Dealing with a maddening ex.

[billrichards41]

I'm not sure where you are or how long it's been since you went through the system, but I'd venture to say this is flat-out not true in most jurisdictions currently. Mothers don't automatically get primary custody if fathers contest such an arrangement. However, the courts typically DO try to keep the child's routine as consistent as possible. So, that means if the parents have been separated and the child is living with the mother, the court will likely keep that arrangement in place unless there is good reason not to. Likewise, a stable parent who has stayed at home with the children will probably get more consideration when it comes to primary custody; again, that's because the court wants to keep the child's life as consistent and stable as possible.

There are many factors that judges and mediators consider when they're figuring out custody and visitation. The goal is making an arrangement that's in the best interest of the child(ren). Most mothers do get primary custody simply because they've been the primary caregivers for much of their child's life, have had the kids through the separation/divorce process or the fathers simply don't want primary or sole custody. However, it can--and does--go the other way when the situation is reversed.

I'm guessing Canada's system is similar to ours - judges try to mess up the kids' lives as little as possible and work out an arrangement that allows the children to benefit from having both parents around whenever they can do so in good conscience.

I went through it within the past 4 years. I'd like to know where you venture, where this not true, flat out that is.
I agree that the goal would seem to be to keep the children's life consistent.
But that is not always the outcome regardless. What the children want doesn't get heard unless the court assigns them advocates, so it one persons word against the other and in most cases the mother can say what she wants and it's up to the father to prove otherwise. During that time the court will err to the side of the mother. More often too the father will give up the martial home so as not to upset the routine, so that along with any other circumstances still makes it that the father at best gets visitation. Most agreements are every other weekend with 1 or 2 weeknights. For an overnight weeknights there are many conditions to be met, all of which ensure the children have no disruption of their routine, such as minimal time to school, close to friends and activities. Understandable and not something I contended. But in the end I would guess most dads get there children for 4 days and nights a month and if they can one night a week for say dinner.
But again for a father to get full custody... rare and not often that I have ever seen in person or any forum I have searched online.
If you are so sure that I am wrong please let me know. I'd be curious as to see how they were able to achieve that. I am not looking to change my children's lives in a destructive way, but again your statement of me being flat out wrong is something I doubt and welcome anything you can enlighten me with in regards to how and where fathers have walked into court and walked out with their children. I felt lucky that financially it only cost me 20k to get shared custody, the emotional cost is incalculable. I'm just glad I get to be with my children and I no longer have to defend myself in the face of lies. Luckily I was organized and prepared to have a defense, but really both of us are stable and can provide for the children and yet that carried no weight in court. The starting point was she gets full custody and I pay, which eventually became shared but still she has residential custody. Again I understood as it pertained to the children, so I did not fight where they sleep during the week.

I am not a drug addict, violent or in anyway a threat to their mother or them, I am gainfully employed in a senior management position at a large financial institution; but the court was no friend to me at any time. I can't imagine that any court starts with the father as having the kids and the mother having to fight to get them... I still would think there would be something wrong with the mother, very wrong for a court to say you move out and he get's them.
Most of the time the only thing men do wrong is be a man.

 

[SweetErika]

Bill, my point was simply that stable mothers do not automatically receive primary custody, although I certainly agree they often get it for a variety of reasons. I actually know fathers who have primary custody because the mother moved out of the family home when they separated, the dads stayed at home with the children while the mom worked, the mom didn't want residential custody, etc.

Of course it depends on the jurisdiction and specific judge or mediator, but here's what the ABA has to say about the issue (and other information--including the specific factors courts in each state take into account--is widely available online):

Do mothers automatically receive custody?

No. Under the laws of almost all states, mothers and fathers have an equal right to custody. Courts are not supposed to assume that a child is automatically better off with the mother or the father. Of course, judges, like the rest of us, are products of their background and personal experience. Some judges may have a deep-seated belief that mothers can take care of children better than fathers and that fathers have little experience in parenting. Conversely, some judges may believe that fathers are automatically better at raising boys--particularly older boys. Judges with such biases may apply these views when they decide custody cases, although they are supposed to base decisions on the facts of each case and not on automatic presumptions. As a group, judges are fair and unbiased in their decisions, and the level of bias is less than it was in years past. Bias on the part of individual judges can be avoided if the parents are able to decide between themselves what the custody or parenting arrangements should be.

In a contested custody case, both the father and mother have an equal burden of proving to the court that it is in the best interest of the child that the child be in his or her custody. There are a couple of states that have laws providing that if everything else is equal, the mother may be preferred; but even in those states, many fathers have been successful in obtaining custody.
American Bar Association Family Legal Guide
Copyright © 2004 American Bar Association​

Source

 

[billrichards41]

Bill, my point was simply that stable mothers do not automatically receive primary custody, although I certainly agree they often get it for a variety of reasons. I actually know fathers who have primary custody because the mother moved out of the family home when they separated, the dads stayed at home with the children while the mom worked, the mom didn't want residential custody, etc.

Of course it depends on the jurisdiction and specific judge or mediator, but here's what the ABA has to say about the issue (and other information--including the specific factors courts in each state take into account--is widely available online):


Source

While that is a nice write up, it is not what I've experienced or have seen from other fathers trying to have their children.
My ex accused me of being a flight risk. She cited a weekend where I brought the kids back later than the initial agreement, at her request; she was away skiing and was running late. I was in touch with her to find out when she would be back- 6 phone calls within 2 hours. My children don't have passports, I've never done anything to indicate that I would attempt to take the children and flee and yet a month later after we had a dispute, she submitted a motion claiming I was a flight risk and threatened to leave the country with the children. I went to court with phone records in hand, explained that I never was nor have ever behaved in such a fashion, had no where to go nor had it ever crossed my mind. Explained the day in question and submitted the evidence of the calls and the circumstance for me returning them 2 hours after the agreed upon time. The judge without ever looking at the phone records or apparently giving any credence to what I said took away visitation and ordered supervised visits. I spent another 5 months in court fighting it until I finally had my children back. I had to submit motion after motion to prove I am not seeking to abscond with the children, had no such behavior, never prepared anything to facilitate it, undergo a physiological evaluation, have the children interviewed by a psychiatrist and have their attorney speak to them and then finally after everything came back in my favor I was with my children as before. I complained to the judge of the treatment and was told that since it happens they have to take caution. My ex after she was satisfied that she caused me harm agreed to the custody agreement to the point of seeming to me as just say okay sure I never intended to keep them from you. But at the same time she has threatened me with "do you want to have that happen again?"
Again I presented the court with so much supporting documentation of my intention, things she has said and done in the past, all documented, not just me saying it versus her just making untrue statements with no evidence, followed by more than one occasion where she just acquiesced and acted like the alarm was turned off therefore everything is normal and the court never reprimanded her or made her have to prove anything.
My ex is a professor, has a tenured position in a university but at the same time has done and said things contradictory to the facade of her position, I illuminated that for the court and still I was the one who paid in every way, along with my children. I still to this day live in fear of her and the court. I realize she is capable and can get the support of the legal system to reek havoc in my life. And when I say we I mean my children's and mine.
And all I can conclude is the bias that exists in the legal system.
I can go on and tell you of more of the insanity I got from superior and family court but it is all of the same nature. The only redeeming thing I got was at one point the court staff seeing my frustration actually told me to hang in there, that they see this all the time and just to hang in there that it will work out.
So again while that is a nice thing the ABA publishes it is far from reality, it's what they have to say. The 20 k I mentioned earlier was just over that one scenario. It supports the courts and there cronies, it's a money making machine. None of it is in consideration of anyone's children. The only thing that resonated true was when my attorney told me, "no judge wants to be on the front page of the paper with a headline that father does harm to children after contentious court battle!" I understood that too, doesn't make it fair or right but I am aware of that happening, but it still doesn't make it fair to punish the 99% of the fathers who just want to be a part of their children's lives.

So for LucyH to be having these issues, something else might be happening that is not laid out here. I doubt the judges care at all about her being on Lit, dating, having orgies or any other activity in her personal life. Again I speak from experience. The kids can be in the house, as long as they aren't in the same room. The judge won't mark her with a scarlet letter. She would have to be in a country that practices Sharai law and then they would have stoned her. Other than that no judge will take her kids and give them to the father. She would literally have to be a danger to them with her activity and that is hard to prove.

 

[Felix_Jones]

Any advice for staying serene when one's ex is suing for custody and refusing to negotiate and pigheadedly dragging stuff into court that has no business being there? I'm usually a pretty calm person, and I'm not used to having to deal with white hot rage. This guy used to be more or less reasonable, but it's like aliens suddenly beamed his brain out of his head and replaced it with a dirty gym sock.

If it's a custody case, you'll win.

This reminds me of a friend of mine. We played rugby together in university. Nice enough guy. After university these melted e-mails started coming from him to me and a few of my friends. He had started going insane, true enough he'd been diagnosed as a schytzophrenic. Throughout this whole ordeal there was this thread consisting of how he'd been wronged by some woman from his hometown. Eventually, the RCMP had to be called and he was briefly jailed and then institutionalized. Fortunately nothing happened to her. Eventually he converted to some conservative Jewish sect because he claimed it offered him structure.

 

[carlieplum]

I can think of two recent cases off the top of my head, two different U.S. states where the dad got sole custody and the mom got visitation. In those cases, the mom was the one who left and who wanted to make serious life changes. Dad got the kids for reasons of stability. Dad was willing to stay in the same neighborhood, keep the kids in the same school, etc. The moms weren't unfit and they continue to have good visits, are actively involved in the kid's lives, school activities, etc.

All other cases I know of recently are shared custody, 50/50 split. That seems to be the norm.

My advice: make it about the kids. Not you. Not him. Not winning. Not losing. The kids. The court will see that and act accordingly.

 

[LucyH]

Thanks guys for the continued advice and encouragement.

So for LucyH to be having these issues, something else might be happening that is not laid out here.

There is. It's a complicated case, and there's a lot of stuff I didn't post, 'cause I'm mainly interested in how not to go crazy. I pay a lot of money for legal advice from someone who knows what she's talking about, specifically in regards to this jurisdiction.

I doubt the judges care at all about her being on Lit, dating, having orgies or any other activity in her personal life. Again I speak from experience. The kids can be in the house, as long as they aren't in the same room.

For me, keeping her out of my love life is as much about not bringing people into my daughter's life only to have her lose them and miss them if we break up. And also, I try to spend time with her when she's here, and shuffle most of my social life to the time when she's not here.

Anyway, fortunately (from my perspective) in a preliminary session, the judge told my ex pretty much exactly the same things I said months ago about why this should not be in court, except he wasn't as tactful about it. It was pretty awesome. Looks like we may have an actual discussion about settling things now. Yay!

 

[akatrex]

FACT: Men on average get 18% Visitation in California.

http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/r05rpt.pdf

Page 4

 

[chipcarver]

I got sole custody of my son and the ex got visitation when I said so.

Here in the Memphis courts more and more judges are looking at the best parent in their mind as to who gets custody. And yes judges here do not like it when a parent is seeing someone and the child is around.

What helped me is that he bf was spending the night even when our son was there.