What do you think of "Right of First Refusal"? - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 37 Old 05-23-2010, 10:42 AM - Thread Starter
 
VocalMinority's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: surrounded by testosterone
Posts: 1,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
(This is an off-shoot of another post, which hit on this topic, but was primarily focused on something else...)

Right of First Refusal (basically, the right of either parent to care for the child outside their normal parenting time, rather than the current parent arranging other childcare) is part of our state Parenting Time Guidelines. Thereby, it's presumed to apply to all divorces with children, unless the couple's custodial orders make an exception. In fact, even if a couple doesn't have orders (say they're separated, but not legally): If a dispute over access to the kids gets taken to court, the judge is supposed to say that in the absence of agreement between the parties, they should have followed the PTG.

I understand CPs who like the peace of mind that comes with knowing your time with the kids is yours and you can make whatever arrangements for them that you want. But based on my family's experience, I find it frightening when ROFR isn't automatic. (Another member lightheartedly suggested it was frightening that ROFR is standard, where I live.)

A large part of the reason my husband now has sole custody of his son (from a previous marriage) was that his ex - after using every excuse in the book to deny his visitation while she lived here, but getting little or no support from the courts - moved across the country and essentially said, "Think you can tell me what to do? Try enforcing regular visitation from 2,500 miles away!" My husband spent a fortune traveling to see his son. He'd be out there one week a month, every month. And he sent her a schedule of his visits at the beginning of each school year, so she always had plenty of notice. Some months, she gave him no parenting time while he was out there. At most, she'd give him 7 hours total for the week; never more than 4 hours in one day, never more than 2 total days of his visit, never 2 days in a row. Meanwhile, the kid was in after-school childcare an average of 14 hours/week and frequently babysat by her parents. Once, the ex went out of town on business for 4 days while my husband was visiting. She left the kid with her parents the whole time. So my husband could have tripled his time with their son - or more! - simply by parenting him during the hours the Mom wasn't with him, anyway!

Beyond that, it sent an atrocious message to their son, who was at an impressionable age: It's not just your Mom who doesn't like your Dad. The court decided she is your only real parent and he is just some guy you should check in with every now and then. But even when he flies across the country to visit, you shouldn't spend much time with him. He doesn't even rank as high as your daycare providers, in terms of who should take care of you.

Our state guidelines do instruct the CP to contact the NCP and offer extra time with the child, before other childcare arrangements are made. But which principle is the critical one?:

> The NCP can't have the child outside his regular parenting time, unless the CP invites it? (In which case, she can sidestep his ROFR, simply by failing to offer it to him.)
OR
> The child's chance to be parented - by either one of his parents - always takes priority over other forms of childcare? (In which case, the NCP can walk into daycare and pick up the child even if the CP is hostile toward this.)

In my husband's case the court ruled emphatically for the latter.

I wholeheartedly agree with that legal principle. Custodial laws throughout the first world generally trend toward trying to approximate the life the child would have led if his/her parents hadn't split up.
* Child support tries to quantify how much of the parents' incomes would've been spent on the child, if they had remained combined.
*In determining things like whether the parents have to share the cost of private school, courts often explore the likelihood that the child would've attended that school, if the parents had stayed together.
*Visitation is trending away from EOW and toward incorporating the other parent into the child's weekday life, as would be the case if the parents still lived together.
*More clear and stringent guidelines on the NCP's access to school, extra-curricular activities and the child's records are also predicated on the idea that both parents would be aware of/involved in these things, if they were still together.

Well, in an intact family, if Dad got off work early, none would question his right to pick up the kid from daycare early. And he'd be trusted to communicate with his wife about it, so she wouldn't worry. So, I like the idea of making divorced Moms prove why their exes should lose that right... instead of making every divorced Dad prove he deserves to keep it!

As with a lot of things in divorce, ROFR does work better in the absence of conflict... but it's arguably more important, when there is conflict.

One woman in a house full of men:  my soul mate:    or... twin sons:(HS seniors) ... step-son:  (a sophomore) ... our little man:   (a first grader) ... and there is another female in the house, after all:  our
VocalMinority is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 of 37 Old 05-23-2010, 11:22 AM
 
StephandOwen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 8,613
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have to say, I agree with you. We have a child at the daycare I work at who just turned 3. Before now we usually only saw mom. Dad worked odd hours (as a firefighter) so he usually didn't do pick up or drop off. Now their divorce is finalized and the dad has REALLY stepped up. Apparently he has pretty much standard visitation (EOW plus 1 night a week). But he picks the boy up from daycare maybe 3 days a week (sometimes more if he can). Why? ROFR. The mom is at work so puts the boy in daycare (typically he gets there around 7:30). Dad comes to pick up the boy between 8:30 and 9:00 (after I give him breakfast). He spends the day with dad and goes back to mom once she is off work. I think this is wonderful for the boy. He has actually blossomed a ton after his dad started doing this and he really looks forward to these daytime visits. I don't understand why they continue to pay so much for daycare when they only use it 1-2 hours/day.... but that's not my business I guess it's a small price to pay if they can't do an exchange without stress.

Ex and I don't live close so this doesn't really affect us, but if he were to start getting unsupervised visits (overnights/weekends) you can bet I will be staying in town and insisting Owen come back to me when ex has to work (he works in a restaurant so his days/hours are all over the place). If ex were to suddenly show up here.... there really would be no opportunity for him to take ds. I drop ds off at school, I pick him up after school. He's not in any daycare/afterschool program. Very rarely do I leave him with someone else.

Steph, DH Jason (1-1-11), DS Owen (10-3-03) and DS Kai (10-13-11)

StephandOwen is offline  
#3 of 37 Old 05-23-2010, 11:35 AM
 
Goodmom2008's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 720
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I agree with ROFR, as long as the parents live close enough for it to be practical. I also think that the parent should get the child over the stepparent. Some courts don't think that ROFR applies when it is a stepparent caring for the child.
Goodmom2008 is offline  
#4 of 37 Old 05-23-2010, 11:52 AM
 
Marsupialmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: St. Louis MO
Posts: 9,039
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I agree with you.

In some situation I can see were ROFR shouldn't be allowed. There will always be those types of situations.

But, IMO, it should be the defacto situation. I hearing more stories were mainly mom's are hurting themselves because they insist on daycare when dad is more than available. We have several friends that are laid off and ex is insisting day care even though dad is home all day or if not dad can take over to his parents.
Marsupialmom is offline  
#5 of 37 Old 05-23-2010, 11:59 AM
 
PoppyMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In my own delusions.
Posts: 3,126
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I think it's a good idea in theory and great with reasonable co-parents but I can see it being really bad without there being an "awful" enough reason to get it legally removed.

If my x had picked my kids up from daycare frequently and extremely early I would have been kicked out of the daycare which would have been disastrous for both the kids and I. ...and what about the child's activities and visits to family members? Can the other parent decide that those aren't going to happen too? I can see ROFR being abused and used to manipulate and control the CP. Totally sane, appropriately behaved co-parents...great! Otherwise....eek!
PoppyMama is offline  
#6 of 37 Old 05-23-2010, 12:02 PM
 
PoppyMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In my own delusions.
Posts: 3,126
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Decent daycare can be very hard to come by. If the child is pulled in and out depending on what is going on with each parent that could be really bad. I would not have allowed my x's parents to take my children over daycare. Daycare was a better situation and more reliable which I counted on to be able to work. The CP who generally carries the larger financial burden should not have their life turned chaotic for ROFR. I don't think it should be default.
PoppyMama is offline  
#7 of 37 Old 05-23-2010, 01:04 PM
 
Marsupialmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: St. Louis MO
Posts: 9,039
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
In the situations I am talking about it with grandparents watching noncustodial are laid off and the grand parents can see the school outside their door.

Dad nor mom has problem letting grandparents baby sit. Well see didn't until she could no longer justify higher child support for day care. Dad wants to use grandparents to save money mom can't give a valid reason why not to.

As for activities, if a child has a scheduled activity the parent should take them.

Schedule visits to relatives are different than letting Grandma watch the child instead of the dad. Like the above situation, she asked grandma to watch the child on the week end instead of dad since it wasn't his time. That is wrong.
Marsupialmom is offline  
#8 of 37 Old 05-23-2010, 04:03 PM
 
EarthRootsStarSoul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 898
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
I think ROFR is essential. My ex used to take the kids and drop them off at his parents and go and do whatever (fishing, etc.), when I was home and available to have our kids. Just to hurt me, just because he didn't want me to have them. And he admitted that outright, pretty much word for word what I just typed.

bellyhair.giftreehugger.gif     coolshine.gif      greenthumb.gif     read.gif
EarthRootsStarSoul is online now  
#9 of 37 Old 05-23-2010, 04:22 PM
 
*MamaJen*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 5,266
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I can see ROFR going either way. But in this particular situation with your husband's custody case, it seems like the sensible thing to do would have been
going back to the judge and getting an amended custody order reflecting the fact that his child had moved out of state. Am I missing something there?

Jen, journalist, policy wonk, and formerly a proud single mama to my sweet little man Cyrus, born at home Dec. 2007 . Now married to my Incredibly Nice Guy and new mama to baby Arthur.
*MamaJen* is offline  
#10 of 37 Old 05-23-2010, 10:19 PM
 
Marsupialmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: St. Louis MO
Posts: 9,039
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by *MamaJen* View Post
I can see ROFR going either way. But in this particular situation with your husband's custody case, it seems like the sensible thing to do would have been
going back to the judge and getting an amended custody order reflecting the fact that his child had moved out of state. Am I missing something there?
She says he has custody now. I think it boils down to there is a process. When a parent moves out of state, depending on state law, this can add to the process.
Marsupialmom is offline  
#11 of 37 Old 05-23-2010, 10:41 PM
 
Ceinwen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The cold, crazy north
Posts: 2,599
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeannine View Post
Well, in an intact family, if Dad got off work early, none would question his right to pick up the kid from daycare early. And he'd be trusted to communicate with his wife about it, so she wouldn't worry. So, I like the idea of making divorced Moms prove why their exes should lose that right... instead of making every divorced Dad prove he deserves to keep it!

As with a lot of things in divorce, ROFR does work better in the absence of conflict... but it's arguably more important, when there is conflict.
"He'd be trusted to communicate with his wife about it, so she wouldn't worry."

That's talking about a married couple - not a divorced one, right? I think it's a huge leap and assumption that the same courtesy would be extended to an ex following a divorce.

Again - glad I don't live where you do.

I find it scary and unsettling that my ex could potentially waltz into school/daycare and pick up the kids w/o telling me.

And then I show up and they're arbitrarily gone?

So if he leaves them with his parents - I can just show up there and take the kids?

Where's the line? I pay for summer camp that my dd wants to go to - he can show up and take her?

She's at a friend's birthday party - he can show up and take her?

I think it's essential that ROFR should be established, but not assumed, and that the NCP can prove they can abide by the guidelines. Not the other way around.

Full time working mom to two bright and busy little girls! treehugger.gif
Ceinwen is offline  
#12 of 37 Old 05-23-2010, 11:16 PM - Thread Starter
 
VocalMinority's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: surrounded by testosterone
Posts: 1,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by *MamaJen* View Post
But in this particular situation with your husband's custody case, it seems like the sensible thing to do would have been going back to the judge and getting an amended custody order reflecting the fact that his child had moved out of state. Am I missing something there?
Goodness, what you're missing (what I didn't say) could fill a novel! Certainly, the visitation orders changed when she moved across the country. Aside from the standard visits during school breaks, my husband became entitled to "liberal parenting time" whenever he traveled out there to visit. But during the 1st 4 (or was it 5?) hearings, the judges (2 different ones!) basically ruled that the ex couldn't be found in contempt for denying liberal parenting time, if no one had defined what that was. She felt 0-7 hours in a week was compliant, so who were the judges to say it wasn't? The complicating factors:
1- The cowardly judges were reluctant to go ahead and define liberal parenting time, for fear of appeals and potential precedents for other cases. And certainly, in most cases it would be better for two people who live in separate states to negotiate what works for them individually and not be hampered by precedents that were set based on other people's lives.
2- The ex was under a Permanent Injunction to comply with all aspects of their custodial orders or serve 30 days in jail. So no judge was willing to find her in contempt for anything and thereby invoke that penalty. It just isn't done, here. Fathers who fail to pay child support actually serve jail time, sure. But not mothers who deny access to the child. If threatening a mother with contempt and injunctions doesn't scare her straight, nothing else will happen to her... until a judge finally gets fed up enough to take away custody of her child! And that's what happened to my husband's ex.

As far as ROFR, it was written into their custodial orders, but it's not standard in the state the ex moved to. So, even when presented with copies of my husband's court orders and reminded that our state still had jurisdiction over the child's custody and that the federal Uniform Child Custody Act required Mom's state to respect the orders...the after-school daycare director, the principal and the school system attorney still refused to let my husband pick up the child after school without written permission from the Mom. And she wouldn't give it. And she's nothing if not cunning. Each time this came up in court she said, "I have no problem with him picking up V. after school and I've never failed to comply with our orders. Each time, it has been school staff who decided not to let V. leave the building with him. That's not my doing or my responsibility. Clearly, he must have behaved in some threatening or dangerous way that made them think V. wouldn't be safe with him." Then the judge would clarify - verbally - what my husband's rights are, or even admonish the ex to write the necessary note. But the judge(s) refused to issue new orders, since the way she presented things made it sound like she had no argument with my husband's position and it had all been some misunderstanding. Sometimes that bought her several months to continue with the same old noncompliance, before my husband could get a new court date. After 18 months or so, the third judge basically said this was b.s. and gave my husband custody.

So, again - it would've been simpler if California recognized a NCP's ROFR unless the CP has a court order proving it's been revoked, in their case. Then again, all these problems eventually led to my husband having custody, which I find much nicer, of course. So does he. It's much more complicated for my step-son to say so, but I think he prefers the current arrangements, as well.

One woman in a house full of men:  my soul mate:    or... twin sons:(HS seniors) ... step-son:  (a sophomore) ... our little man:   (a first grader) ... and there is another female in the house, after all:  our
VocalMinority is online now  
#13 of 37 Old 05-23-2010, 11:30 PM
 
La Sombra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA, for now
Posts: 703
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I can see where their are applications for RoFR that seem reasonable and fair, and indeed in the best interest of the child. However, I can see a lot more abuses of RoFR--namely what others have suggested.

Before my divorce was finalized, I had to attend a court-mandated parenting-through-a-divorce seminar wherein the two Friend of the Court caseworkers suggested plainly that RoFR, 9 times out of 10, is used as a way for one parent to manipulate or control the other. The potential for that seems, to me, obvious.

Mama to a beautiful girl since May 2007 and a beautiful boy since August 2010! :
La Sombra is offline  
#14 of 37 Old 05-23-2010, 11:44 PM - Thread Starter
 
VocalMinority's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: surrounded by testosterone
Posts: 1,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceinwen View Post
I find it scary and unsettling that my ex could potentially waltz into school/daycare and pick up the kids w/o telling me.

And then I show up and they're arbitrarily gone?

So if he leaves them with his parents - I can just show up there and take the kids?

Where's the line? I pay for summer camp that my dd wants to go to - he can show up and take her?

She's at a friend's birthday party - he can show up and take her?
Certainly, any of these abuses could arguably be justification for terminating the ROFR. None of them are in the best interest of the child, which is supposed to be the top priority.

To me, the essential debate here is should we assume a NCP is going to be a bad parent and make him prove he won't be, or should we assume he will be a good parent and start revoking his rights after he abuses them? Or, to put it differently: Is the CP necessarily the better parent, or is one parent often assigned to be the NCP simply because the details of their lives, work schedules, the kids' ages, tempraments, etc. make it impractical for the kids to spend equal time with both parents?

I think it's easy for us women - who generally expect to be the CP - to feel cavalier about making men prove they deserve the same parental rights we take for granted... not because they've done anything yet to call their parenting into question, but simply because they didn't get primary custody.

One woman in a house full of men:  my soul mate:    or... twin sons:(HS seniors) ... step-son:  (a sophomore) ... our little man:   (a first grader) ... and there is another female in the house, after all:  our
VocalMinority is online now  
#15 of 37 Old 05-24-2010, 02:54 AM
 
vocalise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 236
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
As someone whose ex has definitely done things (and *not* done things--vital things) which have called his parenting into question, it's hard for me to imagine ROFR working for dd. I could see it working for others, for sure.

But some things cross my mind when it isn't just a matter of a "babysitter" being called in for a day here and there while the NCP could be caring for the child. What about the child's need for stability and routine? As the parent of a toddler, I just can't imagine it being in her best interests to be bounced from mom to daycare to dad to daycare and back to mom again in one day, especially if this happens at random days and times, and unpredictable intervals. I also think that, while we don't consider daycare to be on par with the care a child receives from their parents, that the relationship a child has with their daycare provider is still an attachment relationship, and it needs to be respected and nurtured for the child to feel truly secure and comfortable.

I'd say, random babysitting times longer than a couple of hours would be fine for ROFR, but regular daycare, maybe not so much, or on a "as agreed on by both parents" basis.

Not intending to hijack, but another issue that this thread reminded me of is the flip side: what about those NCPs who cancel their scheduled visits on a whim (in my case, it's usually because he has a social engagement), leaving the CP having to cancel their plans? Should the NCP in such situations be ordered to pay any extra child care costs incurred if the CP has already scheduled activities during this time and needs to hire a sitter?
vocalise is offline  
#16 of 37 Old 05-24-2010, 11:35 AM
 
Phoenix~Mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA
Posts: 5,230
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppyMama View Post
I think it's a good idea in theory and great with reasonable co-parents but I can see it being really bad without there being an "awful" enough reason to get it legally removed.
I think treating anything in child custody as a black and white rule doesn't usually work well in practice. There are just too many variables in case to case.

I'm going through this now, and simply because STBX doesn't have a problem with drugs and/or alcohol nor has actually ever physically hit me or the kids, everything goes as normal as far as standard custody laws.

It sucks. Right now he could essentially pick up DD anytime he wanted to, and there isn't a damn thing I can do about it. Talk about feeling defenseless.

So yeah, in theory where you are dealing with two sane good co-parents, ROFR shouldn't even have to be spelled out... they likely are respectful enough to each other to handle this logically. In other cases... who knows who is going to abuse it to whatever icky means.

Unfortunatley, not every adult looks out for the the best interest of the child. And unfortunately, it seems not all laws do either...

ribbonpurple.gif  Proud Single Mama, Birth & Postpartum Doula

Student, Aspiring CNM 
treehugger.gif  DD ~ 1/7/09   shamrocksmile.gif  DS ~ 9/22/10

Phoenix~Mama is offline  
#17 of 37 Old 05-24-2010, 12:46 PM
 
One_Girl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
There is no way I would agree with giving my ex the right of first refusal. He barely comes around, she sees the people who lead the monthly Y sleepovers more often than she sees him, and when he does show up he is patient for maybe an hour if that.
Each parent should be able to decide where they want their child to be when it is thier time for custody.

A parent moving away without the other parents written permission is different. The parent is still responsible for getting the child to the parent with visitation rights, in our state they even have to foot the bill and the non-custodial parent can block the move if they know about it in advance or get a court order for the parent to move back if they don't. Moving away is different from having a child in daycare or with a sitter that you trust while you are at work or on a date.
One_Girl is offline  
#18 of 37 Old 05-24-2010, 01:11 PM
 
Ceinwen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The cold, crazy north
Posts: 2,599
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeannine View Post
I think it's easy for us women - who generally expect to be the CP - to feel cavalier about making men prove they deserve the same parental rights we take for granted... not because they've done anything yet to call their parenting into question, but simply because they didn't get primary custody.
To address this point - I realize that there are some different scenarios - but women generally expect to be the CP - because the majority of the time (even in a married couple - they are the primary caregiver.

I don't know a single couple where (whether SAH or WOH parent) the father is an equal parent in terms of child care, booking and going to appointments, etc.

I work in an emergency dept. and can count on one hand the number of times a father has brought in an ill child - it's always the mother.

Full time working mom to two bright and busy little girls! treehugger.gif
Ceinwen is offline  
#19 of 37 Old 05-24-2010, 02:31 PM
 
danaalex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i didn't read the entire message word for word. i brought this right of first refusal thing up to my STBX on saturday. i planned a brief vacation to see a friend in june. told him about it about 1.5 -2 months before so that i could see if he wanted to watch the kids or if he wanted me to find someone to do it. he agreed he would watch them.

on sat night he basically told me that i TOLD HIM i was leaving and he was watching the kids and he had no choice. i reminded him that i gave him the choice and if he wanted me to find someone i would. i told him about the ROFR and he was like " oh i don't care about that, that is so not what this is about." he basically sent me an email that he didn't want me farming out our kids to randome people to fit " my agenda" and that he doubts i'm going to see my friend that i'm going to see.

what do you do in a situation like that? where you're trying to do the right thing and it's getting all mangled up??
danaalex is offline  
#20 of 37 Old 05-24-2010, 05:39 PM
 
StephandOwen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 8,613
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by vocalise View Post
What about the child's need for stability and routine? As the parent of a toddler, I just can't imagine it being in her best interests to be bounced from mom to daycare to dad to daycare and back to mom again in one day, especially if this happens at random days and times, and unpredictable intervals. I also think that, while we don't consider daycare to be on par with the care a child receives from their parents, that the relationship a child has with their daycare provider is still an attachment relationship, and it needs to be respected and nurtured for the child to feel truly secure and comfortable.
I think it really depends on the child. The child I wrote about in my earlier post is absolutely fine with the arrangement. Just this morning his mom dropped him off at 7:30 this morning, I fed him breakfast and dad picked him up at 8:30 for the day. When mom gets off work around 5:00 dad will bring kid to her house for the night. I absolutely think that, IN HIS SITUATION, it is way better for the kid to be spending so much time, though unpredictable, with dad rather than at the daycare. We love him, he's been with us since he was 6 weeks old (he just turned 3 years), he's very attached to us. But he's more attached to his daddy.

For my son, that would never have worked. My son thrives on routine and anything unpredictable is enough to throw him off for the entire day. Not cool.

Steph, DH Jason (1-1-11), DS Owen (10-3-03) and DS Kai (10-13-11)

StephandOwen is offline  
#21 of 37 Old 05-24-2010, 06:25 PM - Thread Starter
 
VocalMinority's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: surrounded by testosterone
Posts: 1,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by danaalex View Post
i didn't read the entire message word for word. i brought this right of first refusal thing up to my STBX on saturday. i planned a brief vacation to see a friend in june. told him about it about 1.5 -2 months before so that i could see if he wanted to watch the kids or if he wanted me to find someone to do it. he agreed he would watch them.

on sat night he basically told me that i TOLD HIM i was leaving and he was watching the kids and he had no choice. i reminded him that i gave him the choice and if he wanted me to find someone i would. i told him about the ROFR and he was like " oh i don't care about that, that is so not what this is about." he basically sent me an email that he didn't want me farming out our kids to randome people to fit " my agenda" and that he doubts i'm going to see my friend that i'm going to see.

what do you do in a situation like that? where you're trying to do the right thing and it's getting all mangled up??
It sounds like he simply resents you, or is having trouble adjusting to the divorce and will feel angry - or feel that you're taking advantage of him - no matter what you do. So follow the Golden Rule until he gets over it. It took my ex and me a year or two, to quit feeling snippy toward each other all the time, but it's been very even-keeled since then. Maybe it will be the same for you.

You did the right thing, offering to let him take care of the kids. And now, just brush aside all the crap and verify: Does he want to watch them, or not? Where you're going without the kids simply isn't his business anymore.

One woman in a house full of men:  my soul mate:    or... twin sons:(HS seniors) ... step-son:  (a sophomore) ... our little man:   (a first grader) ... and there is another female in the house, after all:  our
VocalMinority is online now  
#22 of 37 Old 05-24-2010, 06:55 PM
 
greenemami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,797
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
FWIW (jumping in from blended family) my understanding of ROFR is not that the other parent can just pick the child up from anothe caregiver whenever they want, but that the parent in custody of the child at the time they need alternate care must offer that time to the other parent. So, the CP would have to offer the NCP the time the child would otherwise be at daycare, and the NCP would either accept or decline. Once they decline, I wouldn't think they could just randomly pick up the child without the CPs consent. This would work both ways (i.e. if NCP leaves child with Grandma/stepmom etc. for a few hours, CP couldn't just show up and take the child). So, for this to work, both parents would have to be willing to offer the time and it would actually have to be enforced by a court (doesn't always happen).

I think it is really tough because I can see how it can be easily manipulated by BOTH sides. I totally agree that the NCP shouldn't always be assumed to be a bad parent who is looking to manipulate things-my dp actually WANTS that extra time with his daughter and feels that their relationship is more important than that of dsd and her grandparents/ caregivers. But I can also see how sometimes the adults aren't acting like adults and ROFR could make life tough for everyone.

Forgive my spelling errors btw, NAK

Single mama namaste.gif to dd dust.gifand ds fencing.gif, loving my dsd always reading.gif .
greenemami is online now  
#23 of 37 Old 05-24-2010, 07:55 PM
 
*MamaJen*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 5,266
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I was thinking about it, and in general XP and I pretty much do ROFR in practice. We don't actually have a set visitation schedule, mostly because his work schedule is all over the place. In general, XP can take DS whenever he wants (within reason and provided it works out for my schedule as well), which usually winds up being about once or twice per week.
If I know I have something I would need a babysitter for, I almost always call him and see if he wants to take DS, partly because I want the two of them to spend time together, partly because I would rather him be with his dad than a babysitter, and partly to save money I would have to pay to a babysitter.
ROFR works for us because we live just about 15 minutes away and we get along pretty well (at least on the big things that impact our son, even if he sometimes makes me go .
But if it was less amicable, I could see it being just disastrous.
One big problem I could see would be one partner sabotaging the other parent -- like, if they knew their ex had a date, they could say they would provide childcare and then flake out at the last second.

Jen, journalist, policy wonk, and formerly a proud single mama to my sweet little man Cyrus, born at home Dec. 2007 . Now married to my Incredibly Nice Guy and new mama to baby Arthur.
*MamaJen* is offline  
#24 of 37 Old 05-24-2010, 08:22 PM
 
Sharlla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Springfield Mo
Posts: 11,638
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
i dont agree wth it at all. i dont feel the courts need to get involved in this area. if the parents can agree to it, thats fine. in the fall dx will be having me watch ds2 3 days a week during his 2 weeks because he's going back to school. now while im gad to have him that just means seeing my ex more and potenially more drama. its esp annoying that hes not the least bit appreciative about the free childcare hes getting. he wanted to do some complicated custody arrangment but i told him i still wanted my 2weeks which he's very angry about because now i'll have ds2 more than him rather than being grateul he deosnt have to pay $300 a month for child care
Posted via Mobile Device

Unassisted birthing, atheist, poly, bi WOHM to 4 wonderful, smart homeschooling kids Wes (14) Seth (7) Pandora Moonlilly (2) and Nevermore Stargazer (11/2012)  Married to awesome SAH DH.

Sharlla is offline  
#25 of 37 Old 05-24-2010, 11:44 PM
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,639
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I am also jumping in from blended family.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceinwen View Post
I don't know a single couple where (whether SAH or WOH parent) the father is an equal parent in terms of child care, booking and going to appointments, etc.
My DH is without question an equal parent, both with the children he and I have together as well as with his DD from a previous relationship. He has 50/50 custody, has done the majority of all doctor, dental, and hair appointments, he took her to her preschool screening, researched elementary schools, and enrolls her in most of her extracurricular activities. So although many women do the majority of the parenting, it is not always true. I do not believe that a man should have to "prove" that he can be a responsible father when women are just assumed to be responsible mothers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by greenemami View Post
FWIW (jumping in from blended family) my understanding of ROFR is not that the other parent can just pick the child up from anothe caregiver whenever they want, but that the parent in custody of the child at the time they need alternate care must offer that time to the other parent. So, the CP would have to offer the NCP the time the child would otherwise be at daycare, and the NCP would either accept or decline. Once they decline, I wouldn't think they could just randomly pick up the child without the CPs consent.
This was my understanding, too. When DH was drafting his parenting agreement with DSD's mom, his lawyer advised leaving the ROFR out even though he was annoyed that DSD's mom often left DSD with her man du jour. The lawyer told him that it would make it a PITA for me (stepmom of quite a few years now) to pick DSD up at school if DH was getting off work an hour later than school ended, or for me to stay with her while he ran to the store, etc. She said that in her experience, ROFR caused more problems than it solved.

love.gif

pinksprklybarefoot is offline  
#26 of 37 Old 05-25-2010, 03:51 AM
 
Marsupialmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: St. Louis MO
Posts: 9,039
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceinwen View Post
To address this point - I realize that there are some different scenarios - but women generally expect to be the CP - because the majority of the time (even in a married couple - they are the primary caregiver.

I don't know a single couple where (whether SAH or WOH parent) the father is an equal parent in terms of child care, booking and going to appointments, etc.

I work in an emergency dept. and can count on one hand the number of times a father has brought in an ill child - it's always the mother.
In our case it would be because my dh is with the children at home. I can think of several times that my dh took a child to ER. Doesn't fit my friend's family usually it is grandma because she is the one that doesn't work.

I wouldn't include trips to ER as proof of fatherly involvement to many variables.
Marsupialmom is offline  
#27 of 37 Old 05-25-2010, 04:44 AM
 
Ceinwen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The cold, crazy north
Posts: 2,599
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pinksprklybarefoot View Post
My DH is without question an equal parent, both with the children he and I have together as well as with his DD from a previous relationship. He has 50/50 custody, has done the majority of all doctor, dental, and hair appointments, he took her to her preschool screening, researched elementary schools, and enrolls her in most of her extracurricular activities. So although many women do the majority of the parenting, it is not always true. I do not believe that a man should have to "prove" that he can be a responsible father when women are just assumed to be responsible mothers.
IME this is rare. I'm sorry, but it really just is. I don't see anyone other than mothers at doctor's appts, dentists, dance and soccer classes, etc. I live in a large urban centre and if there is a handful of fathers occasionally - that's a rarity.

I do think that the parent who spends less time with the children overall, be required to prove they are responsible and able to provide proper care.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Marsupialmom View Post
In our case it would be because my dh is with the children at home. I can think of several times that my dh took a child to ER. Doesn't fit my friend's family usually it is grandma because she is the one that doesn't work.

I wouldn't include trips to ER as proof of fatherly involvement to many variables.
Well, being the one that sees hundreds of children - all hours of the day and night, from school and home, daycare, etc. - I have yet to see anything other than 95% mom. Period.

Full time working mom to two bright and busy little girls! treehugger.gif
Ceinwen is offline  
#28 of 37 Old 05-25-2010, 11:49 AM
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cover letter he!!
Posts: 6,387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenemami View Post
FWIW (jumping in from blended family) my understanding of ROFR is not that the other parent can just pick the child up from anothe caregiver whenever they want, but that the parent in custody of the child at the time they need alternate care must offer that time to the other parent. So, the CP would have to offer the NCP the time the child would otherwise be at daycare, and the NCP would either accept or decline. Once they decline, I wouldn't think they could just randomly pick up the child without the CPs consent. This would work both ways (i.e. if NCP leaves child with Grandma/stepmom etc. for a few hours, CP couldn't just show up and take the child). So, for this to work, both parents would have to be willing to offer the time and it would actually have to be enforced by a court (doesn't always happen).
This was my understanding as well.

I think ROFR is great, and I'm going to be asking for it in my situation very soon (next week). I'm even going to be asking for it to be mutual so that I have to offer it to my ex as well as him offering it to me. This is b/c during his visitation he is basically having his mom care for our son so that I can't (he's currently studying for the bar exam). I don't trust his mother to do a good job with our son (LONG story, I won't tell it here but basically she doesn't believe in car seats for babies, never fed ds enough, and she's in her 60's and ds is FAST and furious and I can hardly keep up with him). Anyway, so I'll be asking for it since its completely reasonable for me to do that.
Super~Single~Mama is offline  
#29 of 37 Old 05-25-2010, 12:31 PM
 
ProtoLawyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,968
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Jumping in from a blended situation (where we do not have a ROFR clause because of physical distance) I am a fan of *reasonable* ROFR clauses.

(Note: This is not legal advice.)

What do I mean by "reasonable?" Reasonable in terms of time and what constitutes "child care."

"Time" = I don't think the other parent should need to be notified and asked if they want parenting time in a situation where, for instance, the CP needs to run to the drugstore or the emergency vet or wherever at 3 a.m. and the child is left with the stepparent, grandparent, or other responsible adult already in the house. (No, most people don't want a phone call at 3 a.m., but nobody should be able to use this as ammo, either.)

Some ROFR clauses I've seen have an hour or two-hour minimum--if the parent will need alternate care for more than an hour, then ROFR kicks in. I like those because that avoids fights over scenarios like car breakdowns or quick errands.

"What constitutes child care" = I have seen parents fight each other in mediation over a sleepover party. Not because either parent objects to their kids attending sleepovers, but because Dad wanted to claim that a sleepover party constituted "child care" (because, he'd heard, Mom had social plans during the party) and he should have been given the right to take the child instead (even though the sleepover party was entirely during Mom's time). If I was getting an ROFR clause, I would clarify that playing with friends, outings with family, parties, soccer games, and other social-life things do not qualify as "child care." Even if your family does not do sleepover parties or drop-off playdates, I think we can all agree that a ROFR clause should not interfere with a child's social life.

ProtoLawyer (the now-actual lawyer, this isn't legal advice,  please don't take legal advice from some anonymous yahoo on the Internet)
Spouse (the political geek) * Stepdaughter (the artist) * and introducing...the Baby (um, he's a baby? He likes shiny things).
ProtoLawyer is offline  
#30 of 37 Old 05-25-2010, 12:59 PM
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cover letter he!!
Posts: 6,387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProtoLawyer View Post
Jumping in from a blended situation (where we do not have a ROFR clause because of physical distance) I am a fan of *reasonable* ROFR clauses.

(Note: This is not legal advice.)

What do I mean by "reasonable?" Reasonable in terms of time and what constitutes "child care."

"Time" = I don't think the other parent should need to be notified and asked if they want parenting time in a situation where, for instance, the CP needs to run to the drugstore or the emergency vet or wherever at 3 a.m. and the child is left with the stepparent, grandparent, or other responsible adult already in the house. (No, most people don't want a phone call at 3 a.m., but nobody should be able to use this as ammo, either.)

Some ROFR clauses I've seen have an hour or two-hour minimum--if the parent will need alternate care for more than an hour, then ROFR kicks in. I like those because that avoids fights over scenarios like car breakdowns or quick errands.

"What constitutes child care" = I have seen parents fight each other in mediation over a sleepover party. Not because either parent objects to their kids attending sleepovers, but because Dad wanted to claim that a sleepover party constituted "child care" (because, he'd heard, Mom had social plans during the party) and he should have been given the right to take the child instead (even though the sleepover party was entirely during Mom's time). If I was getting an ROFR clause, I would clarify that playing with friends, outings with family, parties, soccer games, and other social-life things do not qualify as "child care." Even if your family does not do sleepover parties or drop-off playdates, I think we can all agree that a ROFR clause should not interfere with a child's social life.
Absolutely it should be reasonable!! And, no, it shouldn't interfere with a child's social life - but right now my son is 16months and doesn't have a social life!! Just daycare....
Super~Single~Mama is offline  
Reply

User Tag List



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off