Conference quark::mennotes-v1

In theory, custody arrangements are by agreement of the parents.  One parent
cannot unilaterally decide to change the arrangement.  If your boyfriend cannot
settle with his ex on a mutually agreeable arrangement, he will have to
fight it out in court.  However, so will his ex.

Since the current arrangement is not written down and part of a divorce
stipulation, it carries no legal weight.  In fact, courts are much more
likely to allow the current situation to continue.   However, it looks
like a court battle is in the offing - yuck.  This is the worst thing to
do to a child.

The arrangement I have with my ex is that we each have our son for two
weeks at a time.  This works because we are on good terms and live
close to each other.  It's not for everyone.  But it does give each of us
a chance to spend steady time with our son, and still have a "break".
Perhaps your boyfriend needs to think of nontraditional alternatives.

					Steve

    1.	As they say in the plumbing business, "the jobs not finished
    until the paperwork is done."  If there is no formal temporary order,
    then as far as the courts are concerned, there is no agreement.
    
    2.	I am not sure how custody works if they were never married.
    Is there a common law marriage?  She can take any position she wants
    as far as when and where she thinks he should be allowed to see
    the kids.  He can do the same.  He has the same rights as she does
    to parenting.  Where the child is placed physically will depend
    on the age of the the child.  Usually, it goes to the woman.  However
    if he can show through documentation that he has served as the 
    child's primary care giver, in function and for extended periods
    of time, then he has a stronger case.  This concept of "primary
    care," seems to be the coming thing in some of the progressive courts
    around the country and the concept is supported by both mothers'
    and fathers' advocates.  There is a certain common sense to it and
    it also may have the affect of sending a message to all parents
    to get and stay involved with their kids in positive ways.
    (In another reply, I will enter some info on what constitutes 
    "primary care.")
    
    3.	He needs to log everything.  Time he spent with the child. 
    How he spent it.  Telephone calls.  Support paid.  etc., etc.  He
    needs to get compulsive about keeping records and staying involved
    with the child.
    
    4.	He can theaten to back out altogether.  If he isn't married,
    I'm not sure what the mother can do.  I do not advocate that; it
    is just a tactic to bring her to terms quickly.
    
    5.	Take Judith Wallerstein's book into court.  It stresses the
    just how important the non custodial parent is.
    
    Craig

    
    
    Only an attorney (and probably, ultimately, a judge), can
    and should answer your legal questions.
    
    You didn't mention how the age of the child.  We have found
    that a situation similar to Steve's works well for us.  We
    'share' custody of our son, each of us having him for one
    week.  Initially we tried the 'every other day' routine, and
    found it too difficult for all concerned.  A week at a time
    gives our son more continuity.
    
    Finally, child support is to share the cost of a child.  Her
    income should have no bearing on what the father pays to sup-
    port their child.  If it costs x number of dollars per month,
    he should pay 1/2x.
    
    Deborah
    
    

    Sorry for the messy state of this reply.  You'll have to sort through
    the "DOCUMENT" formatting commands.  I scrubbed some of them out.
    
    Craig
    
    
    Experts on Impact of Divorce on Children
Citations from Literature and Congressional Hearings

Dodson, Fitzhugh,  "How to Father" (Nash Publishing, Los Angeles: 
    1974).  Fitzhugh Dodson, Ph.D. is a psychologist and author of "How the 
    Parent."

    <le>pp. 124:  Beginning at the age of six the mother is no longer the 
    center of the child's universe.  The father can often guide and manage 
    the six year old best.
    <le>pp. 124-128:  Six year old boys demonstrate seemingly unlimited 
    energy and activity.
    <le>pp. 124-129:  Established peer groups and friends are particularly 
    important for boys ages 6 through 11.

    
Wallerstein, Judith & Kelly, Joan Berlin, Surviving the Breakup 
    (Basic Books Publishers, N.Y.:1980).  Judith Wallerstein, Ph.D., is the 
    principal investigator of the California Children of Divorce Project 
    and Executive Director of the Center for the Family in Transition, 
    Corte Madera, California.  Joan Berlin Kelly, Ph.D., is the 
    co-principal investigator of the California Children of Divorce Project 
    and Director of the Northern California Mediation Center, Marin, 
    California.

    <le>pp. 26:  Talk of moving and actual moves produces much anxiety and 
    uncertainty in children of divorce.
    <le>pp. 310:  It is important for both parents to remain genuinely 
    involved and responsible for their children.
    <le>pp. 310-311:  There is no compelling legal reason to pattern the 
    post divorce family after the intact family [mother being the primary 
    caretaker].  It is undesirable to routinely designate one parent as the 
    psychological parent and of vesting sole legal and physical custody in 
    that one parent.  Continuity of the parent child relationship with both 
    parents is paramount.

Francke, Linda, "Divorce - Research Shows Boys Hit Harder Than 
    Girls by Parent's Breakup" (Washington Post, Washington, D.C., June 13, 
    1988)

    <le>Boys seem to suffer more from divorce than girls.  They exhibit 
    lower academic achievement and seem to have a more difficult time 
    socially.  Boys in custody of mothers can become sexually insecure and 
    threatened.  University of Texas research supports the notion of same 
    sex custody since boys seem to need the persistent role model of the 
    father which seems to yield higher self-esteem, maturity, independence, 
    and personal warmth.
    
Skafte, Dianne, "Breaking Up Is Hard to Do" (Washington Post, 
    Washington, D.C., July 16, 1986).  Diane Skafte is a custody evaluator 
    and divorce counselor in Boulder, Colorado.
    
    <le>Children, parents and other relatives can and do live happily in a 
    variety of arrangements which do not conform to prescriptive 
    presumptions that are part of American myth of the nuclear family.
    <le>Fundamental resistance to fathers having physical custody is 
    grounded in the myth that women should stay with their children all day 
    every day.
    <le>Resistance to fathers having physical custody comes from the myth 
    that males cannot parent as well as females.  
    <le>From the children's point of view, the time-sharing arrangement is 
    the most important issue.  Children need to see both parents on a 
    regular basis.
    <le>Reasons for making the father's house home-base: The child seem 
    most secure, content, and joyful around the father. The father has 
    been active in the care of the child from the time of birth. 
    The father is willing to take over primary care.

Ricci, Isolina, "Mom's House, Dad's House, Making Shared Custody 
    Work" (Macmillan Publishing, N.Y., 1980).  Isolina Ricci, Ph.D., is a 
    family counselor and mediator and a recognized pioneer in the field of 
    counseling, mediation, and education for divorced families.  She is a 
    researcher at Stanford University and the Executive Director of the New 
    Family Center in Palo Alto, CA.
    
    <le>Summary - Children can and do thrive living in a "two home" 
    arrangement.  It is important for both parents to maintain an ongoing 
    relationship with children of divorce.  Environmental factors such as 
    schooling and established social and support groups, rather than 
    stereotype role models, need to determine when and how long children 
    reside with each parent.
    

Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families, "Divorce: The 
    Impact on Children and Families - June 19, 1986 Hearing" (U.S. 
    Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1987)
    
    Testimony
    
    Judith S. Wallerstein, Ph.D., Executive Director, Center for the 
    Family in Transition, Corte Madera, CA.
    
    <le>pp. 15:  The absence of a persistent and ongoing relationship of 
    boys with their fathers seems to yield poor self-esteem, poor academic 
    achievement, and shallow aspirations well into their 20s.
    <le>pp. 16:  The chief hazards [to children of divorce] lie in the 
    diminished or disrupted parenting and continued household 
    disorganization that can continue over many years, especially when the 
    custodial parent is isolated; in the broken or diminished relationship 
    with the non-custodial parent and the unremitting feelings of rejection 
    engendered in the child; in the multiple relocations; in the curtailed 
    educational or social opportunities.<endlist>
    
    
    Nancy Polikoff, staff attorney, Women's Legal Defense Fund, 
    Director of Child Custody Project, Washington, D.C.
    
    pp. 51-52: Summary - In Garska v. McCoy, <emphasis>((Garska v. 
    McCoy, 278 S.E. 2d 357 (W.Va. 1981))), the court developed a sex 
    neutral standard for determining the best interest of the child by 
    enumerating the following factors as those which in part constitute 
    primary parenting:
    
    <le>Preparing and planning of meals <le>bathing, 
    grooming, and dressing; <le>Purchasing, cleaning, and care of clothes; 
    <le>Medical, care, including nursing and trips to physicians; 
    <le>Arranging for social interactions among peers; <le>Arranging for 
    alternative care; <le>Putting child to bed at night, attending to child 
    at night, waking the child in the morning; <le>Disciplining, teaching, 
    and toilet training; <le>Educating, i.e. religious, cultural, social; 
    <le>Teaching elementary skills, i.e., reading, writing, 
    arithmetic.<endlist>
    
    <le>In July 1982 the Pennsylvania court applied primary caretaker 
    standards.  In Jordan v. Jordan. 8 Fam. L. Rep. (BNA) 2596 (Pa. Super. 
    Ct. Pittsburgh Dist. August 17, 1982) the court held that positive 
    consideration must be given to parents who have served as primary 
    caretakers.


    David L. Levy, Esq., President, National Council for Children's 
    Rights, Washington, D.C.
    
    pp. 53:  Sampling of research indicates that fathers are as good at 
    parenting as mothers.
    <le>pp. 53:  Research by Shiller indicates that joint custody boys are 
    better adjusted than sole custody boys.
    <le>pp. 53:  Santrock and Warshak found that boys living with their 
    fathers were generally better adjusted than boys living with their 
    mothers. 
    <le>pp. 60: Livingston research found that boys in joint custody and 
    residing with fathers were most well adjusted.<endlist>
    

    
    
    Let me just fill you in a bit.
    
    The current custody situation has been going on now for about a
    year.  It has seemed to work best for everyone involved.  It is
    written down in a temporary court visitation document.  However,
    as I said before, it is not a permanent document.  The parents
    were never married so there is no divorce to speak of, and legally,
    in the case of an unmarried mother, she has 100% custody unless
    she has agreed otherwise.  She still retains 100% physical custody,
    but he is trying to get joint.
    
    The mother will not allow the child to live with the father on any
    count because she is still young (will be 3 in August).  There is
    a restraining order on both parents barring them from speaking to
    each other in the child'd presence and neither parent is allowed
    into the other's house.  So the situation is not amicable at all.
    So it is still pretty much a mine/yours situation.  She feels that
    the child is hers and hers alone which is not the way to raise a
    kid.  The only reason he has any custody is because he moved in
    with her to help raise Erin for about a year.  Then she moved out
    without telling him.  And the courts looked at his effort to be
    a good parent and also the fact that taking him away from Erin would
    ultimately hurt Erin.
    
    This child has been through alot of changes in her young life.
    She has already on her third daycare situation.  That just recently
    changed and she is reacting negatively to that.  Her father is a
    stable force in her life, and I feel it would have an adverse affect
    on her if she was not allowed to continue being with him as much
    as she already is.  Her Mom will no longer be spending as much time
    with her and I'm sure that too is going to affect her.  But why
    should her time with her father be changed to suit her mother's
    whims?  
    
    It would be great to have her stay for a week or two weeks, but
    her mother will not agree to that.  It took enough fighting just
    to allow her to stay overnight one night a week.
    
    As for the child support, she gets one half his paycheck each week.
    He can barely afford to survive off of the remainder.  That was
    decided according to the courts wacko equations.  She already makes
    twice as much as he does.  I am quite sure that what he pays is
    not one half of what is costs to raise the child.  So the half/half
    cost is not the case here.  He has to pay for the same things she
    does, except he also pays all her medical.  He buys her clothes,
    he feeds her, she has her own room (unlike at her mom's where she
    shares her mother's room), plus he has to pay child support.  It
    makes no sense, but unfortunately it is reality.
                                                    
    
    He spoke to his lawyer last night, and the matter has to be
    investigated further.  But they feel that she can not take away
    the time he already has.  Hopefully, that is going to be the case.
    
    Thanks for listening!
    
    Michele

This is a complex situation, as they were never married.  Only his lawyer
can help - there's very little precedent in such cases.

As to the notion that 3 is "too young" to be living with her father, I say
"sez who?"  My son has been living with me half-time since he was 2, he's
now 5-1/2.

				Steve

    With a court order I suspect that it is unlikely that the mother
    can change the visitation arrangement.
    
    I find the comment that she is making twice his salary yet he is
    giving her half rather odd.  Was that the situation when the original
    agreement was enacted?  If not, how much was the mother making then?
    If I remember the equation, it goes something like this:
    
    	Custodial parent's income		X
    	less $15,000  			- $15,000
    	less employment daycare		-       C
        -----------------------------------------
    	Custodial parent's contribution (X-$15K-C) >= zero
    
    	Non-custodial parent's income		Y
    	Factor (depends on # & age of kids)    22%
    	------------------------------------------
    	Non-custodial fundamental amount    0.22Y
    	less custodial parent's contri -(X-$15K-C)
    	------------------------------------------
    	The order 				
    	(+/- 2% court discretion)   $CHILD SUPPORT
    	------------------------------------------
    
    I believe that health insurance premiums count toward the amount
    though I am not sure.  The obvious inequity is that the court
    protects the custodial parent, usually the woman, by accounting
    for the the poverty level, whereasa the non-=custodial parent, usually
    the man is not protected from sliding below the poverty line which
    in turn makes it nearly impossible for the non custodial parent
    to provide for his children, which in turn...  Apparently, the court's
    reasoning is that it will judge in deference of the children.  Whether
    it works out that way is anybody's guess.  There is certainly a
    fair number of men who skip on payments just because of the burden...
    and this usually takes place in low income cased just where the
    equation really needs to serve the reconstituted family so that
    the children do not suffer economically and so that they have acess
    to both parents.  For instance, using the equation above, a woman
    with custody of one five year old could be earning $20,000.  
    The father could be earning $17,000.  The non custodial father 
    would have to pay the custodial mother roughly $3,700 per year 
    pushing his gross earning down to $13,300 while the mother's 
    gross would be $23,300, more than the median income for a family
    of four.  These gaps widen when you consider the tax consequences
    since the father has to pay at least $550 in income taxes on the
    child support while the custodial parent pays no taxes on that amount.
    Accounting for taxes, the non custodial parent's income available
    for purchasing is around $12,800 while the custodial parent has
    the same purchasing power that a salary of almost $24,000 would
    weild.
    
    If the mother is making twice the father then their may 
    be what's called a material change in circumstances.
    It may be to your friend's advantage that the whole thing is going
    back into court still under the temporary order.  I'd have him ask
    his attorney to request a review of support.  Get evidence of
    her income.
    
    If necessary to
    preserve or increase visitation, ask for a family service review.  If the
    mother is wacko, do the later quickly.  It is not unheard of for
    _some_ mothers to raise false issues of child abuse, but with the
    real crisis that this country is experiencing with child abuse,
    judges are sensitive to that sort of thing (even though statistical
    samples show that women...because they tend to be the primay care providers...
    are responsible for 60% to 70% of all forms of abuse).
    	

It's tough to do, but it does happen.

The weekend I flew to St. Paul, Mn. to pick up my two children who
were living there.  This month I was given custody of three of 
my children.  The fourth, my oldest son, I've had custody of for
the last 4 years, and my oldest daughter has been living with us
for the last year on a temporary change of custody.  This brings
to an end a 9 1/2 year struggle to regain custody.  I don't have time
to go into all the gory details right now, but the fight and the
change *was* necessary.

One of the main things I used was that violation of visitation is 
also a violation of the children's rights and impairs their emotional
development.  My ex is also wanted in Colorado for three counts
of contempt of court and will have to spend 29 days *in jail* if she
ever returns to Colorado (for starters).

I owe a lot to my 15 year old daughter who had the courage to defy
her mother and go into court and tell the judge just what was
*really* going on with her mother.  I also owe a lot to my current
wife for standing by me these last eight years, six of them married.

fred();