Joint decisions on therapy for child

[DecentDad]

Hi Soc,

Final orders issued May 2004 state joint physical and joint legal.

Under temporary orders of the same, in Sept 2003 mother entered (then) 3 year old child into regular therapy sessions with LMFT of mother's choice; and against my wishes.

Mother stopped taking child to therapist in April 2004.

Beginning 3 weeks ago, mother started taking (now 4) daughter to same therapist.

Mother refuses to advise why daughter has been entered into therapy again, and didn't discuss with me.  She just advises me of the appointments that she makes.

Custody evaluator didn't recommend that child needs therapy.  He described daughter as well-adjusted and that the parents need therapy to get over their anger toward each other.

Custody evaluator reported elevated paranoia scale on mother's MMPI and a description of the Millon results that suggest mother has difficulty taking responsibility for herself, her faults, and her decisions.  He noted that mother tends to blame all others for her difficulties, rather than looking inward.

I came out in normal range on my psych tests.

According to custody evaluator (in his report), it's clear that the LMFT is strongly biased towards the mother and has believed what mother reports.

Custody evaluator noted that LMFT is the only "objective" witness who reported daughter saying negative things about me, but he also noted that LMFT admitted that mother has always been present in their sessions.

There is no specific language in our orders with regard to how we select a health professional for our daughter.

Known to me, but not mentioned in the custody eval report, mother has a history through her adulthood bouncing from therapist to therapist for herself.  I'm concerned of her indoctrinating this in daughter.


1.  While I understand the spirit and intent of joint legal custody, do I realistically have any say in what mother does during her custodial time with regard to taking daughter to mental health professionals?

2.  What can be done about mother's refusal to discuss daughter's mental health issues with me (i.e., she ignores me questions about why she's putting our daughter in therapy)?

Thanks, Soc.  Happy belated independence day!

DD

[socrateaser]

>1.  While I understand the spirit and intent of joint legal
>custody, do I realistically have any say in what mother does
>during her custodial time with regard to taking daughter to
>mental health professionals?

Not much you can do, except to refuse to pay the bill as not reasonably necessary.

>
>2.  What can be done about mother's refusal to discuss
>daughter's mental health issues with me (i.e., she ignores me
>questions about why she's putting our daughter in therapy)?

I'd need to read your court orders, to see what kind of cooperation is required. You may have a possible contempt motion.

[nosonew]

when this happened to us, my husband began going to all sessions.  The child had been going to a therapist for over a year before we got our first indication of it from insurance (she paid in cash  the first 11 months so we wouldn't know).  He called the office, got dates and times and began going himself.  Amazing how the therapy and the therapists attitude changed with BOTH sides of the story.  

[DecentDad]

Thanks.

The only clauses in the orders that would apply are:

A.  That each parent advises each other of appointments with teachers and health care professionals.

B.  That both parents shall be listed as having custody on all school and health records involving daughter.

The mother isn't violating either of those, obviously.  

She never requested reimbursement of costs for the therapist either (not that I'd pay it).

There is no language specifically addressing how schools are picked, how health professionals are picked, how extra curricular activities are picked.

In terms of communication about daughter, there are orders on what is NOT allowed.  Nothing describing what MUST occur regarding joint decision-making.

The orders do say that the parents have joint custody (i.e., physical and legal).

1.  One would presume that joint custody implies (or mandates by law?) that the parents jointly make major decisions involving the child, but if such a clause isn't specifically outlined, would it still be contempt of court for failing to jointly make a major decision?

Thanks,
DD

[socrateaser]

>1.  One would presume that joint custody implies (or mandates
>by law?) that the parents jointly make major decisions
>involving the child, but if such a clause isn't specifically
>outlined, would it still be contempt of court for failing to
>jointly make a major decision?

You presume wrongly.

"Joint" means together. Joint tenancy means that all parties have an equal right to occupy the entire estate. Joint liability means all parties are together liable for a debt.

When parties are married, they share joint legal and physical custody, meaning at any instant either of them can independently make any major or minor decision concerning the child's health and welfare.

Absent an express order of the court, both of you can independently make major decisions concerning your child, to the other parent's imparment, unless there are orders that require you to "cooperate," or "agree" with the other parent. Your facts show no such orders, however, you may simply not have posted them.

However, your orders do state that both parents must be listed as having custody on all healthcare records, and that each must advise the other as to appointments regarding same. From this I could reasonably imply, that if you are entitled to know of an appointment, that you are equally entitled to ATTEND it, and to confir with the professional about the visit/therapy, etc.

So, write/call/attend and be a concerned parent, and try to confirm or eliminate your fears regarding the therapist. You can even record the proceedings and conferences, and if you obtain evidence that shows that the therapist is credibly biased against you, then ask the court to restrain the mother from using said therapist in the future.

All in the child's best interests, of course. (choke, cough).

[DecentDad]

.

[DecentDad]

If there are no specific orders on how decisions will be made, what happens when we inevitably disagree on elementary school, a new health professional, etc.???

If we each have equal authority to act in our daughter's interest, and such legal definition invites chaos (i.e., not good for the child) if parents can't agree, then what serves the purpose of the assignment of joint custody?

Arrrrrrrgh.  This crap never ends.  Our orders are eight pages long, and still we'll be going back to court on major decisions, I guess.

[socrateaser]

>If we each have equal authority to act in our daughter's
>interest, and such legal definition invites chaos (i.e., not
>good for the child) if parents can't agree, then what serves
>the purpose of the assignment of joint custody?

Just to be clear, you do NOT have "equal authority." If you did, then both of you would have an exact 50% voice in the decisions. You have JOINT authority, which means that you both share 100% of the decision making power.

Your orders should have stated exactly how major decisions would be made, or at least said something like, "The parties are hereby ordered to cooperate in any major decision concerning their minor child." If such an order was made, then you would at least be able to threaten the other parent with contempt for failing to cooperate.

Now, you do have the general duty to act in the child's best interests, IF you want to retain your custodial rights, because proof of a parent affirmatively acting against the child's interests is a substantial change in circumstances, and that could lead to a new custody hearing.

But, let's face it, you have to pick your battles unless you want to be wiped out financially. My point is that I don't really know if this particular issue is worth the fight. But, if you really think that the therapist is out to get cha, then by all means, start compiling your evidence.

Only watch out for "in your ear." -- Ray Liotta, Field of Dreams. You may be building a case to demonstrate your own paranoia.

I know you're not paranoid, because there really ARE people following you.

[DecentDad]

.