This isn't quite clear to me - "It states that we have the skids 35% of the time, but its made flexible. So the skids get to have a say where they want to go, and how long they want to stay"

FDH needs to get clarification from his attorney, and then either live with it or appeal it.

To me, 10 is a little young for a child to be ablse to choose, but the court may have decided best to keep them togethor.

I am not certain what you mean by setting boundaries, but ignoring court orders will likely put your FDH on the wrong side of a boudnary.

I think, and correct me if I'm wrong, that what this mom does is plan things the kids will want to do while they are to have time with dad, and then because the schedule is 'flexible' tell them to tell dad to let them come home so they can participate. So she intentionally disrupts dad's time rather than planning a play date on her time.

I take the question as how to say 'No, your mom has no business or compassion in planning these things knowing you won't be home and you are not going. We want to spend time with you and your mom has more than enough other opportunities. Mom needs to respect, you, your dad and your time together by making plans on her own time."

And that, by the way, is exactly what I would say.

It's like JNM is saying kkny. BM is playing games, planning things in 'our time' and then of course the kids want to go to her place. BM then says: well' it's THEIR choice and therefore FDH has been allowing it until now.

As for the court order being very unclear; it is exactly that. And I agree 10 is a bit young to have to choose, but that is what was decided by the court, so that was that.

I mean by setting boundaries that we just have to stop saying yes every time because BM's behavior is too disruptive which makes it too stressfull.
So the boundary will be to say 'no' again to BM's planning stuff in our weekend, unless of course it IS an actual birthday of a close relative..

Because it's such a grey area now it's very hard to judge when someone is breaching or not breaching this order. It WAS MEANT to cover the birthdays and odd parties that might come up so that the skids can go with the other parent to these occasions, not for BM to abuse EOW. Therefore, if we say 'no' and she would take us to court (that would be a first) than it would be interesting to see what a judge would think of her behavior. Was it really that necessary that the skids had to go to McDonalds and a movie on that particular weekend?? That sort of thing.

I'm actually hoping that she would take it back to court, because the sooner we get this court order changed, the better as far as I'm concerned.

Thanks for the advise JNM on what to say, I think it should be something like that as well and we'll be prepared next time we see the skids.

I guess I already knew the answer, but I sometimes don't know if it's ok to just say it how it is. BM bags us soo bad, and I'll be d*mned if I'd be doing the same.
But to state the facts is what we need to do and sometimes you just have to say it how it is. I'll let you know how it went down. :-)

What would mom say if dad planned something during her time & called the kids to invite them? I am assuming he is not doing that and I am not suggesting he do that, but just think about what she would say/do. Boundaries are needed and if dad respects mom's time but mom doesn't, then it might be time to get rid of the 'flexible' order... it isn't working. It would work if both parents are being cooperative.

kkny, it would be a hard issue to press when the court makes an order that is ambiguous and vague as to time with kids, thus it's 'flexible'. I am guessing the 35% is used to attribute time for child support calculation purposes.

In my opinion, it sounds as if mom is trying to cut dad out of kids' lives and that goes against the principle of it's in the child's best interest for frequent & continuing contact with both parents. A court may be inclined to give dad primary custody if mom doesn't cut it out. Of course, when dealing with kids that are not quite too young but not quite old enough to decide what they really want, it makes it a tough call.

My suggestion is to go along with it... no resistance. I know that isn't what you want to do and it's probably the hardest thing to do, but mom wants to keep the battle going. She is getting something out of it, maybe she has nothing else in her life so she focuses on how she can make waves with your DH (and you). If she knows it irritates you, she will keep doing it. If she knows DH is upset, especially if he protests, she will keep doing it. If you take all the game (fun) out of it for her, give it a few months and see what she does. When she stomps on your weekend or ruins your plans, I'd tell the kids "I'm sorry you can't stay, I was really looking forward to spending time with you, but I want you to have fun." I'd try to keep a smile and cheerful attitude about it and not let them see you get upset over it, as it would probably make mom's day if that was reported back to her. If you do this for a few months (or at least several weeks), if she is doing it to get a reaction, she will have to work harder & harder to get you to react. Eventually, the kids may see that she is using them as weapons against you, if they don't already. Just keep telling them you love them and wish you could spend more time together.

I don't know if that's the right answer, but I know from past experience that when someone is only in it to play the game, when you stop playing the game, they go away.

Imamommy; you are describing EXACTLY what our views have been so far. We've been doing exactly that for the past 4 months. We thought that she would tire of the game if we don't play. The more we say 'no' the more we she will be inclined to keep playing. So it was 'yes' every time.
It was actually pretty hard to explain our motivation for saying yes all the time to other people, like our families, because everybody's first reaction is: just say 'no'. Nice to know that you think along the same lines as we did :-)

Anyway so we did that and I still believe that if we hang in there long enough she will tire of it, it's only been 4 months. What we didn't expect is that it would be sooo hard to not let it affect you. It's incredibly stressful to have the constant disruptions and to not even be able to just do shopping and plan a meal for 2 or for 4, for example. It also makes me angry, and it shows, which is really frustrating because the girls are supposed to come to our place for a rest, not to have another angry person around. We can't continue like this, FDH has been able to control his anger, but he knows I'm struggling and I know it too. For our own sanity we need to go back to saying 'no', the plan seems to be backfiring and that is not worth it.

And of course there was never a hope in hell that we would see the skids a bit extra in 'her time'. This sort of thing only goes one way, BM's way. We never tried to organise something just to get some time back; but in the past 4 months there were two occasions when we invited the skids over for dinner, one was with my brother and the other with my parents visiting. They came all the way from Holland to Australia for a visit, and so we had a 'legit' reason for inviting the girls over. But nooo...BM just organised something 'better' and put that to the girls. They knew that they'd be in trouble not to go with BM's plans, and because they don't get in trouble with us they will 'choose' BM's plans over ours. And then we are just talking about a couple of hours....

BM has taken more than 50% of 'our' time so far. And that is another reason to start saying no again: the skids NEED the break even if they don't realise it so much themselves, and I feel it's irresponsible on our behalf to continue allowing BM to disrupt their 'break' from her. It's wearing them down and we as adults need to put a stop to it.

As children get older, they spend more time in activities and less time at home. As others on this board have noted, frequently there are two sides to a story. My guess is the mom will say all she wants is the kids to have a normal life, which includes activities, etc. Why can't Dad take teh kids to the activities? How do you know the kids dont really want these things -- I hear a lot of hatred in your narritive - perhaps your vision is clouded and biased? How do you know they just say what the mom tells them, and not want they want?

Parents in intact families have trouble planning as the kids get older. Practices get moved. Schedules change.

And btw, "we" dont have a court order -- your FDH, his X and the kids do.

Liesbeth, if children have been told that thair wishes are to be given heed, and you or you and your FDH say no, I think there might be resentment. If you do it once, they may just not come over next time. But you'll see.

As to your FDH (or you) wanting extra time when YOUR family is visiting -- these are your family, not the children's. I don't see when my Xs SO has family over that should disrupt my schedule.

I am not sure i understand. If the time is flexible and kids come and go when they want to, then it is not 35%. Because if they leave or skip the visit then it is less and if next time when they choose to stay longer it is more than 35%. It looks to me that judge reduced dad's time (unintentioanlly maybe).

You said dad will go to court to get custody because mom drinks. Now not only he didn't get custody mom has kids more. was the drinking addressed in court?

I remember you said kids are scared of mom and call 1AM in fear, it is rather strange than choose to go to her more. I would assume they use this opportunity to stick wiht dad. Hmmm

Now as about flexible court order. I and X always had flexible court order. I was CP but we didn't have anything set in stone. when we lived close by it worked well and when we lived far away it worked well for DD and both of us. But we got along well and never had major misunderstandings, also no stepparents or SOs interfer in whatever we planned for DD or whatever DD expressed as her wish.

Now if I would have bad relationship wiht X and we would not be able to negotiate anything reasonable, no way i would want flexible schedule. I would want a court order saying excatly what everyone does. So maybe your Dh needs to go to judge again.

Another thought...Could it be that kids do want to go to moms more? I forgot gender of the kids. but girls often want to hang out wiht mom more. Is it possible? It might be hurtful for DH, but .... He might think she is not a great mom (and if she drinks like you said it is really no good for the kids) but kids might not see it this way...

"I remember you said kids are scared of mom and call 1AM in fear, it is rather strange than choose to go to her more. I would assume they use this opportunity to stick wiht dad. Hmmm"

Finedreams, that would be common sense to a reasonable adult. We aren't talking about a 'reasonable adult', we are talking about children.... and not regular children, they are children of an alcoholic parent. There is dysfunction that comes with alcoholism within a family. I 'stuck' with my mom when, as an adult, I see my dad would have been the better place for me to go. I worried about leaving her alone. I worried nobody would take care of her so I stayed to do that. I remember coming home from school to find her passed out on the couch and not knowing if she was still alive. I used to check to see if she was breathing. I didn't want anyone to know about her or how bad it was, I wanted to 'protect' her. As an adult, I know it would have been better for others to find out and force her to get help. (or at least put me with my dad) But, I was not an adult, I was a 13 year old kid that everyone 'thought' should be able to decide because it was thought, I will do what I want anyways. That is too much pressure to put on a child of ANY age.

If the order says 35% and mom is constructively reducing dad's time but never letting him make it up, I would start with complaining that SHE is violating the order.. not dad. Sure, it might be viewed that dad would be in violation if he refuses to let kids go with mom but the intent of the 'flexible' order is to have kids feel they can come or go and not be bound to Friday at 6pm until Sunday at 6pm. Mom should be offering dad to make up time when she takes the kids on his time and should encourage that. If the kids refuse to make up time independent of mom's influence, that's a different story but it doesn't sound as if mom is encouraging kids to have a relationship with dad, it sounds quite opposite. That isn't the intent of the court... of course, I can't say for sure what the court's intent is, but I doubt they want kids to choose one parent over the other or for dad to see kids less. Both parents are important and I believe that is what the court wants to see.... less conflict and everyone working together cooperatively.

But, I do agree kids could be resentful if dad says no and they really want to go. However, they may also be relieved if he says no to her. Perhaps they want to spend the time with dad but are fearful of disappointing or going against mom. Dad needs to stand up for his relationship with his kids. If the KIDS protest him, then maybe he should relent and let them go if he sees it's what they really want. If mom is the only one protesting, too bad.

If OP has already said this, sorry, but how far apart do they live. Many opportuniies to spend time with pre-teens may revolve going to their practices and games, driving them home or out for pizza afterwards.

I agree with FD, flexible arrangements make more sense when people get along. That is why I said Dad needs to get this clarified and either live with it or appeal.

I still wonder what happened with dad pressing for custody...Did he present all this evidence how they call him at 1AM scared or how mom is too drunk to get kids to school, times when he called the police, whne boyfriend takes care of the kids because she is too drunk etc? If he has that much evidence, i wonder why Judge didn't increase his time wiht the kids but actually allowed more flexibility for mom. If things are that awful, why isn't dad doing anything about it? What did judge say when dad showed all this proof of neglectful or abusive parenting on mom's part?

"Did he present all this evidence how they call him at 1AM scared or how mom is too drunk to get kids to school, times when he called the police, whne boyfriend takes care of the kids because she is too drunk etc?'

People that have not gone through the court system have a black and white view on these issues. I used to be one of them. Before DH and BM had their court battle, I felt that justice would prevail. I really believed that the courts would recognize BM's alcohol addiction and would move to give DH primary custody.

Unfortunately, this is just NOT how the system works. A parent has to do some terrible damage to their child(ren) before the courts will intervene.

Alcohol or drug addiction really only seems to *matter* in court if the child is physically placed in harm. And it cannot just be the possibility that the child *might* be placed in harm's way---it actually has to happen! We were told that it did not matter that BM was on probation for a DWI, nor did it matter that she'd been arrested for another alcohol-related traffic incident. The GAL said the only thing that WOULD matter was if we could PROVE that she drank and drove WITH her son in the car.

Accusations, even when TRUE, are just that--accusations.

We presented A LOT of evidence about BM's alcohlism to the courts. We even had the testimony of her cousin who corroborated what we said---that BM is an alcoholic and that her drinking directly affects her parenting. We had a notarized letter from this cousin and it still didn't matter.

The courts are VERY hesitant to take a child from a parent, even in the face of chemical/alcohol dependancy.

The only thing we were able to get via going to court was residential custody for school purposes. DH and BM still retain 50-50 physical custody. And BM really does have a drinking problem! She drinks herself into a stupor pretty much every night, gets in violent physical fights with her DH, and then calls our house sobbing hysterically. The GAL even heard some of these messages from her and said as long as SS wasn't HURT, it didn't matter.

The only consolation we got in court was that if BM gets another DWI, my DH will get primary custody automatically because BM will HAVE to spend 90 days in jail.

BUT who knows if and when that will ever happpen.

Sorry to be so long winded, but my point is just that people THINK it is EASY to get custody when there's an addiction involved and this is really just not true.

I would not necessarilly expect children to be taken away. But i would expect dad to get more time than mom, or at least get 50/50. But dad not only didn't get more time, he has less now. new order is worse than the last one. Something just doesn't add up.

It doesn't necessarily surprise me, especially given the fact that the judge took the children's wishes into consideration.

My mom is a recovering alcoholic. We are very close now and have a good, healthy relationship. She has been sober for 7+ years. But she drank from the time I was 9 until I was 21. She was a binge drinker, a sporadic and unpredictable drinker. She never drank socially and, in fact, would not drink around people. She would lock herself in the bedroom or bathroom or even closet, down a bottle of vodka, and some Valium and pass out. Then she'd wake up and sometimes would be FINE---or sometimes the binge would continue for days. Eventually, she would sober up and she had LONG dry periods, the longest one being about a year. It was very upsetting to me and only now, at 28, am I able to look back and really see how dysfunctional the entire family was and how that dysfunction revolved around the alcoholism.

But you know what? I was still VERY loyal to my mom. I defended her and loved her and really just wanted to do whatever it could to make her stop. I felt responsible for her happiness and responsible for her sadness. I felt guilty when she drank---in some weird way, I felt that if I were BETTER or NICER or more PATIENT, she would be happy and she wouldn't drink.

The desire to protect and take care of an alcoholic parent is very intense and very real. So I am NOT at all surprised that OP's two SDs told the judge they want to spend more time with mom.

Liesbeth - My Ex used to pull the same stunts, 'tempting' DS to ask to go to his house on my time, and always with something that could be rescheduled to be on his time -- movies, toy store trips, favorite restaurants... But fortunately, our custody agreement was specific and did not have that type of flexibility clause, so I was able to answer JNM-style with a simple "Why would Daddy plan to do that now when he knows you're with me? Ask him if you couldn't do that on Thursday instead." And after about six months, that worked.

But it didn't end Ex's pressure to get me to agree to let DS go over there any time he wanted to -- easy walk of 3-4 blocks. My response to him was always that as long as he continued to pressure DS to visit him more, then DS would never really have a 'free choice' in the matter, so sticking to the proscribed schedule was the only way to keep that pressure off of DS. We even discussed this point in counselling, and at first, the counsellors thought I was being "a little rigid" on that point. But after a few weeks (once they got to know Ex), they agreed that "sticking to the schedule" made sense.

Since BioMom has already taken 50% of your time (or something close to it) -- I'd document as much of that as you can and seek to have your custody arrangement changed. Dad is NOT getting his 35%, and if you can make the court see that BioMom is deliberately playing games, they might 'slap her down' on it. If not, you might ask the court to stipulate that if the kids go back to BioMom's during your normal time, that you get an equivilent time (of your choosing) within the next two weeks to make up for it.

Or, if going back to court is something you really want to avoid, you can simply apply that policy to BioMom. When she asks for the kids back, pleasantly agree in principle, provided you and she agree on an alternate 'replacement time' so Dad's visitation isn't reduced.

Sweeby,

I dont think the present arrangement is as clear as 35% to dad, it seems to say the kids have some discretion. So if they say they want to do these things, I dont see a slapdown.

"As children get older, they spend more time in activities and less time at home. As others on this board have noted, frequently there are two sides to a story. My guess is the mom will say all she wants is the kids to have a normal life, which includes activities, etc. Why can't Dad take teh kids to the activities?"
KKNY: this is not about the activities. FDH and BM both take the skids to their sports and activities like basketball, school activities etc.

The things that BM organises in our time are things she can do in her own 10 days. For example shell announce to the skids to cook their favourite meal and rent a movie. Or she will ring the skids and tell them she bought a new game for the Wii and if they want they can come home and play it now. Or she invites one of SD10s friends over and then asks SD10 if she wants to come and play with her friend. For those of you who think something is not adding up, you probably cant believe that BM would actually do something like invite the skids friends over when skids arent even there, but that is what shes like. Believe it or not.

"How do you know they just say what the mom tells them, and not want they want?"
Because in the bad moments the skids tell us that they feel guilty for coming to our place and they want to please their mom. BM manipulates them, I dont see why its so hard to believe that. Do you guys (not all of you) think that a BM cant possibly be like that? I must be telling you half the truth or maybe Im making it sound a bit worse because I suffer from all this hatred?? I dont think BM does not do the wrong thing by her kids on purpose, its all about her and she doesnt see what shes doing to her own kids. Shes not a bad parent on purpose; but she is a bad parent. Ok theres a statement, now have a go guys!

"You said dad will go to court to get custody because mom drinks. Now not only he didn't get custody mom has kids more. was the drinking addressed in court?"
I remember you said kids are scared of mom and call 1AM in fear, it is rather strange than choose to go to her more. I would assume they use this opportunity to stick wiht dad. Hmmm"

Nothing hmmm about that FD. The girls are protecting their mom, as ima explained:
"We aren't talking about a 'reasonable adult', we are talking about children.... and not regular children, they are children of an alcoholic parent. There is dysfunction that comes with alcoholism within a family. I 'stuck' with my mom when, as an adult, I see my dad would have been the better place for me to go. I worried about leaving her alone."

"I still wonder what happened with dad pressing for custody...
What did judge say when dad showed all this proof of neglectful or abusive parenting on mom's part?"
As I said before and I will say it again because you just dont want to take it in. CPS did not see any concerns for skids after they gave BM a phonecall. No hard evidence there. The police did not want to go around her house, referred us to the family court for urgent orders. So no evidence there either. (Only evidence that we made a phonecall to police, that is not evidence). FDHs word against BMs made the judge decide to give kids a say for themselves. Skids felt very frightened for their mom and protected her. (BM told them that she might go to jail!) That is why we never wanted them to be involved like that. Ima and Lovehadley understand that the system doesnt always work.

BM more than likely has some kind of personality disorder, that is why she behaves this way. Mix that with alcoholism and it gets truly nasty. Because this is so hard to deal with I have come here for a bit of support and advice. I dont feel "hatred" but I do feel anger. Anger at the system for enabling BM to keep damaging her own children. I never felt angry like this before the court case. The injustice of it all has really had a big effect on me. I am trying to find ways to deal with this anger, part of why Im here.

I have fallen for it again and here I am defending myself once more. I think Im done with that now. Its just like some of you guys seem to enjoy picking at my stories, suggesting that I might be telling you half the truth, after all this cannot be true right? I must be full of hatred, am I for real or do I just want you guys on my side so I can continue pulling the wool over my own eyes?? Im certainly not fooling you am I? Reality check for Liesbeth please!!

Im on this forum to get some feedback for issues that we have to deal with, all feedback is appreciated, but Im not here to defend myself. I already have to deal with BMs ongoing attacks and the effect that has on the skids, Im not going to defend myself any longer here as well, trying to convince people that are not going to be convinced anyway.
For those of you that understandthat is why Im here and Im happy to be here!!

Hi Liesbeth. I wanted to send you a private message but you don't have an email addy on your "My Page". Please send me a message through my "My Page". Thanks :-)

Hi Colleen, I just sent you my address :-)

This is a classic example of a person using the system to their advantage. The judge gives some leniency, so mom uses that to her advantage, not for the kids benefit. If mom respected her kids and their right to a relationship with their dad she would cook their favorite meal and plan a play date on 'her' time just like the rest of us with shared parenting time do. Pulling these stunts puts her kids in the horrible predicament of picking between parents. An important event is one thing, but a Wii game is not.

I understand these type of moms, Liesbeth. You aren't alone.

It is obvious that mom manipulates the system to her advantage, some people unfortunatelly do that. I don't think it was very nice of a judge to let kids decide, certainly not at 10. I don't think kids are mature enough.

If mom takes 50% of dad's time then it needs to be addressed in court. It really doesnot matter what we say here. apparently judge decides otherwise.

I also wonder if kids manipulate both parents. They tell you that mom guilts them but they really want to be wiht dad. And they tell mom that they want to be with her more, so mom comes up wiht stuff to make sure kids get their wishes.

Beliveve me when kids know (and they always know) that parents do not get along, they would play them against each other all the time. They'd make parents to compete for kids attention. I feel bad for the kids whose parents do not get along. Frankly I put up wiht my X's crap so much just to make sure we maintain good communication for DD's sake.

maybe dad should ask mom what really bothers her? Does she think dad is bad influence, does she not like you? I would just ask directly and see if she can explain. I develop a headache to even read through that much drama and commotion, no way i would want to live through that. i believe there is a solution and it lies in mom's and dad's communication.

FD, all well said and good advice. Just ignoring court order to respect children's wishes isnt a good idea. If court has been unfair, talk to court counselor re what is happening. Of course some kids say one thing to one parent and one to another. Dad talking to mom is a good idea too.

KKNY, We have looked at the court order again, to see what we can do. So it states that "both parents agree to be flexible in regards to the arrangements", but it also states that proposals for change need to be discussed by phone. So far BM has been putting FDH on the spot in the presence of the kids, and usually that is last minute anyway so it does not leave any time for FDH to think about it. Otherwise she'll send a text message, which is also last minute. F.e. at 4.30pm he might receive a message to say the skids will not be there at 5.

Anyway, we have been to a counselor yesterday, and we discussed the options. She advised us to stick to the court order to the letter. FDH should not accept any other way but for BM to give FDH a phonecall. Otherwise she is breaching the court order, not us.

And this is the thing; in 4 years BM has not rang FDH once, not once. She plainly refuses to ring him. Because FDH and BM went to the court counseling and were then talking again FDH has tried to keep this fragile contact by caving in whenever BM would bring things up in presence of kids. Just to keep the peace. The kids were so happy to see BM and FDH talk and he did not want to yeopardise that.

The counselor advised us to not accept it any longer, just stick to the court order and unless BM rings, no more changes. FDH will write BM a letter and send it in registered mail, so we have the proof that he has asked BM to stick to the court order. Unfortunately it will have to be like this. But I'm sooo relieved that at least the phonecall is stated in the court order specifically as the only option to discuss any proposed changes. It's nice FDH tried to be easygoing, but it's not working so time to take this court order to the letter.

And FD, you are right to say that the kids might tell both parents that they want to stay with them. I'm 100% sure that it happens. But this is what BM does, she will manipulate kids to say they want to stay with her; and then she actually believes it herself and so she feels that she's respecting the kids' wishes. She creates her own truth and then she goes with it. She's not mentally healthy.

"FDH will write BM a letter and send it in registered mail, so we have the proof that he has asked BM to stick to the court order. "

Is email not an option? (Return receipt requested.) There's just something about 'registered mail' that says Big Guns and Lawsuits...

Yeas I know that's why it's not ideal, it gives me the same feeling. However we don't have BM's email, she claims not to have one? So it ldoesn't leave us much.
I totally agree though Sweeby, it has an aggressive air around it

Any thoughts on the wording of the letter?

Hi BM,

Since September 2008 weve had the new court order in place. I have been contacting you by phone whenever I needed to discuss anything. I would like you to do the same, as this is how it is stated in the court order paragraph 6.

I have always given you at least a weeks notice of my plans, as was agreed in the counselling sessions. I would like you to also give me a weeks notice of any proposals to change the arrangements.

At counselling we agreed that its not good to discuss things in the presence of the kids, for example at the drop-off. If it happens again I will have to tell you that I will not discuss it in the presence of the kids and ask for you to give me a phonecall.

We also agreed that text messages can be misinterpreted easily so a phonecall is better. I know that Ive been sending messages to you as well on occasion so I will also stop doing that myself.

If you want to talk to me regarding the arrangements please give me a call, as I will do the same.

Regards,

FDH

Dear BM,

Since the most recent order in September 2008 states we are to contact each other by phone, that is what should be done. When things are discussed during exchanges, the children are being put in the middle of a situation that may make them uncomfortable and that should be avoided for the sake of the children. Therefore, it would be best to communicate when the children are not present and by giving each other adequate notice, say a week, so the children aren't being subjected to last minute disruptions in their scheduled time with either of us. While it is best for the children for us to keep open communication with each other, any changes in parenting time should be discussed on the phone only, to avoid any confusion or misinterpretations. We can continue to send text messages to communicate about the kids, such as progress in school, etc.

Sincerely,

FDH

honestly, unless you can tape the phone calls I would try to have it switched to email/text only. There is too much room for misunderstandings with calls. . . . trust me, I know. Or, if you can't switch follow up the phone call with an email/text - "BM, per our conversation tonight I will have the kids from X to Y on Thursday, You will have them Friday and I will have them Sat. and Sun. Please let me know if you understood this to be different."

Email is free - perhaps one could be set up for BM just for this reason?

Perhaps BM doesn't have access to a computer with internet capabilities....such people do exist.

of course they do colleen, but until I ask I don't know if that is the case here or not. Did you forget the sugar on your corn flakes this morning?

My Dh sent a registered letter stating phone calls for emergencies and email for schedualed arrangments. She doesn't follow it at all. Doesn't want a paper trail and so continues to use her daughter for communication with my DH.
the damage is done unfortunately but that is bm fault not my Dh. He's sent letters , he's spoken to her but she avoids us now which has actually brought alot of peace. So i can't really complain too much.
SHe has tried to fight during pick ups and he sent her lawyer 2 warnings about that....so sh'es backed off.
But i think all hell will break loose soon. I have the feeling her new hubby will ditch her.things are not going well...so when he leaves..she will begin her assualts again..but my hubby and i wont take it like before.
I wonder if you can launch a suite against someone for harrassment?????