substitute person for parent visitation?

[hillymum]

Quick question.....if my sbx can't make his sceduled visitation do I have to let his mom come and get our children or can I say no. When sbx doesn't come (4 out of 5 weeks so far) it's because he is working out of state, which he knew when he set the visitation scedule in mediation. Sbx does still have the children every other weekend so his mom sees the children then.

Thanks for any input or experience!!! 

[BabyFireFly]

Is there any mention of this in the mediation notes?

I'm assuming there is a reason that you would rather not have your kids go with their "other grandmother" - and if this is the case, you are probably either going to have to work it out with your ex or re-open it through mediation and come to another agreement.

How long are the visits when your ex's mom takes the kids?

[maeby]

i feel like if you are going to hold it against him that he can't be consistent with his visitation every other wednesday because he is working out of state then you can't blame him for getting his mom to take them. just be glad its not the girlfriend.

[hillymum]

This is something that she just mentioned to me today. She hasn't had the kids before unless sbx left them with her. It's not mentioned in mediation or any of the orders we have. I'm kind of thinking I should just say no because the kids already see her every 2 weeks, and thats more frequently than it was when sbx and I were together.

[doubledutch]

personally, if stbx were not going to be able to take a visitation, but his mother wanted to take the kids during that time, i would be thrilled.  that's because he doesn't take them much and i need breaks, and i like mil.  however, if i didn't want the kids to go with her for whatever reason, and i knew they were definitely not going to see their dad, i would say no.

[hillymum]

After reading the responses and talking it over with a friend I came to the conclusion I wouldn't want sbx dictating who I could leave the children with, so I shouldn't try doing the same to him. I may not like MIL picking up the children, but have no valid reason to not allow it.

The only things I am going to set in stoine is she has to follow the same court orders as sbx. Whoever uses sbx's parenting time has to follow the samme rules, is responsible for collecting the children from their schools and making sure homework is finished before dropping the children off at 8pm.

I'm also annoyed that MIL took it into her head to start calling the boys at home which she has never ever done before. I am going to put a stop to that. There is no need for it.

Anyone thinking I am not being fair?

[maeby]

good for you! and yes she needs to follow the same rules!

about the phone calls - i would not ask her to stop calling but maybe agree to once a week limit? i would be irate if my mom couldn't call ds when he was with his dad, if his dad was the CP with most custody. my ex's family usually calls me to speak with ds because 1) they know he is usually with me and 2) when he is with his dad its special time and they don't want to bother them, which is fine with me.

[hillymum]

Originally Posted by kristinekristine 

good for you! and yes she needs to follow the same rules!

about the phone calls - i would not ask her to stop calling but maybe agree to once a week limit? i would be irate if my mom couldn't call ds when he was with his dad, if his dad was the CP with most custody. my ex's family usually calls me to speak with ds because 1) they know he is usually with me and 2) when he is with his dad its special time and they don't want to bother them, which is fine with me.

I would agree with this if the situation was the same, but MIL has never called to talk to the boys before. I mean in 10 whole years! Also sbx lives with his parents now so they are also seeing the children, and actually seeing them more than they did before we seperated. There is an alterior motive in MIL wanting to start calling the children.

 

[Phoenix~Mama]

If your gut is telling you there is an alterior motive, listen to it.  I'd check to see if your state has some BS grandparent visitation law... just in case.  Saying cause of the crap I'm dealing with now. 

[MissLotus]

There is a common clause in custody/visitation agreements called "right of first refusal", meaning if he can't/won't parent during his parenting time, then you have first dibs on the kids.  So you have to make sure your agreement containts this clause.

[provocativa]

I don't think you should let them go with her until you speak to your lawyer.  If she has never called them before, then she is obviously not close to them.  If you allow her to take them, then you are setting a precedent that can be used in court.  What's to stop him for pushing for 50/50 custody 2 years from now, and giving the kids to her, arguing that you always saw her as a fit parental surrogate before?  I would think that if it is not on the mediation document, then you don't have to do it.  I am in KY and that's what we were told.  If we wanted to add supervisors or change the mediation agreement, we had to put it in writing and both sign it.

[Goodmom2008]

If you are available to care for them while your ex is at work, then you should get them.  It's called right of first refusal.  And is standard in some states. 

It's not a question of dictating who has your kids during your ex's time, it's a question of should someone who is not a parent get the kids over a parent?  My answer is no.  Don't get me wrong, I think that if you aren't available to care the kids when it's your ex's time and he's out of state, that he should be the one who determines who cares for the kids at that time.  Just don't think that he should be able to choose a non-parent over a parent.  Just like I don't think that you should be able to choose someone over the father if he's available when you have plans and need someone to care for them .

[simplemama32]

Re the right of first refusal...if you include that in your agreement, you might want to think about being very specific about the guidelines.  Ex and I just had a similar issue in that I'm going to be out of town for a few days, and so I made arrangements for DS to stay with my parents during that time instead of with Ex, even though Ex wants him. 

(Ex works a long night shift and then sleeps most of the day, so he would actually not be able to care for DS himself.  It seems a little ridiculous for me to send DS to his other parent when that other parent isn't even going to be around much and would have to call in a non-parent, 3rd party caretaker.  Plus, DS is with my parents everyday while I'm at work anyway, so staying with them would be the closest to his normal routine.)

I was able to refuse Ex's request because it states in our "right of first refusal" clause that the other parent must be able to primarily care for the child.  In the event they are not able to do so, then the first parent (me, in this case) has the right to make appropriate arrangements for the child's care.

[hillymum]

That is my concern with the right of first refusal. As sbx only has the boys eow and supposedly wednesdays from school to 8pm it's actually only the wednesday evenings that are my concern. I am more than happy to have the boys and want to be able to say to to MIL if there is something the boys want to do, such as scouts. Normally I wont have a problem with MIL having the boys. I do not want sbx throwing the first right of refusal thing in my face on the once or twice (if I'm really lucky) that I might need a sitter.

     I was thinking of having it written in such a way that it is only applicable for if child care is required for 4 or more waking hours excluding day camp. That would be enough for me to say no for child care from 3pm to 8pm on a wednesday, or in the summer all day on wednesday which is what we agreed to for summers.

It's so frustrating that I have to try and predict the loop holes sbx will try to exploit! It just shouldn't be like this!!!

[Super~Single~Mama]

So the way we do it, is that we don't have the right of first refusal.  My attorney had never even heard of that (and she's been around the block in custody - I don't think its standard in NYC).

BUT - my ex HAS TO BE the one to pick up ds.  And I HAVE TO BE the one to take him back.  I always offer ex babysitting when I need it, but if he can't do it I find someone else.  I know darn well that ds is being babysat by aunts and uncles and grandma when he's with his dad, but his dad works an hour from here where the rest of his family lives, so its not all that simple.  And for the most part, I'm completely OK with Lincoln being with his extended family (there are a few exceptions, but theres not a lot I can do about it).

If my ex didn't show to pick up ds, ds wouldn't be going anywhere.  My attorney made it perfectly clear that if one of us couldn't pick up ds, then the other had zero obligation to hand him over.  Don't know what your situation would be, but I doubt you have a legal obligation to hand ds over to anyone other than your ex.