't ya think??

Also, Wouldn't it be possible for him to argue that he should not be responsible for the cost of an entire week of day care if the children are only  attending 3 days, and calculate the cost for the time the children would really be there??


And of course shouldn't he contact the facility the mother is intending to use to be certain of the price and contract the mother is claiming??

Just some thoughts...

The Witch

[socrateaser]

>Soc,
>
>In this situation would it benifit the father to research
>other day care facilities in the area to compare costs, and
>also to compare contracts.

Couldn't hurt.

>
>Since the mother really only needs to have the kids in day
>care 3 days a week, there must be other facilities that would
>offer that kind of contract. Wouldn't ya think??

Definitely.

>
>Also, Wouldn't it be possible for him to argue that he should
>not be responsible for the cost of an entire week of day care
>if the children are only  attending 3 days, and calculate the
>cost for the time the children would really be there??

It is almost certain.

>
>And of course shouldn't he contact the facility the mother is
>intending to use to be certain of the price and contract the
>mother is claiming??

Unquestionably good thinking.


PS. Ever use one of those big 8-Ball toys that you shake up and ask a question and then look into the little viewplate on the bottom to see your answer float to the surface?

That's sort of like what's happening here. The 8-Ball will grant and confirm your fondest dreams and desires.

...if only the court would do that!




>
>Just some thoughts...
>
>The Witch
>