Sort of had a hearing

[mistoffolees]

>Well, first off ex's attorney got a temp hearing date, but
>never filed any papers for it.
>
>Second, its not really our fight.  We have our rules.  We
>really think 14 is still too young to have a cell phone, she
>still isn't responsible with it.
>Also the rule is when we are home, she uses the land
>phone-this way there is proof that ex is calling and that ex
>has all the contact she wants, otherwise she lies like she is
>in court and saying she can't contact SD and we don't give
>messages (which we give SD as soon as we get the message)
>The second rule is that SD IS allowed to take her cell phone
>when she goes out, she just has to be responsible for it.  
>
>Ex refuses to give us any information if SD is not home and
>when she goes to family or friends, if SD wants to take the
>cell she does. if she doesn't we don't make her.
>
>We have the landline rule because we do have trouble with ex
>and she is the pressing the issue, not us.  She has been
>claiming since before the visitation started that she could
>not reach SD whenever she wanted instead of following the
>court order.

This is my last comment.

I would urge you to get some advice from a neutral third party. Frankly, I don't know about Ex, but IMHO, you're being extremely controlling.

For example, "14 is too young for a cell phone" is ridiculous. While YOU may not wish your daughter to have a cell phone at 14, it is not unusual to see 8 or 10 year olds with cell phones. I don't know about other schools, but at my daughter's school, it looks like 90+% of 14 year olds have cell phones.

As for the rest, just what rational reason is there for forbidding the use of a cell phone at home if you're not trying to control it. "I don't like it" or "she should do what I want" isn't a rational reason. Just what LOGICAL, RATIONAL reason do you have? On the other side, there's a very clear, logical, rational reason - she may be concerned about you recording conversations - which is harder to do with a cell phone, at least without the SD seeing it.

Seems to me that you're making a battle where none needs to exist. If you set a rule that cell phone use was not allowed after 9 pm (or whatever) or only 1 hour per day or whatever (both of these can be enforced simply by looking at the bills), that might be reasonable. But it sure looks to me like you're making arbitrary, emotion-based rules that have no logical basis and are instigating trouble.

As I said, that's my last comment on this thread.

[Jade]

>Well, first off ex's attorney got a temp hearing date, but
>never filed any papers for it.
>
>Second, its not really our fight.  We have our rules.  We
>really think 14 is still too young to have a cell phone, she
>still isn't responsible with it.
>Also the rule is when we are home, she uses the land
>phone-this way there is proof that ex is calling and that ex
>has all the contact she wants, otherwise she lies like she is
>in court and saying she can't contact SD and we don't give
>messages (which we give SD as soon as we get the message)
>The second rule is that SD IS allowed to take her cell phone
>when she goes out, she just has to be responsible for it.  


The above argument isn't going to fly with a judge.  BTW, there is proof with a cell phone of contact.  A cell phone lists BOTH outgoing and incoming calls.  



>
>Ex refuses to give us any information if SD is not home and
>when she goes to family or friends, if SD wants to take the
>cell she does. if she doesn't we don't make her.
>
>We have the landline rule because we do have trouble with ex
>and she is the pressing the issue, not us.  She has been
>claiming since before the visitation started that she could
>not reach SD whenever she wanted instead of following the
>court order.


The ex's child should be able to call her mother using her cell or the landline.  The ex's child has a right to speak to her mother anytime she wants to.

Your attempt to control that is only going to backfire in court.  

[Jade]

>I agree with Kitty.  If the mother can contact SD through her
>cell phone, I dont think she needs the grandparents info as
>well.  

The father requires the child to turn the cell phone off and uses the landline for both personal calls and the computer.  

Clearly, the mother can't contact her daughter via the cell phone if the father has made the child turn the cell phone off.

[lucky]

If you have a court order stating times that she can call, follow it to the letter from now on and if you end up in court tell the judge that you allowed unlimited access because you felt that was right, but because BM couldn't get hold of SD everytime she called, BM began to harrass you so you decided to stick to the court order.

We had the issue that BM was calling 20+ times per day at any time, she'd call a midnight and bitch because we wouldn't let her talk to the kids!  On a worknight to boot.  We ended up getting a court order allowing her to call between 8am and 8pm, two calls initiated by her per day (including those resulting in voice mails) with a maximum of one hour per call.  Kids calling to her were unlimited.  She learned not to leave a voice mail - we had caller ID and told the kids (assuming they hadn't already checked it) when she called.  Am I controlling?  Probably.  BUT, this is my home, I have the right to control it and she has NO right to disrupt our lives.

BTW, I agree with the 14 yo having a cell phone.  Our kids aren't allowed to have one and when BM got OSD a cell, we took it away and told BM that if it came into our house again, it would be destroyed.  Didn't see it again after that.

Was destroying it legal?  No, but our point was made and I was willing to deal with the legal consequences of my actions as BM makes absolutely NO RULES about our home and how it is run.

[em]Lucky

Lead your life so you wouldn't be ashamed to sell the family parrot to the town gossip.
- Will Rogers[em]

[Kitty C.]

'BTW, there is proof with a cell phone of contact. A cell phone lists BOTH outgoing and incoming calls.'

Better check your plan first.  The only way I can get that kind of service is to pay extra for it.  We have to pay extra on DH's because his is considered a work phone and gets reimbursed for it.  But I don't have it on my plan because I felt it was money better spent to have unlimited national coverage.

'The ex's child should be able to call her mother using her cell or the landline. The ex's child has a right to speak to her mother anytime she wants to.'

She DOES............she just chooses NOT to at times.  Let me ask again......why isn't the BM questioning the SD as to why SD isn't calling her back?  Or should the BF be FORCING the SD to call the BM back?

I agree with lucky.................if there's a court order that SPECIFIES when the BM can call (and she's abusing the privilege of the unlimited access that the BF allows beyond the CO) then better to stick to the CO until it's ironed out in court.

[Genie]

and this may be the root of it all here...

She can't use the cell phone if she is home but she can use it if she goes out.  So how does BM know if she is home or not?  Try calling landline, get machine then call cell phone?  That is inconvenient.

You stated when at your parents, SD can use their phone to call BM if wants.  Again, why can't she use the cell phone?  

What I woudl feel like in this instance is that I am damned if I do and damed if I don't.  I would never know what phone to call her on because I would never know if she was home or not or at your parent's house or not.  It would be quite frustrating.

Rules are good and necessary when you have children and SKs that come to visit.  It is the only way to keep everyone on the same page and in order.  However, I wouldn't want to be subjected to those rules as a parent.  If I want to call my children at a decent hour (I would go by times that were too late and early to call unless emergency. That is not unreasonable), I shouldn't have to make several calls just to figure out how to get ahold of her.  

I know that many NCPs complain that they can't get ahold of children or don't get calls back when at the CP's house and how it isn't right and the CP should make the children available to talk and call back the NCP.  Isn't this the same thing but in reverse?

[Genie]

I have more facts so I can post better.  Sorry about anything I said.

If there are times that she is supposed to call, then no matter what, SD should be available.  If you aren't home then, SD should call her BM at that time.  I think this would alleviate some of her hard feelings about the whole thing.

I would be very interested in hearing the outcome of all of this. Please keep us posted on what happens.

Question - when SD is at BM's house, is the court order reversed and DH has specified times he can call?  Is SD available to talk when he calls? Can he call her on her cell?  Does SD call back if the call is missed? Does BM "make" SD call DH back?

Answers to those questions could forsee the outcome of all this. If SD is the same with BF as with BM then that shows that it is not your doing, it is a 14 yr old being a teenager.  

[Genie]

what part of IL are you in?  I am in IL too.  Dupage county in Northern IL.  I definitely know what you mean about the hot days.  Those 90's last weekend were a killer!!!

I went without air conditioner for many years too or didn't use it b/c I couldn't afford the high electric bills at the time. Fans were my best friend but didn't do quite the job.  And when the SKs were over and it was hot, all they did was complain.  Totally understand you going to your parent's house for some relief.

Hope you guys are having a good Summer despite BM's actions.

[mistoffolees]

>and this may be the root of it all here...
>
>She can't use the cell phone if she is home but she can use it
>if she goes out.  So how does BM know if she is home or not?
>Try calling landline, get machine then call cell phone?  That
>is inconvenient.

Excellent point.

[Jade]

>'BTW, there is proof with a cell phone of contact. A cell
>phone lists BOTH outgoing and incoming calls.'
>
>Better check your plan first.  The only way I can get that
>kind of service is to pay extra for it.  We have to pay extra
>on DH's because his is considered a work phone and gets
>reimbursed for it.  But I don't have it on my plan because I
>felt it was money better spent to have unlimited national
>coverage.
>

Not all cellphone companies charge for incoming calls as well as outgoing calls?  Do you know which one this is so that I can look into it?

While I don't use all of my minutes (which are unlimited on nights and week-ends), both incoming and outgoing calls count towards the minutes on my plan.  

And if I go over, I have to pay for the extra minutes.  Even on the incoming calls.