The forum will be unavailable starting at 3 a.m. Eastern / 12 a.m. Pacific, Saturday, December 10. The forum will be completely inaccessible for a few hours and is expected to return that same Saturday morning. If you have questions or concerns during the maintenance window, please email email@example.com
Well it's official now. The bpd stbx now has the full power of the US government backing her up. Judge signed off on the Temp Order of giving her primary residential, joint legal, 50% custody time and 16% CS. I keep house (recently bought it with nothing down so there is no equity value).
Final set for next month. Everything else up for grabs at final, but I expect to keep everything. Hopefully daycare will not be added. I may have to pay her legal fees, but I will only pay a few dollars a month as I heard someone here say that was possible.
Three attornies did not expect it to come out this good. Her attorney gasped after I got my stbx to agree to 50% custody time and a reduced CS even though she just got finished giving an exhaustive explanation on why I should pay substantially more. Of course, I don't feel like it came out all that good, if you don't get primary or sole custody you have to pay CS and get jerked around on other issues for a long time to come. I will continue to look for subtantial changes in circumstances to get primary reversed.
Many of you may remember from what I said before, ever since stbx left I have made some extra money on the side by renting out rooms in my house. One of the girls I rent to works as a teacher at a prestigious daycare. She agreed to sign a contract to be a live-in nanny if I was to get primary custody. Not a bad deal, free rent and a little extra cash...Total value = slightly more than what I would be giving stbx for CS. One of the other girls claimed to be a paralegal, but she turned out to be useless when it came to ANYTHING legal. She finally left and took her big ugly hole digging neighborhood terrorizing dog with her, thank god.
So with an open room I have interviewed a few potential candidates and 3 of them have high potential. A 6th grade teacher, a lifeguard, and a lady that works for the Department of Family and Children Services (DFCS). It turns out that the DFCS is just down the street from me. This could be interesting. I wonder what could happen if I stock up my house with people that are directly involved in helping children. I guess it can't hurt to have friends in the DFCS.
Jason, You are right and your are wrong. Having someone from the DFCS in your home can be extremely helpful in that you get 'inside' information about how things work there. You would have an ally from the inside to help you formulate a long-term, primary custody plan.
However, should anything go down at your place regarding the child, the first thing that will probably happen is the DFCS worker will recuse themselves and a supervisor will appoint someone else who works there to conduct an investigation. Then, in order to appear non-biased, they will magnify each and every mistake you make/made.
If it were me, I would pass on this individual. Hope this helps.
Very good and interesting perspective. I think the chances of anything happening that requires an investigation is miniscule. If per chance it happens, I think it would be about a 50% chance of which way they were biased, and that is if they are biased at all.
Given the situation in which I don't have primary custody and don't have much to work with and don't have much to lose (other than the fight to get primary...which without an edge I already lost) I think I will go ahead and take in the DFCS girl. She is not as attractive as the lifeguard girl but at least I wouldn't have to worry about her paying me. The lifeguard girl is only 20 and makes very little money, but another girl staying here is exactly the same in every way and she manages to pay on time...where-as the paralegal girl made a good bit and probably made out like a bandit from her divorce of her very wealthy husband and she hassled me about everything...I felt quite sorry for all her ex's. I think she had initially intended me as her next target but when I moved in two other girls she understood it was time to move on
And it's not like I will only rent to girls, but about 90% of my responses are female. Guess all the guys that are looking to rent try to rent from girls...all the girls looking to rent usually first try to rent from other girls but find it more difficult given they have more competition. I also have a negotiation theory on what is happening here but it is a bit complex.
Maybe once I finish off the basement I can rent to four girls instead of just three. I wonder what my neighbors will think when I have 5 cars parked out front. Guess they will be ok with it if I have the girls help out with the yard work in their bikinis
You just married him last week and you are already dragging him back to your hometown? lol There has been a good bit of job growth here lately so he is looking in a good area. Hey don't forget to send me those wedding pictures! I will send you a link to my ad for the rooms. Heh. You never know! lol
You mean to tell me that you lost primary to a bpd?
I guess that is what you get for putizing around the way you did.
You are still delusional thinkinf you can reverse that decision in the final hearing with a "substantial change" attack.
90% of the time judges will do the status quo at final hearing time. Now you need the judge to reverse himself and that ain't gonna happen. The kids will have been with her for another 6 months and that will give the judge more reason to keep the status quo.
Congratulations. You still don't get it. You think that "joint" legal custody and "50%" timeshare mean something. The person that is primary calls the shots.
If your ex is truly a BPD then she is going to now make your life more of a hell than it was because she won and you put her through this.
It is a given that not having primary custody is a bad thing.
You give no useful advice. You don't know, or fail to acknowledge, the entire situation.
Don't pretend. It's not healthy, and it's potentially harmful to those that do not thoroughly comprehend or as capable of dealing with abstract ideas and situations.
The judge we have is known to take the cookie cutter approach and always says "skirts with skirts". After the final next month, I plan on sticking to the list and eventually bring her back to court in the district in which she now resides. That judge is known for being open minded and NOT taking the rubber stamp approach.
This was a motion to enforce right? Didn't the document you signed have the 50% parenting time in there and the reduced cs? Why was her attorney trying to argue for more if it was already signed and this was a motion to enforce hearing?
I think you will probably be hearing more scoldings and I told you so responses (Don't think you don't deserve a few of them). However, the outcome could have been alot worse. It would seem your saving grace in all of this was actually your ex. She agreed to the 50% parenting time and the reduced child support.
If you ever want to take another crack at the family court system, knock up the lifeguard, read the list, and start from scratch.
"Didn't the document you signed have the 50% parenting time in there and the reduced cs?" Yes.
"Why was her attorney trying to argue for more if it was already signed and this was a motion to enforce hearing?" This occurred at mediation, I wouldn't have agreed otherwise.
"I think you will probably be hearing more scoldings and I told you so responses (Don't think you don't deserve a few of them)." Rediculous. There has been NOTHING that has happened that I did not plan on nor mention directly in my posts. I mentioned everything before it happened. My purpose was to brainstorm other possibilities. My options were bad or worse. I decided to go with bad. Now am I going to be told that I took a bad option?
"However, the outcome could have been alot worse. It would seem your saving grace in all of this was actually your ex. She agreed to the 50% parenting time and the reduced child support. " Strictly due to negotiation tactics was I able to convince her to those terms. I hit her with almost everything I had during mediation. I knew that the costs would be split 50/50 for mediation so I drew it out for hours. I told her to leave the room twice while I chatted it up with the mediator, gave the mediator my opinions and evidence (dv police reports, and had video of stbx engaged in lesbian act) and told her I had been speaking directly with a judge at the courthouse that suggested I should change my locks to keep stbx out...and I told her the name and number of the detective that had suggested that I file charges against her. Mediator confirmed what I had been told by one of the attornies...said in not exact words but that the judge was strictly "skirts go with skirts". Mediator suggested hitting stbx with all this when she gets back into room. I waited for them to speak their last breath of why they believe I should pay 900 a month then I hit them with all of it at once...while they were stumbling through the DV reports (stbx failed to mention there existance to her attorney) I asked for cs to be reduced to 700 (got it) then asked to get daughter an extra day each week (got it) which put me at having 50% custody time.
Having a child care worker in your house who will agree to be a full-time nanny will not help you get custody. I had the same thing and my attorney said it won't help. Courts prefer to give custody to family members...even if they are losers. I had to say that my mother, sister, and other family members have rearranged their schedules so that my boys will have family members caring for them full time. Now, if you had someone in your family that could live with you, that might help.
Also, did you ever ask the judge for an outsource evaluation? If your stbx is truly bipolar or has some other disorder, paying for a psych eval now could save you a lot in time and money down the line. It could also tip the scales for you in terms of custody.
@copy; 2016 Men's Divorce Forum - All Rights Reserved
THIS IS AN ATTORNEY ADVERTISEMENT. CORDELL & CORDELL, ST. LOUIS, MO. Attorney services are provided by licensed attorneys in every state where Cordell & Cordell offices are located. The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements.
Joseph Cordell, Principal Partner, licensed in MO and IL only. Michelle Ferreri licensed in PA and NJ only. Offices in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, PA. Kimberly Lewellen licensed in CA only. Dorothy Walsh Ripka licensed in OH, IL, MO, KY and TX only. Jerrad Ahrens licensed in NE and IA only. Lauren Adkins, Florida Resident Partner. Tampa, FL.