First, I'd ask you to be sure you're not calling more often than is reasonable. Most people would consider once call a day to be very reasonable. I'd consider two calls to begin to be a nuisance. More than that, and yes, I'd be tempted to 'lose' cell phones also.

If you're really only calling once per day, I'd lay it on the line with Ex and let him know that you want to talk with your daughter daily, and would prefer an amicable agreement to dragging him back into court. See if you can live with what he proposes. If not -- then drag him back into court.

If SD10 brought a cell phone from her mom's house, we would not allow it. If we want her to have a cell phone, we would get her one. Her mom does not have the right to give her something to use in her dad's house that her dad has already said NO to. She is welcome to call her mom from our phones and her mom is welcome to call her.. if we can't pick up, we have her call back.

The issue is whether you are being denied contact with your child.

In my opinion, it is much more serious if you go days without talking than if he only has her every other weekend and you miss talking to her a couple of days, then it's not as big a deal. He should not stop you from saying goodnight, but my SD goes to her mom on the weekends & is only gone two days, not the end of the world if he can't call and say goodnight... she is at her mom's and her mom has limited time with her so he will see her in a day or two. If she's on an extended vacation (more than four or five days), then it's a bigger deal. The question that needs to be asked is "Is the CHILD being denied contact with his/her parent?" That is usually more important to the court than whether the parent is being denied contact... especially when the parent wants unlimited contact that may interfere with the visiting parent's limited time. It all boils down to what is in the CHILD'S best interest.

If you feel your being denied contact (or your child is being denied contact with you), then the answer is to take it before a Judge and have them decide. Buying cell phone after cell phone is keeping you in a power struggle over who is right. It's his house, he does not have to let her bring a cell phone... but he does have to allow her to call her mom if she wants. and if it's in the order, he has to allow you reasonable contact as well.

DD only got cell phone when she started high school and that was because of the transportation issue, car pool, safety etc etc. i don't think kids of young age should have cell phones, but then again parents should be able to talk to their children. it helps if parents get along, unfortunately not the case way too often

4 cell phones purchased for my SD were lost while she was at her mother's for visitation. We also had the stay in backpack rule, yet two were 'lost' and two ended up in the washing machine. We didn't even contact her on them - we still called mom's cell phone so there was no appearance of hiding conversations. The problem was SD would use the cell to contact us when there were problems with her mom and step dad . . . which is truly why she had it as her mom would not allow her to use her own cell at those times and they had no land line. Things there often got out of hand so having a point of contact was important. It finally got to the point that SD would hide her phone when she got there.

I think Ima gives you the only real option you have - If you feel your being denied contact (or your child is being denied contact with you), then the answer is to take it before a Judge and have them decide. Buying cell phone after cell phone is keeping you in a power struggle over who is right. It's his house, he does not have to let her bring a cell phone... but he does have to allow her to call her mom if she wants. and if it's in the order, he has to allow you reasonable contact as well."

Good luck. I know how very frustrating this can be!!

Our custody arrangement was great for my daughter when she was six, now she is twelve, he continues to negotiate another, despite divorce agreement. My ex follows only the parts of the agreement that serve him best. I continue to pay for items that we are to share the cost of...too much conflict, and I am doing it for the best interest of my daughter.
I only call her once a night, we share custody, but always have to leave a message, and he is not reliable in passing messages.
He feels that the phone should not even enter his home, because he does not want it there, it stays in her back pack. Children need to socialize beyond school, and he will not allow that, as she does not use his phone, and can't use hers. I think I am 'fighting a battle that my daughter is the loser in'.
I appreciate the time you have taken to help, and I certainly do have much to think about.

I would take it back to court, I would be very concerned that he doesn't let her use the phone at all? Very strange. Is this only about her calling you or does he not let her use it at all for anyone?

I think the only way to really resolve it, is to take care of it through the court system, that way you at the very least create a paper trail. Is your daughter upset that he does not allow contact with you when she's with him?

~Cat

Not that its any of my business, but why no contact with the girl's buddies either? By Jr High most girls think of their girlfriends as little extentions of themselves and just gotta gossip/share/and study together if in no other way then via the phone.

Is it as simple as he does not want anyone, friends included, butting in on his time, or is it more of a control think where he refuses to let the young daughter begin to find there is a 'world' outside mom/dad/siblings?

My little one recently turned 10 and she does have a cell also just recently, but it's pretty limited on her line (me, dad, greatgrandma, aunt, her siblings and her cousins) if she wants to call someone else she has to use my cell with my permission. My GS8 and she texted back and forth last night until just after midnight, then her dad turned the phone off--it was harmless and they were having fun. A couple more years and I know I won't get away with this limiting.

If he doesn't have a land line, why can't the kid have a phone so she can say goodnight to her mother, text someone or leave a message? Did he get rid of the landline, just so you can't contact him and the child? Sounds like a deliberately dick move, to me.

not letting a child using a phone provided by another parents is a silly form of control unless of course were talking about very young children like 5-year-olds. this girl is 12, and dad just make it difficult. not letting kids use the phone just because mom is the one who got it is silly and teaches children wrong lessons. plus dad has no land line. all this power struggle, what for

FD~ the power struggle could also be a parent buying the child a phone after the other parent said no... then insisting the objecting parent MUST allow the child to use it. That is also a form of control.

Parents don't agree enough to stay married, so disagreeing on house rules sometimes comes with divorce. It's nice if parents can agree for the sake of kids, but they cannot control what happens in each others house. All they can do is take it to an arbitration or Judge when they can't agree and feel their rights, or the rights of their children are being denied.

exactly, if the parent has no access to their child via land phone or other parent's cell phone and then cell phone, that is provided for a child, either is not "allowed" in the house (why?) or conveniently dissapears then time to see a lawyer, I believe I was the first one to suggest that to OP.

I would also address another issue here...something what mom buys dissapears from her bag while in Dads care. it is expensive and I would want to know where those phones dissapear, does dad take possession of them, uses them, sells on ebay?

then i would want to either get those phones back or get compensation. most women struggle after divorce and simply cannot afford this kind of luxury. plus what else is going to dissapear from girl's bag next time? money? MP3 player? then as she gets older dad won't want her to use a laptop and it is going to conveniently dissapear too?

I also wonder what is dad doing digging up in 12-year-old girl's backpack? how does he even know what is in there? hope OP contacts her lawyer ASAP.

My struggle with my ex is that he dictates what can or can't be in HER backpack. She does not use the phone while she is with him, which I have to agree to, his house his rules.
The last phone went missing while she was out with her father, and her SM and SS stayed at home. Do the math.
She does not want to bring her laptop to his place (she paid for it), because she is nervous about her things. Nothing that she is overly fond of goes to his place. I understand, but she has access to her MP3, DS, etc when she is here because she worries about them.
I agree with your statements that he (and now his wife) is a control freak, it was much easier when it was me he was controlling.

Kelly,
it sounds a bit bizarre and possibly abusive. I think you need legal advice for this situation. Your daughter may be old enough to have a say in this too.

~Cat

here we go, i was right from the beginning, there was more to the story than just dad reinforcing his rule, control freaks who have no respect for a child.

looks like they go through DD's stuff and take what they like.

sure way to make a child to feel at home: go through their stuff, read their correspondence, deny them privacy and then be surprised they don't want to come over or don't feel at home.

you do need legal advice because frankly it is stealing, she was not even home and stuff disappeared. somebody took it and it costs money.

My SD's mother was calling on her cell phone up to 20x a day. Literally, without exaggeration, to say... "what are you doing?". In other words, nothing crucial. We finally had to take the cell phone away from her. She can call her mom from our phones (cell, house) but the constant barrage of her in "our" time was intrusive and would really put a damper on whatever we were doing. Playing a board game? Have to stop, mom just called. Having a good time? Mom calls and instantly the voice goes to baby/whiny kid and it's really hard to get her to snap out of it. Mom was FURIOUS that we took away her phone. If you can't tell, I could care less. My DD goes to her dad's, and other family member's homes and I hardly call. She can call me when she likes, and I figure the time she has there is HER time with them. A constant presence of me makes her unable to form a bond with the people she is with. But then again, I trust the people she's with when she's not with me. That makes a BIG difference.

Sooooo, if your daughter is able to call home when she likes, and when you call your call is either taken by her or she calls back within a reasonable time frame, I say... you have no ground. Leave the cell at home.

If neither/either of those is not how it plays out, you have a bigger issue than the missing cell phones and should be addressing the communication issue, not the missing cell phone issue.

Best of luck,
~Silver

A child needs to have access to a telephone at both homes in order to contact the other parent - I feel this is an absolute MUST with divorced families. So, if the father does NOT have a land line nor does he readily let the child utilize his personal cell phone (which would be her only form of communication with her mother while in his care), then I think Kelly's only option was giving her daughter a cell phone. I wonder what his reaction would be if you sent him a bill for the cost of the replacement phones? Since she's in his possession, then he is responsible for the possessions that are with her...? I guess given the fact that he does not share in the cost of the things he's court ordered to pay then he'd probably just shrug it off...

I see huge problem not with not letting her use cell phone (which in itself is bizarre) but actually taking her phone out of her bag when she is not even there and never return it. It costs money and it is a violation of basic privacy and is plain mean. Then when DD is an adult (or maybe earlier), he will wonder why is she estranged from him. Huge mistake. He digs himself a big hole.

"A child needs to have access to a telephone at both homes in order to contact the other parent - I feel this is an absolute MUST with divorced families."

I wonder what people did before cell phones? Why is it a MUST in divorced households? Parents are parents... each parent is entitled to uninterrupted time with the child at their house irregardless of how the other parent feels/trusts/etc. the situation. I sure do not like to be on the receiving end of BM always questioning everything we do in our house.. but DH doesn't bother SD when she is visiting her mom, that's her mom's time. If she went camping in the wilderness with her girl scout troop, she would not be able to call and I would be much more worried about her safety than when she is with her PARENT. If there is such a reason to be concerned for her safety when she is with her PARENT, then it really needs to be addressed in court... not by giving her a cell phone that he has said he doesn't want in his home.

Is the issue really her safety or is it about control... him controlling not letting the phone into his house or her controlling by sending multiple phones??? I think it's ridiculous. If the child is complaining they want to call but aren't allowed.. well, those are daddy's rules. If child is being hurt and not being allowed to call for help, then the court needs to know about it. The bottom line is ~who is upset over the phone issue?~ Mom or child? My parents were married until I was 12 and as a small child, I had no "right" to call my dad at work when I was home with my mom. She'd say 'wait til he gets home'. As a teen, I could find my way to a payphone to call dad if I needed to. I am not trying to minimize the issue if it is REALLY about safety... but to me, it sounds like a complete power struggle~maybe on both sides.

"I wonder what people did before cell phones?"

They had land line phones, OP's ex does not.

and before land lines, there was the telegraph.. or pony express. So what? Nobody HAS to have a phone line. When my kids were little & I was a struggling single mom, I didn't have a phone at times. I might ask a neighbor or walk to a pay phone if there was an emergency.

When my son was younger, his father would not answer the phone when I called. I took it to court & got an order to be able to call him every other day when he was there for more than a week. That was between his father and me, my son was NOT involved in that. I would never have given my son a cell phone against his father's house rules & told him it's okay to use it to call me whenever he wants since his dad won't answer my calls. THAT is putting the child in the middle and basically telling them that they can go against one of their parents and I don't agree on anyone thinking it's okay to do that.

I agree that it needs to be addressed in court and that's what I suggested in the beginning. OP should see her lawyer. You cannot reason with control freaks because they are not willing to compromise, that's why she needs a lawyer. To get compensation for stolen phones and address the issue of 12-year-old not having access to the phone neither land nor cell.

I think the issue is that girl is 12, not 6, and should have privacy (I never looked in DD's bag without permission)and should be able to make some decisions. Dad wants to control and it always backfires. DD will resent him or will grow up rebellious or unable to make wise decisions as an adult.

While I think taking the girl's cell while there and then not handing it back to BM at pick-up/drop off is pretty extreme of dad and boarding on ridiculous, I don't think demanding in court payback of the lost cells is a real good idea.

It could cause additional problems and show BM has a direct dismissal of dad and dad's authority in dad's home. BM knew dad said no phone in his house and she snubbed her nose at his house rules and sent them repeatedly anyway. Showing her total lack of reguard for rules and boundaries at dad's house to a judge, might be something judge views with a poor light against BM.

Yeah, the rules of no cell seem silly if there is no landline and no agreement of arranged calls in place, but ima is right--let a judge deal with arrangement of phone calls and then once it is laid out, be sure it is followed.

It's not much different really than when a kid takes something against the rules to school, knowing it's against the rules and then constantly taking the forbidden item anyway. Doubt when the rules of school actually say the item is forbidden and they routinely confiscate the forbidden item, that a lawyer will think it is wise to sue for loss of item.

Instead of playing power games though, dad should have handed the cell to BM when they exchanged the child and then BM should have either stopped sending cells or approached the court with communication issues that need resolved.

I also think dad is going to have problems up ahead if he denies the girl to have calls with friends very soon as the daughter enters and expects to take part in the usual normal teen socialization. But there again, it will be dad's problem to figure out and deal with and come to a fairly happy solution with the teen who wishes to chat when she is in his home.

It also would be hard to prove dad took cell when girl and dad are out together and cell is taken during this time. Yeah, it could have been the SM, but there was also a another child there. I really don't think BM wants to get into fight over being paid back, it just might open up all kinds of new issues and resentment.

The other thing BM want want to consider as she keeps defying dad is that she is also teaching the daughter that it is okay to ignore what dad says and dad's rules. If something happened to BM--and here's hoping nothing ever would, just using an example to stress the point-- and the girl had to go live with dad fulltime, would a series of lessons teaching daughter to disobey and ignore dad be lessons BM would want the daughter to live by. I'd hope not, cause next the girl would think it's okay to blow off anybody through-out life that daughter does not want to respect in her own marriage, her future employment, blah blah.

Just somethings to think about.

I think you need to start revisiting custody -- it seemed kinda vague when you said joint. That means a lot of things to differnt people. I think joint can get tougher as kids get holder -- its harder for them to go back and forth. It also sounds like X may be a little controlling -- I would first discuss with him rules for calls to OP, etc. If you cant get agreement, I would talk to DD regarding where shed rather live. Do you have other children with X?

justmetoo, at school students are not allowed to use cell phones or have them in the open, but they are allowed to keep them in lockers as long as they are off. even if a student violates that rule and uses his phone and his phone is taken away, it is returned to a parent. School does not take cell phones out of backpacks and throws them out. Why do people think dad should be allowed not to return cell phone...

kkny I am under impression that DD lives with mom and visits dad. all of her major expensive possessions are at home (moms) like laptop and other things she is fond off. Plus i really doubt she lives with dad (even half the time) and has no phone and no computer there. Plus people don't keep stuff in backpacks at home, they do it when they visit.

kelly, could you clarify how often DD goes to dad and for how long does she stay there?

If dad is not giving child messages, and not accomodating communication, thats not right. Sounds to me that dad is over controlling.

finedreams, you took what I actually said and turned it into what you wanted it to say. I said dad should have returned cell to BM at end of visit and was extreme not to.

Why do you always seem to think you know how things are in different states under GA compiled laws? In my school yes, the school can confiscate phones, yes, they can search items left in their property (school property locker, personal item--backpack--left in locker).

Phones here are to be powered off and off their persons the entire time school is in session, meaning also between classes and during our closed campus lunch. When the rules are broken different consequences are faced, step by step and grows as offenses continue. Kids can be made to check phones into office each morning for 10 days, next can be in school suspension and a ban of one bringing a cell to school at all for 30 days, yet additional violations or dismissal of rules/consequences can result in student facing gross insubordination and be handled under our discipline policies.

Yeah, while the phone is eventually given back to parents, the parents do not get to snub the rules/laws and let their kid continue to do as pleases. In my posting with my example of schools above, I said 'it is not much different than...' and it's not, kids and/or parents do not just get to defy rules. And I never said school 'throws them (cell/other item)out'. But they can search a bag in locker, they can take the item and they can add additional consequences for additonal defiance, which is why I stated a lawyer would not suggest suing over loss.

JMT, if child was under any disclipany action for cell phone, mother as at least joint custody parent should have been informed. I find it highly unlikely they took action and mother was not informed. This is not a MIA mother. Fact is, if dad had not "forgotten" to tell child that mom called, this might not be happening at all. Mom needs to deal with dads refusal to communicate.

My ex and I share custody of my daughter. She is with each of us equally. The phone issue is only one issue that he continues to control, and I cannot afford going to a lawyer. He has violated many parts of our separation agreement, and I am at the point where I can sleep at night knowing what I am doing as a parent. My daughter knows what goes on in both homes, and he is the one that will lose.

The cell phone issue is important, because any other form of communication is difficult. My phone calls/messages go unanswered because he has control of the only phone. I only call to say goodnight, so I am not calling more than needed. I leave a message with time, and brief message to have her call me. Despite his actions, I do not restrict his calls, and have her call him if he has not called. I believe in doing what is right, and it is up to others to make their choices.

I recently learned that her SS was given a laptop by her BM, and the only way my daughter can get one there is by doing more chores, including her SS'. Her BF will share the cost if they shared the computer, which will result in once again a violation of her privacy.

She has no way to text her friends or even talk to them, which is what her school mates do because they all live far from each other (private school).

I assume that the only way to change the above is to turn to a lawyer, but I fear that there may be more repercussions for her than there are now. After our separation we co-parented our daughter well, until his new wife entered the picture, and then the respect we had for each others disappeared.

Perhaps if I change the way she communicates with her BF it may open channels, but I struggle with putting her in the middle.

I am so sorry for your DD. Some of the SMs here wont ever face the facts that some SMs favor their own kids, and dads arent around or dont notice problems. Pay them no mind, you know your facts. If her dad wont treat her fairly, and you cant afford attorney, go to family court in your area, see if you can file for more custody time. I realize this is a lot. If you cant, encourage your DD speak to her Guidance counselor at school, ask for ways to cope - more activities, etc.

"Some of the SMs here wont ever face the facts that some SMs favor their own kids, and dads arent around or dont notice problems."

Now kkny, that's a bunch of bull! It IS possible for any parent to favor their own kids. My DH SHOULD favor his DD over my kids, she is his daughter. (He is my kids' stepfather) Of course, he should not mistreat my kids in order to prove his favor to his daughter. and vice versa... it is not unusual to favor your own children, but it is not an excuse to mistreat ANY child.

Every parent should protect their child and if they allow anyone to mistreat the child, they bear just as much, if not MORE of the responsibility for the harm to the child than the person that does the mistreating. If a dad is not around or has his head stuck in the sand (doesn't notice problems), then the problem is with dad. It is easy to use the step parent as a scape goat to blame because things change. Dad picked the SM. Dad changed the way he parents after he brought SM into the picture. It's DAD's fault if his child suffers because of HIS choice to bring SM around & if he allows SM (and her children) to interfere in his relationship with him or to abuse her things and make her feel she can't bring things over... that is all on dad.

Dad has the obligation to his daughter... SM does not.

That's like blaming the other woman for the affair. The husband made the vows. He broke the vows. He owed the wife the obligation. The other woman was just doing what she does... wanting a man, maybe disregarding that he's married. IT doesn't make her innocent, but it is not HER obligation to be faithful to the wife, it's HIS!

SM may not be a nice person.. she may favor her kids.. but it's still DAD's responsibility to his daughter!

Ima, when dad is working more hours, which is what happens in many homes, and may be happening in OPs X, SM does have more control. Of course Dad should be seeing that things are fair. But if he isnt, my advice is what to do. My heart goes out to OP who is afraid/cant afford lawyer.

justmetoo, I think we generally agree that what dad does is wrong. As about schools we have strict rules about phone use as well. But eventually parents are able to get the phone back, school cannot just confiscate it indefinitely. I know you never said it is OK for dad to take phones away. i just don't think school rules apply here. It is his own daughter, there is no land line, and her phone is in a backpack.

This is just awful. Your DD has no access to any communication to anyone. No phone, no computer. Well I can see what is going to happen, she will put up with it until she has to and then (at what age children are allowed to choose to see their parents or not? 14?16?) she will not go to dad's house and possibly won't see him at all. And then he will be posting on estranged forums I wonder why my DD doesn't want to see me? hhhmmm I agree with kkny, DD should talk to school counselor or any counselor and maybe get some strategies how to deal with overly controlling parent.

Overly controlling adults damage children's ability to make smart choices as they grow up. You don't want her to get pregnant at 15, or hook up with wrong partners or rebell in some other disastrous ways.

It's a great idea of kkny's for your DD to talk to a counsellor at school about this issue. Not having a computer or a cell or a landline to talk to friends after school is borderline abuse. A kid of 12 needs to talk to peers and friends, what if her homework is done and there is nothing on tv? Poor kid, I feel very badly for her, FD is right, that girl will run away from her Dad's home when she is old enough. And 12 is getting to be old enough, a 12 year old here in Canada is listened to by a judge. Can your DD talk to your ex about this and explain to him that it's not normal to restrict this way? He will make what appears to be a "good" kid into a very bad one if he keeps it up. My best friend in high school was VERY restricted by her parents from grade 6-7 onwards and she was WILD when she got the chance, I had to rein her in!!

"Not having a computer or a cell or a landline to talk to friends after school is borderline abuse."

Shannon, are you serious!?!

My grandma must have been abused for sure.. they didn't have phones, computers, or TV. Gimme a break... she read a book, learned to knit & baked the most fabulous cookies and candies til the day she went to be with the lord.

And we all wonder why kids today feel so darned entitled to things! LMAO... thanks for the evening chuckle!

BTW, teen pregnancy can happen to ANY teen... rebellious or not... hormones drive sex urges, family values help in decision making but are no guarantee that the right choices will be made.

I agree no guarantee, but it doesn't mean we should not think twice what kind of environment we create for our children, do we want them to run around as soon as they are 13-14 to just break away from our tyranny?

Grandma's example is irrelevant. We don't live at those times, and grandma had things that were important for her at those times as well. Like if somebody would take away grandma's books or yarn just because they want to exercise control. It is like saying cavemen needed no clothes, so why do you wear any. Just because my greatgrandpa had a horse and a buggy, it doesn't mean i should give away my car. Com'n those are childish and desperate comparisons.

FD, I guess I was a tyrant with my kids. I can say that they have turned out to make me proud.... not breaking away from my tyranny.

No, we don't live in Grandma's times but I don't think it's childish or desperate to compare. It hasn't really been that long ago... CD players came out when I was in high school but who listened to their 8 tracks... yeah, times were different & today kids have more technology, but they also deal with a lot more problems associated with that technology... sexting, cyberbullying, posting inappropriate pictures on myspace/facebook, friends with benefits has become so casually accepted & they use the internet to prearrange it with strangers. Texting while driving has become such a problem that laws have been passed to stop it, just like drunk driving. and those are just problems they deal with because of technology... they also have to be aware of AIDS, gang violence, new drugs, so much more than I had to think about at their age.

My children may tell you that I am controlling. I don't deny it. My children know that they were raised with loving intentions and with their safety in my heart. Some parents choose to do whatever they can to make the child 'happy' but what makes children truly happy is knowing they are loved and safe... that someone cares about their welfare and if depriving my kids of a cell phone, computer or the social life they WANTED... because I could see the problems around them associated with those things... well, all I can say is that each of my kids has THANKED me for all I did... moving them away from their 'friends' when they were getting into high school. They can't give me more than a handful of names of those 'friends' that are still alive, haven't gotten into drugs or pregnant. (I don't think any of their 'friends' gave college a thought) They were angry at me for most of their high school years because they wanted to 'have a life'. Sometimes you HAVE to be a tyrant... it's called tough love. Today, they are alive, healthy, happy and have each said THANK YOU MOM to me so to each her own.

But, I still stand behind thinking it is probably the funniest thing I have ever heard... calling it "borderline abuse" to not give a kid those things....

Ima, you're missing the point. Dad either doesnt give messages or allow child to use landline to call mom. Not allowing a child to call other parent is just not right. And if child doesnt have cell, child should have reasonable use of landline (eg not during dinner or after a certain time) to talk to friends. Thats was so controlling. If dad had allowed reasonable use of landline and had not restricted calls to mom, cell would not be such a necessity.

Kell, please advise your DD to talk to her school guidance counselor and get help in dealing with the situation. Also, if you can contact your local family court or legal aid (even if you dont qualify, many times they will answer a question) and ask at what age in your jurisdiction to courts generally listen to kids as to where they want to live. Impeding converstion with other parent is not looked on well by courts.

"Not allowing a child to call other parent is just not right."

I'm not missing the point, I was responding to the comment about it being borderline abuse. It is NOT borderline abuse... teaching children they are owed or are deserving of things without having to work for it... teaching children that one parent's rules are irrelevant if they are not the same as theirs.. that is, in my opinion, more abusive than saying "when you are at my house, you can't use a phone." even to call the other parent. If the court is inclined, they can make an order to allow mom to talk to the child and if dad violates the order, then he faces the court's consequences. Absent an order, mom can also say "It's my time, you'll see your dad next weekend" If mom is going a weekend without talking to her child, it's not the end of the world.

and each parent is entitled to decide if kids should be allowed to do certain things in their own home... including use of cell phones & computers. That may affect the parents relationship with kids... good or bad, but it is the parent's choice in their relationship with THEIR kids.

My SD is allowed to go online at her mom's house, she is not allowed to here. That's OUR choice. It is written into the agreement/order to allow phone calls, THAT is not an issue for them... other than BM is rarely available for her calls. Of course, that may later affect HER relationship with HER daughter.

BTW, it is CONTROLLING to force an issue like giving a kid a cell phone when the other parent has said no, just because she thinks she's right. The court is the proper venue to decide. You don't need guidance counselors, therapists, or anyone else to 'gang up' on dad. She needs to go to the family court and ask a Judge to allow her to have contact with her child. I doubt the court would deny it but you never know... the court may say "It's dad's time". At least the issue could be put to rest and both parents can get out of the power struggle they are in!

If Dad didnt want kid to call back mom, he should have communicated that clearly. He didnt. He also apparently either doesnt have a landline or doesnt allow child to use it. Thats not right. When you were growing up, were you allowed use of family landline during reasonable hours? I've said it before, I dont think house without a landline is a good idea if kids are there.

When I was growing up... I never used the phone. I never had a reason. When I was in high school, we often didn't have a phone so I would walk across town to be with my friends... not a plan I recommend. Comparing myself to OP's situation is comparing apples to oranges. I don't think it's a good idea to not have a landline or any form of communicating with the world... but I also know that there are many people that choose to live their lives that way. They have that right. This isn't about OUR personal preference... obviously OP has a preference that her child gets to use the phone, that's why she's given her several.

The COURT is the venue to decide this issue and we can argue til the cows come home & it won't matter... you do not need a lawyer to ask a Judge to talk to your child. It is a reasonable request and if he were to fight it and try to come up with a bunch of reasons why their child should not be allowed to talk to mom, then it will make him look bad. I don't care how good his attorney is... he can have a 'dream team' and it is still not unreasonable to say I would like to be allowed to talk to my child during the week when she's there. It may not be as often as OP likes, the court set an order for 3 times a week for 15 minutes each time as reasonable when my son was young. But anything is better than nothing. Sending cell phone after cell phone is getting her nowhere... but frustrated and in debt.

What we think is right or wrong is really irrelevant and not going to change OP's situation.

Your right, its up to OP. She said she is afraid or not able to go to court. So I have suggested at a minimum, she have DD speak to her guidance counselor in dealing with dad, and mom try to ask family court as to when dd can live with her.

For what it's worth, I agree with you IMA. It's not abuse (borderline or not) to not have television and internet. I grew up without a land-line, without tv, without internet, without friends close by (two mile minimum, and I walked it). It cracked me up too, to read ..."what if there's nothing on TV..."

LOL. I guess she'll have to count flowers on the wall. Do something. Somehow I managed. I also send my DD to relatives several times a year and do not have daily, sometimes weekly contact with her. I trust she's fine. If you don't have that trust you need to do something to regain that trust, or you will be miserable until she is 18.

The issue is the context in which this child is being treated. No phone/technology is one thing, not allowing the child to utilize what's available is another thing, and not allowing access out of spite for the other parent is a whole 'nother ball of wax.

I think for the OP the best suggestion I have is having a really clear talk with the Dad, and with an impartial person there if possible. Discuss the reasons you want to have DD with her own phone and see if there isn't an agreement you can come to. Discuss her feelings of violation and the stories you've heard of things going missing. If that doesn't work to solve the situation, your only recourse is to go to court.

Kelly,

Please do not listen to these people who say your only recourse is court after you have said you are not financially able to go to court. I agree, you should, but first, have DD speak to her guidance counselor. Dont leave her alone while you try to work through this. Good luck.

But it's not just phone calls to mom that is being addressed here. OP followed up with the fact that dad won't allow a computer at his house unless it is shared and OP does not want that as she feels it violates the daughters privacy.

--" Her BF will share the cost if they shared the computer, which will result in once again a violation of her privacy". --

So even after mom goes to court to settle phone calls to mom, mom will next be upset dad does not let daughter have private and unsupervised computer usage in his home.

So seems we're right back to where Ima says, power struggle on what one parent allows in one house vs what another parent allows in the other house with BM trying to run the rules and situations in both houses.

And kkny, I think asking to let girl decide at this point is not solving anything except BM and daughter not having to consider dad and dad's rules. I did not hear OP say daughter does not want to visit dad, just that BM and daughter don't like dad's controling rules. And for the record: no kid especially at pre-teen/teen gets a unsupervised computer at my house nor will my grandkids and I don't give a flying hoot what their parents think about it. My house, my rules, want to use a computer at my house and I will control and supervise or they will not use computer.

justmetoo,

It's one thing to ask for parent/child contact. It is still "dad's house~dad's rules" regarding having a phone to call friends or private computer. Don't get me wrong, I don't necessarily agree with dad.. I would not make my child share a computer. I always had a house full of kids and if something was a 'community' item, anyone could use it... but if it was 'personal' item, hands off!

The father in this situation may pay the price in the end. But, it's HIS choice. Eventually the child may not want to go there because of how dad conducts his home but until mom is willing to take it to court, he is entitled to his rights of visitation. The law is the law...

The power struggle will continue and they will find anything to battle over if they want to keep it going. How about a sock war? Mom needs to accept that she has no control over dad's rules... even if he's wrong & damaging his relationship with his daughter. It sounds if maybe he is letting SM or her kids step on toes... that's also HIS choice and he will reap what he sows.

Makes me think of the serenity prayer:

Grant me the strength to accept the things I cannot change (Dad's rules)
Courage to change the things I can (enforcing your legal rights)
and the wisdom to know the difference (start studying family laws in your state)

Actually I'm not sure who the girl was to 'share' with if dad paid part as the other girl (ss) already has a computer, would not make sense for SS to have usage of two computers for the only sake of snooping in 2nd computer.

And right, personal item is off limits to another sibling/step/ect, but I am under the impression that BM does not want ANYBODY to be able to peek in on what would be the computer daughter uses. If SS has computer already, who would daughter be 'sharing' with and why? And yes, I realize the wording was share, but it's not clear as to who is doing the sharing or to what point the 'sharing' would be implemented. And actually if the original offer was SM pay half and dad pay other half and girls share, networking can be set up to where neither girl would have access to the other one's personal data and settings. If this were to be the manner of PC set-up, no privacy violations could occur.

And yeah, dad is being a jerk and he'll see the day he wishes he could turn back the clock. Dad is setting up all kinds of problems for his future with this girl, but BM is handling this no better than dad is.

Your clarification with additional stress on the serenity prayer here is good, but I think it will float across on 'deaf ears', as some seem to think the girl is being abused cause she has house rules, who can't wait to flee having dad visitation and should cease them immediatley as they see him as some kind of danger to her (aka kkny with the 'don't leave her alone while you work through this').

If Kelly would respect dad's rules and see what she can change via the court system or try to have a sit down grown up convo with dad adressing phones and computer and friends and blah blah blah hoping for some mutual agreeing compromise instead of dismissing him and his rules I think things might be different. But repeatedly defying and tossing up her hands claiming there's nothing OP can do but try defiance, can't afford representation ect is not going to OP very far.

My dont leave her alone, was clearly meant in an emotional sense, as to get DD to see her guidance counselor, who hopefully can suggest ways for DD to communicate etc. But I think you knew what I meant.

it might not be abuse but certainly is stupidity and poor parenting. digging up in girl's bag and taking whatever dad and SM want is bizarre. Now what kelly should do... I agree with kkny encourage DD to talk to school counselor, then try to go to court and possibly adjust custody agreement if it is in DD's interests. I don't know much about courts but I hope OP can at least consult with someone.

Hi Ima and Silver:)

I agree with you that kids have too much these days!! Here's to simpler times when we played outside and talked to friends instead of "texting" everything...In our family, we take away computer priviledges, tv, cell phones, etc...and it's a good way to help them see that "talking back gets you knowhere!", if you get my drift. I was a bit strong in calling it "abuse" but I think you know what I meant... :)

I think that it's just sad that her Dad is trying to have so much "control" over her, or it appears that way from what the OP is saying. As I said, my best friend in high school was controlled by her very religious parents in these ways, and it ended very badly. She rarely speaks to them now, because their strictness was "control" and it was not done out of love. I think it is sad for this girl, also, (as I mentioned) that if all her friends are talking to one another on the phone, and chatting on the net, that she has no opportunity to do so. I don't mean that "if jane jumps off the bridge, she should copy her friends" but when one child doesnt have access to things that others do (WITHIN reason, ie.no computer til homework is done!), I think it's very sad for the child. Especially if it's done out of "control", if it's because finances are tight, that's a whole other story....

Anyways, glad I made you giggle (my post was a little all over the place, they often are!) :)