telephone use was not added to parenting plan

[sweetmedicine24]

recently motioned for a parenting plan modification  to add provisions such as being able to call and talk to my children on off weeks, but was denied, stating no "substantial change" was shown. I'm not trying to add anything major, and I don't know how to show that, or why I even need to just to talk to my children. a restraining order(fraudulent) exists b/n the mother and I.

[ocean]

Maybe how you worded it? Did you give a reason like "father requests specific language to be added to the parenting to plan to include phone access to the children as there is a current restraining order between parents and mother is not allowing children to call father. Father requests certain days and times children will call him or he will call them without mother's interference".   Did the same judge hand out the RO? Sometimes it is best to allow the children to have time with other parent and just keep telling children if you need me while your at mom's you know my number. As they get older , you can use social media to say hi (text, facebook, twitter, instagram). You can set up an account when they are with you, show them how to use it, make it very private settings so strangers cant get to them. If they are school age, you can use the school for access and see them by volunteering at the school with the PTA or directly with child's teachers.

[sweetmedicine24]

yeah, pretty confident I got the wording right, including the obvious importance of both parents as they get older. still nothing though.

he was not the judge who ordered restraining order.

id like to be more involved with them and not just limited to 4 days a month.

I don't understand the "substantial change" thing in order to add things to parenting plan if not changing residential schedule.

[ocean]

Basically it means that no changes are to be made unless there is a big issue that came up after the court orders were written. That is why it is very important to put everything in the first set of papers as it is very hard to change. You may be able to go back to the RO judge and ask him to put language in the RO in order for you to talk to your children. Ask for specific days and times so neither you or mom are not violating the RO.

[sweetmedicine24]

thanks for the response. hadn't thought of adding it as a stipulation to the restraining order. worth a shot.

also, found out that after a parenting plan is set, it is typically two years before provisions can be added to the plan w/o having to prove some sort of "substantial change".

thanks

[OneMan]

I obviously don't know the details of your case or your relationship with the ex. Based on my experience, 4 days a month is a ridiculously short amount of time for a child to be with his/her parent. IMO, it should be equal time. Mom and dad are equally the parents and the child needs and wants them equally unless one of them is completely insane. To me, this is a no brainer.

My custody and timesharing arrangement was made when my child was a baby. By the time the late teens rolled around, it was useless. But it called for flexibility on both parents' part. As things changed, if the the mom decided she wanted to hassle me instead of being flexible, she was violating the agreement. That constituted a substantial change.

My agreement was approved by the court but not ordered by the court. So it had the weight of law without being written by a judge. Maybe that makes a difference, maybe it doesn't, I don't know, since we only went back to court once--when she violated one of the terms of the agreement. It was important to waste no time.

At the time, my attorney had a great idea. He didn't handle the violation of the agreement. Instead, he referred me to a criminal attorney, who was not only a lot cheaper, but wasn't going to allow the other party to play games. We reached an understanding very quickly and didn't have to book judge time.

The key to all this, as I discovered, was speed. Move fast. Do not let the other party establish a beach head because they will try to use it against you, and therefore against the child.  I always kept in mind that when the Mom was attempting to keep her child away from Dad, she was engaging in a form of child abuse. The courts do not take child abuse lightly. I also had no illusions that the Family Court system is impartial to dads. As someone told me, you don't go to court to get justice. This meant I needed twice as much evidence and had to be clean as a whistle at all times. The mom, unfortunately, did not. Lastly, I let my record as an attentive, devoted father speak for itself. This was good all around.

My personal opinion is that fathers in this country roll over far too easily to mothers and the courts even though they (moms and courts) are very often wrong. There seems to be a nationally sanctioned belief that it is okay for mom to keep the kids away from dad when she perceives dad did her wrong--or even if he really did. The "kids-as-hostages-of-mom's-rage" is widely accepted. Less so when it's dad's rage. I expect my views as the father to carry equal weight with courts, psychologists, and attorneys as the mom's. I'm aware of conventional thinking but it doesn't mean I have to give it deference.

The last thing I'd suggest is to have this restraining order rescinded through an appeal if at all possible. If the other party obtained the order through false pretenses, I would consider that a further violation of the order.