Court again with no expanded visitation and now mediation

[Seraphim]

I hope so Victoria.

 

You are. As a daughter of a man who did not give a rat's bum about her believe me you ARE. The most valuable thing in the world for your daughter is to know you love and care for her.

[lukeb]

Luke I am thinking what's best for my daughter and that is to have both parents in her life. I am not going to let anyone tell me I cannot be a loving father. I have done nothing wrong and in fact I am the one who is getting robbed of precious moments by her ignorance. She had kept me in court longer than needed only because she is scorn and also using my support to pay her lawyers fees to alienate me.

 

You should never let anyone tell you that you can not be a loving father, I agree with that. That was never my point to begin with. To have both parents in a child's life is statistically speaking usually the best, but it doesn't have to be. It would depend on the circumstance. I think actually you may have an opportunity to be in your daughter's life, but I think you are squandering it through the path you are on. There is nothing in your post ever to suggest that she would ever lose primary custody, and as time goes on, that possibility will become more and more remote. This is what you have to work with. Where I agree with avman is that joint custody is not going to work, and never had a chance of working. Where I completely disagree with him is trying to go for sole custody, there is no reason to think she is an unfit mother to the child, just someone that wants nothing to do with her ex. It will just make it look like your doing this to hurt her. I think this could backfire for you in court.

[avman]

Sorry lukeb but I completely disagree. This is not about proving the mother to be unfit. This is illustrating to the court that the mother is trying to alienate the father and prevent a relationship with his child. And THAT will be of interest to a court. It is more then her not wanting anything to do with her ex - there's nothing wrong with that as long as she doesn't impede his relationship with his child. But she is taking active steps to prevent a relationship and that is not in the best interest of the child. I have indeed seen mothers lose custody in those instances - especially when they take it to such vindictive extremes.

 

It is not appropriate nor in the childs interests for yngguns to settle for whatever scraps his ex is willing to leave for him regarding his child. If she said "meh maybe you can see her once a year for her birthday" and then rarely even let that happen - according to you yngguns should settle for that. And that's simply ridiculous. From what I've seen here he has been reasonable for the most part and his ex still has refused to consider any fair offer. Its fathers that walk away (just like you suggest) that give all the other fathers who want to be involved an implicit disadvantage.

[WithLove]

You should never let anyone tell you that you can not be a loving father, I agree with that. That was never my point to begin with. To have both parents in a child's life is statistically speaking usually the best, but it doesn't have to be. It would depend on the circumstance. I think actually you may have an opportunity to be in your daughter's life, but I think you are squandering it through the path you are on. There is nothing in your post ever to suggest that she would ever lose primary custody, and as time goes on, that possibility will become more and more remote. This is what you have to work with. Where I agree with avman is that joint custody is not going to work, and never had a chance of working. Where I completely disagree with him is trying to go for sole custody, there is no reason to think she is an unfit mother to the child, just someone that wants nothing to do with her ex. It will just make it look like your doing this to hurt her. I think this could backfire for you in court.[/QUOTE]

 

I just wanted to mention something about this part. I dated a guy that had a young, autistic daughter with a woman that was completely unreasonable in everything when it came to the child. She would purposely do the opposite of what doctors told her to do to care for her child based solely on that fact that she knew it hurt the father's (my ex's) feelings. She went out of her way to make him feel like a miserable father and he so resented her for it.

 

When he decided to fight for custody for her, everyone knew he was doing the right thing. But in the end, he dismissed the case and the mother still has custody of their daughter. He only decided to fight for her because he knew it was the right thing to do, but not necessarily because it's what he wanted.

 

It's important for the OP to understand the reasons that he wants to fight for more visitation rights/custody of his daughter. Doing it just because he's angry at his ex and wants "revenge" against her isn't enough of a reason. And I think he has demonstrated that he loves his daughter and just wants to be in her life more.

[lukeb]

You'd be a fool to believe the OP has any chance of getting sole custody of his child. They are not going to take away a baby that has bonded with its mother who is taking good care of it to give it to a complete stranger, a guy who has a full time job, and has not shown he is even capable of taking on that responsibility just because the mother happens to be less forth coming in allowing the father to visit. The only way the mother would lose the child would be if she was some kind of a crack (prostitute) living on the street, ie only if the child was in imminent danger or neglect. Yngguns is an an incredible disadvantage here, and not only because he is a guy.

[Seraphim]

You'd be a fool to believe the OP has any chance of getting sole custody of his child. They are not going to take away a baby that has bonded with its mother who is taking good care of it to give it to a complete stranger, a guy who has a full time job, and has not shown he is even capable of taking on that responsibility just because the mother happens to be less forth coming in allowing the father to visit. The only way the mother would lose the child would be if she was some kind of a crack (prostitute) living on the street, ie only if the child was in imminent danger or neglect. Yngguns is an an incredible disadvantage here, and not only because he is a guy.

 

I recently saw the story of a mother who lost cutody of her kids for alienating the father. She also had to pay for therapy bills for 3 kids and this woman was a doctor.

[avman]

You'd be a fool to believe the OP has any chance of getting sole custody of his child. They are not going to take away a baby that has bonded with its mother who is taking good care of it to give it to a complete stranger, a guy who has a full time job, and has not shown he is even capable of taking on that responsibility just because the mother happens to be less forth coming in allowing the father to visit. The only way the mother would lose the child would be if she was some kind of a crack (prostitute) living on the street, ie only if the child was in imminent danger or neglect. Yngguns is an an incredible disadvantage here, and not only because he is a guy.

 

I believe I speak from far more experience in the matter then you do.

[Cheetarah]

Oh, Illinois is quite progressive when it comes to fathers rights.

 

I think he'd need some more time to build a case, but I certainly believe it's a possibility that he could receive primary placement or sole custody if this continues. The onus is not on him to prove she's unfit, rather to indicate to the courts why it's in their daughter's best interest for him to have sole custody. The fact that he compromises, follows court orders, and shows by historical and present behavior that he wants to unite with her on decision making and her care works in his favor. A lot.

 

Judges do not like to see parents battling, or one trying to alienate the other. That's why mediation is so valued, because it gives the parents a chance to work together via a neutral party.

 

Ynguns - Have you heard of Our Family Wizard? It's a really wonderful tool in which you and Kelly can use to do many things, including communicate - And it's all right there. You can print everything off and take it to court in the event that you would need to. It cuts the 'he said/she said'.

[ynguns251]

Hi all I had a meeting with my attorneys this afternoon and we have a court date set for this coming Friday which is on the motion of expanded visitation and also to go over what the mediator has to recommend. I think I did very well in the mediation as I showed that I was willing to do what I can to make this work as a co-parenting team however kelly had the mediator stumped by her unwillingness to even bend as much as to FaceTime me so i can say " Hi " to my daughter. I just hope that I am awarded joint custody as I am not concerned on the name anymore " It's only a name " as many have said on here and the main thing is that we both have positive influence in our daughters life and provide her with a stable childhood which will not impact her in anyway negatively. I and Kelly talk fine until it is my time to leave and that is when I can hear her dad making noise upstairs basically saying " It's time to go " and my lawyers are appalled by this and definitely want either her father gone or me to not go to her house period any more. I can only try and try I am but if the mother does not want me in the pic and tells me she does not need my money then she will fight me as much as she can and use my support to fight me also. Luke you have valid points but there is no way i am going to back off from being a father to my little pumpkin.

[lukeb]

I recently saw the story of a mother who lost cutody of her kids for alienating the father. She also had to pay for therapy bills for 3 kids and this woman was a doctor.

 

Yes there are circumstances of course where the mother can lose primary custody, I can't really comment on this particular anecdotal story because there are no details except for the fact that the mother has a full time job, and perhaps the father was in a much better position to look after the child? The mother being a doctor was in a much better position to financially support the child, I mean these are possibilities. It is unusual though, even in this day and age, and the law isn't supposed to discriminate but we are talking about something very subjective here and that is what is in the best interest of the child. There is still a prejudice out there that women are more nurturing than men.

[sargon]

Well buddy if she won't abide by the settlement agreement then you go for full custody yourself.

 

Easy enough to say that but if he is going to fight a custody battle he can expect to rack up at least $100k in legal fees for his side alone. That may not even include costs of therapists who will testify as expert witnesses, as well as fees paid to custody evaluators designated by the courts, and a whole lot more. Expect a custody battle to take years, and that's only one part of the divorce.

 

Just because she's being unfair to him in regard to their agreements doesn't mean he's got a better chance at gaining custody. She's the primary caregiver right now, he's got an uphill battle ahead of him and she's already in a much better position to gain sole custody.

 

Its fathers that walk away (just like you suggest) that give all the other fathers who want to be involved an implicit disadvantage.

 

It's bias by the courts that mothers make better parents and the fact that historically custody is awarded to the mother except in extreme circumstances that give involved fathers an implicit disadvantage.

 

You'd be a fool to believe the OP has any chance of getting sole custody of his child. They are not going to take away a baby that has bonded with its mother who is taking good care of it to give it to a complete stranger, a guy who has a full time job, and has not shown he is even capable of taking on that responsibility just because the mother happens to be less forth coming in allowing the father to visit. The only way the mother would lose the child would be if she was some kind of a crack (prostitute) living on the street, ie only if the child was in imminent danger or neglect. Yngguns is an an incredible disadvantage here, and not only because he is a guy.

 

This is unfortunately, true. You don't need to spend years and 100k in legal fees to fight a battle you can't possibly win to know this will be the ultimate result.

 

I just hope that I am awarded joint custody

 

That is not going to happen. In most states, the courts do not have the jurisdiction to award joint custody if both parents do not agree on it. In other words, if at least one parent insists on sole custody then the courts must make a decision. Even if you live in a jurisdiction where joint custody can and is awarded by courts on a regular basis, since the conflict with your wife is so high it's unlikely the judges will award joint because it's going to be a disaster trying to get too highly conflicted parents to cooperate with joint parenting of a child.

 

Edited to add: Ok I see you're in Illinois. A quick search found this:

 

Joint Custody: Joint custody is not for everyone. It will be awarded only if the parents exhibit an ability to effectively and consistently cooperate in matters that directly affect the child or children.

 

So yes, the courts have discretion to award joint custody but they won't unless the parents cooperate with each other and this is obviously not the case here.

 

Also this A common misperception among parents is the notion that joint custody means equal parenting time. Not so. Parenting time for the non-custodial parent is the same in both sole and joint custody situations.[/i]

 

In Illinois, all that "joint custody" means is joint decision making, and we've been down this road before. If your daughter resides primarily with her mother, you're not going to have much say in important matters unless your wife chooses to include you.

[sargon]

I think he'd need some more time to build a case, but I certainly believe it's a possibility that he could receive primary placement or sole custody if this continues.

 

Good luck proving she's denying him visitation. You think she's going to stand up in court and say "Yeah, I try to cut him out every chance I get, if it was up to me he'd never see his daughter again". Of course not. Her lawyer will build a case full of outright lies that he doesn't even bother to come see his daughter, and no matter how hard she tries to make things work between you and your daughter, it's just too dysfunctional a situation between daughter and father.

[avman]

You may find it interesting that fathers who do not bother to fight for custody win 0% of the time. It is silly to advise the OP not to even bother to explore the possibility before coming to the conclusion that it is hopeless.

 

I did not tell him it would be easy, I told him to talk this over carefully with his attorneys to understand what he would be getting into. His attorneys are in a better position to advise him on his chances of success since they have far more background on his case and the tendencies in his jurisdiction.

[sargon]

You may find it interesting that fathers who do not bother to fight for custody win 0% of the time.

 

No, not really. I'll bet most of those dads really wanted more time with their children, and they would have loved to have custody and not having to pay at lesat 28% of their gross income in child support to their exwife for upwards of 20 years but they didn't "bother" because they knew it was a fight they could not win. Maybe we anonymous internet forum advice givers don't have enough facts but an ethical attorney will tell him exactly that. You can give custody to mom or you can pay me $100k and spend 3 years of your life fighting for custody and THEN watch the courts give custody to mom, that's your choice.

 

Here's an excellent website that talks about divorce laws vs practical application in every state. 100s of attorneys were interviewed to gain true perspective of what happens in typical divorces in the various states.

 

link removed

 

Illinois is an outlier in its propensity to award decision-making authority to one parent. What other states call "sole legal custody" and infrequently grant is commonly granted in Illinois, at least as of July 2014 when we conducted these interviews. One of the biological parents thus has the authority going forward to make all decisions regarding the child's life, including for health care, education, and religion. The winner parent can have the child tattooed or authorize one of her kidneys to be donated. The other biological parent is reduced to a babysitter who earns negative 20 percent of whatever the rest of his or her jobs pay.

 

Current Illinois law makes the stakes very high in a divorce with children. By convention judges will award "custody" to just one parent. Unless parties agree, Illinois does not have the conventional separation of "legal" and "physical" custody. The winner parent gets all of the decision-making power regarding the child, including for medical, education, and religious issues. The loser parent or "visitor" has essentially the same rights as a babysitter, except with a negative rate of pay and the right to keep working.

 

Perhaps due to the fact that it is so easy for a plaintiff who can show that she was the historical primary caregiver to obtain custody, Schiller says that fabricated tales of abuse, child molestation, etc. are not part of the stock-in-trade of divorce litigation in Illinois as they are in some New England states. "Oftentimes there are exaggerations," says Schiller, "but outright fabrication is uncommon." Does he agree with the attorney in the movie Divorce Corp. who says that every divorce trial has the same story: there is a victim, a victimizer, and a rescuer, which is sometimes an attorney and sometimes a judge? "I think that is the case in every litigation, not just in family law," says Schiller.

 

Illinois rewards a parent who generates conflict during litigation by foreclosing the possibility of shared custody, and its potential for reduced child support profits, if the court finds "conflict" between parents where one has sued the other. "I have a case like that right now," says Dorene Marcus. "My client is a difficult person to deal with. The wife uses it. She has created a situation where they can't have joint custody."

[ynguns251]

There is no reason I should not have joint decision making. I am her father and also have to have a ya or nay in certain issues especially if it costs me money I don't have. She makes 20k more then I do with my support and her salary. I have to have a life too and money to spend on my daughter.

[sargon]

There is no reason I should not have joint decision making. I am her father and also have to have a ya or nay in certain issues especially if it costs me money I don't have. She makes 20k more then I do with my support and her salary. I have to have a life too and money to spend on my daughter.

 

Its difficult, but try not to confuse what you want to get, and what you think is fair, with what you actually WILL get, which is visitation every other weekend and one weeknight per week, and in reality very little say over major issues in your daughter's life regardless of whether or not you are awarded joint custody.

[sargon]

I went back and read some of your earlier posts and I see why you're confused. You think that because you want to be a very involved father and because you want to have more visitation and because you are paying all of this child support that a court will hear your side of the story and naturally award you joint custody and everything will be well.

 

It is NOT going to work that way. The judge will look at the status quo, and right now your wife has the child most of the time, you even agreed in mediation for a few hours on the weekends and I think a few hours one night per week, and when you pick up your child, she's already been changed and bathed. Guess what your wife will say to the court? "I am the primary caregiver, he sees the child for a few hours per week, that's all he asked for in mediation, he doesn't even bathe her or change her, I do all of that!".

 

The courts will not say "well he's paying child support so he gets to see the child more than a measly few hours per week. This happens ALL the time- the courts award the wife child support and the husband is reduced to the role of nothing more than an occasional babysitter even though he wants to be so much more to his kids. You think your situation is different from the thousands that go through the illinios courts every day but its not. What makes your situation worse is that you are in high conflict with your ex, and she will fight you every step of the way and will agree to nothing more than you being an occasional visitor in your child's life and the courts are not going to help you in that department, just look at what your experience has been so far with the courts, that's how it's going to be.

 

Unless you hold tight and try for sole custody, which means you must mount a major offensive and hire all these experienced, talented aggressive attorneys who will subpoena witnesses that will testify that you are the better parent and your wife is in some way unable to effectively parent- at a cost to you of well over $100,000 and years of litigation, and ultimately since your wife will have custody of your child for the next few years during such litigation, it's unlikely that you will be able to prove her unfit since she's been the primary caregiver to your child the entire time. And of course if it goes that far your wife will find many people who will testify on her behalf that she's doing a fine job raising your daughter and you are barely in your child's life (because you are restricted to a very limited parenting schedule not of your choice), and she'll throw in that you're a fireman, a first responder, who may be called up at any time and how will that work with parenting a young child?

 

It's unfair, it's messy, it's ineffective, but that's how the divorce system works. Many fathers walk away from their kids, not because they don't love them, not because they love paying 1000s of dollars per month in child support, but because they ultimately realize they are fighting a losing battle and they just don't have the emotional fortitude or financial resourcees to continue and their children are effectively alienated from them by a bitter, greedy, and sometimes mentally unstable exspouse who will do anything to drive the father out of their lives. She'll lie, she'll bend and twist the truth, she'll make the father out to be the worst guy in the world and because she sees the child so much more than the father, eventually her "truth" becomes their reality and there's nothing the dad can do but watch his children withdraw from him.

[Cheetarah]

Is that what happened to you, sargon?

[lukeb]

@sargon: It is actually a little worse than you think since the OP and his ex were never married, they broke up before the baby was born. I am pretty sure legally that makes a difference too, that the child was born out of wedlock. At the very least the mother has all the legal and physical custodial rights to begin with and the father has to fight for any visitation or legal rights, he has none to start with.

[Seraphim]

Why can't the guy be happy and enjoy his daughter? Why do people have to crap on his happiness and the success of the powers that be giving him some recognition and time with his daughter to be a good dad. Why is that?

[sargon]

Is that what happened to you, sargon?[/QUOTe]

 

Pretty much, yes. I have 2 daughters, at the time of my divorce they were 14 and 10. I was the breadwinner, exwife was the stay at home parent. My first attorney (I had 3 during my divorce) said the best you can hope for is visitation with decision making, since my ex refused to agree to joint custody, the courts do not have the power to order it. I realized it was pointless to argue for more, so I agreed to that. Now, 8 years later I realize that decision making is a bunch of BS, whoever the kids live with is going to have complete say over their lives. My exwife was an alienator as well, both daughters stopped talking to me for years during the divorce. Things flipped around when they got older and we re-established contact and they ended up moving in with me and custody reverted to me, but there were many long years prior to that when I was nothing more than an outsider, fighting for the chance to be a part of my children's lives. Even though they eventually came back into my life, they were older by then (late teens) and because I was not part of their lives during their most influential years and there was a lot of damage done.

[sargon]

Why can't the guy be happy and enjoy his daughter? Why do people have to crap on his happiness and the success of the powers that be giving him some recognition and time with his daughter to be a good dad. Why is that?

 

Because the system is broken. Because the courts are biased and incompetant and lazy and overloaded, and sometimes they're even corrupt and often times nobody cares. Yes this our lives at stake here, and the lives of our children, but to the judges and attorneys and bailiffs and everyone else in the courthouse, it's just another day of work and they see hundreds of cases per week that all start to look the same.

 

@sargon: It is actually a little worse than you think since the OP and his ex were never married, they broke up before the baby was born. I am pretty sure legally that makes a difference too, that the child was born out of wedlock. At the very least the mother has all the legal and physical custodial rights to begin with and the father has to fight for any visitation or legal rights, he has none to start with.

 

Not being married has no bearing on the issues with the children, although not being married means no spousal support so that's a big plus for him. But yes, the mother has all the legal and physical custodial rights to the child right now, and he's going to find that it's impossible to turn that around unless he can find solid proof that she's a neglectful or abusive parent. Even neglect isn't always enough. I've read countless cases where the children are ordered to stay with the drug abusing alcoholic mother rather than the responsible father, because to many courts the mom is going to naturally be the best parent.

[ynguns251]

Hi all. I had court on Friday and once again we have to go to another date set for Aug 28th. We had a new judge this time and I feel as if he was totally lost in our case as he said to us " need to go to mediation " but we went to mediation and we had reached no agreement other then a temporary one and my lawyer stated that she filed a motion in April for visitation to be expanded and at my house and had gotten no response at all. The judge seemed fair and asked why I only see my daughter 5 hrs a month and her lawyer said it is because she is nursing a child and also stated that I am not ready for overnights because I never changed her diaper and I live in IN and yada yada yada but the judge replied " anyone can change a diaper " and asked what our agreement was and I had stated we have a temp agreement in mediation for me to have 4 hrs at a time and every other weekend she will drive halfway and we can meet and take Avery to my house also to see a counselor as directed by our mediator. She also agreed to bring daughter to my picnic yesterday and stay a minimum of an hr ( which she did and was great ) so the judge then said next date is Aug 28th and that is the final as he will decide. I get out of court and text her to give me names of therapists in her area and she replies " You lied in court today and so did your attorney " I said how so? Because it says that your mother can see Avery with you and that she never agreed to this. I replied that I was told in mediation that she can be there for a short time and also per our agreement her dad was to be not present at time of visits ( which he was ) and she told me her lawyer said that there is no signed agreement even now except a temp one in mediation and she can refuse it and go back to original one of 2.5 hrs every other weekend. I give up trying to be nice anymore as I get nowhere.

[sargon]

So nothing changes for a month. Sorry about that. Hang in there and hopefully the judge will give you more time with your daughter at the next conference.

 

Why does your ex stay an hour during visitation and why do you think that's great?

[ynguns251]

It was great for my father to see his grandaughter for the first time. Kelly is really mean to me and even said via text that I bounced my daughter to much. I was playing with her and she was laughing and smiling. She treats me like a criminal and uses our daughter as a means to keep me basically held hostage and do as she wants or I will pay the ultimate price. I am worried that the judge will never let me see her without my ex being there and it is getting ridiculous. I need to have overnights by myself and at my house I am not a criminal and have never threatened her. She gets really crazy after court and called me a liar and stated how My lawyer and I went against our agreement in mediation but we did no such thing and in the mediation I asked her father not be present while I visit but she said to me that her lawyer told her there is nothing signed and as I visited my daughter on 7-5-15 her dad was there and stated to me that it is because she is still nursing and cannot trust me bu myself at her house. I asked her " have I done something in your house that you are worried about? " she said no but has to be careful as I am basically a stranger. I had to laugh at this because if she tells judge this he may ask her why would you want a stranger to buy you an engagement ring and sleep with him???????